All Comments for: Yes, Nominal Evangelicals Exist | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > April

Christianity Today, April, 2008 |

Yes, Nominal Evangelicals Exist

But they are an opportunity, not a scandal.

A Christianity Today editorial. | posted 4/15/2008 08:32AM

Long ago, when George W. Bush first ran for President, election exit polls asked, "Are you a member of the Religious Right?" In later elections the McCarthy-esque question morphed into the one that Gallup ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

Donna

Posted: April 18, 2008 1:56 PM

Kim, how can you presume to know the state of Ms. Wicker's soul? Your smug and judgmental comments reinforce the stereotype of born again evangelical Christians as being, well...smug and judgmental. Have you read her book? Do you know her? Even if you knew her well, it wouldn't be up to you to classify her as Christian, or God help us, "Lost". Humanity seems to never change--the good, church-going folks of Jesus' day couldn't bear to hear him to point out their failings, just as the OT people could not bear to hear what the prophets had to say about the ways in which they fell short. We as Christians--evangelical or otherwise--must not be afraid to take a hard look at ourselves--and we should welcome those who prompt us to do so.

Terry Johns

Posted: April 18, 2008 9:22 AM

There is no such thing in the NT as a nominal Christian, Jesus calls us to enter through the narrow gate and lay down our lives. It is Institutional and denominational Christianity with its compromised believes that has been the instrument of bringing confusion regarding what is and who is a Christian Also important to remember that those that live in the US aren’t UNREACHED they are unevangelised. According to ALL the research on world mission it’s those outside the reach of the local church that are classified as unreached.

Randy

Posted: April 17, 2008 8:27 PM

John W, what do political concerns have to do with the Church? We are not called to political action. Political and social structures are destined to be destroyed. God calls his people out of the world. It is those who live holy lives that bears witness to Christ, not our political or social actions. The only Jesus there is, is the Jesus of the Bible who redeems us. Scripture tells us to feed the poor and cloth the naked but it never tells us to be revolutionaries or to fight the state. We can repair the social sturctues as did the 18th and 19th century Christianed who ended slavery but it did not change the basic problem of human nature. Only Christ can change the heart. In the end social sturctures cannot be saved. There is nothing eternal about governments and institutions. All that is eternal are those who have been called of God to be his Chosen people. We need to be the people of God and stop worrying about George bush and let God be his judge as he will be for us all.

Jim Henderson

Posted: April 17, 2008 4:11 PM

Hey CT Nice try on moving the goalposts. You want to live off of evangelicalism and then when it becomes an inconveniece distance yourself. Looks like a Hillary to me. You can't have it both ways. Blaming the messenger wont stop the message. Too many evangelical insiders agree with Ms Wicker. We just don't like an ex- evangelical traitor exposing the truth that we are reluctant to share in fear of losing even more market share. In the spirit of the founder of our family business - Jesus - I say anything that helps to rescue Jesus from the religion business is good news. Rather than criticize her for technicalities we should line up and thank Ms. Wicker for displaying the courage to say what we lack the courage to even acknowledge.

Steve

Posted: April 17, 2008 8:12 AM

It appears that Wicker's analysis is spot on. This should not surprise us. Jesus taught that there would be a visible church that consists of wheat and tares. I have always thought that if 25% of the US population was indeed born again, then the moral character of our country would be much different. Instead of going out into the world to make disciples, modern evangelical churches are part of a growing self-contained culture that doesn't engage the outside culture in a significant way. If one learns the jargon and smiles a lot, it is easy to fake ones way for years. I can never forget the shock I had when one of my firends in bible study finally accepted Christs after ten years involvement in church thinking that he was saved.

JohnW

Posted: April 17, 2008 12:00 AM

Randy, I understand where you are coming from and I know many belittle people of faith. What Jesus are you talking about though? If you are a talking about the Jesus whose father told George W. Bush to invade and occupy Iraq causing the deaths of hundred of thousands of innocent civilians and displacing millions more from their homes...the normal, rational, and decent thing would be to reject that Christ. And yes, I remember 911, just as the Iraqis most certainly remember "shock & awe".

Greg Chase

Posted: April 16, 2008 5:32 PM

I am one of those who takes on the label of evangelical, born again, Bible believing, orthodox Christian. I doubt that Christine Wicker's statistics are as high as she reports. This nation is deeply in need of a visitation of the Holy Spirit. We are a people (evangelicals) in need of being right with God and we do not even know it. We are neither hot nor cold and Jesus would like to spew us out like the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3. God's people have not humbled themselves or prayed or sought the face of God or turned from their wicked ways. This does not lead to being a republican or democrat, it leads to being a Christian who can honor God. Only then will we influence to nation to righteousness in issues like abortion, homosexuality, environment, racial justice, and opportunities for the the poor and prisoners. Do we not see that these issues go from right to left and they are all important? Does not Jesus cry for Darfur? Righteousness exalts a nation.... God help us!

