A Great Blog By Frank Viola

I recently read Jesus Manifesto by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola and thought it was an excellent book. While my views don't perfectly align with theirs on everything they've each written, this particular book was one that I highly recommend you read if you haven't already. It is a stellar book that points us all back to Jesus.

Mike Zenker (GW Canada National Director) sent this blog by Viola to me yesterday and I read it this morning. I've never posted somebody else blog on my own blog before but I think this one is excellent. It does a great job in explaining that among Evangelicals, there is a stirring that leads us neither deeper into conservatism nor liberalism. As Viola states, it leads us forward. I believe that forward movement in grace is the normal result of the Apostle Peter's admonition to "Grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ." As we grow, we change. That's inevitable. Read Viola's thoughts below and see what you think. . .



Beyond Evangelical: Part I

The title of this blog is Beyond Evangelical. But what does that phrase mean? And what does it not mean?

First, “beyond evangelical” doesn’t mean “non-evangelical.” I am an evangelical. What is more, I stand with the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed (just in case anyone was wondering). In this regard, I agree with Alister McGrath’s statement that “evangelicalism is historic Christianity. It’s the standard bearer of historic, orthodox Christianity.”

But the term “evangelical” embraces a wide canopy. So much so that the word is becoming increasingly vague and open to interpretation. Evangelicalism has become a hyphenated movement. For instance, “old-evangelical,” “neo-evangelical,” “conservative-evangelical,” “post-evangelical,” “post-conservative evangelical,” “ecumenical-evangelical,” “charismatic-evangelical,” “young-evangelical,” etc. are all in common use today. American historian Mark Noll rightly points out that evangelicalism is made up of “shifting movements, temporary alliances, and the lengthened shadows of individuals.”

The word “evangelical” has become so generalized that people like Jim Wallis (evangelicalism = social activism/reforms) and Al Mohler (evangelicalism = fundamentalism) stand on the oppose sides of the evangelical spectrum. The same is true for Rob Bell (on the left) and John MacArthur (on the right), both of whom claim to be “evangelical.”

As western culture has balkanized and changed the meaning of words over time, the same is true for religious vocabulary. We can no longer take for granted the meaning of terms like “evangelical” or “evangelicalism.” The evangelical formulas that worked in the past have evolved. So there’s very little consensus today as to their exact meaning.

Second, “beyond evangelical” doesn’t mean “post-evangelical.” Popularized by Dave Tomlinson, the term “post-evangelical” is often equated with the emerging church movement/phenomenon. While I have close friends who identify themselves with this movement, I do not. I appreciate my emergent friends and applaud some of their concerns, while freely disagreeing with other concerns.

In our book Jesus Manifesto, Leonard Sweet and I address what we believe to be some of the critical weaknesses of “emergent” Christianity as it relates to the Person of Jesus Christ (see Chapter 7). We also address some of the critical weaknesses we see in “the Religious Right” (see Chapter 8). Right or wrong, you know where I stand on those issues.

Now here’s something I’d like to say to my friends who are analyzing evangelicalism today. The future of evangelicalism is not restricted to a choice between the left or the right. Another direction exists: It’s forward. As Sweet and I say in our book, "The body of Christ is at a crossroads right now. The two common alternatives are to move either to the left or the right. It’s our observation, however, that we are living in a unique time, when people are frozen as they look in either of those directions. When they look to the left, they decide that they cannot venture there. When they look to the right, they feel the same. Whether they realize it or not, people are looking for a fresh alternative—a third way. The crossroads today, we believe, is one of moving forward or backward." (Jesus Manifesto, p. xiii). Those of us who are moving “beyond evangelical” resonate with that statement. The only gear we have is “forward.”
Third, for many evangelicals, the historical use of the word “evangelical” includes four key notes.

The British evangelical historian David Bebbington has defined the word “evangelical” by the following four notes. Mark Noll also uses this description as well as a host of others.[2] Bebbington’s “evangelical quadrilateral” includes:

* Biblicism - being Bible-centered, which would include the belief that the Bible is the Divinely inspired authority for life and faith; it is trustworthy and sufficient.

* Conversionism – being conversion-centered, which would include the need for being converted to Jesus Christ.

