In their attempt to be relevant to the culture, evangelicals have been both theologically and philosophically naïve, if not outright in error, as they indiscriminately copy methods and ideas from the world to reach the world. The argument justifying such behavior claims they are being culturally relevant for Jesus’ sake.
There are some troubling moves within evangelicalism of late that will have and are having theological implications that will weaken evangelicalism theologically and ministerially. Disappointment increases as many evangelicals seem impervious to the theological damage their intellectual habits are causing. By intellectual habits I am pointing to the patterns of thinking or habits of the mind as seen in recent evangelical choices.
In their attempt to be relevant to the culture, evangelicals have been both theologically and philosophically naïve, if not outright in error, as they indiscriminately copy methods and ideas from the world to reach the world. The argument justifying such behavior claims they are being culturally relevant for Jesus’ sake. While motives may be right, the results have been disastrous for the Gospel. There is no distinguishing between understanding one’s culture and being relevant to that culture. Instead pragmatism becomes the new intellectual pattern/habit.
In response to those objecting to this, one hears the mantra: “our methods change, but our message stays the same.” That response reveals the absence of serious intellectual activity that would eventually subvert the best of intentions as it naively assumes methods are value neutral and assumption free.
This same vacuous assumption now fuels other controversies raging among evangelicals including Southern Baptists. One controversy centers on the use of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Intersectionality as part of theological method. There are those who want to accept the analytical tools of CRT to understand how race, gender, and so forth have played out in society. However, CRT has underlying assumptions about the world which determine their method of critical analysis which in turn legitimizes the initial assumptions. Therefore, before accepting anything of CRT, first one must understand that worldly conclusions are neither value neutral nor assumption free.
