Posted on 02/03/2009 8:11:58 PM PST by fkabuckeyesrule
One of the most frustrating things for those of us who love accuracy in the use of words and terminologies is the torture the word "evangelical" receives at the hands of the media, in general, and many Christians, in particular. Most people use the term "evangelical" as a catchall phrase to describe non-Catholic Christians. Political commentators ignore the theological origin completely and simply use it as another term for "politically conservative."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
It's all politics.
Guess I am an evangelical then. :)
Good article.
Perfect summation!
I think a major issue here is that fundamentalism and evangelicalism get confused, because fundamentalists rarely identify themselves as “fundamentalists,” but rather “evangelicals.”
This is my very first post as a Freeper. I think that is a wonderful article and describes an Evangelical perfectly. And yes, I’m one!
In Europe, “Evangelical” refers to the Lutheran churches.
typically evangelicals believe that Jesus is fully God and fully Man. The liberal christians believe that Jesus is fully Man.
Lots of us evangelicals here. Welcome to FR!!
I agree that there is confusion, particularly among the media, and among non-evangelicals in general. Fundamentalists are almost all evangelistic (Primitive Baptists and Old Order Amish are the only exceptions I am aware of), but my experience has been that fundamentalists are not at all shy about identifying themselves as such, and in fact avoid the label "evangelical". Those who identify themselves as evangelicals (e.g., members of the National Association of Evangelicals) are generally not fundamentalists.
Let me change that a bit to correct it:
Christians believe that Jesus is fully God and fully Man. Those not Christian believe that Jesus is fully Man.
By definition, if they deny His deity, neither would they be Christians They just want to think they are. Big difference. Eternally big difference.
Welcome to FR. No better first post than to claim our Lord Jesus Christ. :)
Scripturally, one might discern between the actual spiritual gift of evangelism from the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher. Both are spiritual gifts of communication. The pastor-teacher has a unique gift from God the Holy Spirit in that person’s human spirit, to be able to spiritually communicate with believers. The Evangelical gift is a unique gift from God the Holy Spirit to that person’s human spirit to spiritually communicate with unbelievers.
In Church History, a movement referred to as Envangelical, is associated with a timeline of around 1730-1860 in some English and American churches. Sometimes the word ‘evangelical’ is referring to those roots and the institutions which evolved from them in the English speaking world.
Fundamentalism, is associated with a conservative theological movement in the early 20th century to hunker down from erosion of liberal theologies.
Here is a link to what appears to be a decent read.
http://www.monergismbooks.com/Understanding-Fundamentalism-and-Evangelicalism-p-16614.html
From http://www.bbcchurch.org/ibs/church_history_II/history2_outline12.pdf
The Fundamentals – Edited by R.A. Torrey, (1910-1930) this series was a compilation of 94 articles in 12 volumes to combat Liberalism – men who paid for this, Stewart brothers from S. Cal – over 3,000,000 sets sent to many seminaries, YMCAs, etc. free of charge – was an effective attempt to further these views.
Out of these publications came the affirmation of the Five Fundamentals:
1. Inerrancy of the Bible
2. Virgin Birth (Virginal Conception) and Deity of Christ
3. Substitutionary atonement
4. Bodily resurrection of Jesus
5. Miracles of Jesus and the Bible are true
(NOTE: In 1919, William Bell Riley’s World Christian Fundamentalist Association added one more: 6.
Premillennial return of Christ).
...
A. New Evangelicalism – Neo-Evangelicalism – This movement is the outgrowth of Fundamentalism –
there is much overlap -
Charles Fuller (1887-1968) and Billy Graham (1918-) as opposed to arrogance and stubbornness and separationism of Fundamentalists – were against the hardcore approach – Fuller and Graham led this dialogue to join Evangelicals in a kinder, gentler Fundamentalism - this is the time of the rise of the new evangelicalism. - This was the term used by Harold J, Ockenga (Pastor of Park St. Church in Boston, 1936-1969)
It differed from older fundamentalism in three respects:
1. No longer a requirement for Premillennialism
2. No longer divisive over Separationism – Fundamentalists wanted 2nd order separationism – to not be in fellowship
with someone who was in fellowship w/ those who were not conservative enough.
3. Committed to social ministry as well as evangelism – C.F. Henry “The Uneasy Conscience” – E.J. Carnell helped form Fuller TS (1947) and Christianity Today (1946) – they were all inerrantists – didn’t agree on all issues and there was some diversity (esp. eschatology, Calvinism) – Fuller later moves away from Conservatism – new Evangelical
seminaries, Trinity, Fuller, Gordon-Conwell and Westminster. Represented new united conservative front
without the harsher anti-intellectualism and separatism of older Fundamentalists, they were friendly with many
conservatives on all sides – many parachurch ministries grew out of the Evangelical Movement – Navs, Campus Crusade, IVCF, Young Life, FCA etc. – Francis Schaeffer, C. S. Lewis key proponents
It appears there is enough meat on this topic to fuel a seminary course in church history, and many seminaries appear to offer such a course discerning between ‘Evangelicalist and Fundamentalist’.
I'm going to pass it along to my dad, who, not uncoincidentally, happens to be a pastor-teacher.
Thank you for the warm welcome. I’m excited to be a newbie!
By definition, if they deny His deity, neither would they be Christians They just want to think they are. Big difference. Eternally big difference.
..........
agreed
The above is a Calvinist boundary -- not an Evangelical one.
Once saved, always saved? Well, Scripture is clear (John 10, for example) that God will never let us go. But that doesn't mean people can't wrestle themselves away from God and divorce Him. Paul told Timothy that despite our unfaithfulness, God remains faithful to us. But that doesn't mean that some believers don't become apostates and up and desert God.
People can be eternally secure in Christ -- especially considering that eternal life begins now vs. heaven.
(But that doesn't mean all people will be eternally secure...Many are called...few are chosen)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.