Short Book Review :: Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism

Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology) is an important book for evangelicals and non-evangelicals alike. Zondervan should be applauded for this project.

I found this book informative and instructive. As the reader might expect, four contributors were asked to write essays representative of four diverse strands within evangelicalism, with each essay being followed by a response from the other three contributors. This review will not focus on the specific arguments of Kevin Bauder (Fundamentalism), Albert Mohler (Confessional), John Stackhouse (Generic), and Roger Olson (Postconservative). Instead, I will keep my comments more general, and more brief.

The contributors were instructed to focus their essays on three concerns within evangelicalism: Christian cooperation (i.e., Evangelicals and Catholics Together and the Manhattan Declaration), views on doctrinal boundaries (i.e., open theism and the Evangelical Theological Society), and the gospel, with a focus on penal substitutionary atonement.

Each author focuses on these issues to varying degrees, so do not expect a fully developed treatment of each issue within each essay, but instead expect each argument to focus on the issue deemed central and vital by that particular author. Mohler and Bauder focus more energy on the gospel itself, and the accompanying doctrinal boundaries that should come to define true evangelicalism. Stackhouse and Olson focus on cooperation within the movement itself, and the doctrinal basis for evangelicalism's diversity.

The essays shed light, and generate heat. Each author illuminates the views associated with their perspective, and often generate critique or highlight friction points between their own approach and that of their fellow evangelicals. Thus, I found each essay instructive and challenging in its own right, and the ensuing response essays helped to underscore differences as well as points of agreement. This book represents dialogue and conversation well done among those with a common commitment to Christ, and an honesty concerning the differences that exist among evangelical Christians. In that respect, it is an edifying work, clarifying and building up, convincing and persuasive. My own views on evangelicalism align most closely with that of John Stackhouse, though I found myself appreciating Bauder, Mohler, and Olson as well.

If you wish to learn more about evangelicalism, this book will help.

Tebowing, Tebowing, Tebowing!

Tebowing is defined thus:

(vb) to get down on a knee and start praying, even if everyone else around you is doing something completely different.

The images speak for themselves.

I think I like this meme because it is so utterly ridiculous.  I am mostly indifferent concerning Tim Tebow.  I am a Dallas Cowboys fan, a resident of Kansas City (should I then hate Tebow as a member of the Broncos, de facto?), and care little for SEC football and his affiliation with The University of Florida.  I applaud Tebow for his convictions.  I am bewildered by the treatment he receives from the media (a mixture of disbelief that evangelical Christians such as Tebow exist apart from stereotypes, combined with amazement such a figure might start in an NFL game despite possessing an elongated throwing motion).  I am sometimes surprised by the cult nature of his fandom, as well as that of his opposition.

That being said, I wish Tebow every success.

One of the most interesting pieces I have seen concerning Tebow was written by Brian Phillips of Grantland.  For enemies of Tebow and his religiousity, this quote is priceless: "But if you're against Tebow, you can't read too much into Tebow's failures, or else Tebow has already won."  You'll have to read the piece to ascertain the importance of this assertion.  And it really is too good to pass up, not only as an entertaining sports column, but as a provocative piece of a/theological reflection.

Read the Grantland piece.  Find a nice spot to do some Tebowing.  And take some pictures.

Bible. Not Business Leadership Books.

Photo Credit: RVing Gal via Flickr

Check out this blog post from Scot McKnight, "The Evangelical Flip and a Call for a Conference."  McKnight writes:

Evangelical pastors have flipped in the last generation. 30-40 years ago what most incited excitement was a new book by the arch-pastor and expositor, John Stott, expositing a New Testament book or a J.I. Packer book on theology. Today's evangelicals pastors are enamored with the latest book on leadership, like that morsel of an idea in the book called Tribes, or the latest book on management, or the latest fad in creativity. 

These are often pastors who, if we were to ask them what is in some Old Testament book or some chapter in Ephesians, to take two soundings, would not know what we were talking about.

When good pastors or good scholars come out with insightful expositions of pastoral leadership, and stick to what the Bible says or even plumb the depths of some of the great books on pastoral leadership -- like Pope Gregory, we see almost no interest.

So let me say this: (too many) evangelical leaders have become too enamored with management skills and techniques and have neglected the nitty-gritty of soaking themselves in the great texts of the Old and the New Testament.

We need a conference, at some church, devoted to one thing: two days of exposition of key biblical texts on pastoral theology and ministry. And no one can bring up a modern management or leadership expert; and no publisher or book table present can sell anything but commentaries.

Who will host it? Who wants to know what the Bible says?

McKnight is spot on here, I think.  Watch this video from The Nines.  I'm not saying that Scott Wilson doesn't know and teach the Bible, but I think it strengthens McKnight's case.

My observations of many church leaders match this assessment of our situation, as it appears that using the latest marketing fad or technique, the trendiest bit of technology, or the hottest leadership approach outweighs our urgency in matters of right doctrine and teaching, knowing the biblical story, and discipling people in the way of Jesus.  Discipling people, maturing people is hard.  So is building a successful organization.  But one has more tangible metrics than the other, and thus the temptation is to build a good organization, rather than to always ensure that we are moving people forward and focusing on mission, all while remaining innovative.

With that being said, I recognize that there is benefit from reading business, marketing, and leadership books.   I do this all the time.  My title clearly overstates the case.  But in this instance, the case needs overstating.  I want to meet more people who have internalized the narrative of Scripture and know how to contextualize God's salvific work for our world today, providing direction, vision, and answers for our world that is consistent with both the words of the Bible and the best of our historic, theological reflection.  Seth Godin is great, and I've read Jim Collins.  They have things to teach us.  But we have to know our story, the story of Scripture, if we are to best incorporate those truths we learn from other sources into faithful ecclesial practice.

What does "evangelical" mean, really?

Photo Credit: A.J. GuptillWell, the definition of the word "evangelical" has brought about some buzz, thanks to Rob Bell.  Bell was interviewed by Michael Paulson of the Boston Globe, and a bit of that interview was posted to Out of Ur, which I will quote below.  Bell has found the transcript of the interview "maddening," saying that much of what he said was omitted, and has responded on his Twitter page.  What does it mean to be an evangelical, really?  Here's the portion stirring the discussion:

From The Boston Globe:

Q. What does it mean to you to be an evangelical?

A. I take issue with the word to a certain degree, so I make a distinction between a capital E and a small e. I was in the Caribbean in 2004, watching the election returns with a group of friends, and when Fox News, in a state of delirious joy, announced that evangelicals had helped sway the election, I realized this word has really been hijacked. I find the word troubling, because it has come in America to mean politically to the right, almost, at times, anti-intellectual. For many, the word has nothing to do with a spiritual context.

Q. OK, how would you describe what it is that you believe?

A. I embrace the term evangelical, if by that we mean a belief that we together can actually work for change in the world, caring for the environment, extending to the poor generosity and kindness, a hopeful outlook. That’s a beautiful sort of thing.

More discussion can be found here at Monday Morning Insight.  Scot McKnight has also chimed in.

So, how do you define the term "evangelical"?  Why do you think this causes such a stir?  Do you identify as an evangelical?  Why or why not?