The classic definition of evangelism is, "One beggar telling another beggar where there is bread" - but many Christians today do not know the language of the beggars. Whether we are using the right language or not in this T. V. age will largely determine our success rate in evangelism. We must be sure that we are not giving answers to non-existent questions. What we need is effective communication.
Communication is comprised of three elements - a source, a message and a receiver. Communication often breaks down when the message from the source is not at a level the receiver can readily understand. Consider three people as distinguished by their means of transportation. The first is "Mercedes." He is fairly well off, has a very good university education, reads the business papers and carries a briefcase to work in the city. The second is "Chevette." He is a member of a union, reads a popular tabloid newspaper and carries a lunch pail to work in a petrochemical plant. The third is "Trike." He is five years old, in grade one and is led by the hand to school every day.
Each of our three communicators has a language bubble which contains the words and phrases each one is accustomed to using. Mercedes for example knows what "debenture" and "lien" mean from his experience in the business world. Chevette understands about "steam traps," "studs" and "dues." Trike on the other hand doesn't know many words yet. He understands the basic ones like, "don't touch!" - "come along this minute!" and "No!" - but nothing too complicated. However, Trike's range is growing week by week and will eventually reach that of his parents.
There is a certain vocabulary range understood by most adults which is called "Common Language." All the words in this area are understood by both Mercedes and Chevette. Boilermakers, bakers, housewives and wind surfers have their own special vocabulary. Everybody has a different range of words depending upon his or her education, age, and experiences. The key in evangelism is to be sure that the words we use are readily understood by our hearers. That is not to say that we cannot use new words with children for example. We can and should try to extend their understanding of words but when we use an unfamiliar one immediately explain it.
This principle is equally true in our choice of Bible Version. The Good News Bible is written in "common language" in that difficult and technical words have been replaced by easily understood phrases so that people from all walks of life can readily understand it. For example, if we are talking to a group of theological students then the English Bible would be appropriate and probably more accurate in its vocabulary. But use that same version with a class of ten-year-olds and they would probably not understand parts of it. The question is, "How much does accuracy count if the hearer does not understand the message?" It impresses me that the New Testament was written not in Latin, the language of the Roman Empire, nor in Classical Greek, the tongue of high society, but in common Greek, the lingo of the ordinary man and woman in the street. Latin and Classical Greek had their place but when it came to communicating a message, the Early Church chose the crude language of the ordinary person.