Randy

Posted: April 16, 2008 2:16 PM

No one should be surprised if the world calls Christians mean and intolerant. When you make the claim that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, the world is going to reject it. So. get over the fact that the world does not like us. But what does the church have to do with politics? Nothing. We are supposed to be a colony of aliens living holy lives and looking for a holy city who foundation and builder is God. Instead, we want to look like the world, be accepted by the world and we scratch our collective heads and wonder why the world hates us. Isn't it time for us to return to being a holy people who live holy lives and dare to cast off our materialism, our felt needs and our hip programs? We need to stop being PR glory hounds and start serving each other as Christ served. I would imaging that looking and acting like Jesus would bring far more change than any political campaign.

Patricia

Posted: April 16, 2008 9:37 AM

JohnW and Leroy are dead right in their assessment of the evangelical movement, at least here in America. Evangelicalism has rightly become associated with being judgemental, materialistic, and downright mean. Case in point is the comment from the G about speaking in tongues being "nonsense." Interesting comments about evangelicalism being associated with liberalism. Here in America, it's much more of a conservative movement, and conservatives can get their teachings just as wrong as liberals can.

John	Posted: April 16, 2008 5:35 AM


The article says Wicker's definition of "evangelical" is non-traditional." Huh, except for the blaspheming of Jesus' name at the end, it sounded pretty spot on to me. Sadly, as others have already commented, evangelicalism has so morphed theologically into liberalism-light that it's now only a label for the religious side of Republican social conservatism, and not much more.

Barry Fleming (Australia)

Posted: April 16, 2008 1:06 AM

Over the past few years I must admit that I have struggled with the term Evangelical as it seems to be becoming more difficult to separate it from Liberalism so I tend to be fairly fluid with its use. When asked by a non-Christian if I am an Evangelical to avoid being associated with Liberalism I will generally say YES, if asked by a Christian I will say NO, I am a Pentecostal. It seems that within the Australian church the divide between Liberalism and Evangelicalism is becoming less clear so I tend to feel somewhat uncomfortable using the term Evangelical within Christian circles. I hope that I am not being too ungracious but it does appear that Evangelicalism has a divide with the Biblical language that it espouses when compare to its outworking. Considering that many of our Pentecostal congregations here in Australia have adopted seeker-sensitive views it may be a case of the Pot calling the Kettle black!

spencer burke

Posted: April 15, 2008 11:05 PM

Sometimes it is our love of the Church that motivates us to reflect on the difficult times we find ourselves in and ask "what if," "why not" or "where can we learn." We can criticize others for their quest to find answers or we can begin to personally journey into the questions. Whether you agree with Wickers methods or conclusions, I hope we can hear the call to awaken. I have watched the Church for the past ten years dismiss, marginalize and ignore these voices as we have slipped into a bewildered slumber or defensive stance. At the same time I have begun to discover that "if I am not a little bit embarrassed about what I said yesterday, then I probably didn't learn anything today."

Philip

Posted: April 15, 2008 9:01 PM

The Problem is that at one time the term evangelical meant something.. it meant that you believed in the bible as the inerrant, inspiried, iffalible word of God. That you had trusted Christ as the only way to be saved and that you were washed in his blood. Today is means anything, therefore it means noting. Today you have evangelical cathoilics... what a waste.. evangelical seventh-day adventist.. the word means nothing today!

Gilbert Gerbrandt

Posted: April 15, 2008 6:29 PM

Thanks for the good article Christine Wicker. Christians need to be counted by the ones who go to 'mid-week' Bible study and prayer meetings. Biola's Dr. Clyde Cook was on the right 'track' with his statment on fundamentalism. I agree with him that Belivers have to be on the foundation of GOD with Jesus Christ being the Chief Corner Stone. So if we are on that Foundation we are fundamentalist, if not you are on the slippery slope going the wrong way.

The G

Posted: April 15, 2008 6:03 PM

The article was pathetic. The comments excellent! There will be no "evangelical" anything until people are prepared to weep over sin, and make a decision to refuse it (repentance), obey God in immersion in water and the Holy Spirit (John 3:5) [and I don't mean the speaking in tongues nonsense, either], and live in surrender to Christ. Then we will be qualified to lead others in the same path of discipleship of humility and service in the Kingdom of the one who bled on the cross and paid the penalty for our sin. America is no the kingdom of God (at all).

