# What does evangelical mean?



## Reformed Fox (Nov 9, 2015)

Did that thread title throw anyone off guard?

Of course "evangelical" applies to any person or organization which evangelizes. But more broadly the term has come to mean dozens of different things, from a focus on personal conversion, to "conservative", to loyalty to the historic church, to just another adjective that one can apply to oneself. The first thing I think of when I hear the term are those churches focused in being born again. Is anyone else under the impression that, in the United States at least, "evangelical" can mean almost anything to any moderately conservative, or Biblical church?

P.S. I know ow the word _ought_ to be used, but practically speaking there seems to be a lot which is context-dependent.


----------



## Username3000 (Nov 10, 2015)

I cannot tell what the word, as it is used, actually means these days.


----------



## Jack K (Nov 10, 2015)

I say its most useful meaning is to designate protestants who differ from the mainline, theological liberals by affirming biblical authority, especially on matters of the person and work of Christ and salvation from sin. That's a broad designation—one which includes faithful Reformed folk—but one I like. I agree, though, that usage can vary. For starters, many people tend not to begin (as I do) by sorting churches based on doctrinal stance.


----------



## Jake (Nov 10, 2015)

To throw a further wrench in trying to define terms, the National Association of Evangelials (NAE), while including churches like the PCA, also includes denominations/groups that have female elders and other questionable practices that are at best moderate, such as the CRC and Salvation Army.


----------



## arapahoepark (Nov 10, 2015)

DG Hart loathes how the term is applied so broadly to the point it means nothing. He argues there is no unified evangelical movement and prefers the term confessional for himself.
I am increasingly that way as well. Evangelicalism is too big. There are Open Theists and Pete Enns and Gundry (hear about his recent book?) in this tent. It is to the point where you can say you believe a couple parts of the Bible might be true and voila! You're an evangelical! If those people are in the tent then I don't want to be.


----------



## Toasty (Nov 10, 2015)

Reformed Fox said:


> Did that thread title throw anyone off guard?
> 
> Of course "evangelical" applies to any person or organization which evangelizes. But more broadly the term has come to mean dozens of different things, from a focus on personal conversion, to "conservative", to loyalty to the historic church, to just another adjective that one can apply to oneself. The first thing I think of when I hear the term are those churches focused in being born again. Is anyone else under the impression that, in the United States at least, "evangelical" can mean almost anything to any moderately conservative, or Biblical church?
> 
> P.S. I know ow the word _ought_ to be used, but practically speaking there seems to be a lot which is context-dependent.



It is my understanding that an evangelical is someone who believes in the doctrines of the Trinity, full deity and humanity of Christ, the Bible as the sole, final authority, the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Bible, Christ's atonement that paid sin's penalty and fully satisfied God's wrath, Christ's literal, bodily resurrection, the total depravity of man, justification by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, salvation not dependent upon the work and will of the sinner, Christ's literal return, and so on.

A Roman Catholic would not be an evangelical because he believes that man's efforts to live a holy life is part of the basis that a sinner is justified. 

Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons are not evangelicals because they deny the doctrine of the Trinity and deny the full deity of Christ.


----------



## Peairtach (Nov 10, 2015)

Reformed Fox said:


> Did that thread title throw anyone off guard?
> 
> Of course "evangelical" applies to any person or organization which evangelizes. But more broadly the term has come to mean dozens of different things, from a focus on personal conversion, to "conservative", to loyalty to the historic church, to just another adjective that one can apply to oneself. The first thing I think of when I hear the term are those churches focused in being born again. Is anyone else under the impression that, in the United States at least, "evangelical" can mean almost anything to any moderately conservative, or Biblical church?
> 
> P.S. I know ow the word _ought_ to be used, but practically speaking there seems to be a lot which is context-dependent.



This has been a development from the mid-twentieth century on. 

E,g. see Francis Schaeffer's book "The Great Evangelical Disaster", and Iain Murray's book "Evangelicalism Divided".

From the mid-twentieth century on some evangelicals, followed a liberal or neo-orthodox aproach to Scripture and its interpretation while deceitfully keeping the name "evangelical".


----------



## Peairtach (Nov 10, 2015)

arap said:


> DG Hart loathes how the term is applied so broadly to the point it means nothing. He argues there is no unified evangelical movement and prefers the term confessional for himself.
> I am increasingly that way as well. Evangelicalism is too big. There are Open Theists and Pete Enns and Gundry (hear about his recent book?) in this tent. It is to the point where you can say you believe a couple parts of the Bible might be true and voila! You're an evangelical! If those people are in the tent then I don't want to be.



You can redeem a word from being downgraded by using it in its proper sense.


----------



## DMcFadden (Nov 10, 2015)

Historically, the term may be denominated a little more specifically the way Bebbington does:



> Bebbington is widely known for his definition of evangelicalism, referred to as the "Bebbington quadrilateral", which was first provided in his 1989 classic study Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s.[1] Bebbington identifies four main qualities which are to be used in defining evangelical convictions and attitudes:[2]
> 
> * biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible (e.g. all essential spiritual truth is to be found in its pages)
> * crucicentrism, a focus on the atoning work of Christ on the cross
> ...


----------



## Reformed Fox (Nov 10, 2015)

So, I am not alone in thinking that the term is context-dependent.


----------



## DMcFadden (Nov 11, 2015)

In one very broad use, it becomes short hand for being everything Protestant that is the counter to liberal mainline Christianity. In this sense, an "evangelical" is a Christian who may be in any number of conservative denominations OR who may even be a conservative member of a mainline denomination (e.g., ABCUSA, UCC, TEC, ELCA, Disciples, UMC, and PCUSA). Here, the Bebbington quadrilateral has been useful.

Viewed in terms of a "high view" of Scripture and an orthodox view of the atonement, it often includes everyone from confessional Presbyterians to Baptists, to Nazarenes, to Pentecostals, to Dispensationalists, to Restorationist Stone-Campbellites, to non-denominationals, to conservative Methodists, to conservative Anglicans, to confessional Lutherans, etc.

Taken, in terms of the post WWII phenom that gave rise to Christianity Today and Fuller Seminary yields a similar list. It may also include conservative mainliners and members of certain sects (e.g., Seventh Day Adventists).

If you mean it in distinction to confessional Reformed and Lutherans, it may equate with Therapeutic Moralistic Deism.

Southern Baptists, Seventh Day Adventists, Restorationists, conservative Mennonites, the Amish, confessional Reformed and Lutheran groups, etc. often demure from being included in the definition. Each of these groups claim a separate historical line that did not go through the formative Fundamentalist-Modernist experience in America during the early part of the last century.

The addition of Open Theists, "progressive evangelicals," advocacy for same-sex marriage, etc. has strained the definition as a denotative term with any fixed meaning today.


----------

