The Boundaries of American Evangelicalism

I became a Christian when I was twenty and soon joined a denomination started by American missionaries. After graduating from university, I enrolled in an evangelical seminary which was rooted in the American evangelicalism. After graduation, I became a pastor in Japan, then, a missionary to the Philippines. Later, I went to the United States to study the Old Testament at an evangelical, interdenominational seminary, and went to England to earn my doctorate under the evangelical scholar Gordon Wenham.

Having spent many years within the American evangelical communities, I believed that the characteristics and emphasis of American evangelicalism were the only correct and biblical form of faith, and that anything else was not evangelical. Here, I will call these characteristics and emphasis that separates evangelicals from non-evangelical groups as "boundaries."

A. The Boundaries of American Evangelicalism

The Boundaries of evangelicalism are, for example,

Doctrinal

1. The Bible contains absolutely no errors in any field, including history, science, and geography.

2. To take the account in Genesis Chapter 1 literally and do not believe in evolution.

3. To refrain from using Biblical criticism.

4. Unbelievers will be cast into hell after death, where they will suffer eternally.

In ethics and life

1. To break away from liberal seminaries and denominations.

2. To avoid working in an ecumenical institution.

3. Not to participatie in social reform movements.

4. Not to drink alcohol or smoke.

And there are probably many other boundaries as well. Recently, it seems political issues have become a boundary: to vote for candidates who oppose abortion and do not support LGBTQ rights or same-sex marriage.

B. British Evangelicals

What I saw and heard about evangelicals in England was shocking. British evangelicals, in general, do not display these boundaries above. Instead,

Doctrinal

1. The Evangelical Alliance UK, which includes many evangelical churches and groups in the UK, describes its view of the Bible as "fully trustworthy for faith and conduct," and it does not use the words "inerrant" or even "infallible."

2. What surprised me when I went to Britain in the 1990s was that the large number of evangelical Christians believed in theistic evolution: "God created the world from nothing through the process of evolution."

3. Not only Gordon Wenham, who belonged to the evangelical movement, but other evangelical scholars also used Biblical criticism or continued to engage in dialogue with it.

4. John Wenham, Gordon Wenham's brother and a prominent evangelical New Testament scholar, and John Stott, who was invited as a speaker at the First Japan Congress on Evangelism, questioned the idea of hell as a place of eternal suffering.

In ethics and life

1. John Stott and many other evangelical scholars and clergy remained with liberal seminaries and denominations, continuing dialogue and collaboration.

I could not forget what my supervisor, Gordon Wenham, said to me when I told him that I was looking for an evangelical church. He said "it sounds like an American consumerism. We attend a nearby church and serve there."

2. British evangelical leaders and believers were active in ecumenical groups such as Bible societies. For example, NT Wright was the chairperson of the board of the British and Foreign Bible Society, and J.I. Packer promoted dialogue and cooperation with the Catholic Church.

3. Evangelical Christian were encouraged in participating in social reform movements. It has also been a long-standing tradition for Christians in the UK. Chris Wright, the main speaker at the Sixth Japan Congress on Evangelism, cited social justice and environmental issues as urgent missions for the church.

4. Whether or not to drink alcohol and smoke seemed to be a matter of personal choice.

C. Why Are There Differences?

In other words, what I considered to be the boundaries of evangelicalism were those of the USA, not of the UK. Both British and American evangelicalism were evangelical movements that held the Bible high as the authoritative word of God, driven by a sense of crisis that the authority of the Bible was being threatened by liberal theology. Despite this, why did such differences arise? Their approaches to face up to liberalism were vastly different.

To put it simply, I personally think the difference is that Britain is dialogic, while America is confrontational. In my Master's program in America, my instructors advised me to write papers by first opposing or denying the other party's opinion head-on and then listing the reasons why. In Britain, I was taught, "That's impolite. Evaluate the other person's point of view first, and then state the problems with it." I really felt the difference in culture between Britain and America.

In the United States, the fight against liberalism intensified in the 20th century. In the 1910s, " The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth " was published, proclaiming five fundamental beliefs. Moreover, it adopted the doctrines and actions described in A above as its boundaries. At the core of those boundaries were a fight against liberalism, separation from ecumenical organizations, liberal denominations and seminaries, and reaction against liberal ways of doing.

　For 2,000 years, the church has helped the poor and the socially vulnerable. Wesley and Wilberforce worked to transform the very structures of society. In the United States, this noble tradition was upheld until Moody in the late 19th century, but the situation changed dramatically in the 20th century. As a reaction against the liberal churches, the evangelicals withdrew from social engagement. Since liberal leaders no longer believed in hell, they raised the traditional doctrine of hell as a boundary in reaction. Because liberal scholars promoted critical scholarship, the evangelicals banned it; and because those scholars claimed the Bible was erroneous from a modern perspective, the evangelicals established a detailed definition of inerrancy from a modern perspective in order to protect the faith.

　In the more dialogic UK, where there was less conflict, division, and reaction, the boundaries have differed.

D. World Evangelical Alliance

The World Evangelical Alliance is an alliance comprised of evangelical groups representing many countries and cultures. Naturally, their boundaries as evangelicals are limited to fundamental principles that everyone can agree on.

E. Japan Evangelical Alliance

The majority of evangelical churches in Japan were founded after the war by American evangelical missionaries. Therefore, the boundaries of American evangelicalism became those of Japanese evangelicalism. However, Japanese evangelicalism should have its own unique path and boundaries, and indeed, examining the history of the JEA and the contents of the Japan Congress on Evangelism reveals influences from British theologians as well as American ones, and they address unique issues such as war responsibility and Yasukuni Shrine. Furthermore, they have adopted a broader definition of what constitutes "without error" of the Bible, rather than the detailed modernistic definition used in the United States.

F. Summary

Personally, I hope that evangelical Christianity in Japan will have the same breadth as the WEA. I also hope that a dialogic approach, rather than a confrontational one, will take root in Japan. A confrontational approach is prone to making the mistake of "throwing the baby out with the bath water" due to reactions. Furthermore, a confrontational approach increases the risk of internal purges, or what Arthur Miller called "witch hunting", where any movement that deviates even slightly from their own boundaries is denounced and eliminated. I believe that such a confrontational approach is not suited to Japanese culture.

I hope that evangelicals in Japan will continue to walk a dialogic path while adhering to the fundamental principle of evangelicalism: that "the Bible is the authoritative Word of God and the Holy Spirit uses the Bible to guide us to faith in Jesus Christ and a life worthy of it (II Tim 3:15-16)."

For information on the doctrine of hell, see " 'Salvation' in America ," and for examples of internal purges, see " Memories Series 4: 'Knowing My Fellow Workers' ."