Comments on: Defining Terms: Evangelical and Post-Evangelical http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical ...dispatches from the post-evangelical wilderness Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:14:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Chris R Armstrong http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-546908 Chris R Armstrong Tue, 03 Aug 2010 10:00:35 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-546908 Great article, Mike. Thank you. You mention the politicizing of evangelicals that began in the 1970s and 80s over the sexual revolution, abortion, and so forth. If I may immodestly offer an article on this shift that I just posted, I think it can contribute helpfully to the conversation--especially of the relationship between the terms "evangelical" and "fundamentalist." Though people rarely claim this term for themselves any more (the media having thoroughly stigmatized it), it is worth thinking about how streams from old-style fundamentalism surfaced in the 1980s and changed the direction of many of the very evangelicals who had, starting in the 1940s, sought to separate themselves from the "fightin' fundies"--at least in their pugnacious "angularity" to American culture, if not in their core beliefs. The article may be found here: http://gratefultothedead.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/fundamentalism-since-the-1970s-an-in-depth-article/. Keep up the good work! Great article, Mike. Thank you.

You mention the politicizing of evangelicals that began in the 1970s and 80s over the sexual revolution, abortion, and so forth. If I may immodestly offer an article on this shift that I just posted, I think it can contribute helpfully to the conversation–especially of the relationship between the terms “evangelical” and “fundamentalist.”

Though people rarely claim this term for themselves any more (the media having thoroughly stigmatized it), it is worth thinking about how streams from old-style fundamentalism surfaced in the 1980s and changed the direction of many of the very evangelicals who had, starting in the 1940s, sought to separate themselves from the “fightin’ fundies”–at least in their pugnacious “angularity” to American culture, if not in their core beliefs.

The article may be found here: http://gratefultothedead.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/fundamentalism-since-the-1970s-an-in-depth-article/.

Keep up the good work!

]]> By: Defining Evangelical and Post-Evangelical « Alcestiseshtemoa's Blog http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-546439 Defining Evangelical and Post-Evangelical « Alcestiseshtemoa's Blog Sun, 01 Aug 2010 19:04:22 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-546439 [...] August 1, 2010 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical [...] [...] August 1, 2010 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical [...]

]]> By: Pat http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-546159 Pat Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:25:37 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-546159 Thank you. "Some have remained within evangelical churches of one kind or another, and have chosen to live in alternative fashion to the prevailing culture." This is what I chosen to do for yet one more year in the church where I'm currently serving. I had decided not to return to my leadership position for next year and then I became broken and spent a couple of weeks wrestling with God. It's the hardest thing for me to do and I even question why I'm in this church because there is such a resistance to new things and to thinking biblically versus relying on the old formulas which have worked in the past. It's such a daunting task to think about returning, but I trust that God has something in this for me. Thank you.

“Some have remained within evangelical churches of one kind or another, and have chosen to live in alternative fashion to the prevailing culture.”

This is what I chosen to do for yet one more year in the church where I’m currently serving. I had decided not to return to my leadership position for next year and then I became broken and spent a couple of weeks wrestling with God. It’s the hardest thing for me to do and I even question why I’m in this church because there is such a resistance to new things and to thinking biblically versus relying on the old formulas which have worked in the past. It’s such a daunting task to think about returning, but I trust that God has something in this for me.

]]> By: Read how to? for internet, travel, gadgets http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-546079 Read how to? for internet, travel, gadgets Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:16:09 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-546079 <strong>Laos Travel Tips - How to Show Your Respect...</strong> I found your entry interesting thus I've added a Trackback to it on my weblog :)... Laos Travel Tips – How to Show Your Respect…

