NEED IN 10 HOURS or LESS

CHAPTER 8

Evangelism and Contemporary American Life

Bill J. Leonard

“Born Again” … Those words once associated in the popular mind with street preachers, holy rollers, and religious outcasts have in the last decade become the watchword of an evangelical elite in America, a thriving subculture filled with success stories, power politics, and social acceptability. Evangelism and evangelicals appear to have arrived in the American religious and political establishment. Presidents, congressional leaders, executives, and celebrities, along with multitudes of “ordinary” folks, testify to a born again experience. George Gallup, that perennial pulse-taker of the American mood, found in 1976 that 34 percent of Americans (one in three) claimed to be born again.1 Assorted religious leaders anticipate a “third great awakening” in America as citizens return to the “old time gospel” of simple faith in Christ and the almost forsaken values of the Protestant ethic. A new generation of media evangelists challenge (at a respectful distance) Billy Graham for the office of America’s chaplain while reporters offer predictions as to which “electric preacher” will receive Graham’s mantle.2 Mainline denominations, which in the 1960s appeared to reject more traditional styles of evangelical outreach, have turned their attention toward a recovery of a theology of evangelism and a style for doing evangelism in the parish and throughout the nation. “Parachurch” groups blitz college campuses and the armed services while unsuspecting travelers receive an airport witness from traditional evangelicals and cultic devotees alike.

There seems to be no shortage of evangelism or evangelicals in contemporary America. The question may better be asked: Which evangelism and which evangelicals? Is the gospel preached by so-called evangelicals in America reflective of certain biblical norms? How does it shape and how is it shaped by American culture? A number of recent works have asked those or similar questions, seeking to define evangelism and examine the state of evangelical Christianity in America.3 This study is a brief attempt to describe certain factors which have influenced evangelism in America, to characterize various evangelical groups on the contemporary scene, and to evaluate the nature of evangelism in American religion.

Evangelism: A Working Definition

Evangelism, that word most basic to Christian faith, seems elusive in both meaning and application. At its most simple level it may be considered the proclamation that Jesus Christ lived, was crucified, and was resurrected; that he is the way of salvation for those who come to

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

him by repentance and faith. In a classic study, Evangelism in the Early Church, Michael Green suggests that kerussein (to proclaim) is not the only meaning of evangelism. He stresses three concepts which illustrate a broader biblical and historical basis for defining the story of Jesus in its relation to the world. Those concepts are: “the gospel is good news; it is proclamation; it is witness.”4

Briefly defined, Christian evangelism is the good news that Jesus Christ is the way to God. It is the proclamation of the story of Jesus and the call to follow him. Evangelism also involves the living out of that good news in the world. Herb Miller describes it as a threefold approach:

(1) Being the Word — the influence of the Christian’s spiritual quality and example. (2) Doing the Word — the influence of the Christian’s loving acts toward other people. (3) Saying the Word — the influence of the Christian’s verbal communication with those outside the church.5

American Evangelism: Formative Forces

Historically, the American experience has shaped significantly the directions, methods, and theology of Christian evangelism. Some of the most important influences have come from pluralism, revivalism, nationalism, and fundamentalism.

Pluralism represents a major factor in American society in general and American religion in particular. It is an obvious result of democratic government, personal liberty, and religious freedom. In religion, pluralism has meant that a number of denominations, sects, and cults could exist side by side, each free to proclaim its doctrines without coercion from the state in a society where no one church was officially dominant. Membership in each religious group was based upon the voluntary consent of the individual. Those churches wishing to grow were required to evangelize in order to secure “volunteers” for membership.6 Evangelism, even aggressive evangelism, was therefore both a means of fulfilling a major imperative of the gospel and securing a larger number of constituents. Evangelism and church growth have seemed inseparable in American churches.

