The biggest problem with the evangelical p.o.v. is not so much the whole "personal relationship" issue (which I think is mistated), but the lack of dogmatic content to such a "relationship."
As CW rightly pointed out, everyone has a relationship to God, with varying degrees (on our end) of problems in that relationship. What the evangelicals should be doing, is rather than speaking imprecisely of "personal relationship", should be speaking in terms of one's committment to their beliefs - that is to say, the difference between a nominal, lukewarm adherance to religion, or one that is a matter of conviction and heartfelt piety.
However, evangelicals generally do mean more than this (conviction in religion) when they speak of "personal relationship" - implicit to this are also anti-heirarchal, anti-ecclessial ideas about that relationship ("Jesus and me, and no one else's imput is necessary.") Of course, there are all sorts of logical problems with this position (ex. didn't someone else have to inform you upon the "gospel" and even "disciple" you, so why a problem with ongoing ecclessial involvement in that relationship - what in principle makes one ok, the other anathema?), but that seems to be the state of things.
Of course, the tragedy (on our human, creaturely end of things) is that there is a question of "which Christ" and "which Gospel" they've come to accept. On that score, it's up to debate how much better/worse off they really are, then others who are not nominally "Christian" at all. For example, while one can speak much of Christ, and invoke His Gospel, what if the content behind both is incredibly perverse? While otoh, a Buddhist (who does not nominally speak of either) spends a lot of time fasting, denying the passing pleasures of this world, and lives a life of poverty and humility? In such a case, it's entirely debatable who is in fact closer to the truth, or who would be more apt to accept the teaching of the Church of Christ (the Orthodox Church)? On one hand, it could be argued the Evangelical would, due to issues of historicity and similarity of "names" and accepted sacred texts, and other superficial similarities - otoh, one could say the Buddhist, who might see the completion of his ideas, without the various falsehoods and pitfalls of his religion.
For reasons like this, it is better for the Body of Christ to not enter vain, ecumenistic speculation of those who, even by their own recognition, are not members of the Orthodox Church, which we fervently believe to be the Body of Christ, and the extension of Pentecost into the present day. The truth is, all outside of Her are a field awaiting harvesting.