I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog :) …

]]> By: Danielle http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-546022 Danielle Fri, 30 Jul 2010 19:19:18 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-546022 I think your point about revivalism is apt -- even though most people don't believe sinless perfection follows conversion, revivalism does pictures the transition from "dark" to "light" and from the "world" to "God" in very stark terms. This language has consequences. It sets up the expectation that a believer who is in the light is also in the right -- conversely, those opposing him are lost in darkness, not equals with a potential valid perception of the world. Thus self-criticism may be de-emphasized and criticism of the outside world heightened to a fever pitch. Problems the believer faces will tend to be described as an attack from "the world" and "Satan" on true believers. An example: A friend of a friend recently posted the following message on Facebook: "The longer I am married, the more I believe that Satan and the world does not want Christians to remain married." Satan ... OK, maybe. But who is "the world"? When did this world develop a unified opinion -- or even an interest -- in Joe Christian's marriage? And why are Joe Christian's marital difficulties the fault of Satan and the world, rather than himself? The logic is troubling. I think your point about revivalism is apt — even though most people don’t believe sinless perfection follows conversion, revivalism does pictures the transition from “dark” to “light” and from the “world” to “God” in very stark terms. This language has consequences. It sets up the expectation that a believer who is in the light is also in the right — conversely, those opposing him are lost in darkness, not equals with a potential valid perception of the world. Thus self-criticism may be de-emphasized and criticism of the outside world heightened to a fever pitch. Problems the believer faces will tend to be described as an attack from “the world” and “Satan” on true believers.

An example: A friend of a friend recently posted the following message on Facebook:

“The longer I am married, the more I believe that Satan and the world does not want Christians to remain married.”

Satan … OK, maybe. But who is “the world”? When did this world develop a unified opinion — or even an interest — in Joe Christian’s marriage? And why are Joe Christian’s marital difficulties the fault of Satan and the world, rather than himself?

The logic is troubling.

]]> By: one more Mike http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-545970 one more Mike Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:29:15 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-545970 Maybe it's a geographic phenomenon/anomaly; evangelical churches in my region are either mega-church wannabees, or fundamentalist YEC cults. I know there are no perfect churches, but we just have too give up to much of our conscience to fit in those communities. There are a lot of Catholic, Episcopal, Presbyterian and Lutheran churches of all varieties here though. Maybe we'll wander over to those neighborhoods for a look. The worst that can happen is we fail another set of tests and keep on wandering. Is thisbecause my name is Mike? Maybe it’s a geographic phenomenon/anomaly; evangelical churches in my region are either mega-church wannabees, or fundamentalist YEC cults. I know there are no perfect churches, but we just have too give up to much of our conscience to fit in those communities. There are a lot of Catholic, Episcopal, Presbyterian and Lutheran churches of all varieties here though. Maybe we’ll wander over to those neighborhoods for a look. The worst that can happen is we fail another set of tests and keep on wandering.

Is thisbecause my name is Mike?

]]> By: Danielle http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-545946 Danielle Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:33:39 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-545946 It is worth noting that fundamentalism is a specific historical movement. That movement has typically affirmed certain beliefs and fostered certain attitudes, but it cannot be defined by any single doctrine or trait (being 'judgmental', etc.). I think what you are observing in fundamentalism its strong sense of being at war -- with various adversaries. It arose as a protest movement against developments in mainstream Protestant churches & consequently has emphasized crusading against error and apostasy. Many of fundamentalism's greatest obsessions and rhetoric make more sense when this history is taken into account. As an offshoot movement, evangelicals basically share the same heritage and most of the same tendencies, but tend to be more moderate in some questions ... sometimes more pragmatic or mainstream in their tone. A fundamentalist and an evangelical generally hold very similar beliefs and exist in overlapping interpersonal and institutional networks; they just exist at different points on the same continuum. As Jerry Falwell put it, "A fundamentalist is an evangelical who is mad about something." :p It is worth noting that fundamentalism is a specific historical movement. That movement has typically affirmed certain beliefs and fostered certain attitudes, but it cannot be defined by any single doctrine or trait (being ‘judgmental’, etc.). I think what you are observing in fundamentalism its strong sense of being at war — with various adversaries. It arose as a protest movement against developments in mainstream Protestant churches & consequently has emphasized crusading against error and apostasy. Many of fundamentalism’s greatest obsessions and rhetoric make more sense when this history is taken into account.

