Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones’s Principles Of Evangelism With Application For Producing Evangelistic Church Members

By Simon J. Green

From his published sermons, Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) has become known in the Reformed and wider evangelical world as someone who was an expositor par excellence. Many Christians continue to profit from his sermons preached during a thirty-year ministry at Westminster Chapel—sermons designed to instruct and edify believers. What remains less appreciated is his evangelistic ministry, which comfortably comprised over half of his total preaching engagements. [1] As his wife Bethan Lloyd-Jones so memorably expressed, “No one will ever understand my husband until they realise that he is first of all a man of prayer and then, an evangelist.” [2] Many of these evangelistic sermons were remarkably owned of God and it is believed that he saw people converted under his ministry every week. [3]

This evangelistic success arose out of deep convictions regarding the work of preaching and evangelism more generally. The definitive views he maintained rendered him unable to support the Billy Graham campaigns in London despite his appreciation of the man leading them. [4] This was not without a loss in popularity in the evangelical landscape at that time, especially in the United Kingdom. Dr. Lloyd-Jones was concerned that when evangelistic practices were separated from biblical teaching, the moral and spiritual condition of the country would go from bad to worse. History has clearly vindicated his assessment of the situation. This paper will therefore examine the teaching of Dr. Lloyd-Jones (ML-J) on the right approach to evangelism for the individual believer. In other words, how are ordinary Christians to engage in evangelism, and how can their witness be made more effective? To answer these questions it will be necessary first of all to summarize the principles undergirding ML-J’s understanding of what true evangelism is, before showing the implications that he drew from those principles.

The Importance Of Evangelism

ML-J was the very antithesis of a pragmatist. Everything he sought to prescribe for Christian living and church practice was derived directly from Scripture, especially the book of Acts and the Epistles. Though many may have differed with him on his conclusions, none could fail to recognize his desire to root evangelism in biblical theology and practice. [5] For him this was the single biggest reason why the church was failing to deal with the increasing corruption and immorality of society. The key question is, therefore, what did he understand the Scriptures to teach concerning the church’s work of evangelism and how it is made effective. There are a number of aspects that are repeatedly evident in his published works, as well as Iain Murray’s two-volume biography of him. Some general statements can be made first relating to his view of evangelism within the life of the church, before highlighting some of the fundamental principles ML-J saw as vital to direct all true evangelism.

ML-J believed evangelism to be the primary work of the church and anything that obscured this would inevitably prove a hindrance. [6] He saw many churches involving themselves in activities other than evangelism and speaking about issues other than man in sin and his need of reconciliation to his Creator. He was quite adamant that when the church involved itself in politics and economics, she was failing to fulfill her divine mandate: “the church is not here to reform the world, for the world cannot be reformed.” [7] Around that time some were protesting against the perceived evil of communism and, from the perspective of ML-J, in doing so were politicizing their message and prejudicing communist hearers against the gospel. So ML-J held the work of evangelism in the highest esteem as the chief business of the church militant.

Secondly and more specifically, he regarded the work of evangelism as devolving upon every believer. He did not see it limited to those in office or even those who were particularly gifted in communication. Expounding John 17:17-19, he stated explicitly that “the plain and clear teaching of Scripture is that every single Christian person is an evangelist.” [8] He was concerned to be understood in this area due to criticism that Westminster Chapel was a one man show with everybody else doing nothing but listening. [9] Though this can occur when the life of a church greatly deteriorates, ML-J was decidedly clear that he did not expect that outcome to be the fruit of his ministry. [10]

The priority, therefore, that ML-J gave to evangelism in the church, and particularly within the life of every believer, is abundantly plain. This is something that all Christians must be engaged in, but the next issue concerns how this work is to be carried out. Perhaps the best summary of the principles that controlled ML-J’s evangelism was given by him in an address entitled The Presentation of the Gospel. [11] The five points that he gives here will serve as a framework around which his teaching elsewhere can be gathered.

