Evangelism and Evidentialism Should Be Friends

It's easy to wonder where the plain proclamation of the gospel, without the presentation of an evidential case (at least, at that time) fits into the mindset of a person who is an evidentialist in apologetics. If we think that you need to defend the Gospels in order to have a sufficiently strong case for the resurrection of Jesus, does this mean that you should be opposed to "bare" proclamation of the Good News? Or should you change your mind about what constitutes a good case in order to be consistent with your evidentialism? Should you tell someone to wait to get right with God (if he shows a strong desire to do so) until he's been given a lengthy course in apologetics?  These are fascinating questions that I've been thinking about for quite a few years. See the relevant blog posts I link below, especially "What Evidentialism Is Not."  The upshot is that the evangelist and the evidentialist should be friends. We can understand why evidentialism is not in conflict with plain gospel proclamation when we understand two very different meanings of the word "justified."  

http://lydiaswebpage.blogspot.com/2020/08/what-evidentialism-is-not.html  http://lydiaswebpage.blogspot.com/2020/07/why-christian-parents-get-nervous-about.html  http://lydiaswebpage.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-not-to-tell-young-inquirer-about.html   

Originally uploaded to YouTube Oct 21 2021