* Crucicentrism - being cross-centered, which would include emphasizing the death of Jesus for salvation.

* Activism – being activist-centered, which would include living the Christian life, evangelizing, and helping those in need.[3]

I hold to all of the above. Therefore, I am an evangelical in the historic sense. But going “beyond evangelical” means asking some incisive questions like . . .

*In what sense is the Bible authoritative? And how exactly does a person hear and encounter God through the Scriptures? What’s the main point of the Bible . . . the grand narrative?

*How is a person converted? And what does conversion give an individual? What does it include?

*What happened at the cross exactly? How does Jesus’ death save us? Does His death on the cross do more than just forgive sins? If so, what?

*How should Christians present the gospel? What is God’s central mission exactly? And what does the Scripture teach concerning how we are to fulfill that mission? (I predict that the question “What exactly is the Mission?” is going to define the missional church conversation over the next 5 years. This is always assumed . . . grossly so. So hide and watch.)

Over the last three years of this blog’s existence, I have weighed-in on some these questions. My books also address them. But I’ve only scratched the surface. This leads us to the next point.

Fourth, those of us who have moved “beyond evangelical” have expanded the evangelical quadrilateral with four additional notes.

* Christ-centered – a recovery of the Bible’s consistent and razor-sharp emphasis that Jesus Christ is supreme, preeminent, sovereign, the center of biblical revelation, and the practical, living head of the church. In today’s evangelicalism, countless religious “themes” and “subjects” have replaced Christ as the centrality and supremacy.[4]

* Resurrection Life-centered – what stands beyond the cross is the resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection means so many things. It means the beginning of the new creation. It means the triumph of God over all things, including death, His greatest enemy. But it also means that God’s people can live in the foretaste of our future resurrection, participating in its life and power here and now. It means that Jesus Christ is still alive, can be known, and has come to live out His resurrected life in and through us. Learning to live by the indwelling life of Christ in a corporate context and all that it involves is a missing note in modern evangelicalism. (The latter is focused on imitating Jesus as an individual through one’s own efforts.) Living by the life of Christ also means being radically sold out to Jesus without being legalistic on the one hand or libertine on the other.[5]

* Body Life-centered – the typical evangelical holds to the idea that the Christian life is an individual pursuit. “Church” is something Christians attend in order to be motivated to go out and serve as an individual Christian and live a strong individual Christian life. But those who have gone “beyond evangelical” believe that the church is, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer put it, Christ existing as community. Church is not a denomination, a service, or something you attend. It’s the experience of the body of Christ, a la, “body life.” In fact, the Christian life doesn’t work outside of a local, shared-life community that’s meeting under the headship of Jesus Christ as His body on the earth. Consequently, how a local church functions and expresses itself is imminently important.[6]

* Eternal Purpose-centered – God has an eternal purpose, or grand mission, that provoked Him to create. That purpose goes beyond the saving of lost souls and making the world a better place. God’s purpose transcends evangelism and social action (both of which are focused on meeting human needs). The eternal purpose is primarily by Him, through Him, and to Him. Meeting human needs is a byproduct, not the prime product.[7]

Contemporary evangelicalism in America is essentially a reactionary movement. As a result, it has produced an “us” vs. “them” mentality. Those of us who have gone “beyond evangelical” have moved on from the early 20th-century fundamentalist vs. modernist debate that our forefathers passionately fought . . . a fight that continues to rope many contemporary Christians into today, some 100 years later. This fight leaves people with a false choice between left or right. The alternative direction of “forward” doesn’t appear on the radar screen.

Those who are “beyond evangelical” have moved on from that battle to discovering, exploring, and displaying the unsearchable riches of Jesus Christ with our brothers and sisters in Christ.(How often do you hear that language in evangelical circles? The vocabulary we find in books like Ephesians emerged from a living experience. An experience that is available to Christians today, though it be rarely found.)

I am not alone in observing the trend of moving “beyond evangelical.” Before his passing, Michael Spencer famously wrote about the coming evangelical collapse. Scot McKnight has written prolifically and intelligently on the present crisis that evangelicalism faces and the pressing need to reshape it. David Fitch has also written on the subject (though more for an academic audience). And a host of others have as well.