Evangelicals have a serious image problem and need to reform their ways by getting back to the historic meaning of their identity, declared prominent leaders of the movement on Wednesday.
Today's Christian News Online - The Christian Post
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. (JN 8:32)
CP HOME
> Society > General
Evangelicals Set Record Straight on Image Problem
By
Michelle A. Vu
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, May. 08 2008 08:04 PM EDT
[-] Text [+]
Prev1Next
Most Commented Articles
La. Governor Signs 'Science Education Act'
Obama Prying Loose Evangelicals from Republicans
Federal Marriage Amendment Re-introduced in Senate
Why I Thank God for Charles Darwin
Anglican Head Sees Risks in Conservative Proposals
PCUSA Assembly Approves Deleting Gay Clergy Ban
Arizona Puts Marriage Amendment on Ballot - Again
Featured Advertiser Links
Comments
Jesus and St. Paul either didn't have good pr people (they were both put to death) or they weren't concerned about pr. Why are we so concerned of the evangelicals' reputation in the world?
As an agnostic, the problem I have with evangelicals is they attempt to force their beliefs on those with different view points and are not shy about telling others they have the wrong beliefs- "your religion is wrong, mine is correct" I tend to be skeptical of all religions.
Here's the rub ... the entire treatise, as true as it is, is nothing more than a social-theological commentary on the desire to achieve appropriate Biblically based Christian behavior personally, interpersonally, and socially.
There is NO mention in either the Manifesto or the Study Guide of what the Bible says about:
... where faith in Christ comes from (Ro 10:17; Eph 2:8-9)
... the cost of discipleship (2Co 5:15; Mt 16:24)
... the expectations of the fruit of the spirit in changing personal behavior as expressed as the process of sanctification (2 Pe 1:5-12)
... that all of the law is found in loving God and your neighbor (De 6:5; Lev 19:18; Mt 22:39-40)
.... the definitions of loving God and neighbor (Jn 4:24; Mt 25:34-46; Mt 5:43-47; Lk 10:36-37; cf. Ja 1:22; Ro 2:13; Mt 7:12)
... the personal relationship that Christ expects (Mt 12:50; Jn 14:15, 21, 15:15; Ga 4:15)
... and the several expressions of spiritual disciplines that help Christians spend time with Christ in order to build a relationship with Him (confess faith in Christ: Ro 10:9-10 (is important in order for Christ to repair and restore relationship to God); confess sins: 1Jn 1:8-10; repent of sins: Lk 15:7 (these steps are important daily to restore communication with God - Jn 9:31; Ps 66:18; Pr 15:29); participating in a one-time baptism: Mat 28:19-20; participating in the Lord's Supper: 1Co 11:24-26; prayer: Php 4:6; reading the Bible: De 17:19; studying the Bible: Deu 6:6-7; 2Ti 2:15; thanksgiving and praise: Ps 100:4; worship: Jn 4:23-24; tithe: Lk 11:42; give alms (additional gifts beyond the tithe): Lk 12:33-34; personal sacrifice for the sake of advancing the Kingdom of God: 2Co 5:15; serving others: 1Pe 4:10; fasting: Mat 6:16-18.
And that is really and truly the point. In order to achieve what the manifesto wants, every Christian in the world has to understand and personally incorporate in the expression of his or her own personal, interpersonal, and social life, every word of the referenced scriptures. Sadly, the manifesto doesn't do anything more than infer this, and certainly doesn't point out where to find the answer to their question.
Here's the rub ... the entire treatise, as true as it is, is nothing more than a social-theological commentary on the desire to achieve appropriate Biblically based Christian behavior personally, interpersonally, and socially.
