Get E-Mail Updates

Defining "Evangelical" and Other Unsolved Mysteries

Cathleen Falsani by Katrina Wittkamp.
Cathleen Falsani by Katrina Wittkamp.

As someone who self-identifies as an evangelical Christian, often I begin to feel like the subject of a Discovery Channel documentary, particularly in the midst of a heated presidential election cycle.

It’s Evangelical Week here on Discovery! Travel with us as our explorers track the elusive evangelical in its native habitats. Watch as evangelicals worship, work and play, all captured on film with the latest high definition technology. And follow our intrepid documentary team members as they bravely venture into the most dangerous of exotic evangelical locations — the voting booth!

I understand the interest in us evangelicals, I really do. The way much of the mainstream media covers our communities in the news can make us seem like a puzzling subspecies of the American population, not unlike the Rocky Mountain long-haired yeti. 

Are we really that difficult to comprehend?

In a word, yes.

Last autumn, we here at the God’s Politics blog launched an ongoing series called “What is an Evangelical?” in the hopes of providing a better answer to the question that, apparently, so many of our neighbors and friends in the media are preoccupied with in these days leading to the November 2012 general election where, we are told, evangelical voters may again cast the deciding swing votes.

To that end, we invited a number of evangelical Christian thinkers — pastors, writers, scholars, filmmakers, artists, theologians, etc. — to tell us in their own words what they believe it means to be an evangelical, or, rather, what it should mean.

Not surprisingly, the answers we’ve received and published so far have been as varied and nuanced as the authors themselves. Evangelicals are decided not a monolith.

Here, for your reading pleasure and edification, is a sampling of some of their answers:

Randall Balmer, Episcopal priest and professor of American Religious History at Columbia University:

 Antebellum evangelicalism also included a robust peace movement, and Charles Grandison Finney, the most influential evangelical of the 19th century, excoriated capitalism as utterly inimical to Christianity. Finney allowed that "the business aims and practices of business men are almost universally an abomination in the sight of God." What are the principles of those who engage in business? Finney asked. "Seeking their own ends; doing something not for others, but for self." Other evangelicals echoed Finney's suspicion of business interests, as did evangelicals of a later era, people such as William Jennings Bryan, the three-time Democratic nominee for president. But the one overriding characteristic of these evangelicals was their concern for those on the margins of society.

David Vanderveen, Entrepreneur, Surfer and Author:

Being an Evangelical Christian means accepting grace and being honest about your faith with others. First, I think you have be honest with yourself and God; and, then, when you’re as true as you can be about both what you actually know and what you actually don’t -- that’s what’s worth sharing.

Lynne Hybels, author and co-founder of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill.:

In Jesus I found a radical call to compassionate action in the world. At Jesus' first public appearance he said, "I have come to set the captives free and to preach good news to the poor." Then, through his teaching and life of servanthood, he slowly and methodically turned the values of the powerful Roman Empire upside down. He threw the moneychangers out of the temple because they were exploiting the poor. He said that when we feed the hungry or clothe the naked it's like we're doing it to him. He said to love our enemies, to do good to those who hate us. Jesus changed the rules and ushered in an upside-down Kingdom.

Greg Fromholz, Author, filmmaker and director of the Church of Ireland’s 3Rock Youth Program:

When I think of the question ... my brain, it splits in two. One side hears the word and immediately thinks of a bland, beige, flaccid idea -- something that inspires apathy. The other part of me thinks of brands and what they are now synonymous with. You know, like Kleenex equals tissues, and Hoovers equal vacuums. Evangelical? Well, judgmentalism. Control. Even hatred. And that really bugs me because these are only symptoms of a word no longer living up to its meaning.

Wes Granberg-Michaelson, Author and former General Secretary of the Reformed Church in America:

You can always interview someone who will validate the stereotype. But there are other millions who don’t. Yet, no one seems to notice (or care.) Sensible studies of this elastic group called “evangelicals” reveal those with strong views on the political right, but others with moderate, centrist political convictions, and still more on the progressive side of the spectrum. These views become even more diverse as you look at evangelicals who are younger and those who are non-white — in other words, those parts of the evangelical constituency who are shaping its future.