Pluralism has also meant that many groups could claim to possess the one “true” gospel without being able to impose that gospel on the entire society. Many demonstrate evangelistic zeal but not the same evangelistic message. Southern Baptists, Campus Crusaders, Full Gospel Business Men’s Fellowship members, Mormons, and Moonies all demonstrate an aggressive style of evangelism, but the content of their messages is certainly not the same. Each of those groups (and a multitude of others) reflects diverse views of conversion, discipleship, and church membership. Religious freedom and its accompanying pluralism suggest that a variety of belief systems may be proclaimed as “good news,” as being the most representative of biblical tradition and a variety of methods as the most reliable for winning converts.

As churches experienced the reality of pluralism, they needed a technique by which they could both fulfill the gospel command to evangelize and also attract converts to their particular view of the gospel. Revivalism became a primary method by which many American

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

religious bodies spread the gospel and secured converts. Indeed, revivalism, as perhaps no other phenomenon, has shaped the directions of evangelical Protestantism in America.7

Obviously religious awakenings are not unique to the American experience. Christian history, both Protestant and Catholic, is full of accounts of those periods when the fires of religious enthusiasm burned brightly, converts were numerous, and churches were spiritually rejuvenated. In America, however, revivalism served as both the means and the technique for fulfilling the church’s call to evangelize the masses. It produced a style which dramatically influenced the content of evangelical theology.

Revivalism in many respects systematized the process of evangelism and conversion. This is reflected in the issue of “means” in revivals. Among the New England Calvinists of the First Great Awakening, the means for revival rested with God. Evangelists might preach for revival, Christians might unite in “prayer concerts” beseeching God to give revival, but ultimately only the sovereign God could grant the outpouring of revivalistic zeal. Thus Jonathan Edwards described the evangelical awakening at Northampton, Massachusetts, in the 1730s by calling it “a surprising work of God,” begun and controlled entirely by the divine will.

By the Second Great Awakening of the nineteenth century, evangelists such as Charles G. Finney condemned those Christians who waited for revival while thousands remained unevangelized. Finney wrote that a revival

is not a miracle, or dependent on a miracle, in any sense. It is a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means … There may be a miracle among its antecedent causes, or there may not.8

D. L. Moody, the great evangelist of the late 1800s, elaborated on Finney’s views regarding the means of evangelism. He urged any method which would lead to the conversion of a person, insisting, “It doesn’t matter how you get a man to God, provided you get him there.”9 Moody and company refined Finney’s new measures so that techniques for mass revivalism and personal witnessing were carefully systematized. Revival campaigns were planned in detail and Christians taught how to share their faith with “inquirers” before and after the nightly meetings.

Moody’s methods continue to influence modern revivalistic evangelical techniques. Music, sermons, counselors at mass rallies, media campaigns, and training in the fine art of personal evangelism are among the major aspects of contemporary evangelical action. Revivalism has also had impact on the structure (or lack of it) in the worship services of evangelical churches. The hymns of frontier and urban revivals, spontaneous testimonies, preaching style, and entire worship format frequently have been shaped by the revivalistic context. This is particularly true of what in many churches is the most important symbol of evangelical conversion, the invitation.

Unknown to evangelical religion before the nineteenth century, the public invitation to “come forward” and accept Christ began in the frontier camp meetings. Sinners were exhorted to enter the “anxious pens,” fenced-in areas in front of the pulpits, in order to be

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

“prayed through” to conversion. Finney perfected the process with his “anxious bench,” a similar area where those seeking conversion could find support and counsel. Many questioned Finney’s actions, fearing that a public response smacked of works done for salvation focusing attention on outward, not inward manifestations. Moody institutionalized the invitation or altar call by urging the unevangelized to come forward and be taken to “inquiry rooms” where trained laity and pastors spoke with each individual about specific needs.

Soon these methods had become linked inseparably to the weekly liturgy of Protestant worship. No service was concluded without an appeal to public decision. So important was this new symbol that evangelical conversion itself is often described in the language of the invitation. Believers speak of conversion as “walking the aisle” or “coming forward.” So significant is the invitation, and its eternal implications, that in many churches it has become the central event of worship. If no one responds publicly, some imply that worship and sermon, pastor and people have not experienced the presence of God and that the service was less than significant. It is one of the most obvious illustrations of the way in which Christian evangelism has been shaped by American religious tradition.

The exhortation to immediate conversion and public response is also evidence of the way in which American revivalism has affected the theology of evangelism in an increasingly Arminian direction. In the period of the First Great Awakening, the evangelists were primarily Calvinistic in their theological orientation. Conversion was much more a process by which the sovereign God brought salvation to the depraved and helpless sinner. Edwards traced the steps of salvation: (1) an extreme sense of sinfulness, helplessness under the wrath of God; (2) agony over sin; (3) a time of quietness first before a “little light has risen”; (4) dawning of divine light — sometimes gradually, sometimes rapidly; (5) joy and thankfulness at the gift of redemption; (6) evidence of genuine change of heart and life.10

The process of conversion was often quite lengthy, extending for days. weeks, even months, as the individual waited on God to provide the grace which produced salvation. Increasingly, however, the Calvinists themselves debated the question of human participation in the salvific process. The Edwardseans, the New Divinity men, who claimed to be the heirs of Jonathan Edwards, softened sovereignty somewhat to permit cooperation between God and those seeking conversion. They continued to insist that the chief agent in conversion was God but urged moral “duties” as a sign of true conversion.11

By the time of the camp meetings and the urban revivals, more democratic and Arminian ideals were claiming the support of a large number of evangelical preachers. Conversion was a process in which divine grace interacted with the free will of the individual. Indeed, no salvation could occur without the response of the human will. Grace was not irresistible; it also could be rejected or ignored by each person.

In many current evangelical communions, the sovereignty of God has been replaced by the sovereignty of the individual. Conversion is less a process of waiting on God to provide the grace for salvation than of convincing the sinner to ask God for that grace which is

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

immediately available. Potential converts are often urged to pray a prayer and to “invite Jesus into your heart,” and are assured that the moment the human will is activated, God responds. Grace is less the mysterious gift of God than the terms of a transaction which is dependent on the free will of the new believer. As H. Richard Niebuhr writes, conversion is something which happens less as process than as transaction carried out during the last hymn of the worship service.12

Debates over these issues illustrate one other influence of American revivalism upon evangelism. The revivals created extensive controversies among American Christians, particularly regarding the relationship of the evangelistic message to revivalistic method. Many denominations divided and new ones were formed. Often the question was not over the importance of conversion but whether or not conversion was dependent on revivalistic technique. The Regular and Separate Baptists, for example, who divided during the First Great Awakening, were both evangelical but could not agree on revivalistic method. The Regulars were suspicious of the emotionalism and sensational methods of the Separates who insisted that conversion was dramatic and, therefore, required dramatic response.

The student of American evangelicalism should expect to find division among Christian groups regarding methods and motives related to a particular style of evangelism. The tendency to see a particular style as synonymous with proper Christian evangelism continues to be a problem which affects the evangelical efforts of many American denominations.

In addition to pluralism and revivalism, another influence on evangelicalism in America is nationalism. America’s peculiar beginnings and sense of manifest destiny have been particularly significant to the evangelism promoted in many of the churches.

To varying degrees, evangelicals in America have sometimes united concepts of personal and national salvation, with particular attention to the American experience as paralleled with that of Israel. The North American continent, long unknown to the Europeans, seemed chosen by God as the place where biblical Christianity could be restored and the kingdom of God established. The idea of America as having a peculiar part in the redemptive plan was often a strong emphasis of the Puritans. Jonathan Edwards, observing the religious outpourings of the Great Awakening, saw the mass conversions as evidence of a “Golden Age,” a prelude to the establishment of the kingdom. Edwards apparently believed that America had a unique role in these post-millennial preparations. He wrote:

