Yeshua's last words that appear in the Gospel of Matthew are in Matt 28:18-20:

¹⁸ And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. (NKJV)

The Lord's commandment here clearly implies a mandate to evangelize the lost. After all, an unbeliever cannot become a disciple of Messiah.

There is, of course, another implication in this commandment that may sometimes be lost in the modern church, which is that once you have converted an unbeliever to the Lord, your job isn't finished. It is just beginning.

Since nobody is piping up, I'll get things started...

Setting the Bible aside for a moment, a motivator for evangelism is the desire to see everyone saved. I wouldn't wish eternal torment upon anyone, given a choice (maybe just shy of eternity for some). This should make me want to tell others about the choice they have, tha they may be saved by Jesus' substitutionary atonement. However, this is not very Biblical.

Biblically speaking, the obvious verse that comes to mind is the Great Commission:

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20 NASB)

Before we dive into the particulars, I must ask: to whom was Jesus speaking? Obviously, He was commanding His disciples who were with Him at that moment. It's not a foregone conclusion that this also applies to us today. It's widely presumed that it does, though. Why would we think this applied to us today, too?

The primary verb of that sentence may be "teaching", but "Go...all the nations" seems pretty clear, too. Whom is to be the target of the teaching? People in all the nations, to be sure, but which people in these nations? Everyone (implying some use of force)? Only everyone who will listen? Only those who ask? Only already present believers? (One must wonder how they became believers, then.)

In addition to teaching, the disciples were told to baptize. Are these two audiences one and the same? In other words, were they to baptize those they taught? Or were those baptized a subset of those taught? It would seem as if there's not enough information in this command to discern some of these details.

What was to be taught? "[T]o observe all that I commanded you..." What are the bounds of those commands? Were they to teach the Sermon on the Mount? Every jot and tittle they learned from the Master? All of the Scriptures? (Remember that the Scriptures at that time did not include any of the New Testament yet.) He didn't mention teaching observance of the Scriptures at all, but merely observance of what He commanded them. Interesting.

There's no indication in this passage of how persistent evangelists should be in their teaching. How convincing must they be before they've taught enough and should move on? Or was force indeed to be used to create converts? What passed for first century teaching? How aggressive should they have been in teaching and baptizing? Should they await people to come to them--what about going to all the nations?--or should they actively seek out unbelievers to teach?

Obviously, this is only one passage, albeit a commonly quoted one, but it's a place to start.

Jews (non-Messianic) don't evangelize at all. In fact, they tend to dissuade converts (except Gentiles betrothed to Jews). One reason for this, or so I heard, is that they view Judaism as a burden and wouldn't wish that upon anybody. In truth, Christianity has far more rules than [errant] Judaism, and the burden should be much greater for believers of the New Covenant. Regardless, there's something positive to be said for not looking for false justification for one's faith by dragging others into it, too.

Why did Christianity stray from this lone-wolf mentality of Jews? False justification (the mob mentality) may be one factor. More obviously, though, were Paul's efforts in his travels. Even though thoroughly Jewish, even after recognizing the Messiah, Paul was merely following orders. He was given specific instructions to take the Gospel to those faraway lands. Can we say this applies to us, too? Why?

Another passage not yet raised is Acts 1:8:

[Y]ou shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth.

The Great Commission spoke of teaching and baptizing. This verse speaks of being witnesses. Being a witness is tough to see in any aggressive manner. Witnesses don't speak unless spoken to. They don't try to convince anyone of anything, but merely tell their story or what they know.

I continue to see evangelistic passages carry this kind of flavor: passive witnessing, answering when questioned, but not seeking out others to convert. Having said this, there are clear orders to spread the Gospel in this subdued manner throughout the world--orders to His disciples then (not yet resolved if they apply to us now).

I raise the issue of applicability of Scripture. What are the rules for knowing when Scriptures applies to us now and not just them then?

For example, when the Israelites were told to wipe out the various Canaanite tribes, purging the Promised Land, why would this not apply to us now? Surely we would benefit from wiping out those who are unbelievers or hate God? We could make America a God-fearing nation once again. If we even limited the applicability to God's people and the Promised Land, wouldn't the Israelis be fully justified in wiping out the interlopers in their land, the so-called "Palestinians", Jordanians, Syrians, Iraqis, and other Yehovah-haters?

Why do we pick some passages to apply to us now while others only applied back in those olden days? In the context of evangelism, perhaps spreading the Gospel was necessary then to get a good foundation for the faith, while such establishment is no longer necessary now. How can we tell how to apply such commands?

Discussion sure has been poor on this thread (except for me talking to myself). I thought this would have sparked some interest. There are those who enjoy standing on street corners preaching to all who will listen. There are others who abhor talking to other people, especially anyone less than a friend, about their faith. Each would be looking for Biblical justification for their preferences. But, alas, only Dave showed and only for a moment.

Perhaps this apparent lack of interest is due to a tendency to accept the status quo (<shudder>). I suppose we could all play the "no time" card, but that has really gotten tiresome, cliché, overused, and frankly, it never was (nor will it ever be) a particularly valid excuse. (Now if that doesn't ruffle a feather or two...)