The Post-Evangelical

Rating:
Summary: repeating our mistakes?
Review: A book of some vintage, yet we are hearing more of the same from a number of quarters now! As a church planter and pastor the subject area is of vital interest.

Whilst I loved the chapter on relating to the world, I have one important question. If the church's debt to modernism is so bad, why buy into postmodernism in such a wholesale fashion? What is really unexamined in the book is a theology of relating to the world. Rather than capitulating to the latest trends, shouldn't we be a bit more discerning and affirm some things whilst rejecting others? The post-modernist project does not mind if the church tags along for a while, but is ultimately going in a different direction.

Rating:
Summary: Uncharitable work from a Very Charitable Man
Review: Dave Tomlinson is a gentle, charitable and thoughtful person. I hear that his next book will emanate more directly from his graduate studies in Biblical Interpretation, and am looking forward to learning much from him along those lines. He is certainly a learned man to whom we should listen closely.

However, his present book, The Post-Evangelical, seems out of character in that it introduces evangelical Christians into an uncharitable and thin view of evangelical Christianity. Tomlinson's book (I say his book, because I know this doesn't apply to Tomlinson himself) does not engage evangelical Christianity in a conversation, but rather brands evangelical Christianity as childish, immature and conformist.

As Mark Galli comments in his thoughtful sidebar notes, there are many good reasons why evangelicals do things that seem childish, immature and conformist to outsiders. The charitable critique will look for these well-intentioned underlying reasons, for accuracy if not for the sake of generating conversation over condemnation.

Tomlinson's story of the cross-town minister who "refused to allow the [wedding] service [of 2 congregants] in his church once he discovered that Simon had been previously married" is an example, which includes Tomlinson's conclusion that once he performed the service himself, "I suspect he was more than happy to self-righteously wash his hands of the matter and leave it to someone else to sort out". Galli makes the sidebar comment that was on my mind as well: "It's striking that there's so little effort to understand why a minister would make this decision. While his decision seems extreme, charity requires that we give him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he had a very high view of marriage and believed that allowing divorced people to remarry would encourage a casual view of marriage." (p.51)

Chapter 4, Longing to Grow, is unfortunately animated by a similarly condescending orientation to evangelical Christianity. We need to speak about differences honestly, openly and lovingly, not speculate that those with whom we disagree are stuck in the child stages of various models of psychological development.

Towards the end of the book, Tomlinson engages some giants in the history of theological thought - Barth, Macquarrie and Brueggemann for example. These closing chapters, while not containing fully-developed ideas, are hopefully the preludes to Tomlinson's future work.

Rating:
Summary: Uncharitable work from a Very Charitable Man
Review: Dave Tomlinson is a gentle, charitable and thoughtful person. I hear that his next book will emanate more directly from his graduate studies in Biblical Interpretation, and am looking forward to learning much from him along those lines. He is certainly a learned man to whom we should listen closely.

However, his present book, The Post-Evangelical, seems out of character in that it introduces evangelical Christians into an uncharitable and thin view of evangelical Christianity. Tomlinson's book (I say his book, because I know this doesn't apply to Tomlinson himself) does not engage evangelical Christianity in a conversation, but rather brands evangelical Christianity as childish, immature and conformist.

As Mark Galli comments in his thoughtful sidebar notes, there are many good reasons why evangelicals do things that seem childish, immature and conformist to outsiders. The charitable critique will look for these well-intentioned underlying reasons, for accuracy if not for the sake of generating conversation over condemnation.