The Glory Of God

The first concern that ML-J had in evangelism was regarding motivation for the work. Nothing less than the glory of God should be the aim of the Christian in all of life, and this area was no exception. Even the desire to save souls, noble as it is, must not be allowed to supplant this controlling axiom. [12] For ML-J this was vital, since the appropriation of it would govern the very message and method of evangelism. He demonstrated that evangelism must begin with God and not man, since that was the approach of the apostles and prophets. Preaching upon Romans 1:18 he said, “He [Paul] is not talking in terms of their happiness or some particular state of mind, or something that might appeal to them, as certain possibilities do—but this staggering, amazing thing, the wrath of God! And he puts it first; it is the thing he says at once. Here is the motive for evangelism; here is the thing that drove this man.” [13] ML-J regarded many approaches in evangelism to fail at this initial stage because they were ultimately anthropocentric and not theocentric. In connection with this, Murray records ML-J’s identification of one of the major problems with most modern evangelism: “The gospel was being preached in terms of the offer of a friend and a helper. The characteristic of Calvinistic evangelism is that the majesty and glory of God is put first, instead of some benefit provided for man.” [14]

The Power Of The Holy Spirit

The second principle that ML-J put forward was the necessity of the work and power of the Holy Spirit. He reasoned that regardless of an individual’s abilities and gifts, without the work of the Holy Spirit the presentation of the gospel will be ineffectual. Preaching on Ephesians 2:1, he highlighted the biblical view of man which called for this position unequivocally: “If you and I but realised that every man who is yet a sinner is absolutely dominated by ‘the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience,’ if we only understood that he is really a child of wrath and dead in trespasses and sins, we would realise that only one power can deal with such an individual, and that is the power of God, the power of the Holy Ghost.” Biblical evangelism must therefore proceed in utter dependence upon the Holy Spirit.

It is probably appropriate at this point to mention the stress ML-J put on the need for revival in connection with the work of evangelism. [15] He understood the shortage of genuine converts to the Christian faith and the relatively low state of spirituality among Christians as evidence of a lack of the Holy Spirit within the life of the church. Such a lack could only be reversed by a divine visitation. However, this did not mean that the work of evangelism should be halted while the church waited for such a revival to come; rather, while engaged in the work, the church should recognize its impotency that only such an outpouring of the Holy Spirit could adequately address. [16] Contrary to the teaching on revival which had gained popularity under Charles Finney in the nineteenth century, ML-J knew that revival was sovereignly controlled, and yet the church must be active in seeking it. In an interview with Carl F. Henry that appeared in Christianity Today in 1980, ML-J said:

I have always believed that nothing but a revival—a visitation of the Holy Spirit, in distinction from an evangelistic campaign— can deal with the situation of the church and of the world…. I am convinced that nothing can avail but churches and ministers on their knees in total dependence on God. As long as you go on organizing, people will not fall on their knees and implore God to come and heal them. It seems to me that the campaign approach trusts ultimately in techniques rather in the power of the Spirit. [17]

For ML-J, evangelism was inextricably bound up with revival; any attempts to carry on without simultaneously beseeching God to visit His people would only prove fruitless in the long run. Positively, then, there was a great need of prayer in evangelism but not simply prayer that asked God to bless human effort. The prayer that was demanded by a general low spiritual condition was one of importunity arising out of conscious powerlessness and ineffectiveness. For ML-J, this was the way that evidenced real dependence upon the Holy Spirit for the progress of the gospel.

The Centrality Of The Word Of God

The third foundational principle that ML-J set down for governing evangelism was the centrality of the Bible. Closely linked to his emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit was the plain scriptural teaching that “the one and only medium through which the Holy Spirit works is the Word of God.” [18] He supported this thesis by demonstrating the invariable method of the apostles was that they “reasoned out of the Scriptures.” Hence ML-J would maintain that, “True evangelism…is highly doctrinal.” [19] The presentation of the gospel was marked by informing the unbeliever about the nature and works of God, the condition of man in sin and his inability to remedy himself, and of the person and work of Jesus Christ on behalf of sinners. Like his Puritan forbears, ML-J understood the gospel addressing the mind, which moved the affections and changed the will. He would repeatedly state that the first thing the gospel does for a man is to make him think.

