Posts Tagged ‘Evangelicalism’
Evangelicals: Now is Not the Time to Spike the Football
I was as happy as you were that the Supreme Court upheld the closely held corporation, Hobby Lobby’s, right to not provide coverage for the 4 abortifacients in the Affordable Care Act. While in no way do I pretend to understand the field of law, the argumentation that closely held corporations appear, function, and act more like individuals than they do corporations made common sense to me – and hence, applying the Constitutional right to dissent to the mandatory coverage of the 4 abortifacients in Affordable Care Act seemed appropriate.
All of that said, now is not the time to spike the football. Evangelicals cannot rely on the Supreme Court, Congress, the Senate, nor the Executive branches to make America a “Christian nation” once again. I am pretty confident that I love America as much as you do, but the reality is that we are a post-Christian nation that is growing increasingly undiscerning. The people/culture(s) of America lack the worldview needed to understand the logical consequences of the breakdown of gender, marriage, and the family (the most fundamental unit of society). The people/culture(s) of America have created a Swiss cheese patchwork quilt from a variety of different worldviews to piecemeal together sets of ideas that justify their behaviors, lifestyles, sin patterns, and addictions.
In other words, we cannot rely on the federal government to be a positive agent of cultural change in America. Cultural change happens at a wide variety of levels but politicians and bureaucrats are chameleons which change their skin color based on the popular opinion – this is why politics is more of a reflection of the culture(s) rather than the driver of the culture(s). Evangelicals have a Herculean task ahead of them to engage the drifting, aimless, and anesthetized conglomeration of sub-cultures that comprise this thing we call the United States of America.
Culture flows out of people’s wants and desires. People’s wants and desires flow out of their hearts. If you want cultural change then you have to see changed hearts. If you want changed hearts then you must see the Holy Spirit remove the heart of stone and replace it with the heart of flesh. If you want the Spirit to move then you must pray for Him to move and you must be faithful to share the Gospel winsomely, clearly, and boldly. I am not saying don’t vote, or don’t engage politically; however, we cannot lobby or legislate people into the Kingdom of God.
Best Links of the Week
Incredible story of a geological statistician who figured out the algorithm of winning certain lottery scratch off tickets.
Apparently a higher up Google executive, turned spokesperson for Egyptian opposition group is now missing. Strange.
Microsoft scandal of Bing copying Google’s search results.
“The Arab Revolution and Western Decline”
Excellent piece by Doug Wilson entitled, “Gravitron Fairies”
Christianity Today on the debate of Bible translation how far to go in contextualization into Arabic
U.S. gives secrets about British Trident class nuclear submarines in order to secure nuclear arms deal with Russia.
Kevin DeYoung makes a brief yet cogent case that the principle difference between Liberal Protestants, Evangelical Protestants, and Roman Catholics is their view of Scripture.
91 year old man and his 82 year old wife successfully stand against a robber in their home. These kinds of folks amaze me… the kind of folks that made this country great. We need more like them.
Online Universities are future of education says Bill Gates.
A Typical Day of Air Traffic:
Excellent Article from Tim Keller on Issues Facing the Western Church
The Big Issues Facing the Western Church
1. The opportunity for extensive culture-making in the U.S
2. The rise of Islam
3. The new non-western Global Christianity
4. The growing cultural remoteness of the gospel
5. The end of prosperity?
As usual, Keller has some prescient and keen cultural insight. Your thoughts?
A.W. Tozer Critique of the “New Cross” of Popular Evangelicalism
I ran across this quote from A.W. Tozer in his relatively unknown book, The Pursuit of Man.
But if I see aright, the cross of popular evangelicalism is not the cross of the New Testament. It is, rather, a new bright ornament upon the bosom of self-assured and carnal Christianity whose hands are indeed the hands of Abel, but whose voice is the voice of Cain. The old cross slew men; the new cross entertains them. The old cross condemned; the new cross amuses. The old cross destroyed confidence in the flesh; the new cross encourages it. The old cross brought tears and blood; the new cross brings laughter.
Tozer wrote this in 1950: eerily prophetic, alarmingly true.
Convicting Gem from Piper’s “Don’t Waste Your Life”
Don't Waste Your Life: Click for the free PDF book
Oh, how many lives are wasted by people who believe that the Christian life means simply avoiding badness and providing for the family. So there is no adultery, no stealing, no killing, no embezzlement, no fraud – just lots of hard work during the day, and lots of TV and PG-13 videos in the evening (during quality family time), and lots of fun stuff on the weekend-woven around church (mostly). This is life for millions of people. Wasted life. We were created for more, far more. John Piper, Don’t Waste Your Life, ch. 7, pps. 119-120.
Ouch. That hits close to home. Full book available in PDF here.
Top 15 Books on Status of American Evangelicalism
No Place for Truth by David Wells
These books represent the best analysis on the present status and recent history of evangelicalism. This list is meant to be informative and not to be alarmist or disconcerting. I think the classic Dicken’s line, ‘it was the best of times, it was the worst of times‘ will apply the Christ’s church til He return. It is implicit also in this list that works commending a Christian worldview, like Nancy Pearcey’s Total Truth, are must reads. I have also omitted more esoteric debates including books on open theism, federal vision, new perspectives on paul… etc. The purpose of this list is zoomed out than those specific issues.
1. No Place for Truth by David Wells [e, p, s]
How modernity crept in and screwed up evangelicalism. Absolute classic.
2. The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark Noll [y, l, e, p, s]
The scandal of the evangelical mind is that it is so scarce and scant. You may also want to read Os Guinness’ Fit Bodies Fat Minds, addressing evangelicalism’s intellectual laziness and preoccupation with the temporary.
3. The Democritization of American Christianity by Nathan Hatch [e, p, s]
Fascinating analysis of the democritization of Christianity in America. His historical analysis is keen and well-researched.
4. Christianity and Liberalism by J. Greshem Machen [e, p, s]
This classic work delineates the liberalism of the early 20th century as being a completely other faith than the historic orthodox Christian faith. 86 years later it is still relevant.
5. God in the Wasteland by David Wells [e, p, s]
Wells continues where he left off in No Place for Truth, by challenging evidenced consumerism in evangelicalism.
6. The Courage to Be Protestant by David Wells [e, p, s]
The title is a play on Paul Tillich’s The Courage to Be. Tillich’s work was a classic in early 20th century Protestant liberalism. Wells draws connections between the emergent movement as really being a form of rehashed 20th century era liberalism. Wells is also scathing on the level and abuse of marketing in modern evangelicalism. As far as Wells goes, his Above All Earthly Pow’rs s also a worthwhile read: in terms of analysis Pow’rs is to post-modernity what No Place for Truth was to modernity.
7. The New Shape of World Christianity: How American Experience Reflects Global Faith by Mark Noll [e, p, s]
I am surprised by the lack of press for this book. Noll examines the history of Christianity in America and draws parallels in key growth areas (Southern hemisphere and the East). Noll is actually rather positive amid the torrent of bad press on what American Christians are exporting. This is an important work because we are good to be reminded that American evangelicalism is not the height of church history. Further, the church is Christ’s and she will prevail. I think Noll has his fingers on the pulse of what is going on and what is next, we would be wise to listen to what he has to say.
8. Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism by George Marsden [e, p, s]
This is a must read if you seek to understand our history. Also an important work is Revival and Revivalism by Iain Murray.
9. Reclaiming the Center: Confronting Evangelical Accomodation to Postmodern Times by Various Authors [y, l, e, p, s]
Various heavyweights chime in on the necessity of remaining faithful to the preaching of the Word and to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If you like this work, I suggest also Os Guinness’, Prophetic Untimeliness: Challenging the Idol of Relevance.
10. Christless Christianity by Michael Horton [y, l, e, p, s]
This books has caused a bit of a stir. You can read John Frame’s book review here. I have yet to read the book, but I thought it a worthwhile mention to engage in present dialogue over the status of the Gospel in evangelicalism. From what I gather, Horton has guys like Joel Osteen in view when he speaks of a Christianity without Christ.
11. Young, Restless, and Reformed by Colin Hansen [y, l, e, p, s]
This book is an important first look at the growing demographic of young Reformed folk. This is an area that needs further analysis and hopefully a good work will come soon.
12. Respectable Sins: Confronting the Sins We Tolerate by Jerry Bridges [y, l, e, p, s]
Bridges is 100% right when he highlights several sins that evangelicals strangely tolerate: gossip, anger, pride, jealousy, anxiety, and selfishness to name a few.
13. Why Johnny Can’t Preach: The Media Have Shaped the Messengers by T. David Gordon [e, p, s]
Gordon applies Marshall McLuhan’s keen insights to shed light on the dearth of serious bible teaching in evangelicalism.
14. Confessions of a Reformission Rev by Mark Driscoll [y, l, e, p, s]
I think Mark Driscoll is a very important voice in evangelicalism, moreso than many of my fellow Reformed brethren. This book is a humorous yet insightful look into the story of the planting of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. There are many lessons weaved into the narrative that are wise and memorable.
15. Why We’re Not Emergent: From Two Guys That Should Be and Why We Love the Church: In Praise of Institutions and Organized Religion by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck [y, l, e, p, s]
The first book is a solid book on the emergent church. I also wanted to end this list with on a positive note with Why We Love the Church. Many times we can get so bogged down in self-criticism that we forget to praise God for all the truly good things he is doing in and through the church in America.
What we need is always adherence to the same three things: orthodoxy, orthopathos, and orthopraxis.
(c=children; y=young adult; l=lay leader; e=elder; p=pastor; s=scholar)
Thoughts on Evangelicalism Moving Forward, Part 10: Final Analysis
Hard Work Ahead
I have stated before that there is cause for optimism in evangelicalism. There are some solid movements, positive shifts, and creative/bold people. Broadly speaking, I have concern for evangelical populism and am more encouraged by Reformed evangelicalism (see blog series for why).
Our world is becoming more complex and it is changing faster. We need to be proactive in thinking about these shifts, ready to address them with the Gospel, rather than writing books about the shifts 10-20 years after they have happened. Our thinking about our world/culture(s)/context need to be thoughtful and not intellectually sloppy. Are we positioning ourselves to have influence in all areas of America – transcending class, ethnicity, politics, geography, technology, and social media? Are we seeking balance in our theology, philosophy of ministry, and relationships?
I have hope for the future. However, I think we have a lot of hard work ahead of us.
Up next, there will be a series on book recommendations and online resources.
Thoughts on Evangelicalism Moving Forward, Part 9: Balance
"Because the deck of life is always shifting..."
Because the deck of life is always shifting balance can be nothing more than momentary synchronicity. (Richard Pratt)
Balance is something that evangelicals know very little of. We were birthed as a reaction against liberalism. In doing so, much of the conservative theology and philosophy of ministry were an equal and opposite reaction against liberalism. For much of fundamentalism-turned-evangelicalism’s existence, we defined ourselves anegativa against liberalism, rather than forming a positive definition from Scripture alone. In many ways, early evangelicalism required liberalism to exist, in order for it to exist.
Moving forward, here are 9 (non-comprehensive) areas where evangelicals ought to seek balance:
1. Words and Deeds
Some churches like to show the gospel, some like to preach the gospel – we should do birth. The lost should see and hear Christ preached.
2. Evangelism and Discipleship
Jesus called us to make disciples and this includes evangelism. Jesus modeled evangelism as a part of his disipleship. In many cases, Jesus sent out his disciples before him. These two things go together. When we do not model how to share our faith, we cannot expect that our disciples will ever multiply themselves.
3. Boldness and Clarity
Boldness corresponds to preaching the gospel. Clarity corresponds to showing the gospel in relationship. Paul did both.
4. Immanence and Transcendence
Immanence emphasizes God’s nearness. Transcendence emphasizes God’s bigness and incomprehensibility. Both are true and both need to be reflected in our personal and corporate worship. Some like to emphasize God’s immanence at the expense of his transcendence (Pentecostalism). Some like to emphasize God’s transcendence at the cost of his immanence (Liturgical). We need to help people see both and not just pander to one or the other. Who cares about the form of worship style if God is presented in both his immanence and transcendence.
5. Preservation and Adaptation
We need to honor the vast tradition of the history of the church – preservation. We need to innovate to adapt to the language of the culture (obviously, without over-contextualizing).
6. Individual and Communal
We are saved as individuals. We are called out to a community. We are not saved by merely being in the church while we are called out to a church.
7. “Already/Now” and “Not Yet”
Christ has already risen from the dead; Christ has not yet returned. We stand between two worlds and must yearn for the one to come, while seeking to affect change on the one we reside.
8. Reaching-up and Reaching-in and Reaching-out
Reaching-up is the vertical ministry of our relationship with God. Reaching-in is the horizontal and inward ministry of those in our church. Reaching-out is the horizontal outward ministry to the world. If we fail to do any one of these, we have been deficient as a church.