It is not unlikely that this work of God’s Spirit, so extraordinary and wonderful, is the dawning, or at least a prelude of that glorious work of God, so often foretold in scripture … and there are many things that make it probable that this work will begin in America.13

The influence of nationalism upon American evangelicalism has been a topic of great discussion by many scholars. It is difficult to trace and generalizations are dangerous. It does seem clear, however, that certain evangelicals have united nationalistic influences with Christian evangelism. Whether in utopian sects or zealous missionaries, in American evangelists or civil religion itself, national identity has sometimes been associated with

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

genuine Christian experience. Perhaps no modern revivalist has so illustrated the nationalistic influence on the

evangelical as William A. Sunday. For Billy Sunday, “Christianity and Patriotism are synonymous terms and hell and traitors are synonymous.”14 In Sunday’s view, the best Christians were the best Americans and vice versa. In the face of massive Catholic and Jewish immigration in the early 1900s, Sunday insisted that America would accept anyone “who wants to come here and assimilate our ways and conditions.” This meant a person should be “a teetotaler, a Bible-believing Protestant, and a … middle class citizen.”15 Obviously, Sunday’s approach is extreme in some respects, but it does indicate the influence of nationalism on the proclamation of the gospel in America. The following generalizations as to nationalism and contemporary evangelicalism may be noted.

First, in the minds of some (though certainly not all) evangelicals, the possibilities for world evangelism rested upon the shoulders of American Christians. America was a “city on the hill” to give the light of the gospel to the nations. Failure to live up to that calling was to warrant the judgment of God.

Second, some evangelicals often equated evangelization with Americanization and democracy. In missionary activities at home or abroad the gift of the gospel was the gift of American culture.

Third, evangelism has sometimes been united with particular millennial views. Post- millennialists in America affirmed a sense of destiny in which they helped to convert the masses and thus bring in the kingdom of God. Both individuals and social structures could be redeemed. Pre-millenialists warned that the church should not waste time on redeeming unredeemable society but race to evangelize the nations before the second coming brought destruction to the powers of this world. Finally, some have implied that America was indeed the last best hope of church. If its message was not shared or went unheeded, the gospel was seriously threatened in the world.

In addition to pluralism, revivalism, and nationalism, the ideology of fundamentalism has had a major impact on American evangelism. Fundamentalism has been described as that movement which places emphasis on biblical inerrancy, is hostile toward modern methods of biblical and theological interpretation, and is concerned that those who reject fundamentalist doctrines are not “true Christians.”16

It began, most agree, as a nineteenth-century reaction to liberal trends in Christian theology, closely related to certain pre-millennial groups in Britain and America and reaching giddy heights in the 1920s. Subsequent evangelicals have sometimes sought to separate themselves from the narrowness and unpopular image of fundamentalism. Some have used the phrase “neo-Evangelical” to describe conservatives who repudiated the negative image of fundamentalism but sought to remain faithful to orthodox dogma.

Nonetheless, fundamentalism strongly influences many aspects of evangelism in America. First, fundamentalists agree on the need for personal conversion and on the evangelical experience of divine grace through repentance and faith. Second, they frequently relate

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

genuine conversion, explicitly or implicitly, to certain fundamental doctrines of the faith. Such doctrines are considered non-negotiable in their relationship to Christianity. For fundamentalists, genuine conversion is intricately related to the trustworthiness of the biblical record, the legitimacy of the saving work of Christ in atonement and resurrection, his sinless nature, and the inviolability of his miracles. To certain traditional fundamentalist dogmas such as virgin birth, miracles, sacrificial atonement, bodily resurrection, and second coming, stronger statements on biblical inerrancy, the creation narratives, and a personal devil have recently been added.

