Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are Reformed “Evangelical” or “Evangelicals”? (Ecuminic)
Heidelblog ^ | July 26, 2008 | R. Scott Clark

Posted on 07/26/2008 7:13:28 PM PDT by PAR35

Judged on the basis of the Reformed confessions and the classic reformed of theology of the 16th and 17th centuries, there can be no doubt that the Reformed theology, piety, and practice, is evangelical. The great difficulty in this discussion is that, in our time, the word the evangelical no longer denotes what it did in the 16th have the 17th centuries.

Since the 18th century, and particularly since the middle of the 19th century, the word of evangelical has come to denote what I call ”the quest for illegitimate religious experience” (QIRC). By that I mean to say that to be an evangelical, in the modern sense, is to be on a quest for the immediate experience of the risen Christ, apart from Word and sacrament ministry, apart from the means of grace....

Perhaps it would be helpful to distinguish between being “evangelical” and being “an evangelical”? I am the former but not the latter. I deny that much of what has become “evangelical” in the modern period is really evangelical at all. What does modern, post-canonical glossolalia have to with the the evangel? What does the health and wealth message have to do with the evangel? What does taking back America (or any form of the so-called “social gospel”) have to do with the evangel? What does the emerging movement have to do with the evangel? I haven’t even raised the specter of the appalling theology of worship and the consequent practice of most contemporary evangelicals...

(Excerpt) Read more at heidelblog.wordpress.com ...


TOPICS: Evangelical Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: arminian; evangelical; openness; reformed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: Gamecock; PAR35
While most Protestants were at one time evangelicals, the term has been distorted to the point where we must now claim that we are Reformed, period.

I agree. I like the term "reformed." Not only does it refer to the church ridding itself of the errors of Rome through reformation, it also echoes the "new man" in Jesus Christ.

21 posted on 07/27/2008 11:55:38 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
it also echoes the "new man" in Jesus Christ.

I hadn't thought of that. I think I'll 'borrow' that and share it with some folks.

22 posted on 07/27/2008 12:06:53 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

All things work for the glory of God. 8~)


23 posted on 07/27/2008 12:43:08 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Migraine

Amen, Migraine. That’s my thoughts about a person that’s an evangelical. S/he’s a born again believer.


24 posted on 07/27/2008 3:41:40 PM PDT by Marysecretary (.GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
Amen, Migraine. That’s my thoughts about a person that’s an evangelical. S/he’s a born again believer.

That's the problem.

When everybody and his dog, inside and outside of Protestantism, and Christianity itself, has their own different definition of "evangelical", the term looses any precision it might have had.

From the original piece:

Further, it’s not at all clear what it means to say that one is “an evangelical” any longer. ..... Consider that one can be an “evangelical” and affirm inerrancy in the traditional sense or deny it. One can hold to divine sovereignty or deny it. One can hold to the historic doctrine of the Trinity or deny it (via social Trinitarianism). One can affirm the historic Protestant doctrine of justification sola gratia et sola fide or deny it (via NPP or FV). One can affirm an open canon or deny it and be an evangelical. Today there are Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic evangelicals. Perhaps the greatest difference between the old definition of evangelical and the modern is that to be a modern “evangelical” is to deny the doctrine of the church—which follows from the pietist/QIRC trajectory of evangelicalism since the 18th century.

"Evangelical" as a term has a history that dates back at least to the beginning of the Protestant movement in Christianity.

Part of it is an inside/outside problem. Those on the inside of whatever, here conservative Protestants, will make distinctions those on the outside will not. Thus, to the TeeVee, anybody who talks about Jesus and isn't Roman Catholic, uberliberal liturgical mainline or in an overt cult, is evangelical.

Todd Bentley is an evangelical, did you know that? So sayeth that font of truth, Nightline, in their story on him. Thus, my current tagline.

25 posted on 07/27/2008 4:41:24 PM PDT by Lee N. Field (Whatever that raving thug false prophet in Florida is called, I want to be called something else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock; PAR35
I like the term "reformed." Not only does it refer to the church ridding itself of the errors of Rome through reformation, it also echoes the "new man" in Jesus Christ.

How does the term "reformed" differ from the term "evangelical"? I read the article and don't recall seeing any clear definitions. I would consider myself Reformed and Evangelical. I try to present The Gospel at every opportunity, just as I believe all that are Reformed do as well.

26 posted on 07/28/2008 5:52:54 AM PDT by wmfights (Believe - THE GOSPEL - and be saved)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field; Marysecretary; PAR35; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg
One can affirm the historic Protestant doctrine of justification sola gratia et sola fide or deny it (via NPP or FV).

If this is a key element to being an Evangelical, believing we are saved by Grace Alone through Faith Alone in Christ Alone, instead of surrendering the language we should be educating people as to terms. For example, the Romanists manipulate language to their benefit all the time. Calling the bread in the Lord's Supper the "host". People fall into the habit of calling the bread that and it's not a big reach to begin believing something is in it.

