Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #197636 in Books
• Published on: 2000-12
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 342 pages

Customer Reviews

Murry would be a martyr, but nobody is threatening him...
In 1950, evangelicalism was at a crossroads. For the previous 50 years evangelicals had fought to create an identity. Having separated from the main-line denominations, evangelicals now were an androgynous group lacking identity. The former generation of evangelicals was tired, having fought battles for the purity and proliferation of the group. Feeling that the gospel's integrity was at stake, they had worked to raise up a younger generation of like-minded evangelicals. This new generation labored to create an identity for their group. Ian Murray, in Evangelicalism Divided, shows the struggles that ensued during this second generation. In a way, their effort was successful, as present day evangelicalism has certain features that identify it.

But, as the title makes clear, Murray feels that the present state of evangelicalism is divided. One wing of it has stood for orthodoxy and biblical doctrine. This wing identifies itself with the martyred reformers who shed their blood at the hands of the Roman church. These evangelicals view themselves as standing for the integrity of the gospel. They have learned from the battles of the previous generation, and have made attempts to separate from the liberal denominations in order to avoid the fights that consumed their predecessors. Yet this new generation would rather die than oversee the compromising of the gospel under their watch.

The other branch of evangelicalism has dedicated itself to gaining recognition for the movement as a whole. Rather than fighting the battles over orthodoxy, these evangelicals fight for scholastic recognition, the expansion of their message through crusades, and the unification of the world-wide Christian church.

Murray makes clear that the goals of the two branches are mutually exclusive. Success in one camp invariably means defeat in the other. The gospel cannot be defended from liberal encroachments and at the same time be recognized as academically profitable by those same liberals. Murray equally makes clear that he is not a neutral historian, but rather one who finds himself squarely in the first camp. He would be willing to die rather than see the gospel compromised. However, Murray also cunningly reveals that no one is willing to kill him; rather his opponents are trying to drag him and his gospel into unholy alliances those who do not uphold it.

One of the strengths of the book is how Murray describes the personal relationships that existed between evangelicals during this time period, and how in many cases those relationships influenced the progression of thought and motives of the main players. Two opposite examples: Billy Graham was influenced by his father-in-law to labor on the same side as the denominations; D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones's resolve was tried and strengthened through the friendship with and separation from J. I. Packer, once his student. In both of these examples, Murray delicately and carefully shows the development and effects of the relationships. In the case of Lloyd-Jones, Murray shows the pain and conflict brought about by the eventual separation of the teacher from the student. This brief section (108-111) is a good brief section to read to get a feel for the theme and tone of the book.

Murray seems to have two main purposes in writing this book. First, he aims to show that the bursting of the evangelical dyke began in England; from there the river of division and compromise flowed across the Atlantic, changing its tack at Park Street Church in Boston, then across the United States it flowed and crested at Fuller Seminary in Los Angeles. Second, he aims to show that those who wanted recognition, academic integrity, and unity in the world-wide body of Christ were in error, and are primarily responsible for the current division in evangelicalism.

This book does a convincing job of showing that there is a difference between true Christianity and unity with liberal denominations. These differences cannot be reconciled (this is most clearly shown on p. 150).

If there is a weakness of the book, it is perhaps found in attributing too much to the likes of people like Lloyd-Jones and Graham. This book describes both of them as the key players in the division of evangelicalism. While others were obviously involved in both branches of the division (and on both sides of the ocean), Murray chooses to focus on the evolution and crystallization of thought in these two as indicative of their forks of the divided evangelical river. But, was Graham to blame for the compromises and division win evangelicals? Or, rather were the drops of compromise already in the water? If Graham would have held fast to his separatist roots, would not the river have thrust another to the front of the movement? Murray does not say.

Good, but imcomplete
As other reviewers have noted, Murray does an excellent job of sustaining his thesis: that the theology of Schleiermacher has crept into evangelicalism over the past fifty years. I would give the book five stars except for two unexamined issues.

First, Murray omits one crucial compromise that evangelicals made. Revivalist movements that emerged from the Second and Third Great Awakenings had originally been excluded under the term "evangelical" because they held to a theology that focused on subjective experience. But in the late 1960s, social conservatism became more important than theological orthodoxy within evangelical circles. Thus, these fellow "conservatives" were invited into the fold despite their Schleiermachian tendencies. I agree that evangelicals also made compromises with liberals and Catholics, and watered down their theology to avoid scorn from intellectuals. But these latter issues all pale in comparison to the changes that came when evangelicals began defining themselves according to social issues rather than doctrine.

Second, Murray fails to point out that these unity-oriented compromises have actually led to disunity. As knowledge of theology has atrophied, individual preachers have gained larger followings. Theological broadening at the macro level has actually led to theological narrowing at the micro level. Denominations and churches now regularly split because the followers of one leader will no longer commune together with the followers of another leader. Oddly, as our ignorance of theology has grown, so has our confidence that our own positions are unassailable.

A thought-provoking book
To begin, I did not give this book four stars because it was necessarily less than a five, but simply because it could not contain everything concerning Evangelicalism's history in America and Britain since 1950. For its content, Murray's book is a five.

Laying down the groundwork by writing about Schleiermacher was excellent because it demonstrates his continuing influence in liberal/critical thought (for lack of better terms) and, ironically, evangelicalism. The desire to have an experience of God over knowing doctrines about God have overtaken much of evangelical worship, thought, and publication. This need not be. Light without heat and heat without light are the two extremes to be avoided. Doctrine is the skeletal system that supports the body and existential experience (along with our interaction & ministry in the world) is the flesh that covers it. Murray does well at offering practical, biblical solutions to several of the problems that Evangelicalism has come under.

It is very difficult to turn a denomination around once it has made the shift from believing the major doctrines of the Christian faith (see the creeds of Apostle's, Nicene, and Chalcedon) to now doubting their validity or trying to say they were for a different time. The Reformers were not able to do it for the Roman Catholic Church and it seems evangelicals have not been able to do it in mainline Protestant denominations, whether by gaining positions of authority within those denominations or teaching at theological schools.

The reason, as Murray demonstrates, is because the tendency is to compromise rather than to stand up. To stand up likely means you aren't going to get those important mind-shaping positions, and even if you do, you are only going to be considered an evangelical "wing". Though the current and recently past Popes desire reunification, it is clear that any talks between Rome and Evangelicals means Rome not giving an inch and Evangelicals having to (surprise) compromise.

The book makes the important point that to doubt the sufficiency, authority, clarity, and completeness of Scripture leads to numerable problems that, while not having immediate negative consequences, will eventually present serious ramifications downs the road. Please read this book with care.