Third, these doctrines often challenge the modern concern for biblical criticism, social Christianity, and ecumenical cooperation. Indeed, fundamentalists often point to the relationship between the decline of evangelism and the rise of a more liberal theological approach. They equate theological liberalism with a lack of evangelism, an evangelism often defined in terms of revivalism. They point to such modern works as Why Conservative Churches are Growing and insist that proper biblical authority and doctrine produces the best and most aggressive evangelism, giving preachers “something to preach” and converts something to believe.

Finally, fundamentalists sometimes mistake their orthodoxy for proper faith, indeed as the only proper evangelism. Some seem quick to call themselves “Bible-believing Christians” or “evangelicals,” in contrast with “non-Bible-believing Christians” and “non-evangelicals.”

Fundamentalism continues to be a powerful force in shaping church life and evangelism, as well as divisions within the denominations. With these and other influences in mind, perhaps some observations on the current state of evangelism in America may be made, both positive and negative.

American Evangelism: Its Present Shape

It is clear that the efforts to “do” evangelism in contemporary America are extremely diverse. Groups may agree on some (though not all) common principles, but differ significantly on method, doctrine, theological emphases, and practical response. In his book Common Roots: A Call to Evangelical Maturity, Robert E. Webber charts some fourteen different types of “evangelicals” in modern America. While not definitive, his list illustrates the great diversity which exists even among so-called “evangelicals.” With those groups are other supposedly “non-evangelicals,” who are castigated for their lack of direct, aggressive evangelistic work but whose concern for nurture, growth in grace, and education in the faith may also be important vehicles of Christian evangelism.17

SUBCULTURAL EVANGELICALISM

Group Major Emphasis Symbols

1. Fundamentalist Evangelicalism Personal and ecclesiastical separationism; Biblicism

Bob Jones University; Sword of the Lord

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

2. Dispensational Evangeli[cali]sm Dispensational hermeneutics; pretribulationalism and premillenarianism

Dallas Theological Seminary; Moody Bible Institute

3. Conservative Evangeli[cali]sm Cooperative evangelism; inclusive of all evangelical groups

Wheaton College; Gordon-Conwell Seminary; Christianity Today; Billy Graham

4. Non-denominational Evangeli[cali]sm

Unity of the church; restoration of the church; Restoration of NT Christianity

Milligan College

5. Reformed Evangelicalism Calvinism (some with a decidedly Puritan flavor); covenant theology and hermeneutics

Calvin College and Seminary; Francis Schaeffer

6. Anabaptist Evangelicalism Discipleship; poverty; peace movement; pacifism

Goshen College; Reba Place Fellowship

7. Wesleyan Evangelicalism Arminianism; sanctification Asbury College and Seminary 8. Holiness Evangelicalism The second work of grace Nazarene Church 9. Pentecostal Evangelicalism Gift of tongues Church of God; Assembly of God

10. Charismatic Evangelicalism Gifts of the Holy Spirit Oral Roberts University; Melodyland School of Theology

11. Black Evangelicalism Black consciousness National Association of Black Evangelicals

12. Progressive Evangelicalism Openness toward critical scholarship and ecumenical relations

Fuller Seminary

13. Radical Evangelicalism Moral, social, and political Consciousness Sojourners; The Other Side; Wittenberg Door

14. Mainline Evangelicalism Historical consciousness at least back to the Reformation

Movements in major denominations; Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Baptist

The list indicates that the evangelicals themselves are widely separated on significant issues of social action, biblical infallibility, ecumenism, gifts of the Spirit, and politics — ideas which form their basic approach to the “simple” gospel of repentance and faith.

In the face of American religious pluralism it may be too much to expect diverse groups to develop a consensus, even on evangelism, beyond very basic assertions. Diversity may help to take the gospel to a variety of persons from various strata of society. The struggle is not for a contrived consensus among different communions as much as for the responsibility of each group to be true to the biblical perspectives on evangelism.

Beyond diversity, there is no doubt that Christian evangelism is having an impact on contemporary society. The need for a personal dimension of faith and a sense of acceptance and transcendence are certainly factors which have drawn many to Christianity. The church in turn insists that the gospel is a timeless remedy for the ills of the society.

This renewed appreciation for evangelism reminds mainline churches that just as they are called to accept the social implications of the gospel, they must cultivate the evangelical dimensions as well. Both powerful forces must be kept in balance. Many established denominations are struggling with that tension today, some seeking to restate and re-

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

emphasize their evangelical roots while retaining a commitment to the social dimension of the gospel.

Evangelism is undergoing a renewed emphasis in American churches. Whether that constitutes the much-discussed third (some say fourth) Great Awakening remains to be seen and may depend on the way the church defines evangelism.

With the renewed emphasis on evangelism have come efforts at changing the style for doing evangelism as well a concern to rethink the theology of evangelism. Both attempts illustrate the vitality and the dangers of contemporary evangelism.

The marketing of evangelism may be its most controversial aspect as different groups utilize various techniques. Some retain the older methods, calling the church to return to the “old time religion” of revivals, altar calls, evangelists, and mass conversions. The traveling professional evangelist, holding “protracted meetings” in local churches, rented halls, and football stadiums, continues to be a significant style of evangelism, particularly in the Bible Belt of the southern and southwestern United States. Thousands testify to having been converted in “crusades” led by prominent, semi-prominent, or almost unknown evangelists and their “team” of musicians, advancemen, counselors, and financial advisors. These evangelistic organizations follow the Finney-Moody-Sunday-Graham pattern of organization, conversion, counseling, and referral to local congregations. Many modern jeremiads warn that evangelism has declined as the church has turned from these time-tested, surefire methods of evangelism. Critics warn that excessive dependence on this “old time” style can lead to a trust in technique and a neglect of a biblical theology of evangelism.

Another style of contemporary evangelism provides a more “modern” approach aimed particularly at the youth culture, the secular materialists, and the unchurched. The strategy varies from group to group, reflecting the particular subculture toward which it is directed. From the ghettos of the inner city (Sojourners), to the fraternity houses of the ivy league schools (Campus Crusade), to the barracks of the Armed Forces (Navigators), to the corporate and political ghettos of business and politics (Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller, and others), the gospel of Christ is couched in the language and mindset of its secular constituents. Sometimes unorthodox, sometimes culture-accommodating, usually intense and highly committed, this style of evangelism has had significant impact, person to person, on individuals often ignored or untouched by traditional evangelistic forms.

Though many others could no doubt be cited, one additional style cannot be overlooked. The old time/new time evangelism presented through the media, particularly television, is the single most influential and controversial mode of current evangelicalism in America.

Billy Graham and Oral Roberts long ago set the pattern for media evangelism. Both had their beginning in crusades televised from halls or stadiums. Graham has retained that method and is perhaps the only major figure who can still accomplish it on a national scale. Roberts set the pattern for a new generation of television evangelists, moving indoors to his own specially constructed church/stadium/studio (in this case at Oral Roberts University), where the vicissitudes of nature and electronics could be carefully controlled. Today media

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

evangelism shapes America’s perceptions of the gospel in new and uncertain ways. Some, like Jerry Falwell and Rex Humbard, package the “old time gospel hour” into a

modern media experience. Listeners are assured that the message proclaimed is that of the evangelical forefathers; the services are traditionally revivalistic, the theology unashamedly fundamentalist, and the social concerns focused primarily on issues of personal morality. Their constituency tends to be more blue-collar, working class, suburban, and rural. Others, like Robert Schuller of Garden Grove, California, preach the gospel for a more middle- and upper-middle-class constituency who appreciate the aesthetics of fountains, robed clergy, an occasional Bach chorale, and the piece de resistance, the magnificent sixteen-million-dollar Crystal Cathedral, dedicated in 1980, debt-free.