As an offshoot movement, evangelicals basically share the same heritage and most of the same tendencies, but tend to be more moderate in some questions … sometimes more pragmatic or mainstream in their tone. A fundamentalist and an evangelical generally hold very similar beliefs and exist in overlapping interpersonal and institutional networks; they just exist at different points on the same continuum.

As Jerry Falwell put it, “A fundamentalist is an evangelical who is mad about something.” :p

]]> By: Chaplain Mike http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-545935 Chaplain Mike Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:07:51 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-545935 On the subject of Communion, once a month has been the pattern in most churches I've been with, Michael. But there have been plenty of times in my evangelical church experience that worship at the Lord's Table has felt like an "afterthought." And I've often lamented that I as a pastor, our church leadership and people didn't really know what to do with communion other than squint our eyes real tight, try to imagine Jesus on the cross, and feel sorry that our sins put him there. Not always. But only rarely was communion integrated into the service as seamlessly and meaningfully as it is in the liturgical traditions, where the practice of worship is defined by both Word and Table. On the subject of Communion, once a month has been the pattern in most churches I’ve been with, Michael. But there have been plenty of times in my evangelical church experience that worship at the Lord’s Table has felt like an “afterthought.” And I’ve often lamented that I as a pastor, our church leadership and people didn’t really know what to do with communion other than squint our eyes real tight, try to imagine Jesus on the cross, and feel sorry that our sins put him there. Not always. But only rarely was communion integrated into the service as seamlessly and meaningfully as it is in the liturgical traditions, where the practice of worship is defined by both Word and Table.

]]> By: dumb ox http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-545919 dumb ox Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:26:53 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-545919 I'm chewing on where this idea of innocence comes from. Schlesinger's article goes into more detail, associating it with the enlightenment idea of the perfectability of man. I think social evolution comes into play as well. But revivalism may be the real culprit - particularly in the teachings of Charles Finney. Revivalism teaches sinless perfection - instantaneously through a conversion experience. If I buy into this, self-criticism becomes impossible, because it would imply less than perfection, which in-turn implies a false-conversion. Rather than justifying my actions, I must assume that all my actions are perfect and in accordance with God's will. External criticism becomes the work of the devil to discourage and destroy us. We are the "saved", and everyone else is the "sinner". The elephant in the middle of the room is the incompatibility between the ideal of innocence and sinless perfection and the doctrine of the fall. If we truly believe in Genesis, that we by nature are sinners and heirs of the sinful nature, how can we be so sure that everything we do is "right"? I’m chewing on where this idea of innocence comes from. Schlesinger’s article goes into more detail, associating it with the enlightenment idea of the perfectability of man. I think social evolution comes into play as well. But revivalism may be the real culprit – particularly in the teachings of Charles Finney. Revivalism teaches sinless perfection – instantaneously through a conversion experience. If I buy into this, self-criticism becomes impossible, because it would imply less than perfection, which in-turn implies a false-conversion. Rather than justifying my actions, I must assume that all my actions are perfect and in accordance with God’s will. External criticism becomes the work of the devil to discourage and destroy us. We are the “saved”, and everyone else is the “sinner”. The elephant in the middle of the room is the incompatibility between the ideal of innocence and sinless perfection and the doctrine of the fall. If we truly believe in Genesis, that we by nature are sinners and heirs of the sinful nature, how can we be so sure that everything we do is “right”?

]]> By: Headless Unicorn Guy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/defining-terms-evangelical-and-post-evangelical/comment-page-1#comment-545918 Headless Unicorn Guy Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:24:44 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=10055#comment-545918 Culture War Without End can all too easily turn you into a Veteran of the Psychic Wars. Culture War Without End can all too easily turn you into a Veteran of the Psychic Wars.

]]>