For ML-J, the centrality of the Word of God in evangelism and the doctrine it teaches implied the importance of preaching in the church’s work of evangelism. He understood the Bible to teach that preaching was the preeminent means God uses to reconcile sinners to Himself, and therefore it must occupy a central place in church life. It was his life’s practice (one that was subsequently copied by many non-conformist churches in the United Kingdom) to preach directly evangelistically every Sunday evening. These sermons, although different in their principal aim from more instructional messages, were nonetheless carefully reasoned expositions of a text of Scripture, much in the same vein as those of the apostles recorded in Acts.

The Right Motivation

The fourth principle that ML-J gives to control evangelism is “that the true urge to evangelization must come from apprehending these principles, and, therefore, from a zeal for the honour and glory of God and a love for the souls of men.” [20] The glory of God, the unequivocal necessity of the Holy Spirit, and the centrality of the Word of God must all be maintained in conjunction with love for the souls of men in the great work of evangelism. In the mind of ML-J, any approach to evangelism that did not proceed from a right understanding of these principles was bound to be deficient.

Associated Dangers

The fifth and final principle that ML-J laid down was the reality of “a constant danger of error and of heresy, even among the most sincere, and also the danger of a false zeal and the employment of unscriptural methods.” [21] Since this is sadly true, he urged the necessity of “constant self-examination and a return to the Scriptures themselves.” [22] These pitfalls he then enlarged upon, both in this address and in his preaching ministry, and elucidated several implications of these dangers. The first of these was to examine oneself by means of self-questioning regarding the purpose and motive for any evangelistic activity. He suggested that there was only one true answer to such questions: “I am anxious that souls should be reconciled to God, because, being what they are, they are dishonouring God, and because, being in a state in which they dishonour God, they are in danger of perdition.” [23] Any answer short of this would inevitably fall short of the primacy of the glory of God in evangelism. Other approaches may yield a greater number of decisions, as the Graham campaigns did, but anything that falls short of reconciling the sinner to God had to be classified as failure.

Another great danger that Lloyd-Jones saw in the field of evangelism was the assumption that a man who believes the gospel and is thoroughly orthodox in his doctrine would automatically apply those truths and then present the gospel in the right way. He wisely recognized that the latter did not inexorably flow out of the former. He proved this from two examples. The first concerned those “men who are sound evangelicals in their belief and doctrine; they are perfectly orthodox in their faith, yet their work is utterly barren…. They are as sound as you are, yet their ministry leads to nothing.” [24] The issue with such a man, he went on to explain, is that he talks about the gospel rather than actually preaching it. The second example concerns the man who is more pragmatic and interested in obtaining results “that he allows a gap to come in between what he is presenting (and what he believes) and the results themselves.” [25] His whole point was that evangelism must be controlled and shaped by our orthodoxy but that alone is not enough. [26]

A further error that ML-J saw many stray into was the supposition that the present conditions were different from any other period of history and therefore required a new approach. He noted that because evangelism was not succeeding as people thought it should, they had concluded the root of the problem was communication. The remedy prescribed varied between an extremism which called for a new or modified message that excised aspects of the biblical message which modern man didn’t accept as valid, such as miracles, and those who sought to follow the way businesses attracted customers through advertising. ML-J, being the expert diagnostician he was, correctly identified this as misdiagnosis founded upon a false assumption. In a sermon on 1 Thessalonians 1:5, he showed that the Apostle Paul faced exactly the same problem. [27] The problem was not communicational, however, but moral. As Szabados Adam pointed out, ML-J asserted that “it was not that the people did not know what they had to do, but that they did not want to do it.” [28] ML-J’s theology informed him that man had not changed at all since the Fall, and therefore the methods of the apostles and the early church still held true.

