What are we to make of these statistics? Well, first of all, we need to define the term "evangelicals." First, Barna considers evangelicals to be "born again Christians" which may be defined aspeople who said they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also indicated that they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior.
In addition to meeting the born again criteria (described above), evangelicals also meet seven additional conditions, which include:
- saying that their faith is very important in their life today;
- believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians;
- believing that Satan exists;
- believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works;
- believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth;
- asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches;
- describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today.
It should also be mentioned that, according to Barna, being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church attended. Also, respondents were not asked to describe themselves as "evangelical."
So keeping all the above criteria in mind, what do you make of the above chart? How do you read these numbers? Are you surprised, pleased, angered, saddened or confused? As we sift through and try to make sense of these statistics, here are - according to Joel Belz - two related questions that thoughtful evangelicals should consider:
When is it that our own clumsiness and klutziness leaves people alienated from the truth that we think should be so attractive? And when is it that the very essence of God's truth drives people away?
As I think through these questions in light of the above statistics, I am reminded of a quote I heard years ago from C. Sumner Wemp, while I was a Bible college student:
If the Gospel is an offense, praise God.
If I'm an offense, that's sin.
So what, in your opinion, are evangelicals in general doing right? What are we doing wrong? Where do we go from here? Please share your thoughts.
The broken link in the blog post is:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.worldmag.com/articles/16009
“If the Gospel is an offense, praise God. If I'm an offense, that's sin.”
It seems to me that the Christians I’ve been around try to be offensive in order to prove that the Gospel is offensive rather than letting it be offensive on its own. The Us vs. Them mentality gets sickening after awhile. Does the church follow the example that Jesus gave for interacting with the world? Somehow I don’t think so. Until we consider ourselves expendable for their sakes, we won’t have the impact that we might want.
Maybe I’m all wet...
Thanks, Matt! Great post! My prayer from Oct 11:
ReplyDeleteI pray that the only thing people see offensive in me today is the gospel of Jesus Christ, and nothing of me.
so sad, but not surprising.
ReplyDeleteAs Christians, we should be
1) holding firm our commitment to the truth
2) speaking the truth compassionately
3) speaking out against "christian" groups whose actions perpetuate these stereotypes and thus blaspheme God.
I wholeheartedly agree with that quote, but would say that if we're not saddened by nonbelievers' rejection of the Gospel, we should take a hard look at whether we're adding unnecessary offensiveness
Concerning your blog and the stats given by Barna I would like to make a few comments. Most "evangelicals" I have meet on the streets and have had in our OAC (Open Air Campaigners evangelism ministry) office to train to do evangelism could not give a Biblical definition of the gospel or of a genuine conversion. Their testimony was filled with Christian cliches and their passion for the Lord and lost souls was greatly lacking. I am talking about hearing over 1000 testimonies and having preached 27 years on the streets. The message and method of evangelism over the last generation has been man-centered. The nicest Man in the world was the most offensive when it came to preaching and explaining the gospel: JESUS CHRIST. His first gospel word was "repent" (Mk. 1:15) and His first message in Nazareth impressed people because of His gracious words (Lk. 4:22). But by the end of the message they were "filled with wrath" (Lk. 4:28) and tried to kill Him. If you look up the word "offense" or "offensive" in the Gospels, you'll see that Jesus and His message were the source of the offense. Simply put, the Lord through us "diffuses the fragrance of His knowledge in every place and to some we smell like death" (II Cor. 2:14-17). These would be most people if it refers to the people on the broad road. We as evangelicals need to stop being man-pleasers and start pleasing God because "we are to God the fragrance of Christ." We can do this with a smile on our face, love in our hearts, the pleasure of God, and hopefully joy in heaven over one sinner who repents.
ReplyDeleteEric Briscoe
I am one that holds firmly to historic evangelical doctrine, and I am also one who thoroughly despises what the contemporary evangelical movement has become; a movement defined by diversity not doctrine.
ReplyDeleteThe singular characteristic that stands out most among contemporary evangelicals is their distaste for drawing any clear lines between truth and error. They, believing it to be humility, are terrified to be thought "negative" when it comes to declaring doctrinal convictions. They don't want anyone to think they are "against" what someone else teaches, but such hesitancy is not humility. Mark Dever says, "The humility we want in our churches is to read the Bible and believe it; everything God has said, dogmatically and humbly! It is NOT humble to be hesitant where God has been clear and plain."
D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones saw this coming and warned against it. He said, "One of the first signs that a man is ceasing to be truly evangelical is that he ceases to be concerned about the negatives and keeps saying we must always be positive." Lloyd-Jones warned that doctrinal indifferentism would destroy the evangelical agenda, and in many ways he was right.
Today, the evangelical label is being used by many who have no right to it. The average American thinks evangelicalism is a political position rather than a set of biblical beliefs and the average church is more concerned about its musical style and being seeker-sensitive rather than getting the gospel right, even though getting the gospel right is the very lifeblood of authentic evangelicalism.
Church history teaches us that it's the quiet, sometimes unrecognized and unsung labors of faithful individuals like OAC that often result in the most profound, long-term impact for God's kingdom, not the popular movements like the seeker-sensitive or emerging church heresy. I can personally testify that the truth WILL eventually defeat every error and it will outlast every fad.
We are living in a time of apostasy not much different from some eras in the OT where worship of God was so compromised that good men like Elijah sometimes wondered if there were any knees left that had not bowed to Baal. So I ask then, "Are there any knees left?"
Rob
I agree with some of the posts. The word evangelical is thrown around to liberally, but what do we expect? Those who do not understand the truth are eager to throw everyone who seems similar under the same bus. Interesting how that happens in such a "pluralistic utopia" as the USA.
ReplyDeleteAnywho, there will always be those outside of the true faith who simply do not and cannot understand. They will by default, by nature, see us differently than we see ourselves.
But as you pointed out, it must be the Gospel-driven faith/love/holiness that makes us distinct. We have to face the fact that far too often we Christians have been offensive in an un-Gospel way. Where Jesus would have had dinner with someone, we get angry and protest them.
So we need to make sure we are a people saturated with the love of Christ (which is indistinguishable from Truth) in all we do. In heartbreak-we love, in anger-we love, in sorrow-we love. Not separate from the Truth of Christ, but in the midst of.
nick jones
I don't think any true believer would argue that it is far better to be gentle than to be harsh, "a soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger" (Prov. 15:1). However, sometimes, when important biblical truth is under attack, when the souls of people are at stake, or above all when the gospel is being tampered with, it is simply wrong to allow the error to be aired without correction; to do so is to reject the example Christ Himself has given us.
ReplyDeleteSadly, the average evangelical today does that very thing. They allow virtually every idea and opinion to be put on the table, received politely, and shown equal respect and honor. The problem with this is Scripture clearly teaches the spiritual warfare every believer is engaged in is first a conflict between truth and error, not merely between good and evil deeds. The language of the NT reveals to us we are in a war, not at a dance.
Too many today have forgotten that it is this war to uphold the truth that is the only hope of peace for the enemies of God. Satan has achieved a stunning victory by substituting the crushing sense of sin and remorse necessary for salvation with guilty feelings and bruised egos.
John Piper says his dad always told him the big problem with evangelism is not getting people saved, it is getting people lost, getting them to feel the full weight of their sin before God. The man-centered, ego-stroking, pop psychology that has overtaken our pulpits and obscured the glory of God's mercy will never do that.