Leroy

Posted: April 15, 2008 5:03 PM

As an evangelical trained at what is considered to be one of the best seminaries in the US, one of those advertising below, I can say in no uncertain terms that Evangelicalism in America is dead. It has been transformed into a materialistic oriented, subcultural phenomena which neither Jesus nor Paul would recognize as having anything to do whatsoever with what Jesus commenced or Paul took to the Gentiles. The election of George Bush was the culmination of a long period in which so called Evangelicals thought that grabbing worldly power, hobnobbing with celebrities and creating a safe suburban subculture in which to play and feel safe, while imposing their morals upon anyone who disagreed in an amazingly arrogant and at times down right mean way, was more important than doing what Jesus commanded his followers to do, ie, love their neighbors as themselves, as well as to make disciples. Christine Wicker (or at least what you report she has said) has only touched the surface of this.

Peter F. Benson

Posted: April 15, 2008 3:47 PM

Amen to this article and the conclusion! There are a huge number nominal "Christians" within the churches in America. But the huge majority are in the older denominations which were really "born-again" in their beginning years, but after 300 years, as Charles Stanley says, "There are more 'born-into' members in my church than 'born-again" believers'." But many mega-churches also have nominal believers. Evangelicalism must reach those as well as non-believers on the outside. Amazingly enough, that is the central core mission of the website I run, UNITYINCHRIST.COM, to strengthen and fully bring to Christ the "nominal" believer. The site features growth oriented sermon transcripts majoring in 'gospel of Christ' content, as well as pointing the diverse members of the Body of Christ toward unity of purpose, the central purpose Jesus has for his entire body of believers. Truly amazing to see and article that addresses this 'problem' and opportunity within the churches in America.

Christine Wicker

Posted: April 15, 2008 3:34 PM

I'm the author of "The Fall of the Evangelical Nation." John seems to have understood what I'm talking about better than the editorial writer. I was able to get a very good sense of how many committed Southern Baptists and members of the National Association of Evangelicals actually exist by using their own stats. My numbers on conversions came from the Southern Baptists themselves. I wonder why the editorial writer thinks them to be less reliable than other unnamed sources. I don't think and didn't write that it's a scandal for megachurches to be filled with uncommitted Christians. I merely think it's a fact, one that church leaders admit readily. I also think that when we're tallying the number of evangelicals as a way of characterizing their power, we ought to at least require that the tally have some measure other than self-report, which is notoriously inaccurate with regard to religion and sex. As for whose heart is right with God, I wouldn't even try to judge that.

deacon steve

Posted: April 15, 2008 2:28 PM

I fail to see what the tirade on 'theocracy books' at the beginning of the article has to do with the main purpose of reviewing Wicker. If you're referring to Kevin Phillips "American Theocracy" as 'discredited', nothing could be further than the truth. Although Phillips' analysis contains its share of factual error and questionable generalization, its major analysis of historical trends and of political/religious cultures in the US is fairly well substantiated. JohnW above states some very real factors in the failure of American evangelicalism to separate itself from a 'christian' lunatic fringe and all the criticism that writers like Kevin Phillips level at American Christianity are unfortunately deserved. Read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine - The Rise of Disaster Capitalism" (Alfred Knopf 2007). What Phillips analyzes is all tied up in the cultural milieu which has led to the US practice of disaster capitalism both at home and abroad. I shall look forward to reading Wicker.

Eric Hanson

Posted: April 15, 2008 1:45 PM


Thanks for a really relevant review/editorial. There are many thought starters in it. I love the conclusion. People are not pawns within demographic blocks. They are precious individuals for whom Jesus christ died, and who need to follow Him.

JohnW

Posted: April 15, 2008 12:50 PM

I understand your frustrations with the definition of "evangelical" and exaggerated notions of impending theocracy, nevertheless, in our society the term "evangelical" has a very negative connotation. Evangelicals are seen as judgmental, intolerant, supporters of war, and as favoring the welfare of big business over that of the poor. While we may know these are mischaracterizations and all evangelicals are not "loyal bushies", unfortunately the people appearing in the popular media as evangelical spokesmen are not helping matters.

Kim	Posted: April 15, 2008 12:48 PM

I'm a former Southern Baptist too. I grew up in the "hellfire and brimstone" churches of the old south. I'm 50 years old. There was a time when I classified myself as an agnostic/atheist. I violently revolted against my upbringing because it led my impressionable mind to believe that God was an awful, horrible being waiting for me to do the next wrong thing so He could send me straight to hell for it. I know better now. And I attend a Presbyterian church that leans toward the conservative end of the spectrum. I think this writer is probably writing from her lack of knowledge of God himself, which is what I lived through. I pray that God will reveal himself to her. Then she'll join the ranks of those of us who're true believers in the God who created us. She'll be more willing to share that faith with others and know that indeed she is loved and always was! Thank God for transformations, and His power to do so.

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment