Ask your average churchgoer what their favorite way to evangelize is, and you’re likely to get a variation on a couple of themes. Undoubtedly the most common method is the “St. Francis of Assisi”. You’ve heard it: “Preach the gospel at all times and, when necessary, use words.” Then there’s the “King James”: the word of God speaks best–and speaks best when quoted verbatim. Then, of course, there’s the “Savvy Shopper”: weigh the pros and cons, you can’t beat the price of this one.
One answer you’re not likely to hear is “Cognitive Dissonance.” But, I believe that cognitive dissonance is probably one of the most effective, and most underused tools of evangelism.
Most likely, you are asking (along with my little sister): “What’s that?”
According to Wikipedia, Cognitive dissonance is “an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously.” In other words, cognitive dissonance is an awareness that the things you believe or do don’t quite match up.
Take, for example, a conversation I had with my advisor this afternoon. I handed her my MOC (memorandum of courses for the uninitiated) and, after looking it over briefly, she asked me “So why aren’t you writing a thesis?” I gave my standard answer–not wanting to specialize, blah, blah, blah. She didn’t really try to convince me, she just kept the conversation going. Then I said something about how both Anna and I had taken Microbiology instead of Food Safety. “Now why’d you do that again?” Dr. Jones asked. “I wanted to keep my options open,” I told her. “I took Biochem 431 instead of 321 for the same reason.”
That’s when she said the words that have been rolling around in my head ever since: “That doesn’t sound like someone who doesn’t want to write a thesis.” I brushed it off quickly, too quickly, with: “Maybe I used up my overachieving in undergrad.” But it doesn’t brush off quite that easily.
Dr. Jones could have tried to convince me to write a thesis. She could have given me the pros and cons of the thesis option and tried to sway me that way. She could have told me I had no option–if I wanted to be her student, I would write a thesis. But she didn’t try to sell the thesis. She didn’t lay down the truth for me to take it or leave it. She just introduced a little cognitive dissonance.
And the thoughts run through my head. “She’s right–I’ve never been someone to take the easy route out.” “Yeah, I probably could do this–I made it through micro and biochem just fine.” “Options open. Options open. I wanted to keep my options open–but now I’m cutting off my option of a doctorate. Just like that.”
She plays a few more fancy evangelistic tricks on me too. “Just out of curiosity,” she asks, “what would you do your thesis on if you were to do a thesis?” The answer jumps out of my lips without warning, “Probably on the meal planning or grocery shopping habits of mothers of young children.” Where’d that come from? And the thoughts continue running through my head. “That was a pretty quick answer. Amazing from someone who’s never even let a thesis be an option.” “You’re sure you don’t want to write a thesis, don’t want to ‘specialize’?”
By now, my mind is going crazy in confusion. Maybe I wasn’t so sure that I didn’t want to write a thesis in the first place. Maybe I’ve been just deceiving myself to think that doing the non-thesis option was in my best interest. After all, I’m not the kind of person who takes the easy way out. I’m not the kind of person who closes off my options. And I can pull a topic off the top of my head that I’d love to explore in thesis-depth.
Do you see what I’m saying? It’s not just about FACTS, it’s not just about CONVINCING. It’s about causing someone to second guess their own beliefs–to realize that what they’re thinking or the way they’re acting is really not consistent with their beliefs.
Surely you can see the applications to evangelism.
I once heard someone speak on an evangelistic strategy they attributed to Francis Schaeffer. According to my memory of this presentation, Schaeffer believed that every worldview (except the correct one), has internal inconsistency–and that the only reason why people persist in holding their particular worldview (that is not correct) is because they are UNAWARE of the inconsistency of their stated worldview. For example, take the individual who claims to believe that there is no God. He does not believe that man is created in the image of God. He believes that humans are just another animal. He has no qualms about eating meat–but cannibalism is repulsive to him. “That’s just wrong,” he says.
Yet, if indeed, humans are not made in the image of God–if they are just another animal–why should eating another animal be repulsive?
Our theoretical atheist takes another tack. “But humans are the most highly developed animal–we have reached intellectual heights not obtained by other animals. This makes us special.
Which makes us wonder if perhaps cannibalism would be okay, as long as we only ate the profoundly mentally retarded. Of course, our theoretical atheist still finds this to be repulsive and “wrong”.
Anyway, enough of my tangent. According to the speaker, Francis Schaeffer suggests that we use this cognitive dissonance to our advantage in evangelism. Push people to take their beliefs to their logical conclusion. This will create the cognitive dissonance that forces them to come to grips with what ideas can be carried out to their logical conclusion and still be consistent with both external and internal reality. Of course, only truth remains consistent with external and internal reality when carried out to its logical conclusion. Everything else falls apart somewhere along the line.
Introducing cognitive dissonance. It’s a novel idea. One I’m pretty sold on, considering its effectiveness this afternoon.