27 posted on 07/28/2008 6:09:34 AM PDT by wmfights (Believe - THE GOSPEL - and be saved)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Amen, dear wmfights. You are soooo right.


28 posted on 07/28/2008 7:22:18 AM PDT by Marysecretary (.GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Gamecock; PAR35
All reformed are evangelical. All evangelicals are not reformed.

Therefore, if a person has to pick one designation, reformed works for me because it implies the Scriptural mandate to preach the Gospel to all men. To say we are reformed and evangelical is somewhat redundant.

29 posted on 07/28/2008 1:15:15 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; PAR35; HarleyD; Alex Murphy; Gamecock
IMO "evangelical" has taken on a false note in that as the article says, it implies an immediate sensory experience.

Yes, I tend to agree with you and the author that the word "evangelical" in modern times has been hijacked by misusers and the media. I also agree with him that the word should not be tossed, as there IS legitimate "evangelicalism" out there. We just have to be careful about being clear about what we mean. I still consider myself an "evangelical" because I believe it is the calling and command of God to all true believers to evangelize the true faith. I have always seen that as a GLARING difference between us and Apostolics. The average Apostolic skirts his responsibility and says "That's not my job".

30 posted on 07/28/2008 3:35:29 PM PDT by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock

Folks that claim to be reformed should subscribe to one of the reformed confessions - Baptist Confession of Faith, Westminster Confession, Belgic Confession, Second Helvetic, Canons of Dort, etc.

Evangelical has become so broad as to be almost meaningless at this point. A few weeks ago, I would have said that it covered anyone who has professed faith in Christ as his or her savior, but a recent survey indicates that perhaps some who ought not be considered Christian flock under that banner. “While 48 percent of all evangelicals surveyed think only born-again Christians will go to heaven, 45 percent said they do not believe that.” http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=3267


31 posted on 07/28/2008 5:10:00 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PAR35; Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock
“While 48 percent of all evangelicals surveyed think only born-again Christians will go to heaven, 45 percent said they do not believe that.”

IOW, a sizable number of evangelicals are not Christians. As I read this, 52-55% of those saying they are evangelical do not believe you must be born again, ie., have total Faith in Christ Alone, in order to go to heaven. It seems the appropriate response is to ask them if they are Christians and what does that mean.

32 posted on 07/28/2008 8:45:38 PM PDT by wmfights (Believe - THE GOSPEL - and be saved)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
IOW, a sizable number of evangelicals are not Christians.

They are pagans.

33 posted on 07/28/2008 8:57:25 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Lee N. Field; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper

Historically, the term Evangelical referred to those who believed in the necessity, authority, sufficiency, and perspicuity of Scripture contra the Romanist system and it’s incorporation of Greek pagan philosophy in which the sinner becomes saint through a metaphysical process of elevation on the “scale of being” which makes Scripture insufficient on it’s own right and requires that the Church is itself a continuing organ of revelation to help the sinner elevate his being.

As others have noted, the term today has more to do with an individuals experience rather than a position on the nature of Scripture.


34 posted on 07/28/2008 10:24:17 PM PDT by the_conscience ( “For what is idolatry if not this: to worship the gifts in place of the Giver himself?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience; Lee N. Field; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper
Historically, the term Evangelical referred to those who believed in the necessity, authority, sufficiency, and perspicuity of Scripture...

I didn't know that. IOW, those that hold to Sola Scriptura.

35 posted on 07/29/2008 5:20:35 AM PDT by wmfights (Believe - THE GOSPEL - and be saved)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Yes.


36 posted on 07/29/2008 5:56:06 AM PDT by the_conscience ( “For what is idolatry if not this: to worship the gifts in place of the Giver himself?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience
those who believed in the necessity, authority, sufficiency, and perspicuity of Scripture contra the Romanist system and it's incorporation of Greek pagan philosophy in which the sinner becomes saint through a metaphysical process of elevation on the "scale of being" which makes Scripture insufficient on it's own right and requires that the Church is itself a continuing organ of revelation to help the sinner elevate his being.

Ah, music. 8~)

37 posted on 07/29/2008 10:51:44 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience
contra the Romanist system and it’s incorporation of Greek pagan philosophy in which the sinner becomes saint through a metaphysical process of elevation on the “scale of being” which makes Scripture insufficient on it’s own right and requires that the Church is itself a continuing organ of revelation to help the sinner elevate his being.

What system is this?

38 posted on 07/29/2008 11:03:56 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
What system is this?

The way by which one is reconciled unto the Father and becomes purified to be brought into his presence.

39 posted on 07/29/2008 11:57:58 AM PDT by the_conscience ( “For what is idolatry if not this: to worship the gifts in place of the Giver himself?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson