Addendum to my first post about evangelicalism

Last updated on: August 18, 2011 at 7:32 pm by Roger E. Olson

Addendum to my first post about evangelicalism 2011-08-18T19:32:18-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Needless to say, my first post about evangelicalism was incomplete. There’s so much more to be said about this subject. Here I want to continue my delineation of the term “evangelical” and the movement called “evangelicalism.” I’m not going to take back anything I wrote there, but I’d like to add to it.

First, about Noll’s and Bebbington’s four hallmarks of authentic evangelicalism. I would add a fifth as part of the historical-theological core of the evangelical movement and its theology: a general respect for the Great Tradition of Christian orthodoxy as that was carved out by the early church fathers and the first four ecumenical councils (which were all accepted by the Protestant Reformers) and as that was expressed consensually by the Protestant reformers of the 16th century. To the best of my knowledge, the evangelical movement as a whole–going back to Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley (who I consider the twin “grandfathers” of the evangelical movement)–has always held that consensual tradition of Christian Protestant orthodoxy in high respect. That doesn’t mean slavish adherence; this respect is consistent with occasionally challenging some part of it (and especially ways in which it has been interpreted and enforced).

That means the evangelical consensual core includes acceptance of the doctrines of the Trinity, the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ, salvation by grace alone through faith alone as normative. Am I now identifying a boundary? I don’t think so. Let me give an example. Some years ago a young evangelical scholar wrote an article for Christian Scholar’s Review challenging the Chalcedonian definition of Christology. He argued from Scripture and reason that a better formula is “the one-natured God-man.” He demonstrated that his was not merely a repetition of monophysitism or the Eutychian heresy. Some people wanted to cast him out of the evangelical movement. (My response is, of course–Who has the authority or power to do that?) One evangelical journal declined to publish his article simply because it raised questions about Chalcedon!

This man’s name is not important and I don’t want to cite it here because I don’t want to cause him any grief if he has gone on to teach in an evangelical college or university. My point is that in my postconservative paradigm of evangelicalism he is NOT automatically non-evangelical just because he dared to raise serious questions and doubts about the Chalcedonian definition of Christology. I would have problems acknowledging him as a fellow evangelical, however, if he declared that he does not believe in the basic Christian theme of the incarnation. He did not do that. He affirmed belief, with all evangelicals, that Jesus Christ is God and Savior.

Much of the debate about who is and who is not an evangelical comes down to differences of opinion about the importance of certain doctrines. I have my doubts about the authenticity of a person’s evangelicalism (to say nothing of his or her Christian faith) who blatantly and knowingly denied the deity of Christ, the Trinity (God is one substance shared equally by three eternal persons), salvation by grace alone through faith alone or the sole supreme authority of Scripture for all matters of faith and Christian life. HOWEVER, these core doctrines are open to varying interpretations and it is not always easy to tell who really does and who does not believe them.

For example, I have good friends who say they do not believe in the Trinity but who very openly and passionately embrace the deity of Jesus Christ. They are “Oneness Pentecostals.” I have come to believe they are simply confused. I attended one of their churches and a soloist sang the song “Oh, Lamb of God.” The first line (as I recall) is “From your side you sent your Son.” Afterwards, I queried my Oneness Pentecostal host about this and he affirmed his belief that the “your” is the Father. I said “Well, you’ve just affirmed the basic idea of the Trinity.” His response? “Well, we believe whatever the Bible says.” I just shook my head at such confusion.

In every other way my Oneness friends are evangelical. (Yes, they baptize in the “name of Jesus Christ” and some of them think they are the only “real Christians.” But I don’t consider the first characteristic heretical and I see real softening of the second one among them.) Are some Oneness Pentecostals evangelicals? You see, in my paradigm of evangelicalism, there’s usually no absolute, black-or-white answer to such a question. Why not just say “They are except in this one area where perhaps they are not yet fully with the historical evangelical consensus?” Who doesn’t harbor some heresy in some corner of his or her mind?

In my book Reformed and Always Reforming I point out that for years many conservative evangelicals were insisting that the Local Church movement of Witness Lee and his followers was not evangelical or even Christian. Most of them have recently had to back off of that claim. Gradually, through dialogue and further, more carefuly study, even some of the movement’s harshest evangelical critics have had to admit that they were wrong. Could it be that in many cases what people say is not always exactly what they mean? Could it be that knowing what they mean often takes long, careful dialogue? I think so. I have found that to be the case in so many situations where I thought a person or group was heretical but after much hard work and sympathetic listening discovered they are not.

Let me explain by citing one more example. Some good folks who believe in baptismal regeneration claim to be evangelicals IN THE SENSE of the movement identified by Noll and Bebbington (and I might add by Marsden and other historians of the evangelical movement). This would seem to conflict with the second hallmark: conversionism. I struggle with this. Does their belief in baptismal regeneration automatically mean they are not authentically evangelical? I have to say not. However, I would say that AT THIS POINT their belief and practice is not fully consistent with the historic evangelical consensus UNLESS they go on to say that a person saved by baptism must later experience a personal conversion in order to enjoy the fullness of regeneration. (John Wesley fell into this category as did many of the early Pietists.)

My basic point is that there are five general hallmarks of authentic evangelical faith, but these are not litmus tests that can be used to kick someone out of the movement (if that were even possible). I believe we evangelicals can agree to disagree about many matters of faith and practice while together enjoying the gospel of Jesus Christ and its transforming benefits. Let’s stop talking about “evangelical boundaries” in a way that demonstrates an intention to exercise magisterial control by excluding people from our movement.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

July 29, 2010

My first foray into blogging! What is "evangelicalism?"

Next Post

August 2, 2010 Why I care about evangelicalism

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Revelation, what is the correct sequence of events in the End Times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, false prophet rises from earth, mark of the beast given False prophet rises, dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, mark of the beast given Mark of the beast given, dragon cast to earth, beast rises, false prophet rises Beast rises from sea, dragon cast to earth, mark of the beast given, false prophet rises