Review of New Covenant Theology: Description, Definition, Defense by Wells and Zaspel

Posted on by
Reply

Review of New Covenant Theology: Description, Definition, Defense by Wells and Zaspel

Wells, Tom, and Fred G. Zaspel. New Covenant Theology: Description, Definition, Defense. Frederick, MD: New Covenant Media, 2002, $79.99. Paperback.

New

How one puts together the Old and New Testaments is a massive conversation. Does one emphasize continuity or discontinuity between the testaments? How does one understand the relation between Israel and the church? What do those in the New Covenant do with the Old Covenant law? And on and on one could go asking relevant questions on this topic. Any endeavor to bring clarity to these questions and this conversation is both a daunting and a needed task, which is why I am thankful for the time-honored classic New Covenant Theology: Description, Definition, Defense by Tom Wells and Fred Zaspel. Though written over twenty years ago, this work brings clarity and conviction to this conversation from a New Covenant Theology (NCT) perspective that is still relevant today.

Tom Wells is a writer and preacher who lives in West Chester, Ohio. He pastored The King’s Chapel (Reformed Baptist Church) in West Chester for nearly thirty years. He has published several books including Come to Me!, Christian: Take Heart!, A Price for a People, The Moral Basis of Faith, and A Vision for Missions. Fred Zaspel serves as a pastor at Reformed Baptist Church in Franconia, Pennsylvania, adjunct professor of systematic theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, executive editor of Books at a Glance, and a project editor at The Gospel Coalition. He has written several books including The Theology of B.B. Warfield: A Systematic Summary, Warfield on the Christian Life: Living in Light of the Gospel, and The New Covenant and New Covenant Theology.

The authors begin the book with a preface that sets the stage for all that follows. In their preface, they offer five justifications for their work and then they work through each justification in depth in the first chapter. Perhaps the most important justification which affects the foundation of NCT as a system is the need to read the OT in light of the NT. As they state on page 14, “We must certainly read the rest of Scripture in light of the apex of revelation, which is the NT. Read it all we must! But which testament controls our thinking and which we use for finetuning is the all-important consideration.” Continuing this line of thought, chapter one offers a defense of each of the five justifications from the preface. In this chapter, Wells relates the goal of NCT by stating, “It is to join together three things: the logical priority of the NT over the Old, the logical priority of Lord Jesus over his godly predecessors, and the logical priority of the theology of the text over our own theologies and those of others” (22). If one needed a summary of what NCT was all about, this would be it.

In the rest of the book, the authors offer a description of divine revelation and how it climaxes in the NT Scriptures (chapter 2), a thorough description of the New Covenant (chapters 3-4), a nearly exhaustive treatment of Matthew 5:17-20 and its implications on this conversation (chapters 5, 6, 7, 8), a discussion about the continued relevance of Divine law (chapter 9), a discussion about the meaning and source of moral law (chapter 10), a response to a critic of their view (chapters 11-12), a couple of test cases in which their view is related to the Sabbath (chapters 13-14), and, finally, a chapter on how Creeds affect one’s understanding on this topic (chapter 15).

Wells and Zaspel’s New Covenant Theology is a fascinating and thoughtful work that is sure to stimulate the minds of almost every reader. Their writing is clear, convictional, and enjoyable. For the purpose of this review, positive evaluations will be discussed first, and then critical evaluations will follow.

First, Wells and Zaspel give a great amount of attention to one of the most debated aspects in the covenantal/dispensational conversation, that is, the relation of the Christian to the Law of Moses. Arguably, this is the focus of the entire book. Though NCT theologians are often accused of being antinomians, Wells and Zaspel are quick to dismiss this claim and provide further clarity of their view. They write,

Jesus is to Moses what the butterfly is to the caterpillar. Moses is not struck down. Moses did not “fall” (Luke 16:17). Nor was he “destroyed” (Matt. 5:17). Moses is “fulfilled.” In Christ, Moses reaches maturity and emerges in full bloom. Moses’ law still has relevance, but only as it comes to us from the hands of the Lord Jesus. Christians today must still read Moses, and for great profit, but when they read him they must be careful to wear their Christian lenses. Moses’ law is not simply incorporated into the New Covenant as it was revealed through Moses–it is fulfilled, advanced, and brought to completion (157).

