The State of Evangelicalism

I have been thinking a lot about the identity of evangelicalism in the second decade of the 21th century.  The coalition of the post WWII created by the like of Harold Ockenga (founder of Fuller and Gordon-Conwell Seminaries), Billy Graham, Bill Bright, etc. has simply faded away.  Instead, we have silos throughout the fruited plains:  The Gospel Coalition, Christianity Today, Together 4 the Gospel, Patheos (and others I am not listing) along with individual voices such Brian McLaren, Rachel Evans, Pete Enns, John Franke who are pushing the boundaries of evangelicalism further than anyone could have imagined even 10 years ago.  The debates also take place in evangelical colleges and among publishers rooted in the evangelical tradition.  We are in an age where everything is questioned, especially the givens of Protestant evangelical identity.  The very idea of evangelical "tradition" seems suspect and should be scrutinized and usually needs, it is argued, serious re-thinking.  So it's fair to say the old liberal "hermeneutic of suspicion" has come to our shores.   This makes you long for the good old days when evangelicals argued whether there would be a 1000-year reign of Christ, arminianism vs calvinism, spiritual gifts today and the role of women in the Church. The days of chivalry are over.   Now the debates have moved to a total war approach and deal with far more fundamental issues, including:
1.  Inerrancy and the normative nature of Scripture  ("the Bible is a human product, therefore not a perfect record")
2.  Historicity of the Biblical record ("theologically true, but not always historical")
3.  Creationism (traditional reading of Genesis account is not compatible with the scientific record)
4.  Justification by grace alone through faith alone (redefinitions of justification)
5.  Sexual Identity ("as long as people love each other, they should be able to fulfill their sexual desires")
6.  Uniqueness of Christ ("not everyone needs to hear the Gospel in order to be saved")


At the same time, those who defend a traditional definition of these doctrines tend to be dismissed as "fundamentalists."  While we have to be careful in drawing tight connections, the situation is not unlike the modernist-fundamentalist controversy of almost a century ago, except now the modernists are intellectual evangelical progressives and the "fundamentalist" role is taken by those who would question the necessity to jettison these doctrines.

I will take up these issues in future blogs as each of these categories need to be unpacked in more details.  

Inerrancy

In our ever-shifting culture, including within evangelicalism, why is it that we have to defend inerrancy?  Here is a quick clip from the Gospel Coalition that addresses this fundamental question.

The other question I have is, why is it that if you do defend inerrancy, some will accuse you of being a fundamentalist? (which, in case you didn't know, is just about the worst sin one could commit within the progressive branch of the evangelical family.)  For example, if one believes in the reality of creation in Genesis 1 (as opposed to an exclusively functional interpretation of Genesis 1 as John Walton argues), does it make this person de facto a fundamentalist?  In other words, are all creationists fundamentalists? Is theistic evolution the only viable option for "thinking" evangelicals?  I have a hunch some would not be entirely happy with this idea (full disclosure, neither would I).  

For a more developed definition of what it means to be an inerrantist (and what it does not mean), check out also Zondervan's new book on the topic.  While it's part of the "Views" series Zondervan has put out, it's clear that a consensus still exists within mainstream evangelicals on the topic, which is a very good thing.

GCTS Class of 2014

This past weekend was commencement at Gordon-Conwell's main campus in Hamilton.  No one will forget Jim Singleton (Allan Emery)'s illustration of that turtle on the fence post and how it got there (or how it didn't get there, ie. by itself).  And how Claude Alexander talked about how to deal with the mess (the word "manure" was mentioned a lot)  that ministry can be at times.  But to me the real highlight came from the students testimonies on Friday night and on Saturday morning:  the narrative in each case was one of sufferings, crushed dreams and outright tragedies.  In a way, these graduating students who shared their experiences while in seminary have understood something no classroom experience will ever be able to give them:  ministry is a call to a war zone and there will be casualties, co-lateral damage, minefields, etc.   One of my favorite WWII movies and one of my favorite John Wayne movies is "In Harm's Way."  While John Wayne in it survives unbelievable battles (he does die in "The Sands of Iwo Jima"), the point is clear: the days ahead are not "safe," "controlled,"  and "happy,"  but will be filled with extraordinary challenges for each of these graduates.  Hostile environment is also the narrative of Rev 12, "because the devil knows that his time is short."  In the midst of these unavoidable dangers, however, the tone of the students' presentation was not dour, downcast and pessimistic at all.  Instead their spirit was filled with joy and the hope that only the Holy Spirit can give to us in the midst of our trials.  So I felt uplifted and encouraged even as I heard their stories because I got the sense they passed perhaps the hardest exam of their time at GCTS (and it's not even on their transcript!):  how to get through hard times without hardening our hearts against the Lord.  Instead they have grown strong in their faith .  In that, they have shown themselves to be ready for what's ahead and the greater tests that are sure to lie ahead for them. 