Linda Midgett, Documentary filmmaker and Emmy Award-winning television producer:

I think an evangelical is someone who believes Jesus is the Son of God, that the Word of God is true, and that we all need redemption from this fallen word. There's other theology I could throw in, but it's pretty boilerplate. And I believe it all, wholeheartedly.

Larry Shallenberger, Pastor and author:

The term "Evangelical" is like a pair of hand-me-down underwear. It's been stretched over so many shapes and sizes that it's lost its snap and doesn't fit anyone anymore. It’s been pulled around the circumference of Mars Hill, Seattle and Mars Hill, Grand Rapids. Billy Graham, Ted Haggard, Jim Bakker, Jay Bakker Benny Hinn, Scot McKnight, Don Miller, Jimmy Carter, W., John Piper, Ken Ham, Jim Wallis, and Bill Hybels have all had their turn sporting this hand-me-down garment.  

Susan Isaacs, Author and actor:

While I may detect a difference between “evangelical Christian” (theological connotation) and “evangelical” (political connotation), a person outside the faith may not. Tell an agnostic you’re an evangelical — meaning you believe in the words of the Apostle’s creed — and he may assume you’re anti-gay, anti-Obama and pro-British Petroleum….I don’t know if we’ll ever divest “evangelical” of its political connotation. We might have to ban the word the way Germany outlawed Hitler as a surname. Which is sad, because the Greek root, evangel, means “good news.”

As you can see from the answers some of our authors have offered, “evangelical” at best has a fluid definition, depending on whether the question is asked in a cultural, religious, historical or political context — and then colored by where both the speaker and the listener situate themselves in those worlds.

Perhaps defining “evangelical” is a bit like trying to define (definitively) what pornography is. To paraphrase former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart in a 1964 Court opinion, I shall not today attempt further to define it, but I know it when I see it.

The best answer I’ve heard lately to the question, “What is an Evangelical,” arrived unexpectedly at a New Year’s Eve party I attended a few weeks ago in the southern California town where I live. Not long before the clock struck 12, a mutual friend casually turned to my longtime friend (and now neighbor) Rob Bell, former pastor of Mars Hill church in Michigan, and casually asked him what “evangelical” really means.

With a glass of champagne in one hand and a smile on his face, Rob answered, “An evangelical is someone who, when they leave the room, you have more hope than when they entered.”

No matter how we might extrapolate what an evangelical is from there, I hope Rob’s answer is one that all of us evangelicals would affirm with a heartfelt, “Amen.”

Cathleen Falsani is Web Editor and Director of New Media for Sojourners. She is author of four nonfiction books, including her latest, BELIEBER!: Fame, Faith and the Heart of Justin Bieber. Follow Cathleen on Twitter @GodGrrl.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: owlcourt

01-19-2012 @ 1:55pm

I am surprised that you self-define as "evangelical." The term has been so corrupted, that it is a disservice to Jesus followers, IMO.  I discontinued using the term when folk immediately associated it with the American right wingers. I think we need to consider a fresh descriptor. (I like "Jesus follower.")

by: charliek2

01-19-2012 @ 2:06pm
in reply to: owlcourt

How about the biblical, "followers of the Way?"

by: charliek2

01-19-2012 @ 2:06pm
in reply to: owlcourt

How about the biblical, "followers of the Way?"

by: Joe-Allen Doty

01-19-2012 @ 3:41pm
in reply to: charliek2

And... calling yourself "Believer" like the members of The Way" did instead of the epithet "Christian" created by Greek-speaking pagans in Antioch, Syria.

by: Sam Hamilton

01-19-2012 @ 2:23pm
in reply to: owlcourt

I don't think we should chuck good terms simply because some people who use the same identifier as we do don't measure up or give people a bad impression.  We should seek to reclaim those terms.  If Christians took your advice and started calling themselves "Jesus followers" then you'd have to find a new term because undoubtably that term would be used by some people you don't want to be affiliated with.  We'd be in a constant state of redefinition.