In other words, they do not denigrate the law; instead, they emphasize its fulfillment in Christ and clearly state that it is still relevant to the Christian today, but only through the interpretive lens of Christ. While some may not be convinced of their argument, accusations that Wells and Zaspel advance antinomianism is unfounded and based upon a misunderstanding of what they are saying.

Second, the irenic spirit throughout the book, especially when interacting with the views of others and critics, is to be commended. Wells and Zaspel seem to desire honest and informed conversation on this incredibly important topic. Though passions often rage when these matters are discussed, their book is a welcome example of thoughtful interaction and charitable dialogue.

Next, and shifting to the critical evaluation, one weakness is that there is not enough time spent on other texts/topics related to the covenantal/dispensational conversation. They spend a significant amount of time on Matthew 5:17-20 (4 chapters!) and the law but give a more cursory survey of other relevant texts and topics. For example, an extended discussion on Hebrew 8 or 2 Corinthians 3 would have been helpful in further delineating their views, as well as a more thorough discussion on NCT’s view of the church and Israel, baptism, the covenant of redemption/works/grace, etc. It is not that Wells and Zaspel ignored these matters altogether, it is rather that they were not sufficiently dealt with in detail. In other words, in order to advance the covenantal/dispensational conversation and perhaps persuade one to become a NCT theologian, more explanation of the fundamental points of divergence between the various systems is needed.

For those unfamiliar with NCT, this resource is a great place to begin learning more about its distinctives and viewpoints. Though several other books on NCT have been printed since this volume first came on the market, New Covenant Theology remains a classic representation and defense of NCT. Wells and Zaspel have penned a thoughtful and insightful work that will challenge the thinking of almost every reader. This reviewer recommends it.

W. Tyler Sykora

Midwestern Seminary

Test Google Map Pro

Posted on by

Review of And Was Made Man: Mind, Metaphysics, and Incarnation by Robin Le Poidevin

Posted on by

Review of And Was Made Man: Mind, Metaphysics, and Incarnation by Robin Le Poidevin

Poidevin, Robin Le. And Was Made Man: Mind, Metaphysics, and Incarnation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023, 256, $84.00, hardcover.

And Was Made Man

And Was Made Man by Robin Le Poidevin is an original, creative, and daring reflective proposal on the metaphysics of the incarnation. Poidevin is emeritus philosopher of philosophy at the University of Leeds. He is well-known for his work in the metaphysics of time having authored several books and numerous essays. Though he is an agnostic, Poidevin is interested in the philosophical issues raised by the incarnation and active in publishing in the various areas of the philosophy of religion.

The book is divided into two main parts: (1) models of the incarnation and (2) various problems or challenges to the incarnation. He covers four broad models. First, on the relational compositional model the Son as joined together with a concrete human nature, thus the Son becomes a part of (though not identical to) a divine-human composite. Second, on the transformational compositional the Son, by acquiring a concrete human nature, is transformed into a divine-human composite. Third, on the divided mind model, which may or may not be “compositional,” the Son has two steams of consciousness in the single person. Finally, on kenotic Christology, there is significant variation but there is unity by treating the Son as giving up certain divine properties in becoming human. The main problems for the coherence of the incarnation he introduces relate to divine embodiment, divine necessity, divine goodness, and the incarnate God’s relation to time. Each of these problems are relatively standard objections to the divine becoming human. How could an immaterial object become material? How could a necessary being die? Etc. Therefore, the first half of the book is designed as an introduction to existing views whereas the second section is focused on original and creative responses to common problems in Christology.

Throughout the book Poidevin advances a form of kenotic Christology wherein the Son “gives up something” to become incarnate (p. 93). He argues it is the ideal model for addressing these pressing Christological issues. As such, he believes kenoticism is profoundly emotionally, theologically, and philosophically satisfying. Notwithstanding, Poidevin’s main goal is philosophical and not theological. He seeks to determine if the incarnation logically and metaphysically possible. And his conclusion is that it is possible. It is possible given a kenotic model wherein God gives up omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, immateriality, self-sufficiency, and meta-ethical status (pp. 212-213). On Kenoticism there is a more satisfying answer to all four of the incarnational problems he introduces. For example, he argues that unless we appeal to kenosis the Son cannot be wholly embodied since it is impossible for a human brain to be omniscient, and thus, the divine mind isn’t really “embodied” (p. 139). Similarly, he suggests that while the Father is absolutely necessary the Son is conditionally so since otherwise the Son couldn’t truly be human since humans are not absolutely necessary (p. 166). Radical as such an account may be, whether it is true is another matter that Poidevin does not consider.