More blessed to give than to receive

In our culture of greed and constant acquisition of more goods, this is a great moto to live by that we should promote and pass on to our children (Act 20:35).  We are reading some books as a family these days on financial giving.  One of which is Daring to Live on the Edge by Loren Cunningham, the founder of Youth With A Mission, one of the largest missionary organizations in the world.  It's a quick read but it is chock-full of wonderful principles regarding finances and giving.  Another compelling reason to read the book is that Loren practices what he preaches.  Not a smidgen of corruption there in his life.  If anything, in instances where there have been financial troubles on certain YWAM bases (and what Christian ministry doesn't run into difficult situations), the turn around has come in sometimes extraordinary ways.  One of the (open) secrets of Loren's approach to fundraising is that he doesn't do fund raising.  He speaks of his great vision to fulfill the Great Commission in our generation and that's enough for people to open their pocket books, give away their houses (I've seen it happen at one of these epic worship services in Kona, HI) and/or go into full time missions. 

The other principle Loren often talks about is to act in the opposite spirit.  Financial problems? Give more!  Injustice in the way you have been treated?  Give some more! I call that the "entitlement slayer."  We all have that little voice inside of us that whispers and sometimes shouts: "I deserve more" to which we say, by acting in the opposite spirit:  "God deserves more" (Rom 12:1-2, we are living sacrifices).  In this spirit, there is no sense of a prosperity "gospel" and a mechanical one-to-one relationship between our giving and our own financial increase.  Instead, there is a strong confidence in the prosperity of the Gospel more than anything else.  This gospel-focused giving results in the multiplication of the health and prosperity of the Gospel, rather than of ourselves and our own portfolio. 

musings on the idea of future rewards

Attending three funerals of close family members in the past 16 months has made me think a lot about eternity and how I should prioritize or re-prioritize my life.  Another related question is the matter of rewards.  Can we speak of future eternal rewards? As a good Protestant who takes his justification doctrine straight, I know that my sins are forgiven past, present and future.  So the future of justification is already here in my life in that the final judgment of the End has invaded my present with the verdict of "not guilty."  This verdict rests solely on the completed work of Christ and His obedience in life and death and resurrection.  But what about rewards?  Do we get to have awards, like at a graduation where some receive distinctions while other don't (e.g. Tommy Boy)?  What about the texts that speak to giving an account at the end? 2 Cor 5:10, "for we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil" (see also Roman 14:10).  Or the other famous one in 1 Cor 3:13, "each one's work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done." 

One way to look at this question is to affirm  both a salvation based on Christ's completed works, with the resulting transformed life (= a living faith), and accountability for our lives on earth.  The justified life will be lived out by righteous actions, which will then result in rewards on the last day when our good works will be revealed before the judgment seat of Christ.  Our ultimate "Graduation" (=life eternal) is based on Christ's work on the Cross, but we are still held to account for what we do in the body (see Titus on this in particular) and this is where we'll have the different GPA's, as it were, revealed.  This is perhaps what Paul meant, also in 1 Cor 3, when he concludes his thought in v 14, "If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward."  Then comes the contrasting outcome in v 15, "if anyone's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire."    The same sense of urgency to "do good" is also reflected in Revelation and the stern messages to the churches in Asia Minor (see Thytira in particular, Rev 3: 26-28).    So, our works won't justify and thereby save us before the Holy One of Israel (ask the hapless Isaiah in Isa 6!), but we must be committed to a life of holiness and obedience (1 Peter). 

In the end, however, any notion of future rewards in fact circles right back to God Himself.   He is the One who empowers His servants for service by the Holy Spirit, as Paul makes clear in Romans 8.  God Himself actually gets ALL the glory for our faithful service/rewards (e.g., the visual aid of the elders casting down their crowns before the throne, Rev 4). So we can all take courage in our brief wilderness wanderings on this earth, knowing that the Lord Himself will be our reward!