The Evangelical and Charismatic labels, its meaning, and searching for a better term
The meaning of Evangelical
Historian David Bebbington discusses four key distinctives of those who call themselves Evangelical: conversionism, biblicism, activism and crucicentrism.What is an Evangelical, National Association of Evangelicals, https://www.nae.org/what-is-an-evangelical/, accessed 18/11/2022
Conversionism
This is "the belief that lives need to be transformed through a “born-again” experience and a life long process of following Jesus"
If I was to effusively affirm this tenet of evangelicalism, I would have to clearly distance myself from the common practice of prematurely leading a person through a sinner's prayer before they are ready to take up their cross, repent, and put their whole trust in Jesus.
A focus on conversion necessarily takes focus off a holistic process of first being drawn to God, and subsequent to conversion, that life-long process of discipleship and becoming more like Christ. As much as the comment mentions being converted into a “life long process of following Jesus”, the word “conversionism” focuses around conversion, and the evangelical churches I've been to also focus around this. They may have practices such as regular calls to make a commitment to Jesus, almost always in a very superficial sense. See the series on Becoming Christian for more on this: http://propheticengineering.org/series/becoming-christian.
Others focus on revival, tent meetings, and sudden conversions. These tend to be Pentecostal. These go even further than simply having altar calls in regular Sunday services, and exacerbate the issues around this practice.
Other Evangelical churches do not generally have an altar call, but focus on the long road of discipleship. If a person wants to come to God, they will have private meetings to deal with the specifics of that person's journey, and counsel them one to one until they are sure they have counted the cost and are ready to take the step. This is a deliberate move to counter the debilitating poor witness of superficial Christians who do not change, because they never actually received Christ.
Can you be Evangelical and “conversionistic” without the poor practices of superficial conversions? I think you can. Nevertheless, I'd be happier with a term that is more holistic, which is probably centred around discipleship.
Biblicism
This is "a high regard for and obedience to the Bible as the ultimate authority"
Insofar as we understand this to be about taking the Bible as your sole foundation for life, without discounting the wisdom and encouragement we can get from other Christians, then this is agreeable.
It can be taken in a fundamentalist way, though, which is to say, not Evangelical, in my understanding of the term 'Evangelical'. I was talking with a fundamentalist who simply could not accept the concept of establishing boundaries between men and women who are not married, because this was not explicitly found in Scripture. Scripture was “sufficient”, in the sense that it answered every question of life, such that if it wasn't in there, you had complete freedom.
Instead, we have to be able to extrapolate out general truths from Scripture, and combine that with psychological wisdom (how people 'work'), like Solomon, to apply the Bible to today. (Otherwise, what do we do with modern technology, or drugs, or the complex economic systems of modern life? Sadly, some just lump it all together as “evil”, although others equally erroneously lump it all as “neutral”.)
Another error is to believe that Scripture is sufficient in the sense that if you read from it, or preach from it, that's all that needs to be said. You don't need to walk with people, understand them, love them or serve them: Scripture is sufficient for them to grow in their walk with God. Rather, the sufficiency of Scripture is foundational in your theory—but would be decidedly lacking if you didn't put it into practice.
I deal with these aberrant views of sufficiency in the series “Sufficiency of Scripture” http://propheticengineering.org/tag/the-sufficiency-of-scripture.
Activism
This is "the expression and demonstration of the gospel in missionary and social reform efforts"
A lot of Evangelical definitions draw out the centrality of the gospel—and rightly so, given that's the core of the term “Evangelical”: euangelion, a Greek term that means good news or gospel.
If we were to understand this term as purely focussing around preaching the gospel, without also focussing on demonstrating the gospel, I would be opposed to it. The good news is that God came to restore our relationship with himself, but also, as part of that, he came to teach us how to live. How we were always supposed to live. And that too is good news!
To be clear, our aim is not to make the world perfect. But what living the gospel means is that we allow ourselves and others to see glimpses of what God is like. We see shadows of heaven, and that brings glory to God. So in effect, our lives should be preaching the Gospel just as much as our words should be. I wrestle with ten points that I'd like to see us as a church imbibe as we put the gospel into practice in the series “Letter to the Melbournians”: http://propheticengineering.org/series/letter-to-the-melbournians.
If one preaches the gospel without living it, that's hypocrisy. If instead you live the gospel without preaching it, that's cowardice. Now, one can place some Evangelicals in one camp or the other, giving them a bad name. But just because some can get it wrong, doesn't mean we can't claim it and do it right.
So, we love the whole person, and every part of a person should be focussed around Christ—the central question of the next and final aspect of Evangelicalism.
Crucicentrism
This is "a stress on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as making possible the redemption of humanity"
Now, there is much to love about this focus. Jesus died for our sins, taking on the punishment that we deserve for our sins, so that we could be forgiven and have everlasting life with God.
But, there is also much that is lost. If this was the only aspect about Jesus that we should be focussing on, why did he spend so long on earth? Why did he take disciples and teach them and live a life that he told his disciples to copy? Jesus' life was to be emulated. We are to live like he lived. In strong relationship with the Father, preaching and teaching and healing and working and so much more.
We take it as a positive to be emulated that he broke the taboo and talked with a woman, dignifying her, and at the same time, dignifying a 'half caste': the Samaritans. This is political—unwritten, but unwritten rules are still rules that groups hold to and our lives are shaped around. Jesus was very much involved in political and social reform. The liberals get this, but as Evangelicals, we don't reject the foundation of the Bible.
There is yet another aspect to Jesus and that is his resurrection. This doesn't just give us solid hope that we will one day be raised to heaven too. It also demonstrates Jesus' victory over death, the demonic and Satan. Evangelical Pentecostals know the importance of the resurrection, but non-Pentecostals miss it, just as they miss most spiritual references in the Bible and daily life. It's the beginning of the end. It gives us strength and hope that we can not only drive out demons, but begin establishing the Kingdom on earth; that is, as much of the kingdom that will be established before his Second Coming when the full Kingdom will come. I discuss this in detail in the series “The Mission of the Church” http://propheticengineering.org/series/mission-of-the-church.
Suffice to say, while there is nothing not to like about crucicentrism, I'd rather be known for a balanced focus that brings out all aspect of Jesus: his life, death and resurrection.
The final verdict on the term Evangelical
I'm happy with conversionism, but would be happier with more of a focus on discipleship, as that is more holistic and balanced. Biblicism is fine, as long as it doesn't degrade into a fundamentalist rejection of godly wisdom. Activism is a good concept, as long as it doesn't focus solely on preaching the gospel at the expense of demonstrating the gospel—as if they could be pulled apart.
Crucicentrism misses two vital areas: Jesus' life and resurrection, which feeds into the imbalance of the other areas. Activism that preaches the gospel misses living out the gospel because of a focus on the crucifixion at the expense of Jesus' social and political life. Biblicism can be suffocating because focusing on the crucifixion ignores Jesus' powerful resurrection, and his victory and defeat over the demonic, suffering and death. The charismatic doesn't fit. Conversionism focuses on the conversion that was enabled with the crucifixion, but misses the discipleship aspects brought out through living like Jesus and walking in a resurrected life.
Overall, I'm not happy with the term. It may have historically revitalised a lost focus on the gospel, but that situation has passed.
Could adding the concept of “Charismatic” reform and revitalise the Evangelical?
The meaning of Charismatic
I take the terms Pentecostal and Charismatic as having different meanings. A Charismatic is one that believes in the charismatic gifts as continuing today, but otherwise continues in their denomination's beliefs. So you can be Baptist Charismatic, Anglican Charismatic, Catholic Charismatic, and so on.
A Pentecostal is an original! It's a whole belief system. They are typically Arminian as opposed to Calvinist, and so believe strongly in the ability of people to decide for Jesus for themselves. God has already done his bit. Hence their strong push for conversion in nearly every meeting. A Pentecostal is typically strongly spirit-focussed, rather than earthly-focussed. They are found more often in prayer and evangelism than discipleship and Bible study. Some also, strangely enough, hold to particular beliefs about holiness, perfection, and two or even three main stages to a Christian's life (more on this in a bit).
So “Pentecostal” describes a denomination, but “Charismatic” describes a few certain views over and above or as distinct from your denomination. The Charismatic believes in the continuation of the so-called 'spiritual' gifts today: gifts like the gift of tongues, prophecy and miracles. They also believe in the Holy Spirit's regular teaching and guidance to each believer, that he can and does communicate to us directly. It seems common also to believe that Apostles and Prophets continue today, at least from my experience.
You could view things another way. You could say that to be Pentecostal is to be Wesleyan-Methodist Charismatic. For that is where the Pentecostal movement started. And this is why some have those beliefs mentioned earlier about holiness, perfection and the different stages. Historically, the early Pentecostal movement started with Wesleyan and/or Methodist believers, who draw their beliefs from John Wesley himself. Many of the charismatic parts were added later, and Wesley's practices and beliefs regarding the charismatic are unknown today. In fact, many of the charismatic parts that we know today stem from a dangerous syncretism with New Age theology and practice from the early 1900's (read about that in my series on Word Faith, http://propheticengineering.org/series/word-of-faith).
Does the addition of the charismatic bring balance to the 'force'?
Sorry if any of you are not Star Wars fans, for borrowing the line about balancing the force. What I should say if that isn't clear is: can the term Charismatic bring balance to our faith, in a way that the term Evangelical by itself can't (insofar as labels are useful in the first place)?
The Spirit and the Word
I love how understanding and experiencing how the Spirit leads us in our Bible studies and life invigorates and recalibrates our use of the Bible. Instead of it being about how we might figure out, with pure reason, what God wants us to do in general, we also hear from God about what he wants us to do today. Go and say this to that person. God wants to heal someone today who has x pain in their body. When we experience this, it brings the Bible alive.
The Biblicist who approaches life without the Spirit misses out on the dynamic relational aspect to life with God, which is why they can struggle to apply the Bible to their life. By seeing just how the Spirit leads us and guides us—as Scripture says the Spirit will—we are immediately drawn to living the Gospel out in our daily lives more, as the Spirit teaches us directly and individually (or corporately).
See the series “The Spirit AND the Word” for more on this: http://propheticengineering.org/series/the-spirit-and-the-word
Helping people see God
Without the Spirit, you may be able to craft the perfect apologetic answer to every question, and you may be able to solve every biblical mystery in your own imagination, but it still remains that if a non-Christian is blind, they will not see the truth. They will not even seek the truth. They will more gladly let other blind people lead them, since they think the same way.
But some people are led by the Spirit to God through an intellectual challenge to their belief system. So we should not reject this totally, as if God gave us our intellect as a tragic mistake.
Others, however, need to see and experience God before they will be awakened to the fact that he is real.
Still others are too proud to admit they need God at all, and need to experience tragedy before they realise their own fragility.
So we don't just need to preach for understanding. We need to live and let people see God. We need to love and let people experience God. We need to be there for people, and be the hands and feet of God that bring good news, because we care as much as we also help people's minds comprehend Him and His goodness.
The Spirit uses a multiplicity of ways to bring people to Him, and I have found it a fascinating and a joy to be an intellectual amongst a totally different group of personalities: and how these differences can bring so much strength as a whole. For just one example, a Pentecostal church is much more open to having different people speak from the front, allowing more gifts to operate, and thus often seeing the “many parts, one body” come alive.
In “The Mission of the Church” series, we look through the metaphors of what the church is to understand a more holistic expression of church: seeking perfection imperfectly http://propheticengineering.org/series/mission-of-the-church.
Discernment
A big lack in Pentecostal circles is discernment. Lack of Scriptural understanding is key, but also it's just plain that those with a gift of discernment are typically much more at home in a solid exegetical Bible teaching church.
But they have a fantastic foundation towards plugging that gap. They believe the Bible when it says that God gave us Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers (Ephesians 4:11)—and those who generally bring discernment are the prophets. (This is generally called the 5-fold ministry, or just Apostolic.) They not only believe that, but practice it, allowing people who have a word from God to speak. In my experience, this allows many more to flourish in the gift of discernment—rather than shoehorning those people into pastoral roles, or just flat out rejecting them (which is why they often start their own discernment or apologetic ministry).
Now, this is where combining with the very best of the Biblicist in the Evangelical world comes in. If we could combine a strong focus on the Word with the understanding that Prophets are still around today, we have the strongest foundation: prophets that are strong in the Word. That's going to produce the best discernment.
Furthermore, the very core of the word “charisma” is the word charis, which is grace. God graciously gives us charismatic gifts. God graciously teaches us, and continues to use us, even though we make mistakes. God graciously saved us even while we were still sinners. Charismatics have a tendency to be more expressive and outgoing in their faith, and as such, you feel their love and grace and friendship. When discernment is combined with a gracious love, a scold becomes the “wound of a friend” which is “faithful” (Proverbs 27:6). A fight becomes iron sharpening iron (Proverbs 27:17). A discernment ministry moves from attacking people to understanding people enough to help them move from where they are to safer ground.
Whereas Charismatics too enamored with New Age positivism cannot bring themselves to critically test and approve, the Evangelical Charismatic realises it is sometimes appropriate to bring a rebuke to leaders: http://propheticengineering.org/series/criticising-leaders.
The final verdict on the term Evangelical Charismatic
The term “Evangelical” by itself has serious inadequacies. It too narrowly focuses on Jesus' crucifixion, which, although extremely important, was not the sole thing that Jesus accomplished or pointed to. Jesus' life lays the foundation for social and political reform, and his resurrection shows how to walk in victory in newness of life with the Spirit.
Whereas single-issue movements are almost by definition unbalanced, and often reactionary, what we ideally want is something that captures the holistic expression of the Bible and God's heart, that can stand at any moment in history or the future.
However, if we did do that, we might be so broad as to advocate for “the Bible”, which while explaining everything, ends up explaining nothing. So we should acknowledge that the Evangelical expression was necessary for a time, when most people did not actively try to convert others and bring the gospel, the evangel, to the heathen. But that is only part of our foundation, and we need a more holistic focus now for this current day and age.
In the modernist age, and amongst people who still think very rationally and naturally (as opposed to supernaturally), people needed and still need a rational understanding of the Word, brought to them by evangelists and apologists, teachers and preachers, as the Evangelical has done well.
In the post-modern age, the age of relativism, rationalism is dismissed, and experience reigns. The Pentecostal movement brought back the authenticity of the Word by helping people see and experience God, bringing a lifeless biblicism to lively reality.
But as the world moves on, the next generation is decidedly post-Christian, and they've replaced their god with the State. We're fast moving into some form of socialism or statism, as could be seen so obviously with the COVID-19 situation, where even Christians were longing for the safe arms of the State to protect them from the evils of the virus and other people.
The Evangelical approach flounders in this arena because they are the founders of the oppressive world that we live in—according to the socialists. They are quite literally hated, and hated because of their Christianity. The world views the Evangelical as patriarchal, oppressive, backward, racist, misogynist, bigoted, and more.
The Pentecostal movement is immediately tainted with their Evangelical backdrop, and only gains credibility if they move away from it. They are accepted if they are New Age in expression, and never criticise, and never shine their light further than their church building—but that will not do. They are shunned if they insist on different standards to the world, labelling certain things as demonic that the world lusts after. But mostly, I find they are still viewed as weird, bizarre, fringe lunatics.
Now, I am not about to say that we change what we do based on what the world want, or anything silly like that. But I am saying that we need to communicate that part of God which the world is seeking—though they are currently seeking the wrong path. People have a hole that only God can fill, but they try and fill it with unfulfilling things.
So the world is seeking solace and comfort in this turbulent world. They think they can find it in the State, the government, but that's not where they are going to find it. They are disillusioned by the church, because they have been lied (mostly but not wholly) that the church is full of pedophiles, priests are there just for the money, and the people are hypocrites. If they could look out and see a beautiful, loving community, who may get it wrong from time to time, but respond with grace, loving correction and forgiveness, that will look like true solace and comfort. It will be like flame to a moth, honey to a bee. If we could but leave our understanding of 'church' as a 90 minute Sunday service, and move towards a holistic community, then, and only then, can we be an effective rival to a holistic socialist government that provides all (or at least claims to). (See a re-appraisal of what the church is here: http://propheticengineering.org/series/letter-to-the-melbournians.)
The world is sick of old conversion practices and slick sales approaches. They crave authenticity (that's the postmodern coming through that is still alive and well). Genuine friendship that sticks through the hard times, even when it costs you (agape love), is going to stand out like a light on a hill. Conversionism and revivalism may still 'convert', but also will still result in spurious, shallow confessions of faith that don't last. They will continue to give a bad name to God because people think they've genuinely come to God when they haven't. (see Becoming Christian http://propheticengineering.org/series/becoming-christian.) So prophetic discernment (a phenomena encouraged by the Evangelical Charismatic view) that stays faithful even when things get hard, both in the theory and the practice, demonstrates true authenticity that clearly witnesses to God. (See 9 tests, for example (but also the whole site): http://propheticengineering.org/wisdom/word-of-faith-03-discerning-between-spirits-amongst-word-faith-believers-9-tests.)
People realise there is more to life than the natural. Most people are happy to say they are spiritual—but not religious. They are looking for a spiritual experience, but often in the wrong places. Meditation is mainstream. Hypnotism is becoming cool. Many mind techniques to become successful are mainstream. 'The Secret' is out. Witches and wizards are openly promoted as practices to emulate. Unfortunately, the Pentecostal movement has also become bewitched by the New Age movement. This is why only an Evangelical Charismatic approach, that restores a strong focus on biblicism to the charismatic, can show forth a biblical spiritual expression that leads to God. (See the difference between New Age, Word Faith and Evangelical Charismatic metaphysics here: http://propheticengineering.org/series/word-of-faith.)
So, a modernist approach that ignores the spiritual will not do. People realise there's more to life than the natural. They are actually looking for something comprehensive. But neither will a purely experiential approach do. It will be good for a time, but like the partygoing uni student, it can't last. Maturity is demanded of something enduring and deeply satisfying. We need to experience God, but also know him intellectually, lest we be easily duped and deceived, and miss out on his overwhelming greatness and being satisfied in him even in the midst of suffering.
Suffering is a massive part that Evangelicals have rarely contemplated, and Charismatics have often denied, downplayed, or ignored. Evangelical Charismatics have a unique understanding that can draw strength from difficult times: and we all know persecution is one the rise, with no hope on the horizon unless the Lord comes (see Michael Brown's book for a revival hope, though I think in practice revivals are generally local rather than political http://propheticengineering.org/salvation/book-review-of-revival-or-we-die-a-great-awakening-is-our-only-hope-by-michael-l-brown-phd). Our key hope is to demonstrate God to others whatever situation we are in—as witnesses, reflections, salt and light, and ambassadors. Thus, there is meaning in suffering, and we have the energy and vitality to push through it, and even dwell in it. In a post-Christian age, we cannot be defeatist, but nor can we be triumphalist. We must be witnesses (see http://propheticengineering.org/church/seeking-perfection-imperfectly-1-introduction-to-the-problem).
Therefore, with all these things in consideration, to be “Evangelical Charismatic” is the call of our day in the 2020's and beyond. I hope and trust you will be blessed as you explore this theology and put it into practice as you mull it over with the Holy Spirit and his Word in the context of your local church and community.