Tomlinson's story of the cross-town minister who "refused to allow the [wedding] service [of 2 congregants] in his church once he discovered that Simon had been previously married" is an example, which includes Tomlinson's conclusion that once he performed the service himself, "I suspect he was more than happy to self-righteously wash his hands of the matter and leave it to someone else to sort out". Galli makes the sidebar comment that was on my mind as well: "It's striking that there's so little effort to understand why a minister would make this decision. While his decision seems extreme, charity requires that we give him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he had a very high view of marriage and believed that allowing divorced people to remarry would encourage a casual view of marriage." (p.51)

Chapter 4, Longing to Grow, is unfortunately animated by a similarly condescending orientation to evangelical Christianity. We need to speak about differences honestly, openly and lovingly, not speculate that those with whom we disagree are stuck in the child stages of various models of psychological development.

Towards the end of the book, Tomlinson engages some giants in the history of theological thought - Barth, Macquarrie and Brueggemann for example. These closing chapters, while not containing fully-developed ideas, are hopefully the preludes to Tomlinson's future work.

Rating:
Summary: Post what after all?
Review: I became aware of this book, although it plays no part in any kind of discussion in Germany, because of its ear-ringing title. "Post- Evangelical" yes, that's what I could call myself. But post- evangelical, what does that mean in an age, pregnant with a lot of "posts", postmodernism being the leading figure. Well, I wasn't disappointed by this book, which does not come as a technical book into the discussion, but rather as a book for everyone. And being honest: Haven't we all, influenced by evangelicalism, felt a sense of uneasiness with our own tradition and aren't a lot of representatives of it rather people that you might feel a bit of shame about? In this way Tomlinson brings together the restlessness of lots of former evangelically influenced people, who have quitted their unofficial membership to the movement by either living their faith privately or leaving any kind of church. The most interesting fact about the book seems to me bringing together the terms post- and evangelical, which is Tomlinson's actual effort. Post- being itself no way of describing something new, poses the question, where all the unrest will go to, once, people have discovered that they're involved. Is Tomlinson's own congregation, Holy Joe's in London, the nucleus, the example of a new movement or not? Sometimes the book reads like that. Thank you Dave Tomlinson for coining the term post-evangelicalism, thanks for listening to all the restlessness around. But after all: What lies behind the post, yet?

Rating:
Summary: An honest and important book for today
Review: I had never heard of the term "post-evangelical" when a friend gave me this book, but reading it has helped me articulate a lot of the confusion I had been feeling regarding my faith. For some time I had been uncertain about various aspects of evangelicalism and the experience of church, although I found it difficult to express my concerns, partly because I wasn't sure what it was that just "didn't seem right", and partly out of fear that I would be branded "unbelieving" if I openly questioned aspects of my faith. Although the church I belong to is fairly moderate on the evangelical scale, there are quite a few people for whom faith is an all-or-nothing matter: if I didn't believe everything that was said, I might as well not believe anything. As I'm sure many others could testify, this is a discomforting and isolating experience, and one that made me feel things would probably be OK as long as I just kept my mouth shut and didn't publicly disagree with anyone.

The Post-Evangelical has helped me put my experience in context, looking at the history of the church, the rise of the evangelical movement, and the subsequent disillusion with this movement as we move from the "modern" to the "postmodern". Granted, these are amibiguous terms that tend to be overused and underexplained, but I believe Dave Tomlinson does as good a job as anyone at defining them. In the same way that postmodern is not a rejection but a continuation of the modern, post-evangelicalism is an attempt at rethinking and questioning evangelicalism without callously throwing it aside.

This book has been of invaluable help to me in understanding where I have come from and why I am finding it problematic. It has helped me give voice and expression to my confusion without rejecting my faith in God, like so many other people I know who decided that there was too much hypocrisy and contradiction in the church and, sadly, gave it all up. There is wonderful debate to be had by free-thinking, intelligent Christians after reading this book.

Rating:
Summary: Strong Book, Weak Edition
Review: I read the British edition of Tomlinson's book a while back and can recommend it without reservation. He points out the many weaknesses of modern Evangelicalism for thinking persons (or even deeply feeling persons) and tries to plot a course toward something greater and more in tune with the Spirit. I liked the fact that he was not afriad to go after sacred cows like inerrancy, a modern attribute forced onto a premodern text, while so many other 'postmodern' Christian authors seem caught up in worrying about worship and preaching styles: the problem goes much deeper than the hipness of your pop culture connections, whether you have video screens in your church, or whether you preach in a relational style.