There is NO mention in either the Manifesto or the Study Guide of what the Bible says about:
... where faith in Christ comes from (Ro 10:17; Eph 2:8-9)
... the cost of discipleship (2Co 5:15; Mt 16:24)
... the expectations of the fruit of the spirit in changing personal behavior as expressed as the process of sanctification (2 Pe 1:5-12)
... that all of the law is found in loving God and your neighbor (De 6:5; Lev 19:18; Mt 22:39-40)
.... the definitions of loving God and neighbor (Jn 4:24; Mt 25:34-46; Mt 5:43-47; Lk 10:36-37; cf. Ja 1:22; Ro 2:13; Mt 7:12)
... the personal relationship that Christ expects (Mt 12:50; Jn 14:15, 21, 15:15; Ga 4:15)
... and the several expressions of spiritual disciplines that help Christians spend time with Christ in order to build a relationship with Him (confess faith in Christ: Ro 10:9-10 (is important in order for Christ to repair and restore relationship to God); confess sins: 1Jn 1:8-10; repent of sins: Lk 15:7 (these steps are important daily to restore communication with God - Jn 9:31; Ps 66:18; Pr 15:29); participating in a one-time baptism: Mat 28:19-20; participating in the Lord's Supper: 1Co 11:24-26; prayer: Php 4:6; reading the Bible: De 17:19; studying the Bible: Deu 6:6-7; 2Ti 2:15; thanksgiving and praise: Ps 100:4; worship: Jn 4:23-24; tithe: Lk 11:42; give alms (additional gifts beyond the tithe): Lk 12:33-34; personal sacrifice for the sake of advancing the Kingdom of God: 2Co 5:15; serving others: 1Pe 4:10; fasting: Mat 6:16-18.
And that is really and truly the point. In order to achieve what the manifesto wants, every Christian in the world has to understand and personally incorporate in the expression of his or her own personal, interpersonal, and social life, every word of the referenced scriptures. Sadly, the manifesto doesn't do anything more than infer this, and certainly doesn't point out where to find the answer to their question.
I am of the opinion that this group may have done themselves and people who call themselves "Evangelicals" a disservice by titling their document a "manifesto". Though the document presents a view of Christianity that is less "politicized", the word it self denotes a political doctrine. The American Heritage Dictionary defines manifesto as "A public declaration of principles, policies, or intentions, especially of a political nature." Though other dictionaries do not include references to a political aspect to the word, many people still have negative connotations of the word (Communist Manifest, unibomber manifest, etc..)
msnchris70
I could not have said it better.
reg599
I agree that Christians need to learn how to handle persecution better.
But we need to recognize the difference between persecution and constructive criticism.
Persecution works against truth while constructive criticism attempts to rebuild truth.
This article is about rebuilding truth. We would not expect the secular world to be critical.
Guys: I don't think the problem is with our image as much as it is with our unwillingness to accept persecution as fact of faith.
Luk 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.
Who needs an Apostles CREED????? Are you kidding me! We need an apostles creed because it is the base of what we Christians believe, without such a creed Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses, Unitarians and Christian Scientists would be considered Christians.
Because of the Creed, we know they are not true Christians. Today's non-denominational Evangelicals scare the you the what out of me. They have no creed to protect the faith and have watered it down to become a "Mission Statement". They have no Liturgy as the early Christians did, they don't believe the bread and wine become Jesus body and blood, they think Baptism is only symbolic and they have turned worship of God on Sunday into mere entertainment and a Bible study with a motivational speaker.
Without the Apostles CREED can you not see the Slippery slope of watered down Christianity?
Why do we need the Apostles Creed when we have the Word of God, which contains the great commission?
And, calling attention to the obvious...
A few years before this (c. 390), the letter addressed to Pope Siricius by the Council of Milan (Migne, P.L., XVI, 1213) supplies the earliest known instance of the combination Symbolum Apostolorum ("Creed of the Apostles") in these striking words: "If you credit not the teachings of the priests . . . let credit at least be given to the Symbol of the Apostles which the Roman Church always preserves and maintains inviolate."
With the last paragraph being...
I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting.
Echoed in 110 A.D. in the first city the Christians were called Christians by Ignatius of Antioch, who followed St. Peter and Evodius as the third Bishop of Antioch, and served just after the time Matthew wrote his Gospel there:
Letter to the Smyrneans [-]
See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
Pretty straightforward if you ask me.
"Huffman pointed to the life of Jesus Christ, who he said went to the cross and died for mankind’s sin, as the Gospel."
This is truly refreshing to hear.
But I would like to point out to Pastor Huffman that we already have the Apostles Creed. Why do we need another document?