Grace Points: Neo-Evangelicalism "A Little Leaven Leavens the Whole Lump"

There is nothing closer to the heart of God the Father than evangelism. He has declared Himself as "not willing that any should perish." His love for the lost cannot be successfully argued against or denied. He is a God whose number one attribute "is love." He is not willing to love at arms length so He sent His "only begotten Son" to save believing sinners. Here is where love and grace meet. The communication of this gospel of love and grace is the instrument by which the light of truth penetrates the darkness of the sinner's soul. It is because of this truth that God "recommends His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." "Greater love hath no man than this!" If this be true, then any attempt, wittingly or unwittingly, to tamper with either the gospel or its packaging can quickly degenerate into heresy.

As an evangelist I keep apprised of the issues in the Christian community that relate to the gospel and sound doctrine and practice. I am speaking from the experience of 21 years in the pastorate and 15 years of itinerant evangelism that has taken me into over 700 churches. I am becoming increasingly concerned with the subtle and sometimes not so subtle changes that have been brought about by the philosophies of the "new (neo) evangelical ism." I fear that it is fast becoming the "neo-modernism." I do not know anyone in my circle of influence or ministry that has totally embraced the philosophy of neo-evangelicalism. Nor do I make any claims of being 100% void of any neo-evangelical thought or practice which may have unwittingly influenced my ministry; but to whatever degree it is found, either in the ministry of BDTLB or any other ministry, it is to be repudiated and avoided as a danger to the truth of the gospel of grace.

I am reminded that any really effective heresy that is capable of influencing others to turn away from sound doctrine to apostasy is, in all probability, 90% true. It is that little 10% that eventually destroys the lump.

When I say I oppose neo-evangelicalism, I am not attacking individuals, but the bad "little lump of leaven."

Neo-evangelicalism is bad because it has limited the scope of the gospel to the doctrine of justification. It was not so when this philosophy of ministry was introduced by its founders. The weakness did not lie in what they believed, for their fundamentalist doctrinal statements stayed in tact. The weakness is found in what they did not say or did not emphasize - preach love not doctrine, positive aspects of truth not negative. Because of this, as time has marched on, the neo-evangelical thinking has become (though not spoken audibly but clearly communicated by silence), "we don't care what you believe about the inspiration of the Scripture, the reality of Hell, the virgin birth or if you're a Mormon, a Catholic, Baptismal Regenerationalist, or a Charismatic - never mind how you define the gospel or what means you employ to receive the benefits of the gospel (faith plus works, baptism, sacraments, etc.), as long as you say you believe in Jesus (never mind if this Jesus is the Jesus of the Bible or the figment of your imagination) - or if your definition of the gospel is correct or if your definition of faith is biblically correct (an undefined faith is a heretics' haven) - we don't want to argue over that - we just want to join hands, be in organizational unity (peace at any price) - never mind about doctrinal unity - let's just be one big, happy family so we can advance the kingdom of God. After all, it's numbers that count. We want a big church for the glory of God and man - we don't really care if it is a church with pure doctrine, 'holy and without blemish.' We want a church that is like Burger King where 'you can have it your way."' Most don't care what you believe as long as you believe the gospel. This is done to the near exclusion of other major and important doctrines such as, sanctification and separation. This is done in an attempt to make the gospel more attractive and popular.

To do this, the neo-evangelical realized that action must be based on something more than faith in the Bible or Christ alone. They suggested, "We must be educated, intellectual Christians; not like those Bible thumping, back-woods, anti-intellectual fundamentalists. We must be thinking Christians with warm fuzzy feelings."

As neo-evangelicalism has matured, it is obviously becoming more culturally, politically and socially orientated than Bible orientated. They have, more and more, avoided sharply defining the gospel or saving faith, or things about which there tends to be a difference of opinion (i.e., dispensational issues, eschatology, eternal security, etc., etc.). Why? So as not to introduce some disturbing element that might diminish their attractiveness. Furthermore, they have bated the hook and sugared the tit by redefining the goal of the gospel, as something more than salvation of the soul, to include social, economic or political improvement. The leadership has labored thinking that by improving and cultivating ecumenical and crossdenominational dialogue or co-operation between evangelicals, catholics and liberals, or romancing the disenfranchised "Christian" homosexual or feminist, it will further promote their gospel goals. Still others seek the advancement of their gospel goals in promoting a "Christian humanism" by overhauling the time-honored, biblically-based Christian views of society, law, economics, history, music, art and philosophy. This means the church's outreach must often be harmonized with the communities decadent customs and culture. It is primarily this Christian humanism agenda that has, of late, impacted the independent, Bible-believing church's leadership styles, music, worship, art and congregational life. This trend is of great concern to many. Where will it go? It is my opinion that this

popularized gospel and its package is largely powerless without the use of promotional gimmicks, Madison Avenue promotions, ghost writers, and multi-level marketing experts. Much of what goes on today in the Christian community can be explained without God.

