Evangelism - Missional, Attractional, or Confrontational?

I believe that all three are viable means of disseminating faith, though each has its own pitfalls.

• Confrontational - yeah, the "bullhorn guy". As long as he speaks a message of love with an attitude of love, which can coexist with words like "sin" and "hell", I'm a fan. Hey, it's a job that no one really wants, but Jesus, John the Baptizer, Peter, Paul, and a host of Prophets were known to get up on the "soapbox" and rant to a crowd. Unfortunately, nowadays, most soapbox types wouldn't know love if it was standing right in front of them.
  
• Attractional - Of course, you actually have to be able to attract people in the first place. Unless you can pull off the miracles that Jesus was known for, I guess you'll just have to rely on technology and geniune creativity. That is, if you can afford it. Then again, Jesus was never a big fan of those who came just to see his parlor tricks, was he?
  
• Missional - This can be described as "Get out of your christian culture bubble, you lazy/scared Christian!" Unless you find yourself surrounded at dinner by "sinners" and "drunkards", you are not missional. I heard Darrin Patrick say recently, "Church happens at the dinner table and in the living room."

I guess it shouldn't be a surprise that Jesus was the master of all three of these methods of evangelism. Might we want to follow in His footsteps?