Read on Twitter
On why losing “evangelical” is not as big a deal as some worry and may even be a good thing.
It has never had a standard meaning, apart from “related to the Gospel.” Some uses:
1. Origin in the Reformation, making it equivalent to “Protestant” to this day in Europe.
1/8
It has never had a standard meaning, apart from “related to the Gospel.” Some uses:
1. Origin in the Reformation, making it equivalent to “Protestant” to this day in Europe.
1/8
2. Roman Catholics and others use it to refer to the Gospel.
3. During the Great Awakening, revivalists and pietistic movements used it in contrast with churches they viewed as “dead.”
4. It was synonymous with “fundamentalist” during rise of liberalism in early 20th cent.
2/8
3. During the Great Awakening, revivalists and pietistic movements used it in contrast with churches they viewed as “dead.”
4. It was synonymous with “fundamentalist” during rise of liberalism in early 20th cent.
2/8
5. Post WWII, the movement to break from fundamentalism and to gain more social influence, was insulted by fundamentalists as “neo-evangelical.”
“Evangelical” stuck and this is the origin for most uses in our recent memory today. (Note: this only goes back to 1940’s).
3/8
“Evangelical” stuck and this is the origin for most uses in our recent memory today. (Note: this only goes back to 1940’s).
3/8
This use of evangelical has labeled a very loose association of groups founded on very minimal doctrinal standards.
Really, George Marsden’s quip may be one of the most accurate assessments, “an evangelical is someone who likes Billy Graham.”
4/8
Really, George Marsden’s quip may be one of the most accurate assessments, “an evangelical is someone who likes Billy Graham.”
4/8
Given the variety of uses, and lack of any precise meaning, there doesn’t seem much reason for loud laments over how “evangelical” is being used today.
If “Christian,” and even “Gospel,” is subject to varying uses, we may expect a term with even less definition to so morph.
5/8
If “Christian,” and even “Gospel,” is subject to varying uses, we may expect a term with even less definition to so morph.
5/8
Personally, I haven’t used it as an identifier for more than a decade. (It hasn’t kept me up at night).
And I actually think there’s promise in the loss of the term. Christians now must consider their ecclesiastical and confessional identities to identify themselves.
6/8
And I actually think there’s promise in the loss of the term. Christians now must consider their ecclesiastical and confessional identities to identify themselves.
6/8
Perhaps this is why some are so uncomfortable. If you do not belong to a defined ecclesiastical tradition or confessional heritage, losing “evangelical” may feel like losing your identity, cut loose from all precedent.
Though uncomfortable, it’s not all together bad.
7/8
Though uncomfortable, it’s not all together bad.
7/8
For if “evangelical” was your identity, you didn’t have much tradition or precedent anyway.
Christians asking where they belong seems like a good thing. Hopefully many will root themselves in a tradition with more doctrinal and historical moorings than liking Billy Graham.
8/
Christians asking where they belong seems like a good thing. Hopefully many will root themselves in a tradition with more doctrinal and historical moorings than liking Billy Graham.
8/