If evangelicals have gotten a bad rap we should reclaim the term by our actions.

by: suzer

01-29-2012 @ 2:58am
in reply to: owlcourt

Personally, I'd like to return to simply "Christian." Hopefully, by the time someone asks me or I tell them, I've demonstrated through my actions what the word means. (And that it's a positive representation. Which is why I don't have a Jesus sticker on my car.)

by: macarthu

01-19-2012 @ 3:40pm

Just the other day I answered a political phone survey. I'm pretty sure it was an Obama Pac running it. Anyway at the end they went through demographics including religious affiliation. The choices included Protestant, Evangelical, Catholic, etc etc. I thought, only two of those are mutually exclusive. Being a Protestant who consders herself Evangelical but attends a mainstream denomination I really didn't know how to answer properly, but since I had given such stellar liberal answers to the question I thought "what the heck" and threw myself in with the Evangelicals. It will skew that sterotypic curve I thought!

by: Joe-Allen Doty

01-19-2012 @ 3:44pm

I have never been a Catholic/catholic nor a Protestant. I never belonged to any church or denominational church with the Roman Catholic Church or Martin Luther in its official history. To be evangelical, you are required to tell others about the good news of Jesus' free gift of salvation. Church affiliation doesn't matter in that situation. I am a practicing Pentecostal by experience.

by: duhsciple

01-19-2012 @ 4:38pm
in reply to: Joe-Allen Doty

Regardless of label, Christ loves you.

by: Joe-Allen Doty

01-20-2012 @ 2:40pm
in reply to: duhsciple

"Christ" is Jesus' heavenly position title. I prefer to say, "Jesus loves you."

by: jesse3

01-19-2012 @ 4:09pm

I think an additional term will have to be developed to distinguish churches that bless same-sex marriages from those that do not--it seems obvious that this will be the biggest dividing line for churches about 10-20 years from now. What will that term be?

by: BlueDeacon

01-20-2012 @ 8:27am
in reply to: jesse3

In this case, beside the point.

by: jesse3

01-20-2012 @ 3:06pm
in reply to: BlueDeacon

it's actually not beside the point at all...in a few years, the term 'evangelical' won't mean nearly as much to people when deciding on a church and on what to call themselves... gay marriage will be the major dividing line...will the word 'evangelical' be used to distinguish these churches? 

by: BlueDeacon

02-16-2012 @ 1:25pm
in reply to: jesse3

it's actually not beside the point at all...in a few years, the term 'evangelical' won't mean nearly as much to people when deciding on a church and on what to call themselves... gay marriage will be the major dividing line...will the word 'evangelical' be used to distinguish these churches?

Well, the Catholic Church isn't considered "evangelical" but opposes "gay marriage" -- that's where the nomenclature fails.  And also consider that many evangelicals these days aren't opposed to it, whether because of fatigue or a truly changed position.

by: duhsciple

01-19-2012 @ 4:38pm

Labels, labels, labels
Who am I?
What am I?

Human being

Sinner
Saint

Lost
Found

Broken
Healed

In bondage
Liberated

Guilty
Forgiven

Christ-centered
Evangelical
Good News
New Kingdom coming down
From heaven to earth
Regime change
Hunger fed
Dying raised
Enemies reconciled
Offenders forgiven
Abusers stopped
Victims loved
Wrongs righted
Self-righteousness wiped out

From partisan to Party, Banquet, Feast of Christ

Following Christ
Though stumbling, bumbling
First, last, last, first
Serving myself, becoming a slave to others
Me first, Christ first
Spirit of the Living God, fall fresh on me

by: duhsciple

01-19-2012 @ 4:39pm

Regardless of label, Christ loves y'all!

by: pearle78223

01-19-2012 @ 4:58pm

I find this article or blog a little confusing. While growing up a Baptist, I was taught that evangelism meant trying to convince others that they should accept Jesus as their Savior because that was the only way to salvation.

