1. I don't read enough G.K. Chesterton. I've only read one book by him.
2. I don't read enough Carl Trueman. Today's book would be my first book or booklet, by him.
3. Maybe I'm making a superficial comparison because they are both British and write in a British accent.

1. Losing Our Religion
2. Exclusion and the Evangelical Mind
3. The Real Scandal of the Evangelical Mind

1. A high regard for the Bible as the primary source of spiritual truth, and
2. A focus on the atoning work of Christ on the cross, and
3. A belief in the necessity of spiritual conversion, and
4. The priority of publicly proclaiming and living out the gospel.

How do you hold a moonbeam in your hand?
When I’m with her I’m confused
Out of focus and bemused
And I never know exactly where I am
Unpredictable as weather
She’s as flighty as a feather
She’s a darling! She’s a demon! She’s a lamb!
She’d outpester any pest
Drive a hornet from its nest
She could throw a whirling dervish out of whirl
She is gentle! She is wild!
She’s a riddle! She’s a child!
She’s a headache! She’s an angel!
She’s Evangelicalism!

Admittedly, there are good historical reasons for the wider cultural fear of boundaries. The exclusion of Jews in Germany, segregation in the American South, and apartheid in South Africa all led to great evil. Exclusion has often been based on bigotry and used as a means of control, manipulation, and worse. Seen in this light, an ill-defined evangelicalism is in tune with the cultural moment, more kind and gentle and tasteful than an exclusive movement.
However, the cultural distaste for boundaries is also connected to the cultural distaste for truth claims. Such claims necessarily exclude, and in a world where the “it just feels right to me” mentality of the Oprah Winfrey Show is more acceptable than the authoritative “Thus says the Lord!” of Old Testament prophets, affinities between the cultural mind-set and the nebulous doctrine of much of evangelicalism are clear.

From the time of Paul, the church has drawn boundaries. Such has been considered necessary for her well-being and even her survival. A movement that cannot or will not draw boundaries, or that allows the modern cultural fear of exclusion to set its theological agenda, is doomed to lose its doctrinal identity. Once it does, it will drift from whatever moorings it may have had in historic Christianity.

Predictably, there will be no evangelical consensus on homosexuality because ethical consideration of it rests upon theological categories of biblical authority, creation, fall, Christology, redemption, and consummation—and there is no evangelical consensus in any of these areas. With evangelicalism no longer defined by doctrinal commitments, there can and will be no evangelical consensus on homosexuality. Marry this theological vagary to a strong desire for a place at the cultural table, and greater acceptance of homosexuality among evangelicals is all but assured.

It is likely that the coming cultural storms will be best weathered by evangelical organizations and institutions with more precisely defined doctrinal statements, particularly statements that are close to, or identical with, historic creeds and confessions. The last one hundred years of evangelicalism has shown that minimal doctrinal bases do not provide real resistance to heterodoxy and the downgrading of doctrine. Of course, no creed can safeguard orthodoxy alone; fidelity and integrity on the part of leaders and gatekeepers are also required. But without a strong and complete doctrinal confession, gatekeeping becomes nearly impossible, even for well-intentioned and faithful leaders.

Abandoning the myth of the evangelical movement can only help us, as it will free us to be who we truly are and to speak the gospel in all of its richness as we understand it. This is what our day and generation needs.
The real scandal of the evangelical mind currently is not that it lacks a mind, but that it lacks any agreed-upon evangel. Until we acknowledge that this is the case—until we can agree on what exactly it is that constitutes the evangel—all talk about evangelicalism as a real, coherent movement is likely to be little more than a chimera, or a trick with smoke and mirrors.

Michael Reeves argues from a global, scriptural, and historical perspective that, while it’s not necessary to discard the label altogether, Christians must return to the root of the term―the evangel, or “gospel”―in order to understand what it truly means. 

• The Real Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Carl Trueman. Amazon. Faithlife.
• The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark Noll. Amazon. Faithlife.
• Gospel People: The Call for Evangelical Integrity by Michael Reeves. Amazon. Logos.