The final implication of this fifth principle concerned the methodology of evangelism. This is perhaps the point at which ML-J differed so greatly from other contemporary evangelical leaders such as Graham and John R. W. Stott. In applying the great emphasis that the Apostle Paul gave to the wrath of God in his evangelism, ML-J posed the questions, “Does this govern our evangelism as well as our thinking? Does it govern us in practice as well as in our theory?” He then went on to state “how easy it is, though we believe the gospel, to begin to think immediately in terms of human wisdom and human strategy.” [29] Though ML-J was not completely opposed to the use of various methods in evangelism, he saw the danger of worldliness in adopting many of the ideas and, more subtly, he understood the tendency to trust in methods rather than the power of God. Similarly, his interpretation of New Testament teaching and knowledge of history disinclined him to any form of organization of the local church’s evangelistic activities. He observed that the method of spreading the gospel during the early church period and every time of revival was “cellular infiltration.” [30] What he meant was that ordinary Christians fulfilling their daily callings would automatically interact with the people they came into contact with and, as they had opportunity, speak to them about Jesus Christ. That Scripture and history informed his view is beyond doubt, but they weren’t the only factors in his thinking. As Murray points out, his constitution as a Welshman made him averse to organization and committees. [31] Secondly, his views in this area were shaped by personal experience. At his former pastorate in Aberavon (1927-1938) he abolished all evangelistic activities and prioritized preaching, and then witnessed rapid growth of the church including some notable conversions. [32] His opposition to organization of local church evangelism was not formed by this experience, but, in his mind, it did serve to support his contention against organizational evangelism.

Functioning As Evangelists

The principles foundational to ML-J’s understanding of biblical evangelism have been set out. What remains is to draw practical lessons from his teaching to help produce more evangelistic effectiveness in the lives of all Christians. There can hardly be a true believer who doesn’t wish to be more useful and faithful in this area, so what can be done? According to ML-J, the most important factor in the witness of each Christian was their sanctification and personal holiness. [33] He very much believed, on the strength of the New Testament and church history, that the life of each Christian should be attractive to those they interacted with in the world. There ought to be something noticeably different in their behavior which would provoke enquiry as to the cause. This would then lead to an opportunity to present the gospel message and invite the enquirer to church where they would come under the chief method of evangelism, the preaching of that gospel. Visibly changed lives were the primary authentication of the gospel message according to ML-J: “Oh yes, the preaching, the Word, the only gospel, and the power of the Spirit upon it are all essential. But the proof of its truth is in the daily lives of the members of the church, people who claim to be Christians.” [34]

The main concern that ML-J therefore had was the degree to which the gospel was regulating our lives. “Are you a phenomenon in the city where you live? Are you an object of wonder to your neighbors and associates?” [35] Only when this happened would the church know great blessing on her evangelism. In this he was following in the footsteps of all God’s servants going back to the Old Testament; he was calling the people back to their God and His holiness. The great lesson for more effective evangelism is for believers to focus on their sanctification in the knowledge that lives adorned with the beauty of Christ never go unnoticed, and are the chief means of attracting unbelievers to the gospel.

The second practical lesson that can be drawn from ML-J’s teaching on evangelism concerns the lack of motivation many Christians have to reach unbelievers. He was quite clear that this was not something that could be worked up but was intimately connected to our view of the gospel. Preaching upon Ephesians 2:1, he said: “The poorness of our missionary and evangelistic zeal is entirely due to this. We have not seen the position of those outside truly—what they are, what they might be, and what Christ has done.” [36] The failure to evangelize was due to a deficient understanding of what God does in the salvation of each soul. Such deficiency could only be rectified through preaching of God’s Word anointed with the Holy Spirit as well as private study and meditation. He regarded the chief function of preaching to be inspirational by bringing the Bible alive to the congregation and thus producing “live, living witnesses, ‘epistles of Christ.’” [37] A real burden for souls in the lives of each believer was therefore furthered by preaching that exalted the wonder of the gospel and applied it to life.

Third, the absolute necessity of the operation of the Holy Spirit in ML-J’s view of evangelism directs us to the attention we must give to prayer of a specific kind. ML-J’s conviction that nothing short of revival could adequately deal with the low state of the church and make the preaching of the gospel effectual in the hearts of unbelievers meant that all preoccupation with methods must be abandoned. Rather, both privately and corporately, the church needed to plead with God to do what He had been pleased to do in the past and pour out the Holy Spirit upon His people. Nothing but importunate and unceasing prayer would avail. Therefore, the application comes to us that if we would become effective witnesses of Christ, we must get down on our knees in humility, relinquish all confidence in any other means, confess our bankruptcy and impotency, and beg God to fulfill His promise “to give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him.” Until this happened, ML-J was quite sure that society would only get progressively worse, but saw great hope if this was taken up. Speaking at a ministers’ conference in 1943, he said:

