Beyond Born Again: Towards Evangelical Maturity (1993)

definite plans for the future (being confident of God's eventual guidance), what eventuallyhappened still surprised me.One often hears the paradoxical statement that many enthusiastic students lose their faith whilein seminary. As the story goes, the wide-eyed seminarian finds his faith in the Bible underminedby the destructive biblical criticism of his Liberal professors. Let me say that there is very littlechance of this happening to anyone at my alma mater, where the commitment to Evangelicalthought and practice is unswerving. My experience does not therefore fit the stereotype I havejust described, but I did undergo quite a change. I found to my unpleasant surprise that by mysecond year, I was unable to affirm much of that upon which I had spent my life up to that point.I might add that I was dragged to this conclusion kicking and screaming.As I have said, one of my greatest interests was in apologetics, which in turn greatly contributedto my interest in New Testament studies. The reading of stalwarts like John WarwickMontgomery and Francis Schaeffer convinced me that the stakes indeed were high: ifEvangelical Christianity were not true, and based upon historically true events, why then lifereally held no significance at all! This put me in quite a charged situation. On the one hand, it allmust be true! Yet, on the other, I must be honest-- I could not try to convince an unbeliever withan apologetical argument I would not myself accept. My enthusiasm for the true faith, and thesecret fear that the faith might not be true, were sources of fuel that fed each other. My zeal wasgreat, but it was interrupted by periods of doubt that might last for months. The more terrible thedoubt, the more zeal was needed to make up for it. As the zeal grew greater, the stakes becamehigher, and the fear in turn grew deeper. Naturally, I was reluctant to find any weakness in thevarious arguments in favor of the resurrection of Christ, or the historicity of the gospels, etc. Yetif there were weaknesses, I had to know! Eventually, I believe, I found them in the course of myown research.At the same time, my suspicions were beginning to mount concerning the viability of the way Ihad been told to interpret experience. I encountered personal disappointments which I piouslyassumed God must have sent "for a purpose." Praise the Lord, I figured. Still, I couldn't help butnotice that I didn't need "God's will" as an explanatory factor. Human failure and immaturityseemed adequate explanations. Besides, what did it imply about life if every significantexperience was significant only as a "test" sent by God? And could you be sure you haddiscerned God's will, since the last time you thought you had it, everything fizzled anyway? Ibegan to wonder if my picture of life was adequate for the increasingly ambiguous world I livedin. Born-again living seemed to me just a crutch which no longer facilitated healing and growth,but actually protracted immaturity.During this period, I did not let my doubts and dissatisfactions stop me from sharing the goodnews of Jesus Christ. But evangelism began to present difficulties of its own. One cold night inBeverly, Massachusetts, I trudged out with a handful of other seminarians to "witness" to localsinners. As I sat conspicuously in a tavern telling a stranger about the abundant life Christoffered her, I suddenly found myself at a loss for words. Behind my evangelistic rhetoric, whatdid it all mean? Just how would her life change if she "accepted Christ"? Well, she would beginto seek guidance daily in God's Word, and to go to church, and. uh. well, basically, to take upnew religious habits, I guess. This girl already believed in being kind, loving and honest. Shedidn't need religion for that. What did she need it for, I had to ask myself? Her "problem" seemedto be mainly that she didn't know the requisite passwords and shibboleths: "Christ is my personalsavior," "I'm born again."Around the same time, I found myself in a Cambridge cafe having supper with some friends. Wewere on our way to a lecture by Harvey Cox, whose books I'd always found fascinating, though5

I'd filled their margins with vociferous criticisms. I suddenly thought, "Listen, is there really thatmuch difference 'them' and 'us'?" I had always accepted the qualitative difference between the"saved" and the "unsaved." Until that moment, it was as if I and my fellow-seminarians had beensitting in a "no-damnation" section of an otherwise "unsaved" restaurant. Then, in a flash, wewere all just people. My feeling about evangelism has never been quite the same.I had to reevaluate my faith. I had some idea of what other theological options were like. Butsince I had always read them only to refute them, it was going to take some adjustment to be ableto give them a sympathetic hearing. In the summer of 1977, I took course work at PrincetonTheological Seminary, learning much from Donald Juel and visiting professor Monica Hellwig.The next fall, I went to Boston University School of Theology and Harvard Divinity School(members of the Boston area consortium to which I had access as a Gordon-Conwell student).There I had the privilege of taking courses with Howard Clark Kee, Helmut Koester, and HarveyCox. A new world had opened up to me, both theologically and personally. I felt like a collegefreshman, thinking through important questions for the first time. The anxiety of doubt hadpassed into the adventure of discovery. It was like being born again.This sharing of my "testimony" brings me now to the theme of the present book. One might callit an attempt to "put away childish things." Of course, I allude to Paul's eschatological vision in 1Corinthians 13. The imperfect must fade with the advent of the perfect. Childish things, adequatein their day, must be set aside, perhaps painfully, when maturity knocks. My experiences andresearches lead me to believe that there is a new maturity on the horizon, beckoning toEvangelical Christians. The current, tiring struggle over biblical inerrancy are part of the "birthpangs" of this "new age." In this book I will sketch several of the difficulties to be found intraditional Evangelical approaches. I will go on to outline some possible directions for the futurealready becoming apparent in the thinking of Evangelicals here and there. What I will beproposing is a really new Evangelicalism, something transcending Harold J. Ockenga's "NeoEvangelicalism" (fundamentalism with better manners) and Richard Quebedeaux's "YoungEvangelicalism" (politically and behaviorally liberalized Neo-Evangelicals). Let it be noted that Iwill not be advocating a new candidate for "the one true faith," but rather a possible option forthose who see the problems as I do, and would still like to remain in real continuity with theirEvangelical heritage. (Not that becoming an out-and-out theological liberal would be a bad thing,mind you. I simply realize that this is not an option for everyone.)Now that I've told you who I am, let me take a guess about who you are, or who I hope you are.Naturally, I hope that Evangelical students and seminarians caught in dilemmas similar to minewill read and profit from this book. Its chapters may serve to articulate or crystallize questionsyou are asking. This would be no surprise, since, as Paul says, "No temptation has overtaken youexcept such as is common to man" (I Corinthians 10:13). Or in the words of Ecclesiastes, "Thereis nothing new under the sun." I do not imagine that I have made many original points here, but Ido know that I had to discover most of them for myself. I had to do this, because mypredecessors in the pilgrimage did not see fit to stick around to tell anyone else what they foundbefore flying the Evangelical coop. I hope to save some of you the trouble I went through.I think next of those convinced apologists who with their inadequate arguments place others inthe dilemma I have described. Such apologists put so much stock in their devices that theirreaction to this book would no doubt be to do apologetics for their apologetics, to defend theirdefenses! But I hope to challenge them to do some honest re-thinking.What about any non-Evangelicals who might chance to pick up this book? I remember oncereading an in-house fundamentalist booklet which chided church members for their insufficientzeal and their worldliness. Halfway through, the writer interrupted himself to threaten any6

irreverent unbeliever who might have gotten hold of this tract. "Don't be too quick to laugh at ourfoibles, mister, because unless you repent, there's a place in hell waiting for you!" On thecontrary, I welcome non-Evangelicals. I hope to further dialogue, just as does Morris Inch in hisThe Evangelical Challenge. Inch sets forth what Evangelicals are supposed to believe and do,inviting a consideration of Evangelicalism at its best. Indeed, one must understand the best hopesand ideals of a group if one is to understand the group. But there is also value in seeing the weakpoints of a movement. Is there something deeply ingrained which produces them? To get a wellrounded picture of Evangelicalism, the observer needs a little dirty linen, I think. Theiroccasional claim to the contrary notwithstanding, Born Again Christians are only human, likeeveryone else.Finally, I should think it would be of interest to Evangelicals themselves to hear in detail justwhy outsiders do not accept their claims and apologetic arguments. Their apologists never tire ofcomplaining that they are ignored by mainstream scholarship. In the main this is true, butperhaps not for the reasons the apologists imagine. At any rate, they do deserve a response.Now, let me explain the set-up of the book. It focuses first on Evangelical schemas forunderstanding experience as colored by their distinctive religious views. Here I attempt to outlinewhat some would call a "phenomenology of consciousness." I go on to consider the social andpsychological devices with which Evangelicals maintain the believability of their world ofexperience. The focus then narrows to consider the nature and function of the Evangelical andPentecostal belief in demon-possession. This small aspect of Born-Again belief, as we will see,contains larger theological and hermeneutical issues in cameo form. I conclude this section withan observation on the meaning of the claim to have a "personal relationship with Christ."The second major part of the book de

themselves (e.g., Donald Bloesch, The Evangelical Renaissance; David Wells and John Woodbridge, The Evangelicals, Richard Quebedeaux, The Young Evangelicals and The Worldly Evangelicals; Morris Inch, The Evangelical Challenge), but a few have been written by non- or ex-Evangelicals (e.g., J