Has that changed?

by: Tom Booker

01-19-2012 @ 5:28pm

I connect the word "evangelical" broadly to any earnest or altruistic Christian, and thus include myself.  Believers who are lukewarm or unfocused upon the ways of God are not included.  It's part of the way of this world that the word is connected to so many other ideas, including those your cited authors refer to.  True evangelicals can never hope to influence (for long) what the world thinks about them, but I hope we don't connect ourselves too closely with the similar term "evangelism", which is a human construct with meanings and connotations among Christians that often keep us away from God's call to teach and witness to the good news.  (See my blog entry of Jan 14, 2011--http://allofmetb.talkspotblogs.com)

by: Pete315

01-19-2012 @ 5:38pm

Labels can be very misleading & deliberately confusing.

I need a new label for me as I believe in a heaven & hell, that marriage is only between a heterosexual male & female, that any sex outside of the marriage bed is wrong, that life is sacred & begins at conception. I further believe that God created only one race, the Human Race & the only way to salvation is through my savior Christ Jesus.

I am sure most folks posting here can recommend a label.

by: rickymit

01-19-2012 @ 5:56pm

Interesting assortment of mostly thoughtful responses (and the responders' titles alone speak of their diversity). However, when I come to the one by Linda Midgett, with all due respect, I am thrown back into a 'cookie-cutter' simplistic theology which to many does not make sense anymore. "Just believe it. I do," Linda says. Sorry, but 99% of us need more than that I think. -- Rick Mitchell

by: urbanladybarber

01-19-2012 @ 11:24pm

How about

e·van·gel·i·cal   [ee-van-jel-i-kuhl, ev-uhn-]

adjective

1. Also, e·van·gel·ic. pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings. 2. belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, especially of the new testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.

by: Joel

01-20-2012 @ 12:03am

Why are soooo many Christians so eager to jump on the bandwagon to identify themselves as evangelical?  The term "evangelical" (whatever people think that means) has never appealed to me and it turns me off more every year.  I am happy being a devout Christian who tries to serve Jesus, supports my church faithfully, I live a compassionate, obedient life for Jesus, donate generously to many Christian and other good causes (including Sojourners), and try to be generous towards others.  And I tell people I am not an evangelical.  Is that okay, or does that label me as "bad" in the eyes of lots of fellow Christians? 

 

by: Rebecca

01-20-2012 @ 1:27am

I am an Indian Christian, a member of the Methodist Church here..I understand the word "evangelical" literally and agree with that..Yet, the word seems to mean different things  in different  contexts..I read the article above and the comments made by Greg Fromholz is the one that I agree with the most.  If only "evangelical" Christians were what the word means literally, there would be no problem but the self-righteous, judgemental, holier-than-thou image that the word brings to mind is the problem..

In recent times, that is exactly what we see, particularly in the US.. Jesus was not judgemental. He was not hypocritical and He was completely against that. ALL human beings are important to Him. He does not descriminate according to colour, wealth, education, class or caste..I speak out against such discriminations in the Christian circles here and I think that kind of hypocricy which allows discrimination but claim to belong to the  Christian faith must be condemned everywhere. If being an "evangelical" means even remotely that one is superior to anyone else, I do not believe it is a good thing..

Jesus loves everything and everybody God created, without exception. He hates sin but loves the sinner. We, humans who call ourselves "Christian", have no other way but to love all who we meet on life's journey..The moment there is discrimination of any kind, the distinction between different types of Christians also comes in and that is wrong.

I agree with the opinions of Jim Wallis and faithfully read all that Sojomail has to offer..:-)

 

by: raiserw

01-20-2012 @ 2:04am

Be careful what you write and possible alternative interpretations. I had to read your ending "definition" several times to make sense out of your closing comment.

