Revealing Details: Why I'm Still an Evangelical (Part Two: Definition)

Despite the frequent abuse and misuse of the term, the word Evangelical really doeshave a definition. In 1987, David W. Bebbington published Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s in which he set forth four qualities that had been consistently comprised within Evangelicalism. Evangelicals, he found, held to Biblicism, Crucicentrism, Conversionism, and Activism.

In his book, though, as he explores the historical developments, he also points out how differently various groups have understood these four categories. Consider “activism” for example. There are those who imagine that the only legitimate activity of Evangelical Christians toward anyone else is that of proclaiming the necessity of belief in the gospel in order to escape eventual damnation and experience any of God’s blessings today. This is clearly a very narrow perspective, and doesn’t include anything of what most of us would consider to be activism. It still seeks to change the circumstances of others, but only in that those others relate to Christ.

My intent is to examine each of these four categories, not academically as Bebbington does. His book is still in print. But to express where I fit within each of the four categories, such that I must accept that the term “Evangelical” comprises my beliefs and behaviors.

In the meantime, I’d be interested to know how you understand these terms as they refer to your own beliefs and behaviors: Bible, Cross, Conversion, and Activism.

About the images: In these, Morgan and Charlotte break character, get the giggles, look for reassurance from the photographer, and in several other ways demonstrate some breadth (and depth) that doesn’t fit the narrative…just like many Evangelicals’ beliefs/behaviors vary from “The Official Theology.” And yet, they both still fit well within what I find lovely, adorable, entertaining, and meaningful. As do many Evangelicals.