Irrespective of what one makes of Poidevin’s thesis, he is an especially lucid writer, providing refreshingly clear accounts of the various terms and concepts throughout his work. It is clearly organized and serves as a useful introduction to some of the important philosophical aspects of the incarnation. It is further quite obvious that Poidevin has decades of teaching experience in philosophy as his brief descriptions of the various metaphysical options for topics like time are especially useful. For example, in less than four pages he introduces the various main views on the metaphysics of time, offer reasons to accept and reject each view, and provide his own preferred rationale for one of the models. Such skill in lucid brevity is rare.

While Poidevin’s book is well written, well organized, and well explained, it suffers from several potential weaknesses. First, Poidevin suggests that his account of the incarnation is more theologically satisfying throughout the work though at the end he pleads innocence by claiming that since he is not a theologian he must defer to theologians to make such a judgment (p. 212). While it is surely appropriate to be modest if one is a philosopher and dealing with theological matters, surely it is more appropriate to simply own any mistakes outright or to refrain from making strong claims about them.

Second, Poidevin’s account is likely to be unsavory for nearly all Christians except for the most radically revisionist. A kenotic account like Poidevin offers, that requires God—even if only the Son—to give up omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, immateriality, self-sufficiency, and meta-ethical status is no small cost. Further, Poidevin suggests there are numerous other unorthodox requirements or expectations for his model. For example, he thinks Social Trinitarianism (one of the requirements for his view) is better off simply accepting tritheism (p. 114). He thinks the only way to avoid the implication of tritheism is to accept a version of relative identity which he finds deeply troubling. If one is to remain committed to classical forms of logic and identity, they will be better off, and will be left with three gods. Elsewhere he thinks elements of Arianism cannot be avoided (p. 168). These are steep costs for any Christian account of the incarnation and most would likely consider it heretical. Proposing alternative models of the incarnation is certainly acceptable—especially as an academic book—but proposing radically revisionary of this sort will gain few hearers.

Third, Poidevin makes some curious claims at points in his book. For example, he suggests that “the creation of free beings is thus a kenotic act insofar as it involves a stepping back from full control of the created order” (p. 101). Whether one is a libertarian about freedom or not, surely this account of divine action is at odds with most traditional accounts. God does not act in a one-to-one fashion with creation. It is part of his nature as divinely transcendent that he can non-competitively act while we act freely simultaneously. A similar curious claim comes from his chapter on divine embodiment. He offers three theories of God and space: occupation, identity, and knowledge and power. Either God is present by occupying every space, by being identical to space, or by having knowledge and power over space. However, these are by no means the only categories. And his definition of occupation is rather strange. For example, the section would have greatly benefited from interaction with the seminal works of Ross Inman who has published variously on accounts of omnipresence in venues he is surely familiar with like Oxford and T&T Clark.

So, how should the biblical-theological student interact with this book? For the student desiring to understand much of the philosophical categories and how they impinge on the doctrine of the incarnation, this resource presents a helpful guide. The student will find a wide range of careful and readable definitions and examples. However, a biblical-theological student from a traditional Christian background will find the book rather off-putting given its massive revisionary requirements. It should be noted that the book is not an undergraduate level text. It is best suited for graduate students and requires some level of prior philosophical-theological knowledge even while it offers definitions. Given this, I have trouble providing a firm recommendation of the book. While I personally disagree vehemently with most every conclusion in the book I did find it well-written and clearly argued. Two virtues that are not easily dismissed. Therefore, I may recommend it to graduate students for specific contexts. However, I would strongly avoid recommendation for undergraduates or those Christians not involved in academic study of religion.

Jordan L. Steffaniak

Wake Forest, NC

Test Publishing

Posted on by
Reply

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum.

Review of Superheroes Can’t Save You: Epic Examples of Historic Heresies by Todd Miles

Posted on by

Review of Superheroes Can’t Save You: Epic Examples of Historic Heresies by Todd Miles

Miles, Todd. Superheroes Can’t Save You: Epic Examples of Historic Heresies. Nashville: B&H 2019. pp. 208, $20 paperback.

Superheroes

Todd L. Miles is professor of Theology and Director of the Master of Theology program at Western Seminary in Portland, OR.