Still others eschew the pulpit for the talk show or variety show format of guests, music, telephone counseling, and audience participation. This style of media evangelism is evident in the phenomenal growth of the 700 Club, the PTL (Praise the Lord) Club, and the variety show approach of Oral Roberts himself. The 700 Club and PTL unite evangelism with Pentecostalism, playing to a cross-section of American Christians, many of whom attest to an experience of tongues and healing in addition to conversion. Numbering Baptists and Roman Catholics among its strongest supporters, the 700 Club and its founder Pat Robertson produce a budget of fifty to sixty million dollars annually, developing the Christian Broadcasting Network with multiple programs aimed at counteracting the negative morality of the major television networks.18

Include in this the syndicated programs of regional evangelists and local churches, the various broadcasting efforts of major denominations, and the occasional evangelical “weirdo,” and the media becomes the major vehicle through which many Christian groups seek to fulfill their calling to evangelize. Most of these electronic efforts preach for conversions, extol the blessings of the gospel, and plead for support (prayer and financial) in continuing and expanding the work, while claiming great statistical success in benefits to the church, the community, and the nation. They are forces to be reckoned with in the issue of gospel and culture in America.

With the influence of the American past, the successes of the present, and the complex problems of the future, those concerned to do evangelism must confront a number of important issues and questions. Some of the more crucial ones include the following.

First, American churches must struggle continually with the question of what Christian evangelism really means. For those denominations which seem less aggressively evangelical, an appropriate form of biblical evangelism must be discovered. If they neglect this task, they may ignore the biblical imperatives and hold to a negative view of evangelism that represents a reaction to the kind of evangelism popularized by evangelists and tent preachers. The so- called non-evangelicals, therefore, need a theology of evangelism which can be compatible with their historic traditions and which can be done with integrity, not ignored as reactionary.

The evangelicals, on the other hand, need not suppose that, because they are aggressive in

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

their methods, they have a corner on evangelism or even that their view of evangelism is necessarily biblical. Just as it is possible “to be a bishop without being religious,” it is possible to be an evangelist without being evangelical, in the New Testament sense.

This is particularly evident in the shift of many churches from an evangelism of process to an evangelism of transaction. The reaction against hyper-Calvinism has in some contexts produced a hyper-Arminianism, equally unacceptable to biblical evangelism. The danger is that modern evangelism replaces an extreme emphasis on divine sovereignty with an extreme concern for human sovereignty. There is less concern for the interaction of divine grace and free will than for grace as dominated by human freedom. “Anytime I ask,” God must respond and is therefore at the mercy of the individual.

This stress on the human side of conversion can and does lead to a “transactional” view of evangelism, not as process but as single event. Once the prayer is prayed and the invitation accepted, then the transaction is over — salvation is secured and heaven achieved. Discipleship, growth, process are obscured for a one-time-does-all transaction. Thus the biblical concerns for repentance, faith, discipleship, and sanctification are minimized for an evangelism of cheap grace, easy belief, and promises of success. Indeed, the increasing effort to equate material success with Christian witness is a major problem confronting evangelism in America. The union of the gospel and the American materialistic success syndrome has seriously obscured for many upper-class congregations the biblical calling to respond to the poor and the oppressed. Ronald Sider wrote recently that evangelical Christians have practiced heresy in their blindness to the social dimensions of the gospel, the presence of God on the side of the poor and the oppressed.19

Second, in failing to struggle continuously with the biblical meaning of evangelism, American churches may be fooled into believing that they are acting evangelically merely because they have a style which is considered evangelistic. Revivalistic techniques, hucksterism, and hard-sell tactics must not automatically be equated with a valid evangelical witness. Many revivalistic methods were a way of reaching an earlier generation with the gospel, but the use of those tactics in the present day does not guarantee evangelical response. Merely to reproduce the setting of “the old time gospel hour” does not ensure that the expected spiritual results will occur. Efforts to unite revivalistic methods inseparably with evangelism itself may lead to the confusion of the gospel with particular cultural forms and social expectations. In some churches. practices identified with evangelical awakenings of the past become the only valid means for having new awakenings. Indeed, many persons may find security in the pious platitudes of an earlier generation and ignore the word of God for the present.