The American edition, however, has been published by Zondervan, a very conservative, borderline fundamentalist publisher. While Zondervan can be congratulated for having the nerve to publish the book at all, they end up handicapping Tomlinson's arguments by adding a running commentary in the margins from several figures in the American emergent church movement. Some of these commentators, like Timothy Keel and Doug Pagitt, have some interesting things to say about how the British Post-Evangelical movement relates to the US Emergent movement. Others are less helpful. Mark Galli, and editor for Christianity Today and Leadership, gives stock 'Christianity Inc' answers for many of Tomlinson's observations. Galli is often offensive in his attitude toward those of us fed up with the easy answers and cosy compromises of his brand of faith: at one point he argues that people leave conservative evangelical churches not because of the rampant anti-intellectualism or the cuultural irrelevance, but rather because they want to avoid discipline and tithing. In another marginal comment he claims that since conservative churches in the US are growing they are obviously on the right track. In the sense that megachurches are providing a product that many consumers seem to enjoy, he is right. Many of us would like to believe that their is something more to Christianity than that.

I assume that Zondervan added the commentary in order to protect its reputation in the evengelical/fundamenatlist community. It is possible to read the book without reading the margins, but if you are a footnote/endnote reader like me you will find yourself drwn to the commentaries; and if you are passionate about finding a more meaningful faith than what you can find in the American megachurch some of those commentaries will drive you crazy. Get the book in any case, but get the British edition if you can find it.

Rating:
Summary: Effective Description of a Developing Trend
Review: The first 5 or 6 chapters of Tomlinson's book provide a thoughtful, informed description both of the evangelical church and those who have have left it behind. His overall thesis that we are moving into a generation of Christians that value their evangelical heritage but who have moved beyond the questions that evangelicalism was designed to answer rings very true to my own experience. Working at a Christian College, I see every day those confused by the very paradigm shift Tomlinson describes. I found in these chapters a very helpful and even comforting explanation for the alienation I often feel.

However, the closing chapters seem to bank too much on the good will of the target audience as Tomlinson tackles that central bugaboo of evangelical thought, the inerrancy of Scripture. While I'm not convinced that he is wrong, Tomlinson's assumption that he doesn't have to make several points also leaves me feeling unconvinced that he is right on this point.

Despite this weakness, Tomlinson certainly offers hope for those wishing to move beyond what they see in their current churches without abandoning those things that attracted them to their faith in the first place. Further, Tomlinson dares to open a discussion about topics that most of the evangelicals I know are loathe to admit exist.

Rating:
Summary: A Catalyst for Further Thought & Discussion
Review: This book should be viewed as a catalyst for further thought and discussion on the topics raised. It touches the heartbeat of a growing "in-house" trend of dissatisfaction with contemporary evangelical culture as organizationally, and in some cases doctrinally and practically, expressed that leaves some "evangelicals," including myself, feeling that they have strayed from the flock when, in fact, they may have discovered the vital bloodstream of the biblical faith that has been clouded over with trivialities and, in some cases, error throughout the years. Dallas Willard states in his forward to the revised North American edition, "post-evangelicalism is by no means ex-evangelicalism... post-evangelicals are evangelicals, perhaps tenaciously so. However, post-evangelicals have also been driven to the margins by some aspects of evangelical church culture with which they cannot honestly identify." With that said, however, Tomlinson points out that some who strongly identify with what the book discusses "may not all be evangelicals" although they certainly are post-moderns.