We are easily enamored with escaping our normal everyday lives to enjoy watching our favorite superhero destroy the evil villain, bring justice to the oppressors, and save the day. Whether you are a Marvel or DC fanatic, most people cannot resist seeing the newest superhero movie that seems to drop every few months. The connection and love we have with superheroes seem to highlight a deeper truth that as humans, we all desire someone who is more powerful and stronger than us to come and save us from the difficulties and sufferings in our lives. All superheroes are attempts to create a “savior-like figure” who can rescue us from our depravity using their super-human powers. Yet as Todd Miles demonstrates in his book, Superheroes Can’t Save You, every superhero that we have created is an inadequate picture of the true hero of the story of reality: Jesus Christ.

Superheroes Can’t Save You attempts to show how each one of our coveted heroes exhibits a “bad idea about Jesus,” that can be traced back to the heresies that arose in the early church about the person of Christ. It is important to understand these heresies because these “bad ideas” undercut the gospel and can lead others away from embracing the true gospel. Therefore, each chapter of the book provides an explanation of a superhero; how each superhero displays an incomplete view of Jesus; and how Jesus is a much better idea than what is represented by each superhero (p. 7). Each chapter is divided up into five sections: an introduction of the superhero, the heresy that the superhero represents, how this heresy is still practiced today, what the Bible teaches to combat this heresy, and why these truths about Jesus are important for our lives today.

Miles covers most of the heresies about the person of Christ from the early church, which include Docetism, Modalism, Arianism, Adoptionism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, and Eutychianism. The only heresy that Miles covers that cannot not be traced back to the early church is Liberalism, which he argues, was birthed in the 18th century by Friedrich Schleiermacher. Due to its focus on the heresies of Christ and the four famous councils of the early church, Superheroes Can’t Save You aids in adding to the reader’s understanding of the church history and Christology of the Patristics. The book is written to students in theological studies but can also be understood by the general Christian or skeptic who has an interest in learning more about the person and work of Jesus.

Four commendable aspects of the book can be seen in the readability of the prose, the relatability to understanding how each heresy is represented by a familiar symbol of a superhero, the linear progression of the author’s thought, and the practical application and discussion questions at the end of each chapter. Throughout the book, Miles uses big theological terms but always defines and provides helpful examples to further the reader’s understanding. One example can be seen when Miles explains how to understand Nestorianism through the character Gollum from The Lord of the Rings. Just as Nestorius believed Jesus had two natures and two separate consciousnesses, Gollum provides a practical example that most readers can relate to in his split personality with his other personhood of Smeagol.

Another example can be seen by each of the sub-headings of the chapters. Miles provides a short statement that describes each heresy in a way that is embodied by the superhero that is the subject of each chapter. For example, Docetism is described as thinking Jesus was simply “God in disguise” just as Superman disguised himself as a man in Clark Kent. The complexities of Eutychianism can be arduous to comprehend for most people, but relating this heresy to Spider-Man, knowing Peter Parker is part human and part Spider, is much easier for the reader to understand Eutyches’ claim that Jesus had a hybrid nature in being part human and part god.

The similarity of the structure and organization of each chapter allows the reader to easily understand Miles’ argument and flow of thought throughout the work. The framework of each argument also helps teach readers how to approach, understand, and combat false ideas that undercut the gospel. For example, Miles starts each chapter laying the background information by describing the superhero, how they emulate the heresy, and then the historical information of what the heresy is and how it originated. Once a charitable explanation of the heresy is given, he expounds on how we can still believe this false idea today and how it leaves a picture of Jesus that cannot save us. Miles then confronts the false idea with the truth of God’s Word; and demonstrates who the Bible proclaims Jesus to truly be; and then concludes with why believing these truths about Jesus are important for our lives today. This structure demonstrates the necessity of conducting sound historical research and biblical exegesis to demolish strongholds or any lofty thought that is raised up against the knowledge of God.

