Recently, I boarded a bus returning from our midweek prayer meeting in Buriram. I sat down next to a man about my age, introduced myself and asked him about his family and work. He likewise asked me about my work, which led easily into a witnessing opportunity. I asked him if he had heard much about Jesus. He said he hadn’t. I didn’t happen to have the outreach book we have written with me, but I did have a copy of the gospel of John that another Christian ministry here in Thailand freely distributes. In the back of this little book is a Bible study called “Bridge of Love.” It’s a typical Gospel presentation that I’ve seen many churches and denominations use. It basically says:
1. God loves you and has a good plan for your life.
2. Mankind is sinful and thus separated from God and deserves to die.
3. Jesus Christ died in our place to make a way (bridge) back to God.
4. What you must do is repent, confess your sins and believe in His name.

Each point is backed up by two or three proof texts. Then there are diagrams that say, “Without God’s help, you will go to hell. With Christ’s help, you will go to heaven.”

Giving these kinds of studies to people who have no background knowledge of God is not how AFM missionaries usually do things. We prefer a more narrative approach, telling stories that gradually unfold the main elements of the Gospel, allowing people to see the big picture. But is this kind of time-consuming approach necessary? How would the proposition/proof-text method of evangelism come across to someone with no background knowledge of God? I wanted to see first-hand.

So, when the man said he hadn’t heard much about Jesus, I answered, “I’ve got a little book with me that teaches about Jesus. Would you mind reading it and letting me know what you think? Please tell me if it is clear or if any parts are confusing.”

“Sure,” he said. “Let me see it.” So I gave it to him and prayed that God would help him understand.

My new friend read the first statement: “God loves you and has a good plan for your life.” That’s a pretty simple proposition. Then came the first proof text—John 3:16. “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” The man turned to me with confusion written across his face. “What does it mean that God gave His one and only Son? Who is the Son? You mean that Jesus and God are not the same? What does it mean that He gave His Son? What does it mean to believe in the Son? What does it mean that people who believe in the Son will not perish? Is this claiming that Christians won’t die? What is eternal life?”

I was amazed to see the confusion and questions that arose from one simple verse. Fortunately, we had a whole hour to tackle those questions. But I couldn’t help thinking, Suppose a Buddhist were to accept a tract or booklet like this from a smiling stranger, take it home and actually try to read it. How far would they get before they just gave up and tossed it aside as nonsense?

Perhaps I should also mention that there are other difficult issues in John 3:16 that philosophical Buddhists struggle with. For example:
1. If God loves the world, then He is not yet detached from that emotion; therefore God must not be as enlightened as the Buddha.
2. Why would anyone want eternal life? Buddhists all know that life is full of suffering, and the only way to escape from suffering is to escape this existence we call life by entering Nirvana, as the Buddha taught.

It was eye-opening for me to see that a little Gospel booklet containing “simple” truths like John 3:16 is actually anything but simple to those unfamiliar with the context of the Gospel story. And this should not surprise us, for John 3:16 was at the heart of a challenging discourse that even Nicodemus, with his background knowledge of the whole Old Testament, struggled to comprehend. Should we expect Bible-illiterate Buddhists of today to grasp it more easily?

As a child, I learned a song that has a verse that goes, “I’ve got the bubbling belief that baffles Buddhists down in my heart.” I used to think that meant our belief makes us joyful winners and proves Buddhists to be sorry losers, as if we were sparring with them in a debate. I now have a different perspective, and I see that our tendency to baffle and confuse our Buddhist friends is really nothing to sing about. I’m more convinced than ever that to really be winners with Buddhists, we have no choice but to present our “bubbling beliefs” (the Gospel) through the simple stories of the Word, and not through propositional preaching or tracts. Only as we do this can John 3:16 be anything but baffling.

• Twitter