9. Orthodoxy and Orthopathos and Orthopraxis
All of the previous balances can be summarized in this final one. Right belief, Right emotion, Right practice. Balance is critical here. If we are seeking sound doctrine it ought to produce right practice and right emotion. If we are seeking right emotion it ought to produce right belief and right practice. If we are seeking right practice it ought to produce right doctrine and right belief.
What balances would you add?
Moving forward, balance is critical. Up next, we will look at some summarizing thoughts regarding evangelicalism in the future.
Thoughts on Evangelicalism Moving Forward, Part 7: No Cultural Center
Is there really a cultural center to America?
Evangelicalism’s Strategy
Last time we examined how hasty evangelicals sought to lump an entire country into one philosophical category: post-modernism. Evangelicals like to do this – we like shortcuts, we like other people to think for us. Evangelicals want someone to:
A. tell them what is at the center of culture
B. give them a brief definition of that thing
C. give them some brief answers for why this thing is wrong
D. make assembly line material on the wrong cultural belief
The Strategies Fundamental Flaw
The problem with this strategy is that it assumes that there is a center to American culture. I wholeheartedly believe that there is no cultural center to the United States. There may have been at some point in time, even so, that time is long gone. In my view, there are at best several sub-cultures some of which overlap with other sub-cultures and some that do not.
Consider the following thought exercise: Post in the comments section any adjectives that can describe all of American culture. (I forbid the use of “consumer,” “sensate,” or “democratic.”)
We are not a melting pot, this would presume homogeneity. We are at best a stew, and even this analogy seriously breaks down.
So What?
What are the consequences of America having no cultural center to the mission of the church? Moving forward, evangelicalism needs to do what some missiologists have been saying for a little while: Evangelicals need to acquire the skills of the cross-cultural missionary. We need to be able to communicate the Gospel in ways that people understand and do it in a manner that does not compromise it’s message.
Every believer is sent by Jesus, with the message of the cross, from a community, to every culture, for the King and His Kingdom.
Moving forward, evangelicals need to avoid oversimplifying both individual people and the many (sub)culture(s) of America. The evangelical strategy of trying to change America through politics alone is/was a dismal failure, as if politics was the center of an American mono-culture. I have tried to show the fallacy of America also being a “post-modern” culture in the previous post. I am trying to help us think beyond insulting misunderstanding in the evangelical mission to North America.
If we are to become more active in understanding the (sub)culture(s)-at-large we need to properly contextualize the Gospel. Up next we will look at the twin dangers of over-contextualization and under-contextualization.
Thoughts on Evangelicalism Moving Forward, Part 6: “Post-Modernism”
Richard Rorty: If you don't understand him, you probably don't understand "post-modernism" either...
Perhaps you have had an experience like this one: You are talking with someone about your personal beliefs. After explaining your story and worldview they respond with something to the effect of, “that is so good for you,” or “I am glad you have that.”
Perhaps you have had another experience like this one: You are at a church, or a conference, or some other Christian meeting and the speaker has talked about the importance of understanding “post-modernism.” I have heard some form of this talk probably a dozen times and never has the speaker ever hit the nail on the head.
This blog post will attempt to sort out Evangelicalism’s imprecise analysis of culture and philosophy on the matter of “post-modernism”
Post-modernism “explained”
Post-modernism is a reaction against the arrogance of modernism and the Enlightenment Project. Modernism and the Enlightenment Project attempted to create a perfect worldview through pure reason alone. Suffice to say this project was a dismal failure and imploded in the late 19th century. This created an intellectual vacuum in Western thinking and the main thing that replaced it was an equal and opposite reaction to modernisms’s hubris. Post-modern thought rejects foundations; it is skeptical of overarching stories and worldviews; it says that truths are merely local and not universal. The problem with post-modernism and defining the term is that post-modernity rejects definitions, rejects categories, rejects foundations, and rejects Truth. Hence, the philosophy is best understood as a reaction against modernism and requires modernism to exist in the same way a tick requires a host.
All to common example
One such example was a kind 70+ year old professor during my time at seminary. The man had incredible ministry experience yet was sorely off in his cultural and philosophical analysis. For several weeks he used modern categories and terms to describe post-modern thought. The underlying irony was that he was attempting to explain as a slightly modernistic outside observer what an entire class of slightly post-modern inside participants had experienced their whole lives.
