Featured Are most churches moving away from tracts?

Congratulations!
Yes, I know it is a stretch. His "writings" would be the only thing close to a tract.
Probably the best passage is:
Acts 20:20 And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house,
21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

He may not have had tracts, but he did go house to house in an evangelistic way. His evangelism was by word of mouth instead of the printed page. The method is essentially the same.

 

I remember, years ago, I had a sermon on this verse called "The 20:20 Vision". It was based on literally going house-to-house with the Gospel.

I wish I could take back that sermon - or at least half of it. We do need share the Gospel whenever possible. But we also need to not burn ourselves out in ill-advised endeavors that God never called us to.

This verse should not be lifted away from its context. Paul was not speaking to all Ephesians. No, he was addressing the elders he had called to himself (v. 17). Read the whole context, verses 15 - 38, and one can see just who the "you" of 20:20 was. These were Christians, ones who merited Paul's especial labor and attention.

We often read a phrase and run with it, unconciously applying a modern slant to it. "House to house" reminds us of what, say, JWs do, going methodically down a neighborhood street. Yes, Baptists do it too, (though seemingly it less than in the 70s.)

"House to house" probably means, basically "house church to house church". Or households of Christians, if not actual meeting places. To verify this just check out Acts 2:46, where the other interpretation just doesn't fit:

"So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart."

Obviously, "house to house" refers to the new converts and the apostles. They did not go down the neighborhood streets breaking bread with all that they met.

 

:thumbs: right there with you, bro.

 

You have some very good points and I generally agree with them, especially in reference to Paul speaking with the Ephesian elders.

However, in view of the modern technology that we have today (printed press included), I believe that we should use all available means that we have to get the gospel out whether it is through the internet, radio, TV, or the printed page. If you can give out a Bible or a tract, and it is effective then please do so.
We live in a multicultural society. I came across a person who had never seen a bible in her own native tongue. I tracked one down and gave it to her. She had a problem speaking English, much less reading it, and therefore was very grateful for it.

Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

 

I pretty much agree with this. I am not against tracts altogether, just that they are often misused, over-relied on in many cases.

 

Speaking of misused tracts. I work for a regional hospital that is big enough to require a map to navigate through 9 buildings and multiple floors. I find tracts all the time in the restrooms. Once in a while I'll find one on a countertop but they are usually stuck between the wall and the exposed plumbing. Later in the day they've made it to the floor or the trash.

I've wondered if the people doing this feel as if they have discharged their Christian duty in spreading the Gospel in this manner? There has to be at least 100 waiting rooms on campus but I don't recall ever seeing a tract mixed in with the 2 year old magazines.