I read that an "evangelical" was one who cause enough problems, difficulties, trouble when in the room that hope increased when they left. Not what you intended, but it took me several re-reads to understand what you were saying: an evangelical brings hope to a room and those in it have more hope as a result of the evangelical having been there.

by: csquared78

01-20-2012 @ 8:09pm

David Vanderveen is wrong. The most influential Christian of the 19th century was Charles Spurgeon. Charles Finney is way down on that list. It might be more helpful to ask who is a believer as opposed to try and define an evangelical. Ms. Falsani, again, I ask is a believer one who votes a certain way or only adheres to a certain theology? I will say that a believer is one whose heart has been opened by the power of the Holy Spirit and because of God's incredible love has received the gift of Salvation only offered through Jesus. They have received him as Lord and Savior of their soul. This act of faith by the power of Holy Spirit is how we know if a person is a believer. I would also say it how we will know if someone is also an evangelical. One final thought. I wish Rob Bell would have told the person where the source of that hope comes from instead of being ambiguous. But, in light of his writings I am not surprised. So Ms. Falsani are you a believer?

by: CommLaw

01-21-2012 @ 1:09pm
in reply to: csquared78

I'll respectfully disagree: if you look at what calls itself evangelical today, Finney was the most influential.

If people looked at the definition of evangelical biblically as you suggest, Spurgeon would be the most influential. He should be. Finney was a disaster for the evangelical church.

by: csquared78

01-21-2012 @ 9:47pm
in reply to: CommLaw

Thank you.

by: amphy070

01-25-2012 @ 2:09pm

Normal
0

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

I'm still trying to figure out the difference between Evangelicals, Conservative Christians, Right-Wingers, Tea Party Christians and just plain old "Christians."

That last word was good enough for the first Biblical followers of The Way, why do we need a new term? More words to divide and conquer??? We know whose job that is!

If Evangelicals want to help in the work of the Cross and the message of salvation, they must remember that Christ told us His kingdom is not of this world, not of Democrats, not of Republicans, not of Independents or any other man made anomaly or form of government or political action.

The Bible teaches us to pray for those in authority. We are to render to Caesar what belongs to him, not what is rightfully God's! We are to love the land God has entrusted to us, be good citizens, help the needy, etc.

Never before have there been such insane arguments about a leader's birth certificate, his hidden religion, his devious ulterior motives. And never have many Christians disregarded the moral lifestyle of some presidential candidates as these days. It's very sad to watch how we have lost focus of the Christian message of Love. I believe God is thoroughly displeased with those who call themselves His people but act so differently than His Son Jesus the Christ.

And if the Evangelicals again vote to throw this nation into the hands of the unkind, untruthful, unwilling, we will all get what we deserve; more destructive acts against all but those at the very top of the financial structure.

Yes, Evangelicals, who are you? Take a real good look and you will see what I see: too many self-righteous, hateful pretentious people who have strayed away from the Gospel of Jesus the Christ.

I hope you will decide to accept the truth about yourselves.

Those who are real Evangelicals, please pray for the others so our nation will prosper again. Or else please don’t be too proud that yours may be the swing vote that decides the election of those bent on destroying democracy as you did in past years!

 

by: maggiezee

01-31-2012 @ 8:48pm

I think a major point is missing [unless I missed it] from the discussion. The term Evangelical Christian is used differently in the Body of Christ and outside of it. The emphasis within the Body is the stress on carrying the message of Jesus beyond the walls of the church building. Outside of the Body, I would say, is usually linked with right-wing politics. So as one commentor wrote she would mess with the survey by giving liberal views and call herself an Evangelical.
In any discussion, I try to remember that we do not speak the same language in the differnt settings.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: owlcourt

01-19-2012 @ 1:55pm

I am surprised that you self-define as "evangelical." The term has been so corrupted, that it is a disservice to Jesus followers, IMO.  I discontinued using the term when folk immediately associated it with the American right wingers. I think we need to consider a fresh descriptor. (I like "Jesus follower.")

by: Joe-Allen Doty

01-19-2012 @ 3:41pm
in reply to: charliek2

And... calling yourself "Believer" like the members of The Way" did instead of the epithet "Christian" created by Greek-speaking pagans in Antioch, Syria.

by: charliek2

01-19-2012 @ 2:06pm
in reply to: owlcourt

How about the biblical, "followers of the Way?"

by: Sam Hamilton

01-19-2012 @ 2:23pm
in reply to: owlcourt

I don't think we should chuck good terms simply because some people who use the same identifier as we do don't measure up or give people a bad impression.  We should seek to reclaim those terms.  If Christians took your advice and started calling themselves "Jesus followers" then you'd have to find a new term because undoubtably that term would be used by some people you don't want to be affiliated with.  We'd be in a constant state of redefinition.