Lastly, the personal application sections and discussion questions are what make this book a user-friendly and a practical resource. When considering ideas that were espoused in the third and fourth centuries, readers can easily revert into thinking these ideas have nothing to do with them today. Yet, Miles provides everyday examples of how we can still fall into these heresies. For example, when looking at Modalism, most Christians understand the common fallacy of comparing the Trinity to H2O or a three-leaf clover, but very few realize they are falling into Modalism during prayer when they ascribe to the Father things that only the Son did (i.e. dying on the cross, Patripassianism). Miles then explains how having these false ideas about Jesus can have serious consequences. Using the Modalism example, if Jesus is just “one of three costumes God put on,” then he cannot answer our prayers because the Bible teaches us to pray in a trinitarian way of praying to the Father, in the name of the Son, and through the Holy Spirit. More importantly, this view of Jesus cannot save us because it was the work of all three persons of the Trinity that was necessary to accomplish our salvation. To drive the application further for the reader, Miles ends every chapter with personal reflection questions, small group discussion questions, and a section for further study to foster deeper application and life transformation by meditating on the timeless truths about Jesus.

One critique of the book is the lack of scholarly contributions. There are few, if any, footnotes and there is no bibliography section. In Miles’s defense, it does not appear that a scholarly and in-depth magnum opus of the heresies of church history and a thorough exegesis of Christology was his intention in writing this book. Rather in this work, Miles seeks to provide a practical resource for students of theology, youth workers, and avid superhero fanatics that provides sound historical theology, biblical exegesis, and Christology in an easy-to-read format and everyday language. Miles’s creativity should be extolled in the way he exquisitely expounds how each heresy is emulated by superheroes that are easy to relate to and remember. Therefore, this book is for any Christian or skeptic who wants to take a deeper dive in understanding the false ideas about Jesus that are still being propagated today and how the Bible confronts those lies to demonstrate who Jesus truly is: two natures, one person, fully God, fully human. Superheroes can’t save us, but praise God that Jesus can!

Andrew Slay

PhD Student

New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

JBTS 8.1 Full Issue Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism in the US and Beyond

Posted on by

JBTS 8.1 Full Issue Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism in the US and Beyond

JBTS Volume 8 | Issue 1

8.1 cover

JBTS 8.1 Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism in the US and Beyond (Full Issue)

Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: Missional, Intellectual, Theologically Diverse, Complex, and Increasingly Global by Ryan A. Brandt and Amber Thomas Reynolds

Posted on by
Reply

Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: Missional, Intellectual, Theologically Diverse, Complex, and Increasingly Global by Ryan A. Brandt and Amber Thomas Reynolds

Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: Missional, Intellectual, Theologically Diverse, Complex, and Increasingly Global 

Ryan A. Brandt and Amber Thomas Reynolds

Ryan A. Brandt is Professor of Christian History and Theology at Grand Canyon University; Amber Thomas Reynolds is Adjunct Assistant Professor of History at Wheaton College (IL)

Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism

Introduction

Twentieth-century evangelicalism: what a daunting subject to choose! The genesis of this special issue of JBTS was in February 2020. In the three plus years since then, the world changed. And although evangelical identity was already heavily contested prior to 2020, more than ever, whether it is possible to analyze modern “evangelicalism” as an essentially religious rather than a political or cultural movement is in question, especially among American academics and journalists. Important studies of the intersections between evangelicalism and race, politics, and gender have certainly revealed historical blind spots.1 Yet, for all of the recent debate, it is important to remember that defining “evangelical” and “evangelicalism”—even whether or not to capitalize the term—has been debated for at least a century. The profusion of writing on evangelicalism, furthermore, frustrates any attempt to contribute something new to the discussion.2 Thus, the editors have approached the topic with modest aims, recognizing our particular perspectives: one editor, trained in theology at a denominational seminary in the United States, teaches theology students at an evangelical university; the other, trained in cultural history of Christianity at a British university, teaches history courses in an evangelical liberal-arts setting. Although our vantage points may seem to be relatively similar, it became clear during the editorial planning stages that we were coming from two very different academic worlds. Like JBTS in general, we write with the evangelical undergraduate student in mind, who probably has heard much about evangelicals of late but may not, in fact, have a clue who they are.

In that light, this special issue of JBTS will certainly not seek to propose a brand-new definition of evangelicalism, or to throw its total weight behind one existing formulation. As a journal geared toward students, not just scholars, our aim is to, first, clarify some of the major questions involved in defining twentieth-century evangelicalism. Secondly, we explore several religious rather than social or political topics, some of which are well-recognized in the literature and others of which have arguably been overlooked in recent discussions—especially at the popular level—of the twentieth- and early twenty-first century movements. As part of this latter goal, we feature scholar-practitioners from a field that is sometimes under-represented in discussions of evangelical identity: missiology.