I was saved, surrendered to the call of God to preach, went to Bible college, pastored and evangelized for 37 years largely due to the influence of an independent, "old-fashioned," Hell-fire-and-brimstone preaching, fundamental, Bible-believing, Bible-teaching, soul-winning church. I've been there ... done that! I say that in order to tell you this. I know where neo-evangelicalism came from. I was a teenager when the neo-evangelical philosophy of ministry was born. I was in college when it was introduced to Christian colleges, world wide, through the books of Edward John Carrell ("Case for Orthodox Theology") and Robert 0. Ferm ("Cooperative Evangelism"). Carnell, in his book, called the "old" theology cultic and called his "new" theology orthodoxy. Ferm's book was used largely as a way to explain Billy Graham's "new" approach to mass evangelism as being better than the "old." I remember what the "old" evangelism was like, and I've had 40 plus years to observe the development and growth of the "new." I see no good reason to abandon the "old" for the "new." I remember and I applaud the "old" ways and the "old" stand that was taken against modernism and worldliness and for the winning of the lost by preaching the clear, powerful truth of the gospel without fear or apology - not some watered down, sweetened up and sometimes jazzed up, "star" studded, Saturday-night-live gospel.

The fact is, this article is largely because I rediscovered a message delivered by the "old" Billy Graham to the "old-fashioned" board of directors of the "old-fashioned" college of which he was president and I wish again for the "old" days. (This article, "Knowledge on Fire!" is printed in full on page ... 23.) The "new" has never equalled the "old." In my opinion, the Christian community is not any stronger for having been influenced by the "new." I ask, "Have the 'new' ways out performed the 'old' ways of getting lost people saved or building lives of stability and character?" "Or, since it was supposed to awaken our social consciousness, do we really have a 'kinder, more gentle' America to live in"?

Early on in its development, some of the architects of this philosophy of ministry saw serious flaws in the fruit from the "neo" seed that was sown and soon defected or distanced themselves. Some of those were Drs. Wilbur Smith, Harold Lindsell, Francis Schaeffer, Charles Woodbridge and Edward Camell.

Wilbur Smith was generally identified as the best read among living theologians of his time. After being called an "amusing eccentric, a dinosaur" by some of his peers, he refused to be associated any longer with them and their attacks against fundamentalism.

Harold Lindsell eventually reacted strongly, refusing to even be called an "evangelical." He felt that the label had become too contaminated and broad to be a meaningful way of identifying either one's theology or philosophy of gospel ministry. He now prefers to call himself a fundamentalist, This, he says, "lets everyone know that they believe in a Bible that is free from errors."

Francis Schaeffer saw neo-evangelicalism as an attempt to bring those who believed in the "purity of the visible church" and those who believed in a "pluralistic church" together. The last book he wrote before he died, was appropriately named "The Great Evangelical Disaster." To him, neo-evangelicalism was an experiment that failed because it too easily led into compromise and accommodation with unbelief.

Charles Woodbridge believed that joining the faculty of a neoevangelical institution would allow him to be on the ground floor of an institution that would reintroduce a Bible-believing orthodoxy to a world that was lost and confused by unbelief and modernism. His departing evaluation of neo-evangelicalism was: "Neoevangelicalism is a theological and moral compromise of the deadliest sort. It is an insidious attack upon the Word of God."

Edward Carnell, after years of promoting the neo-evangelical agenda, looked at the fruit and was unhappy over the changes brought about by his "neo"evangelical philosophy. Things were not turning out the way he and others had dreamed. "The new type of student," he lamented, "was not interested in his apologetics." The .new" was supposed to replace the "old" with morality, law and order - it didn't. He died in deep depression. His death, by an overdose of sleeping pills, was suspiciously described as "accidental or suicidal."

Neo-evangelicalism today does not look at all like the founders had dreamed or anticipated. When it rejected both dispensationalism and the doctrine of separation (personal and ecclesiastical) - in the belief that Christianity would be more attractive and able to better influence the disobedient, the sinful and unbelieving world for Christ - it started down the slippery slope of: toleration, accommodation, co-operation, contamination, and capitulating.

Incidentally, inherent in the thinking of the neo-evangelical, concerning the goal and prosperity of the gospel, is the idea that any form of dispensational theology must be opposed and abolished. This is because dispensational theology is viewed as being too opinionated, confrontational, and "too heavenly minded" - hence a divisive force. In my opinion, it is the dispensationalist's care in "rightly dividing the Word of God" that keeps dispensational believers focused on God's eternal purpose through the Church which is the Body of Christ (Eph. 3:1-12).

I believe we need to "see, and ask for the 'old' paths, where is the good way, and walk therein" (Jer. 6:16). Many Bible-believing churches, and especially the independent ones, exist today because they fought and won a battle with modernism or doctrinal compromise. Modernism and liberal theology always brings with it the chilling winds of cold, formal, liturgical services and finally death. Few of these battles were won without being divorced from their denominations and loss of properties. The victories, however, restored the fundamentals of the faith and a philosophy of ministry that was consistent with historic Christianity. However, having won this battle, we need to fight to keep its prize. These Bible-believing churches were established by dependance upon God, by the power, fullness and guidance of the Holy Spirit, by seasons of prayer, by the old-fashioned gospel preaching, they took the gospel to the streets, shops and door-to-door, they planted thousands and thousands of churches, they expanded missionary outreach to nearly every comer of the globe, they set the pace and carried the banner for revival and soul winning, established the great Bible conference movement, and started Bible colleges and gospel publications. Praise God and give Him the glory! Beware, dear Bible-believing pastor, deacon, youth leader, musician, church member; we cannot improve on the "old-way," the Pauline-way, the Bible-way.

Neo-evangelicalism is "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim 3:7). They are ever coming up with new ideas and "new" ways: a "new" way of looking at the authority of the Scripture, a "new" way of looking at creation, a "new" Adam and Eve (or was there really an Adam and Eve?), a "new" mini-flood, a "new" view of the value of human life (abortion and euthanasia), a "new" unity (Evangelicals and Catholics Together). And the changes go on and on and on and on..."tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine" (Eph. 4:14)!

1. Conduct careful self-examination. No individual or organization is perfect or knows it all. May God keep us from feeling or acting self-righteous. We must pray earnestly for ourselves, that in doctrine, word or deed we will not be weighed in the balances and found wanting.

"Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall" (I Cor. 10:12).

"Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee" (1 Tim 4:16).

"According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth (hereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,

which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every ran's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is" H Cor. 3:10-13).

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears" (Acts 20:28-31).

"Take heed, brethren, lest there be in my of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called today; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin" (Heb. 3:12-13).

2. We must be gentle and careful to teach those who are opposed either to our fundamentalist doctrine and philosophy of ministry. I like the testimony and example of Francis Schaeffer in this regard. He relates how he dealt with the erring and unbelieving Bishop Pike. He said, "I prayed that I would be able to present a clear Christian position to him and to the audience, and at the same time end with a good human relationship between the two of us. It was not something I could do in myself, but God answered my prayer." He said he was able to carry on a discussion with him "without one iota of compromise, and yet again not destroying him, but letting him know that we respected him as a human being." May God give us the love and power to help bring the neo-evangelical back to the "old" paths of true biblical unity (Eph. 3:1-13; 4:4-6).

"Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which an spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted" (Gal. 6:1).

"Aral the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach,

patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance in the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may

recover themselves out of the same of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will" (2 Tim. 2:24-26).

3. In clear cases of apostasy, separation is our only choice.

"A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself" (Titus 3:10-11).

"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" (Eph. 5:10).

"And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God" (Rom. 12:2).

I have discovered that most believers are woefully ignorant of the changes that have occurred in the Christian community over the last forty years and how the changes have accelerated at the speed of light just in the last ten years. Among neo-evangelicals there are those who still adhere to a position that mirrors the original ideal, but others have drifted out into theological outer space. Read about it, be informed and beware! Most of the books listed below are still available (some used) through BDTLB.

Neo-Evangelicalism / Robert Lightner

The Neo-Evangelicalism / Charles Woodbridge
The Great Evangelical Disaster / Francis Schaeffer
Reforming Fundamentalism / George Marsden
The Worldly Evangelicals / Richard Quebedeayx
In Pursuit of Purity / David Beale
Fundamentalism and American Culture / George Marsden
Fundamentalism / I. J. Packer
Battle for the Bible / Harold Lindsell
Bible in the Balance / Harold Lindsell
Cunningly Devised Fables / Basil Miller
Fundamental Christianity / Francis Patton
The Present Peril / Cornelius R. Stam
The Fundamentals (five volumes) / Various Authors

NOTE ... These books may be ordered from our office. E-Mail at BDTLB@aol.com Ask for Jim.

Used with the gracious permission of the good folks at Bible Doctrines to Live By. This fine article was taken from the January/February '97 issue of Truth Aflame