If evangelicals have gotten a bad rap we should reclaim the term by our actions.

by: macarthu

01-19-2012 @ 3:40pm

Just the other day I answered a political phone survey. I'm pretty sure it was an Obama Pac running it. Anyway at the end they went through demographics including religious affiliation. The choices included Protestant, Evangelical, Catholic, etc etc. I thought, only two of those are mutually exclusive. Being a Protestant who consders herself Evangelical but attends a mainstream denomination I really didn't know how to answer properly, but since I had given such stellar liberal answers to the question I thought "what the heck" and threw myself in with the Evangelicals. It will skew that sterotypic curve I thought!

by: Rebecca

01-20-2012 @ 1:27am

I am an Indian Christian, a member of the Methodist Church here..I understand the word "evangelical" literally and agree with that..Yet, the word seems to mean different things  in different  contexts..I read the article above and the comments made by Greg Fromholz is the one that I agree with the most.  If only "evangelical" Christians were what the word means literally, there would be no problem but the self-righteous, judgemental, holier-than-thou image that the word brings to mind is the problem..

In recent times, that is exactly what we see, particularly in the US.. Jesus was not judgemental. He was not hypocritical and He was completely against that. ALL human beings are important to Him. He does not descriminate according to colour, wealth, education, class or caste..I speak out against such discriminations in the Christian circles here and I think that kind of hypocricy which allows discrimination but claim to belong to the  Christian faith must be condemned everywhere. If being an "evangelical" means even remotely that one is superior to anyone else, I do not believe it is a good thing..

Jesus loves everything and everybody God created, without exception. He hates sin but loves the sinner. We, humans who call ourselves "Christian", have no other way but to love all who we meet on life's journey..The moment there is discrimination of any kind, the distinction between different types of Christians also comes in and that is wrong.

I agree with the opinions of Jim Wallis and faithfully read all that Sojomail has to offer..:-)

 

by: Joe-Allen Doty

01-19-2012 @ 3:44pm

I have never been a Catholic/catholic nor a Protestant. I never belonged to any church or denominational church with the Roman Catholic Church or Martin Luther in its official history. To be evangelical, you are required to tell others about the good news of Jesus' free gift of salvation. Church affiliation doesn't matter in that situation. I am a practicing Pentecostal by experience.

by: duhsciple

01-19-2012 @ 4:39pm

Regardless of label, Christ loves y'all!

by: Tom Booker

01-19-2012 @ 5:28pm

I connect the word "evangelical" broadly to any earnest or altruistic Christian, and thus include myself.  Believers who are lukewarm or unfocused upon the ways of God are not included.  It's part of the way of this world that the word is connected to so many other ideas, including those your cited authors refer to.  True evangelicals can never hope to influence (for long) what the world thinks about them, but I hope we don't connect ourselves too closely with the similar term "evangelism", which is a human construct with meanings and connotations among Christians that often keep us away from God's call to teach and witness to the good news.  (See my blog entry of Jan 14, 2011--http://allofmetb.talkspotblogs.com)

by: Joel

01-20-2012 @ 12:03am

Why are soooo many Christians so eager to jump on the bandwagon to identify themselves as evangelical?  The term "evangelical" (whatever people think that means) has never appealed to me and it turns me off more every year.  I am happy being a devout Christian who tries to serve Jesus, supports my church faithfully, I live a compassionate, obedient life for Jesus, donate generously to many Christian and other good causes (including Sojourners), and try to be generous towards others.  And I tell people I am not an evangelical.  Is that okay, or does that label me as "bad" in the eyes of lots of fellow Christians? 