This present introductory article seeks to offer some background and cohesion for this special issue’s articles. In the first part, we broadly survey definitions of evangelicalism, focusing on six successive historical developments in the twentieth century and how these developments illuminate and complicate such definition. In the second part, we introduce the five articles in this special issue as a way of highlighting some of these key debates today.

  1. A few recent examples include Anthea Butler, White Evangelical Racism: The Politics of Morality in America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2021); Aaron Griffith, God’s Law and Order: the Politics of Punishment in Evangelical America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2020); John Corrigan, Melani McAlister, and Axel R. Schäfer, eds., Global Faith, Worldly Power: Evangelical Internationalism and U.S. Empire (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2022); and Kristen Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation (New York: Liveright, 2020).
  2. Start with Mark A. Noll, David W. Bebbington, and George M. Marsden, eds., Evangelicals: Who They Have Been, Are Now, and Could Be (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2019), and Andrew Atherstone and David Ceri Jones, eds., The Routledge Research Companion to the History of Evangelicalism (London and New York: Routledge, 2019).

American Evangelical Missions Since 1910 by A. Scott Moreau

Posted on by
Reply

American Evangelical Missions Since 1910 by A. Scott Moreau

American Evangelical Missions Since 1910

A. Scott Moreau

Scott is Professor of Intercultural Studies Emeritus and former Academic Dean of Wheaton College Graduate School

American Evangelical Missions

Abstract: This article provides a brief synopsis of US evangelical missions over the course of the twentieth century. Each of the four historical sections (1910 to 1945, 1946 to 1974, 1975 to 2000, 2001 to 2020) explores developments, challenges, and trends of the time period under consideration. From the nascent development of evangelical missions to the current climate of evangelical splintering, the twentieth century has seen a tumultuous, exciting, surprising, and challenging journey of American evangelical missions.1

Keywords: mission, missiology, missions, evangelical, ecumenical, conciliar, fundamentalist, Pentecostalism, contextualization, holistic mission.

Forgotten Voices in Early Twentieth-Century Evangelical Theology by Kenneth J. Stewart

Posted on by
Reply

Forgotten Voices in Early Twentieth-Century Evangelical Theology by Kenneth J. Stewart

Forgotten Voices in Early Twentieth-Century Evangelical Theology 

Kenneth J. Stewart

Kenneth is Professor of Theological Studies Emeritus, Covenant College, Lookout Mountain, GA

Forgotten Voices

Abstract: Standard accounts of fundamentalism and evangelicalism in the inter- war period of the twentieth century uniformly emphasize the paucity of energetic scholarship in Scripture and Theology. It is suggested that energies were largely directed towards theological combat. We are told that those who did research and write did so for those who shared their commitments. This standard approach passes over the fact that on both sides of the Atlantic, there were evangelical scholars already in their careers in the 1920s and 30s who worked away doing solid scholarship, scholarship which laid the foundations for the better-recognized blossoming of evangelical learning in the post-World War Two era.

Keywords: Fundamentalism, Evangelicalism, Inter-Varsity, Tyndale House, Fuller Theological Seminary

Bill Bright’s Four Spiritual Laws and Their Place in the History and Trajectory of Evangelical Soteriology by Sean McGever

Posted on by
Reply

Bill Bright’s Four Spiritual Laws and Their Place in the History and Trajectory of Evangelical Soteriology by Sean McGever

Bill Bright’s Four Spiritual Laws and Their Place in the History and Trajectory of Evangelical Soteriology 

Sean McGever

Sean (PhD, Aberdeen) is adjunct faculty in the College of Theology at Grand Canyon University and Area Director for Young Life

Bill Bright

Abstract: This article analyzes the trajectory and norms of evangelical soteriology and evangelistic ministry established by early evangelicals Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley and later pattern set by Bill Bright’s Four Spiritual Laws. It examines how terms such as conversion, regeneration, the new birth, and being born again were used in evangelical literature and how they were understood. It further looks at the practices of Campus Crusade for Christ and its focus on decisions, looking at the results of the Berkeley Blitz, Explo ’74 in South Korea, and the Here’s Life campaigns around the world. It concludes by identifying five key areas in which the approach and practices of Bill Bright and Campus Crusade for Christ differs from that of early evangelicals.

Keywords: Evangelicalism, soteriology, conversion, sinner’s prayer, decisionism, John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards, Bill Bright, Campus Crusade for Christ.