What is wrong with the analysis [Besides the face that almost every time anyone says, “Post-modernism is ________,” they are being reductionistic… ]
I do not believe we are in a post-modern culture!
I have talked to hundreds of people who have many different worldviews. I have talked to people in several countries, on three continents (including Western Europe). Christians love to label “Post-modern” as some kind of catch all. It is dangerous to assume that post-modernism can be considered a “worldview.” It is dangerous because it can be best seen as a rejection of worldviews, even though Christians continue to call it a worldview. Lots of people I talk to are scientific rationalists. Lots of people I talk to are pragmatists. Lots of people I talk to are inspired by Eastern thought. Some of the people I talk to borrow from all of the above – these are the people that we have incorrectly labeled “post-moderns.” Let me repeat:
Post-modernism is not a stand alone philosophy. Christians have completely mislabeled and misunderstood this philosophical undercurrent.
What you need to be studying is the philosophy of Richard Rorty.
Post-modernism is a critique of modernism and is not a standalone worldview. However, Richard Rorty took the post-modern skepticism and married it to another philosophy: pragmatism. Rorty was a philosophy professor at Yale (1956-57), Army (57-58), Wellesley (58-61), Princeton (61-82), Virginia (82-98), and Stanford (98-2005). Here is a brief outline of Rorty’s thought:
1. Propositions are true if they are helpful, and not because they have a one-to-one relationship with facts.
2. Language is a game, because words are defined by other words, which are defined by other words, which are often defined by the original word in question (heavily borrowing from later Wittgenstein and post-structuralism)
3. All language is contingent. There is no link between language and reality.
4. Therefore, Truth is incoherent and pointless. No Final Vocabulary exists (Rorty’s way of denying the existence of absolute truth)
5. The ideal person is the ironist – a person who: 1. skeptical of final vocabulary 2. Argument within ones current vocabulary cannot dissolve such skepticism 3. As they philosophize about their situation they do not think that their vocabulary is somehow closer to reality than others. People that have exhibited these traits according to Rorty – Nietzsche, Foucault, Heidegger, Proust, and Derrida.
6. Final vocabulary leads to cruelty, therefore it must be rejected.
7. What is true is what works. What works is what is true.
Richard Rorty has blended post-modernism with pragmatism, in what I call post-modern-pragmatism. This is what well-meaning Christians have been trying to explain but been unable to have the correct taxonomy. Is everyone in America a post-modern-pragmatist? absolutely not (and I am not sure why so many call ‘our culture’ post-modern). Is there a trend towards the ideas of Rorty in Western Europe and the United States? In my view, yes.
The tricky thing about post-modern-pragmatism is that it does not need to be true for people to desire it and adhere to it – it merely needs to “work for them.” Revisiting the conversation I have had countless times from the beginning of this post – these people are espousing the ideas of Richard Rorty. The whatever-works-for-you worldview is post-modern-pragmatism and not post-modern thought.
Christians have been unable to deconstruct post-modern-pragmatism because they have mislabeled it and been applying the wrong arguments against it. The glaring weakness in Rorty’s (and any post-structuralist) thinking is that it is still subversively is appealing to Final Vocabulary in order to deconstruct Final Vocabulary. In other words, his argument is still essentially:
There is no truth, besides this one.
Post-modern-pragmatism is essentially a bait-and-switch. Worldviews have always been judged on two criteria: is it true? AND does it work? Rorty attempted to make those two separate questions, one single question by defining the two terms circularly as being synonymous with the other. It is a diabolical yet ultimately silly philosophy. The reason it is so powerful is that people employ this philosophy to justify their mutually exclusive beliefs and sin. When confronted with the fact that they hold mutually exclusive beliefs they respond, “that’s ok, it works for me.”
I believe the central reason why evangelicals have missed the target by so far on “post-modernism” is because evangelicals are intellectually lazy. Further, this laziness is always seeking to pigeon hole the many ideas and many cultures of a massive country into a really small box that they can then apply assembly line tools to fix (modernism still rears its ugly head in the evangelical). Moving forward, evangelicals need to be more precise and more rigorous in understanding cultural and philosophical trends and ideas. Up next we will examine how evangelicals have done this, why they have done it, and what we need to do instead.
(if you care to read Rorty for yourself, the best summary of his thought is his book Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity)
Modern Pensées 