The term hobby rider is often negatively applied to Christians who go overboard with a particular belief or practice, to such an extent, that it seems the only thing that really matters to them in their relationship with God, or more especially with all other Christians, is this belief or practice. Maybe enough has been said on the subject of hobby riding for your liking, but allow me a few words if you will. I wish to apply it to something that we do not often consider hobby riding.
I sense that Christians sometimes get out of balance in their evangelistic fervor. Now anyone who knows me is aware that I am in no way an office preacher, with little or no interest in reaching the lost. From my first day of fulltime gospel preaching, I have, for the most part, worked to start new churches, involving myself in their early stages, and trying to find the lost in a big way. Therefore, I hopefully can be objective when I warn against lopsided zeal for spreading the gospel, without someone dismissing it as the ramblings of a man who doesn't do it anyway.
Whenever a congregation is pronounced dead due solely to its lack of numerical growth, I think we have a problem. When a Christian is less than fully received by the others in his fellowship because he hasn't measured up to someone's quota for classes taught or converts made during a year, I think we have a problem. When a Christian is told that his primary mission is to seek and save the lost, I want to ask, "Who said it was primary and therefore more important than bearing the fruit of the Spirit?" The problem is one of balance.
What causes one to get out of balance concerning evangelism? Is it a pendulum-like counter reaction to the churches and Christians who are indifferent to the lost around them? Is that what has produced this extreme? We reprimand our Protestant friends for overly reacting to the Catholic belief in works salvation with a swing to the other extreme--faith only. Maybe that is what has happened here, too. Just a thought.
I once heard Kip McKean of the so-called Boston Movement say that, due to the big numbers they were experiencing in evangelism, no one could question whether the Holy Spirit was working among them. That troubles me. Wasn't the Holy Spirit with Noah when practically no one repented during more than 100 years of preaching? Or was the Holy Spirit not working with Jesus when the multitudes left Him and their numbers dropped dramatically?
When we set goals to baptize so many by a certain time, we are entering a dangerous area. Increase is the Lord's business (1 Corinthians 3). Goals are fine, but don't allow them to become the standard for success!
"I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase. Now he who plants and he who waters are one, and each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor." (1 Corinthians 3:6-8) What happens when HE does not give any increase? Should I then feel unfaithful? Well, maybe we should set goals to have a number of studies during a given time frame. But, what happens when preaching the truth is "out of season," and people are unwilling to endure your teaching them? "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables." (2 Timothy 4:2-4) Am I a failure? If we must set goals, then number of people approached is probably a preferable goal.
Last of all, let me say that seeking to save the lost is to be a BIG part of my discipleship; but it is not bigger, or more important, than any of the many other duties Christ has given me. And it definitely is not the sole criteria that determine my standing with God. As with so many other things in life, so it is with evangelism ... it is a question of balance.
Brother Whit has reminded us of an important principle. Numbers do not determine success. Many judge a preacher's effectiveness by the number of people he converts, or if the church where he preaches is growing numerically. Are these things true indicators of the preacher's work?
After the first year of my tenure in Las Vegas, I began to preach on the issues that were all around us in that city. Such issues as drinking, gambling, sinful occupations, godly living, abortion, and the marriage question. That year, we lost 31 members! The numbers dwindled, but this was not a negative thing; rather, it was a positive thing. Why? We were stronger and more effective godly examples in a city full of sin! In time, we regained the numbers. When I began that work, we had 91 members. When I left nine years later, we still had 91 members-but not the same ones who began with us. Of the cities where I've worked, Las Vegas was by far the most transient. It was quite a challenge to keep those we converted out of the world. Sadly, some went back. Did we fail? Did we waste our time teaching them the truth? Teaching the truth is never a waste of time.
Numbers sometimes dwindle, and the first reaction is: "We need to get a new preacher." Could it be time to get a new congregation? True, a preacher needs to examine his work and his effectiveness. But can one man honestly make a difference unless he has help-either way it goes. If brethren go to sleep in the pews, and the preacher leads them into apostasy, they helped him. A preacher can preach, work, and exert all kinds of time and still have no outward appearance of success. Did he fail? "Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you." (1 Timothy 4:16) Please remember that we will all stand before God in judgment (2 Corinthians 5:10). The preacher will give an account of his work but so will the members of the churches where he labored. God will be just and fair to both. I can live with that; can you? (KMG)