Customer Reviews

The Post Evangelical

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

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.

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 afraid 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, an 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 cultural 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/fundamentalist 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.

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 for 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" with financial intelligence 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.

Every so often, a book is published that acts as a milestone on the rocky road of the Christian journey. I believe this to be such a book. Perceiving in himself and in many of his fellow Christians a deep-seated dissatisfaction with the Evangelical movement of today, Dave Tomlinson sets out, with faltering steps, on a new journey in which the need for honesty and the desire to jettison all unneccesary religious baggage are paramount. At the same time, he is not slow to bring to our attention the benefits that his church background have afforded him. Inevitably, The Post-Evangelical raises more questions than it seeks to answer, but this is to be expected - the thoughts expressed here will hopefully be the seeds of a long and fruitful dialogue that should help us to grow into greater Christian maturity. Behind the author's words it is possible to see a picture of a man who has not made peace with his past, and resultingly the book lacks a sense of balance in parts. Consequently, his unwillingness to window-dress his message in more acceptable garb gives Dave Tomlinson's book a gutsy reality that is instantly appealing. By writing a book which is as honest as he wishes his own faith and ours to be, he has put post-evangelicalism on the map, and has put up a sign that will point the way for many thinking, honest seekers who are prepared to engage fully with their own journey.

The term, "post-evangelical" was coined by Dave Tomlinson to refer to the growing number of committed Christians who feel a need to engage with theological perspectives other than evangelical orthodoxy alone. He does not set out to debunk evangelical Christianity as such, indeed he stresses the important role of his Brethren church in bringing him to faith, but he is critical of the tendency in evangelical circles to over simplify and absolutise the faith. Post evangelicalism represents a step forward rather than away from his roots. Tomlinson argues that in a postmodern age there needs to be a place for Christians to express their genuine questions, doubts and insights without being branded "woolly liberals." A renewed mind, he argues, is a thoughtful mind. In attempting to explain what is going on and why, he offers his own understanding of terms like "evangelical," "liberal" and "postmodern" and he touches on such juicy matters as the nature of truth, the role of science and reason and the status of the bible. For some this book will offer a welcome expression of something similar to their own Christian experience. Others will consider its questioning approach dangerous. Either way this provocative book should serve to generate a useful discussion.

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.

I've read two books by Brian McLaren and number of others by authors associated with the Emergent movement. For a time I was regularly reading a few Emergent blogs. I think it is particularly appealing to those of us who come from church backgrounds where everyone seemed to be fighting mad at all times.

I felt I got a better look at the trajectory of the movement from "The Post-Evangelical", and I would have to say that this book sobered me up a bit. McLaren's books were at least as attractive as they were concerning to me. Tomlinson, writing to a much more progressive British readership, wasn't as effectively and meticulously disarming.

None of us can stand outside of church history. We're products of it. Few of us want to concede how impacted our interpretations of the Bible are by our times, our influences, and our own preferences. Many of us have wasted a lot of time trying to fit complex issues into polemic or political or denominational boxes, while neglecting "the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness."

But many of the doctrines we hold to as conservative Evangelicals (to use a passé term) are demonstrably primal. They were spoken by our Lord, documented by the apostles, and observed in the earliest churches. Where Emergent leaders come into conflict with those doctrines, and they sometimes do, they're in danger and potentially dangerous. I say this not because I dismiss their ideas, but because I take them very seriously.

The primary weakness of this book is that Tomlinson continually defines Post-Evangelicalism in terms of its contrast with, and implied superiority to, something else. As a result, it never stops defining traditional Evangelicalism from its own hyper-sensitive, critical (and frankly condescending, sometimes graceless) point of view. There seems to be almost no awareness that a great many Evangelicals are completely acquainted with the issues he has noted, yet are able to contend with them without becoming disillusioned or feeling like they need to reshape the church in their own image. To be completely honest, I have no desire to join a Charismatic or Fundamentalist Baptist congregation. But I don't think that they all need to be enlightened by my preferences!