 

by: Joe-Allen Doty

01-20-2012 @ 2:40pm
in reply to: duhsciple

"Christ" is Jesus' heavenly position title. I prefer to say, "Jesus loves you."

by: csquared78

01-20-2012 @ 8:09pm

David Vanderveen is wrong. The most influential Christian of the 19th century was Charles Spurgeon. Charles Finney is way down on that list. It might be more helpful to ask who is a believer as opposed to try and define an evangelical. Ms. Falsani, again, I ask is a believer one who votes a certain way or only adheres to a certain theology? I will say that a believer is one whose heart has been opened by the power of the Holy Spirit and because of God's incredible love has received the gift of Salvation only offered through Jesus. They have received him as Lord and Savior of their soul. This act of faith by the power of Holy Spirit is how we know if a person is a believer. I would also say it how we will know if someone is also an evangelical. One final thought. I wish Rob Bell would have told the person where the source of that hope comes from instead of being ambiguous. But, in light of his writings I am not surprised. So Ms. Falsani are you a believer?

by: csquared78

01-21-2012 @ 9:47pm
in reply to: CommLaw

Thank you.

by: charliek2

01-19-2012 @ 2:06pm
in reply to: owlcourt

How about the biblical, "followers of the Way?"

by: duhsciple

01-19-2012 @ 4:38pm
in reply to: Joe-Allen Doty

Regardless of label, Christ loves you.

by: rickymit

01-19-2012 @ 5:56pm

Interesting assortment of mostly thoughtful responses (and the responders' titles alone speak of their diversity). However, when I come to the one by Linda Midgett, with all due respect, I am thrown back into a 'cookie-cutter' simplistic theology which to many does not make sense anymore. "Just believe it. I do," Linda says. Sorry, but 99% of us need more than that I think. -- Rick Mitchell

by: urbanladybarber

01-19-2012 @ 11:24pm

How about

e·van·gel·i·cal   [ee-van-jel-i-kuhl, ev-uhn-]

adjective

1. Also, e·van·gel·ic. pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings. 2. belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, especially of the new testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.

by: raiserw

01-20-2012 @ 2:04am

Be careful what you write and possible alternative interpretations. I had to read your ending "definition" several times to make sense out of your closing comment.

I read that an "evangelical" was one who cause enough problems, difficulties, trouble when in the room that hope increased when they left. Not what you intended, but it took me several re-reads to understand what you were saying: an evangelical brings hope to a room and those in it have more hope as a result of the evangelical having been there.

by: jesse3

01-20-2012 @ 3:06pm
in reply to: BlueDeacon

it's actually not beside the point at all...in a few years, the term 'evangelical' won't mean nearly as much to people when deciding on a church and on what to call themselves... gay marriage will be the major dividing line...will the word 'evangelical' be used to distinguish these churches? 

by: amphy070

01-25-2012 @ 2:09pm

Normal
0

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

I'm still trying to figure out the difference between Evangelicals, Conservative Christians, Right-Wingers, Tea Party Christians and just plain old "Christians."

That last word was good enough for the first Biblical followers of The Way, why do we need a new term? More words to divide and conquer??? We know whose job that is!

If Evangelicals want to help in the work of the Cross and the message of salvation, they must remember that Christ told us His kingdom is not of this world, not of Democrats, not of Republicans, not of Independents or any other man made anomaly or form of government or political action.

The Bible teaches us to pray for those in authority. We are to render to Caesar what belongs to him, not what is rightfully God's! We are to love the land God has entrusted to us, be good citizens, help the needy, etc.

Never before have there been such insane arguments about a leader's birth certificate, his hidden religion, his devious ulterior motives. And never have many Christians disregarded the moral lifestyle of some presidential candidates as these days. It's very sad to watch how we have lost focus of the Christian message of Love. I believe God is thoroughly displeased with those who call themselves His people but act so differently than His Son Jesus the Christ.