My own alienation with certain aspects of contemporary evangelical culture as well as Dallas Willard's forward to this book is why I read it. And although some reviewers disliked the supplemental comments by the book's contributors, I felt that several of them provided good clarifications and critiques whereas others were off the mark. Also, some readers would not consider Tomlinson as the principle representative for their brand of "post-evangelicalism" which is general and vague enough to allow fo different brands among those who identify with it. Additionally, post-evangelicalism should not be confused with what was once called "the new evangelical theology" or neo-evangelicalism (as Mark Galli seems to do in one of his comments on pg. 27) which is an evangelical reaction against the fundamentalist branch of evangelicalism. See page 73 and Robert P. Lightner's "Neo-Evangelicalism" (if you can find a copy). To be sure, post-evangelicalism is against a rigid and legalistic fundamentalism, but it is more than that.

Among other flaws, I personally consider the discussion on truth inadequate and think Mark Galli's commentary on page 94 valid: "Post-evangelicals will admit to using propositional statements, but they seem to have a hard time admitting how utterly dependent they are on such reasoning" (cf. his other comments on pg. 82, note (e)). However, what I find overlooked by critics like Galli (and Christian apologists in general) is the tendency to under-appreciate the important subjective/objective distinction between being sincerely right, sincerely wrong, and insincere. Does God respect sincerity, even if one (Christian or non-Christian) is "objectively" or "propositionally" wrong? I would say that he does (apart from any possible but temporary negative consequences for being wrong) and such popular sayings as "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" as used by many evangelicals miss the mark. Is the road to heaven paved with bad intentions? One area that needed emphasis in the book is how post-evangelicals are more generally "inclusivist" than "pluralist" when it comes to HOW "salvation" occurs than most evangelicals who are primarily "exclusivists" (who believe that if you don't have a volitional [and propositional] "faith in Christ" before you die, then you're going to hell.). [As an aside, although most Christians are inclusivists when it comes to infants where divine grace alone is sufficent for the salvation of dead infants, there is less tolerance for adults which raises the rarely-analyzed question of exactly how a person is ultimately "damned". Many evangelicals pessimistically believe that everybody is on the road to hell until they have "faith in Christ" instead of believing more optimistically that Christ's atonement puts everybody on the road to heaven until they commit the sin that damns which puts the responsibility of damnation primarily in the individual's hands, not solely in God's.] Also, there is a growing emphasis among Christians (thanks to authors like Dallas Willard, Richard Foster, etc.) that salvation is primarily about a relational discipleship to Christ IN THIS LIFE (not just salvation from hell [however defined] in the next). As one walks with Christ through the Spirit and the Word, one is personally and progressively saved from sin and deception.

Another trend I've noticed that some post-evangelicals will support but isn't emphasized in the book is the rejection of monetary tithing as a biblical mandate to fund organizational churches. Non-tithing books like "Beyond Tithes and Offerings," "Should the Church Teach Tithing?," and "Tithing and Still Broke" are becoming popular and hard to refute which will require a reformation to the contemporary Christian understanding of giving to meet people's needs. "Grace giving" is the wave of the future. There is so much more that can be said but, again, consider the book (and this review) a catalyst for further thought and discussion.

Rating:
Summary: great questions... the conclusions, however...
Review: Tomlinson is a very engaging speaker, and after hearing him I was eager to pick up his book. Here's what I found...
His critique of the modern church is right on and insightful. He provides many, many good questions that we need to be asking ourselves. Some of his conclusions, however...
I have often recommended McLaren's books with the proviso that "You won't agree with everything he says, but that's okay." With Tomlinson, the imbalance was enough that I'm not entirely comfortable in recommending it.

There are some excellent parts in the book, including the side-bar dialogue where he allows others to critique what he's saying (not many authors are that brave!), and a good explanation of the "post-evangelical impulse", in other words, why people are abandoning evangelicalism for the "emerging church."

Worth reading, but only if you are a ways into this conversation. I wouldn't recommend it as a first step for anyone wanting to explore emerging thought... which is a shame, because I think that might have been the intent.