I live in the postmodern era. I grew up in it. I understand the tension between rational and poetic thinking. I navigate it every single day. I find I need both modes, in equal measure. The Post-Evangelical half of the equation, as defined here, is inadequate to address the whole of life. Continually pitting the postmodern/poetic against the modern/scientific is an approach that will quickly come up short for any reader, regardless of his or her perspective. Life contains math. Life contains love. We require both the scientific and the poetic every day.

I'm grateful to the Emergent movement for the gut check, but I'm still convinced that our new postmodern world needs John MacArthur just as much as it needs Brian McLaren.

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?

A note to American readers, this is a review of the British edition of the book (without the sidebar commentary etc) and it's of the original printing in 1995.



This book was published in 1995 and although still very acute and with some useful points it does somehow feel dated. Some things, however, don't date - or at least date very slowly! - so Dave Tomlinson's discussion of the post-modern influence on evangelicalism is still valid, and particularly so for this reader.

The basic premise is that the church (and specifically in the case of this book the Evangelical wing of the church) fits into the 'Modern' society method of absolute truth, rationality, literal meaning of texts and proscriptive behaviours; unfortunately for the church the rest of the world has moved on to an imprecise, ambiguous and symbolic world as the penny has dropped that life has rather more to it than the 'modern' model offered. The argument of this book is that many Christians can no longer subscribe to the core requirements of the evangelical church (requirements, we note, that are usually not significant in the Bible) and either join the liberal church, have church once a year at Greenbelt or drift away altogether.

This is a fairly short book at 145 pages which serves to introduce the topic, to give a few examples and to map out the directions in which many post-evangelicals might move. There's not enough space to go deeply into any of the topics which was, for me, a slight failing of this book. It more serves as background for the reader to decide if this area of thought is that which will help them with their faith problems. I can recommend Brian MacLaren's "A New Kind Of Christian" as the more recent and in-depth book that would complement this very well.

There is a real benefit, however, in the simplicity of the writing style of this book. It was easy to identify myself in much of his writing and the confidence this gave - that I'm not alone in my disillusionment with modern Christianity - was very helpful. The datedness of the book is in terms of the examples he gives and perhaps also in the very discussion of 'evangelical' and 'evangelicalism' rather than just 'Christian'; I have a suspicion that the evangelical wing has grown so much in the twelve years since this book was published that it has subsumed most other areas and to me this book seemed to be saying a lot about the 'average' and 'normal' church of a medium-sized town in England, not necessarily one that would shout from the rooftops that it was evangelical. Be that as it may, this is an interesting book which gives encouragement to further reading and references some useful other works in its endnotes.

Dave Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003)

The post-evangelical Christian, according to this house-church planter turned pub-church facilitator, does not leave behind the importance of Scripture and conversion, but is often tired of the Christian sub-culture and arguments: `To be post-evangelical is to take as given many of the assumptions of evangelical faith, while at the same time moving beyond its perceived limitations'. Rather than pursuing separation from the world, post-evangelicals realise their cultural influences (including their often middle class values) and seek to critically interact with their culture. Rather than getting bound up in absolutism and anti-critical attitudes, they recognise ambiguity and read the Bible with critical skills and imagination. Rather than accepting the growth stage of the compliant child, they want to question and have their minds opened. This is a helpful perspective for emerging church leaders to understand some theological and pastoral issues within evangelicalism, and the reasons some believers are feeling the need for something more.

I like the way it stretches thinking. It was quite a ground-breaking book wen it first came out and is still often referred to in emerging chruch circles. The American version (unfortunately) has marginal notes from too many others - we should let Tomlinson speak for (and be evaluated for) hismelf.

Originally reviewed in Darren Cronshaw `The Emerging Church: Spirituality and Worship Reading Guide.' Zadok Papers S159 (Autumn 2008).