And if the Evangelicals again vote to throw this nation into the hands of the unkind, untruthful, unwilling, we will all get what we deserve; more destructive acts against all but those at the very top of the financial structure.

Yes, Evangelicals, who are you? Take a real good look and you will see what I see: too many self-righteous, hateful pretentious people who have strayed away from the Gospel of Jesus the Christ.

I hope you will decide to accept the truth about yourselves.

Those who are real Evangelicals, please pray for the others so our nation will prosper again. Or else please don’t be too proud that yours may be the swing vote that decides the election of those bent on destroying democracy as you did in past years!

 

by: suzer

01-29-2012 @ 2:58am
in reply to: owlcourt

Personally, I'd like to return to simply "Christian." Hopefully, by the time someone asks me or I tell them, I've demonstrated through my actions what the word means. (And that it's a positive representation. Which is why I don't have a Jesus sticker on my car.)

by: duhsciple

01-19-2012 @ 4:38pm

Labels, labels, labels
Who am I?
What am I?

Human being

Sinner
Saint

Lost
Found

Broken
Healed

In bondage
Liberated

Guilty
Forgiven

Christ-centered
Evangelical
Good News
New Kingdom coming down
From heaven to earth
Regime change
Hunger fed
Dying raised
Enemies reconciled
Offenders forgiven
Abusers stopped
Victims loved
Wrongs righted
Self-righteousness wiped out

From partisan to Party, Banquet, Feast of Christ

Following Christ
Though stumbling, bumbling
First, last, last, first
Serving myself, becoming a slave to others
Me first, Christ first
Spirit of the Living God, fall fresh on me

by: Pete315

01-19-2012 @ 5:38pm

Labels can be very misleading & deliberately confusing.

I need a new label for me as I believe in a heaven & hell, that marriage is only between a heterosexual male & female, that any sex outside of the marriage bed is wrong, that life is sacred & begins at conception. I further believe that God created only one race, the Human Race & the only way to salvation is through my savior Christ Jesus.

I am sure most folks posting here can recommend a label.

by: BlueDeacon

01-20-2012 @ 8:27am
in reply to: jesse3

In this case, beside the point.

by: CommLaw

01-21-2012 @ 1:09pm
in reply to: csquared78

I'll respectfully disagree: if you look at what calls itself evangelical today, Finney was the most influential.

If people looked at the definition of evangelical biblically as you suggest, Spurgeon would be the most influential. He should be. Finney was a disaster for the evangelical church.

by: maggiezee

01-31-2012 @ 8:48pm

I think a major point is missing [unless I missed it] from the discussion. The term Evangelical Christian is used differently in the Body of Christ and outside of it. The emphasis within the Body is the stress on carrying the message of Jesus beyond the walls of the church building. Outside of the Body, I would say, is usually linked with right-wing politics. So as one commentor wrote she would mess with the survey by giving liberal views and call herself an Evangelical.
In any discussion, I try to remember that we do not speak the same language in the differnt settings.

by: BlueDeacon

02-16-2012 @ 1:25pm
in reply to: jesse3

it's actually not beside the point at all...in a few years, the term 'evangelical' won't mean nearly as much to people when deciding on a church and on what to call themselves... gay marriage will be the major dividing line...will the word 'evangelical' be used to distinguish these churches?

Well, the Catholic Church isn't considered "evangelical" but opposes "gay marriage" -- that's where the nomenclature fails.  And also consider that many evangelicals these days aren't opposed to it, whether because of fatigue or a truly changed position.

by: pearle78223

01-19-2012 @ 4:58pm

I find this article or blog a little confusing. While growing up a Baptist, I was taught that evangelism meant trying to convince others that they should accept Jesus as their Savior because that was the only way to salvation.

Has that changed?

by: jesse3

01-19-2012 @ 4:09pm

I think an additional term will have to be developed to distinguish churches that bless same-sex marriages from those that do not--it seems obvious that this will be the biggest dividing line for churches about 10-20 years from now. What will that term be?