I am one of those who still believe that the key to the present situation is the local church. It is possible for a revival, if we are waiting and praying for it, to start at any moment. Before we think about planning and organizing in order to reach the outsider, let us concentrate upon our own churches. Are our own churches alive? Are our people real Christians? Are they such that in their contacts with others they are likely to win them for Christ and to awaken in their hearts a desire for spiritual things? That would be my word to you to-day; that instead of spreading outward, we should concentrate inward and deepen and deepen and deepen our own spiritual life, until men here and there get to the place where God can use them as leaders of the great awakening which will spread through the churches and through the land. [38]

For ML-J then, the only real ultimate hope for successful evangelism was a mighty outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The best means for promoting evangelistic activity among church members was a wholehearted return to the Scriptures leading to consecration of the whole life to God, and an emphasis on prayer for God to act. In promoting various methods as the road to success, many have disagreed with ML-J’s position. However, while current approaches fail to satisfactorily prevent the further degeneration of Western society, the principles for effective evangelism prescribed by Dr. Lloyd-Jones, as derived from the Scriptures and underlined by church history, continue to gain weight and authority. May God grant us grace to heed such counsel.

Notes

1. Iain H. Murray, David Martyn Lloyd-Jones: The Fight of Faith, 1939-1981 (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1990), 323.
2. Murray, The Fight of Faith, 322.
3. Szabados Adam, “Two Evangelical Approaches to Evangelism and Mission: Differences Between D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and John R. W. Stott,” 8. http://szabadosadam.hu/divinity/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/ML-J-AND-JS-2.pdf.
4. Murray, The Fight of Faith, 341.
5. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times: Addresses Delivered on Various Occasions, 1942-1977 (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1989), ix.
6. This summary of his teaching on the primacy of evangelism in the church’s life is drawn from David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Life in the Spirit in Marriage, Home & Work: An Exposition of Ephesians 5:18-6:9 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1975), 318-19.
7. Lloyd-Jones, Life in the Spirit, 318-19.
8. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Sanctified Through the Truth: The Assurance of our Salvation (Westchester, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1989), 21.
9. Murray, The Fight of Faith, 400.
10. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Romans: An Exposition of Chapter I: The Gospel of God (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1985), 238-39.
11. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 1-13.
12. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 5.
13. Lloyd-Jones, The Gospel of God, 325.
14. Murray, The Fight of Faith, 732.
15. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Revival (Westchester, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1987).This collection of 24 sermons preached during 1959 represents his fullest treatment of revival.
16. Lloyd-Jones, Revival, vi. ML-J emphasized this often, which was recognized by Dr. J. I. Packer who penned the introduction to this book.
17. “Carl F. H. Henry Interviews Dr. Lloyd-Jones,” n.d., http://www.misterrichardson.com/mlj-int.html (accessed April 4, 2014).
18. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 5.
19. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 58.
20. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 6.
21. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 6.
22. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 6.
23. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 6.
24. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 3.
25. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 3.
26. For a fuller explanation of this distinction, see David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Darkness and Light: An Exposition of Ephesians 4:17-5:17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1982), 374-76.
27. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Setting Our Affections Upon Glory: Nine Sermons On the Gospel and the Church (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2013), 105-125.
28. Adam, “Two Evangelical Approaches to Evangelism and Mission,” 10.
29. Lloyd-Jones, The Gospel of God, 330.
30. Lloyd-Jones, Sanctified Through the Truth, 21.
31. Murray, The Fight of Faith, 757.
32. Adam, “Two Evangelical Approaches to Evangelism and Mission,” 12.
33. For his best and most thorough treatment of the vital relationship between evangelism and sanctification see Lloyd-Jones, Sanctified Through the Truth, 20-32.
34. Lloyd-Jones, Setting Our Affections Upon Glory, 124.
35. Lloyd-Jones, Setting Our Affections Upon Glory, 124.
36. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, God’s Way of Reconciliation (Studies in Ephesians chapter 2) (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), 11.
37. Lloyd-Jones, Knowing the Times, 362. This formed part of ML-J’s inaugural address at London Theological Seminary.
38. Murray, The Fight of Faith, 78-79.