Finally, both the church and the individuals who seek to be evangelical must beware lest their convictions turn to arrogance and their gospel turn to dogmatism. The danger is that the church may become so proud of its evangelical responsiveness that it loses sight of its limitations, its fallibility, and its own position under the judgment of God.

Peter M. Schmiechen warns that this is particularly problematic for those modern

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

Christians who have appropriated the name “evangelical.” Clearly committed to evangelical witness, they nonetheless must avoid the temptation “to equate the gospel with characteristics of the conservative mindset and one view of the Christian faith.” Schmiechen concludes that “since Christian theology is by definition evangelical, it is both naïve and arrogant to suggest that theology is evangelical only when it fits into a particular position.”20

The identification of one segment of the Christian community as “evangelical” may imply that those without a particular philosophy or style of evangelism are not fulfilling the task to be the good news of God to the world. It may suggest that a less aggressive style is not at all evangelical and thereby obscure the heritage of many Christian groups who place evangelism within the context of nurture, teaching, and sacraments.

Clearly, American religion is experiencing, at least in certain segments, a new openness to evangelism and the church’s calling to be evangelistic. As in other ages, however, Christians must never take their theology of evangelism for granted. The church must struggle continually with issues relating to evangelism, with definitions, and with action. It must seek to proclaim and live the gospel to the world, while it is itself confronted by the demands of the gospel which often condemn its captivity to culture and its obsession with superficial results. The church has no choice but to respond to its evangelical calling. Later generations will decide, however, whether current American evangelism reflects that biblical imperative or is merely the product of a group of sophisticated indulgence-sellers.

1. George Gallup, Jr., afterword, Religion in America: 1950 to the Present, ed. Jackson W. Carroll, Douglas W. Johnson, and Martin E. Marty (New York: Harper & Row, 1979), p. 113.

2. Mary Murphy, “The Next Billy Graham,” Esquire, 10 October 1978, pp. 25-32. Murphy suggests that Jerry Falwell may be the candidate. Grant Simmons, “Meet the Next Billy Graham,” Texas Business, December 1979, pp. 25-28. Simmons suggests that Texas evangelist James Robinson will be the next.

3. David F. Wells and John D. Woodbridge, The Evangelicals, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977); Martin E. Marty, A Nation of Behavers (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976); William G. McLoughlin, Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978); and Robert E. Webber, Common Roots: A Call to Evangelical Maturity (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979).

4. Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), p. 48. 5. Herb Miller, Evangelism’s Open Secrets (St. Louis: Bethany, 1977), p. 12. 6. Sidney E. Mead, The Lively Experiment (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), pp. 121-22. 7. Mead, The Lively Experiment, pp. 122-27. 8. Charles G. Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion (New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1888), pp. 12-13. 9. William J. McLaughin, Modern Revivalism (New York: The Ronald Press, 1959), p. 259, citing Boston Daily Advertiser

(3 February 1877): 4. 10. Jonathan Edwards, Distinguishing Marks of a Work in the Spirit of God, in The Great Awakening, ed. Alan Heimert

and Perry Miller (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1967), pp. 204-13. 11. Sydney Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972), pp. 406-14. 12. H. Richard Niebuhr, The Kingdom of God in America (New York: Harper & Row, 1959), pp. 179-80. 13. Jonathan Edwards, “Some Thoughts Concerning the Present Revival of Religions in New England,” in God’s New

Israel, ed. Conrad Cherry (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971), p. 55. 14. McLaughin, Modern Revivalism, p. 444. 15. McLaughin, Modern Revivalism, pp. 443-44.

Chilcote, P. W., & Warner, L. C. (Eds.). (2008). The study of evangelism : Exploring a missional practice of the church. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Created from amridge on 2022-09-21 04:37:38.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 00

8. W

m . B

. E er

dm an

s P

ub lis

hi ng

C o.

. A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .