What do you think?
Rate this book
Restless Faith: Holding Evangelical Beliefs in a World of Contested Labels
One of the most influential evangelical voices in America chronicles what it has meant for him to spend the past half century as a "restless evangelical"--a way of maintaining his identity in an age when many claim the label "evangelical" has become so politicized that it is no longer viable. Richard Mouw candidly reflects on wrestling with traditional evangelical beliefs over the years and shows that although his mind has changed in some ways, his core beliefs have not. He contends that we should hold on to the legacy that has enriched evangelicalism in the past. The Christian life in its healthiest form, says Mouw, is always a matter of holding on to essentials while constantly moving on along paths that we can walk in faithfulness only by seeking the continuing guidance of the light of God's Word. As Mouw affirms the essentials of the evangelical faith, he helps a new generation see the wisdom embodied in them.
192 pages, Paperback
Published March 19, 2019
19 people are currently reading
583 people want to read
About the author
Richard J. Mouw
86 books42 followersRichard John Mouw is a theologian and philosopher. He held the position of President at Fuller Theological Seminary for 20 years (1993-2013), and continues to hold the post of Professor of Faith and Public Life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
January 21, 2019
People generally don't like to be labeled but the practice of labeling continues to be practiced in society. Scholars especially would often qualify their definitions of any particular label. On the word "Christian," one might ask what kind of Christian. On the label "Protestant," one might wonder which branch or denomination one is talking about. On the label "evangelical," some might shrug their shoulders or avoid talking about it due to its association with politics on America. Things are no longer taken at face value or treated simplistically. Maybe society has become more sophisticated. Maybe there are more awareness of the increasing diversity of views and opinions. For author and theologian Richard Mouw, the fear of labels should not be allowed to prevent us from using them legitimately. The word in question is "evangelical." Just because of a few bad eggs should not deter us from appropriate use of it. It is true that some from the political right have been giving the label a bad name, the same applies to many other labels open to stereotyping. He uses Alister McGrath's words as support, that "we evangelicals do often operate with an 'under-developed ecclesiology' - but we are willing to live with that defect because of what we have experienced at the hands of 'others who have over-developed ecclesiologies.'" That's a valid point. He also notes the famous historian, David Bebbington's definition of evangelical by saying that his four points were 'emphases' instead of absolute dogmas. A restless faith seeks to hold together two things: Top-notch scholarship (mindfulness) and down-to-earth connections (relational). It is honouring the Bible; walking in the presence of the Holy Spirit; and an awareness of the saints who had walked faithfully in the past.
Mouw takes us through his personal theological journey, sharing with us his thoughts about Bible inerrancy; Orthodoxy; the "second naivete"; fundamentalism; Bible interpretation and Affirmations; and about the secular cultural climate that finds it hard to understand the modern symbols of evangelicalism. He shares a stark discovery of how in a class of forty students in an evangelical college, only six of them know who Billy Graham was. For that, he believes that we need to learn from the past. For all our new advancements or modern progress, we would be impoverished if we fail to learn from history and the lessons from the past. Thankfully, Mouw deals with the painful past in a compassionate way. Knowing that there has been excesses and horrific practices committed by the Church in history, he takes a measured approach. On the one hand, he acknowledges the wrongs done through institutional religion. On the other hand, he realizes that there is an evangelical "position of privilege" that balances confession with compassion; and conviction with obligation. He also talks about the unique position of being a "Christian scholar" in a largely secular culture. He tells of how even the critique of self-actualization in a mental health society could make people misunderstand the theology of sin. In times like this, we are tempted to dilute our theology with compromise. He looks at judgment theology that brings together the consequences of judgment because of sin and the offer of mercy because of love. What really touches people is the gentle and compassionate manner that such a theology is communicated. Mouw goes on to critique some of the other modern movements such as the "positive thinking," the "possibility thinking," the therapeutic culture; the health and wealth gospel; contextualization; and so on. He makes a powerful point about missionaries (and believers) needing to exegete two worlds: The Biblical world and our culture.
The chapter "About Quoting Hymns" is particularly captivating. In tackling the hymns vs contemporary songs divide, Mouw notes that the difference is essentially generational. He suggests inviting members from both generations to interact. He makes a case for singing more hymns by reminding us once again not to lose sight of the theological tradition and rich theologies we can learn from old hymns. Hymns often are powerful resources to reinforce the main Sunday message. Other virtues include biblical wisdom, poetic beauty, and avoiding sentimentalism that sounds good on the outside but empty on the inside. He is also quick to point out that there are some contemporary songs that are theological sound and worthy.
My Thoughts
First, I find Mouw very fair in making a moderate evangelical stand. He writes passionately and believes in the virtues of historical evangelicalism. He refuses to let the word be hijacked by politicizing individuals. From the word 'activism,' we note that restlessness is still part of the evangelical fabric. This does not mean radicalism or extremism. I like the way that Mouw is able to bring back the merits of tradition and the historical symbols of evangelicalism without dumbing down the cultural reactions against evangelicalism. He is able to connect these tensions in a sensible and sensitive manner. The same sensitivity was done to the approaches taken toward Rob Bell's controversial book "Love Wins." How he manages to deal with critics from both sides is a lesson we can learn from.
Second, Mouw is very open and honest about his own struggles and doubts. He avoids becoming dogmatic about his views. He even shares about his troubles dealing with theological quagmires such as the episode in Romans 11 where Paul talks about the profound mystery of God and the grafting in of Gentiles into the Jewish family tree. He even turns this struggle into a helpful way to tackle theological matters. He invites one to dialogue and is not afraid to live with tensions of unresolved questions. This is crucial with regard to Christian Theology. For instance, we may know a lot about the Holy Trinity but we cannot be so dogmatic as to declare that our view of the Trinity is the way the truth and the life. Only Jesus can say that. We can only affirm what we know for know and to be open for new revelations that may come in the future. That puts Mouw in good stead to dialogue with others such as the Mormons and interfaith conversations. That is a mark of a humble teacher.
Finally, I am most glad to see Mouw's very civil approach in tackling difficult and controversial issues. This is one of the key virtues that evangelicals need most today. While we cannot do much to stop the negative images of Christianity, especially evangelicals in the culture, we can offer up alternative points of view to help others understand that evangelicalism is larger than what the culture paints it to be. This is essentially an act of faith, that trusts God to clarify when there is a need to clarify, and to listen when it's time to listen. One of the problems of modern evangelicalism is the tendency to be too quick to speak and slow to listen. His chapter on "Public Activism" seeks to chart a new path to help us heal from the excesses of cultural and political evangelicalism. Through engagement, we maintain a presence to be ready for any opportunity to clarify views. Thorough a biblical view of authority, we hope to redeem the state of government to be constructive and inclusive.
All of these hopes and dreams form the basis of a restless faith. I concur.
Richard Mouw is President Emeritus and Professor of Faith and Public Life at Fuller Theological Seminary. He has served as President of the same institution from 1993 to 2013.
Rating: 4.75 stars of 5.
conrade
This book has been provided courtesy of Brazos Press and NetGalley without requiring a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
Mouw takes us through his personal theological journey, sharing with us his thoughts about Bible inerrancy; Orthodoxy; the "second naivete"; fundamentalism; Bible interpretation and Affirmations; and about the secular cultural climate that finds it hard to understand the modern symbols of evangelicalism. He shares a stark discovery of how in a class of forty students in an evangelical college, only six of them know who Billy Graham was. For that, he believes that we need to learn from the past. For all our new advancements or modern progress, we would be impoverished if we fail to learn from history and the lessons from the past. Thankfully, Mouw deals with the painful past in a compassionate way. Knowing that there has been excesses and horrific practices committed by the Church in history, he takes a measured approach. On the one hand, he acknowledges the wrongs done through institutional religion. On the other hand, he realizes that there is an evangelical "position of privilege" that balances confession with compassion; and conviction with obligation. He also talks about the unique position of being a "Christian scholar" in a largely secular culture. He tells of how even the critique of self-actualization in a mental health society could make people misunderstand the theology of sin. In times like this, we are tempted to dilute our theology with compromise. He looks at judgment theology that brings together the consequences of judgment because of sin and the offer of mercy because of love. What really touches people is the gentle and compassionate manner that such a theology is communicated. Mouw goes on to critique some of the other modern movements such as the "positive thinking," the "possibility thinking," the therapeutic culture; the health and wealth gospel; contextualization; and so on. He makes a powerful point about missionaries (and believers) needing to exegete two worlds: The Biblical world and our culture.
The chapter "About Quoting Hymns" is particularly captivating. In tackling the hymns vs contemporary songs divide, Mouw notes that the difference is essentially generational. He suggests inviting members from both generations to interact. He makes a case for singing more hymns by reminding us once again not to lose sight of the theological tradition and rich theologies we can learn from old hymns. Hymns often are powerful resources to reinforce the main Sunday message. Other virtues include biblical wisdom, poetic beauty, and avoiding sentimentalism that sounds good on the outside but empty on the inside. He is also quick to point out that there are some contemporary songs that are theological sound and worthy.
My Thoughts
First, I find Mouw very fair in making a moderate evangelical stand. He writes passionately and believes in the virtues of historical evangelicalism. He refuses to let the word be hijacked by politicizing individuals. From the word 'activism,' we note that restlessness is still part of the evangelical fabric. This does not mean radicalism or extremism. I like the way that Mouw is able to bring back the merits of tradition and the historical symbols of evangelicalism without dumbing down the cultural reactions against evangelicalism. He is able to connect these tensions in a sensible and sensitive manner. The same sensitivity was done to the approaches taken toward Rob Bell's controversial book "Love Wins." How he manages to deal with critics from both sides is a lesson we can learn from.
Second, Mouw is very open and honest about his own struggles and doubts. He avoids becoming dogmatic about his views. He even shares about his troubles dealing with theological quagmires such as the episode in Romans 11 where Paul talks about the profound mystery of God and the grafting in of Gentiles into the Jewish family tree. He even turns this struggle into a helpful way to tackle theological matters. He invites one to dialogue and is not afraid to live with tensions of unresolved questions. This is crucial with regard to Christian Theology. For instance, we may know a lot about the Holy Trinity but we cannot be so dogmatic as to declare that our view of the Trinity is the way the truth and the life. Only Jesus can say that. We can only affirm what we know for know and to be open for new revelations that may come in the future. That puts Mouw in good stead to dialogue with others such as the Mormons and interfaith conversations. That is a mark of a humble teacher.
Finally, I am most glad to see Mouw's very civil approach in tackling difficult and controversial issues. This is one of the key virtues that evangelicals need most today. While we cannot do much to stop the negative images of Christianity, especially evangelicals in the culture, we can offer up alternative points of view to help others understand that evangelicalism is larger than what the culture paints it to be. This is essentially an act of faith, that trusts God to clarify when there is a need to clarify, and to listen when it's time to listen. One of the problems of modern evangelicalism is the tendency to be too quick to speak and slow to listen. His chapter on "Public Activism" seeks to chart a new path to help us heal from the excesses of cultural and political evangelicalism. Through engagement, we maintain a presence to be ready for any opportunity to clarify views. Thorough a biblical view of authority, we hope to redeem the state of government to be constructive and inclusive.
All of these hopes and dreams form the basis of a restless faith. I concur.
Richard Mouw is President Emeritus and Professor of Faith and Public Life at Fuller Theological Seminary. He has served as President of the same institution from 1993 to 2013.
Rating: 4.75 stars of 5.
conrade
This book has been provided courtesy of Brazos Press and NetGalley without requiring a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
Read
March 23, 2021A weird little book.
Mouw is, as usual, a generous author. There's a lot of valuable material here from someone who is always seeking understanding. His chapters on activism and politics were especially good. I also enjoyd Mouw's bent toward ecumenicism and was pleasantly surprised by his defense of the nature and necessity of individual salvation as a core evangelical belief. The best part about Mouw's approach is that he is able to locate the tensions in current evangelical strife without ripping people or movements to shreds. This is important to me, because too often we go at our ideological enemies before understanding them or we a preconceived narrative about them that blinds us to nuance.
Though I don't have a problem with Mouw's defense of the use of "evangelical" as a label, per se, his generosity sometimes seems to trip him up. He's looking for the good in everyone to the point where he's even sympathizing with prosperity preachers. And while he recognizes some of the problems presented by the Religious Right, he doesn't seem to grasp how problematic the label "evangelical" can be in the United States. He emphasizes the need to retain the label for the global South and East, which has a massive evangelical population, but the problem with this assessment is simple: the evangelicalism of the global South and East hasn't attached itself to Trumpism the way that some corners of American evangelicalism has. American believers work out their belief in an American context.
Mouw is, as usual, a generous author. There's a lot of valuable material here from someone who is always seeking understanding. His chapters on activism and politics were especially good. I also enjoyd Mouw's bent toward ecumenicism and was pleasantly surprised by his defense of the nature and necessity of individual salvation as a core evangelical belief. The best part about Mouw's approach is that he is able to locate the tensions in current evangelical strife without ripping people or movements to shreds. This is important to me, because too often we go at our ideological enemies before understanding them or we a preconceived narrative about them that blinds us to nuance.
Though I don't have a problem with Mouw's defense of the use of "evangelical" as a label, per se, his generosity sometimes seems to trip him up. He's looking for the good in everyone to the point where he's even sympathizing with prosperity preachers. And while he recognizes some of the problems presented by the Religious Right, he doesn't seem to grasp how problematic the label "evangelical" can be in the United States. He emphasizes the need to retain the label for the global South and East, which has a massive evangelical population, but the problem with this assessment is simple: the evangelicalism of the global South and East hasn't attached itself to Trumpism the way that some corners of American evangelicalism has. American believers work out their belief in an American context.
December 31, 2024
Mouw beschrijft waarom hij zich nog als evangelical beschouwt. De evangicale wereld in de VS is in crisis. Jongeren, maar ook ouderen, nemen afscheid van deze beweging. Zij kunnen de zeer conservatieve normen en waarden niet meer onderschrijven. Ze breken stuk op het gebrek aan bereidheid om andersdenkenden serieus te nemen. Ook de steun van veel evangelicals voor president Trump is reden om de evangicale beweging vaarwel te zeggen.
De toonaangevende evangelical Richard J. Mouw (*1940) ziet zich, nu vrienden en oud-studenten van hem afscheid nemen van de evangelicale beweging voor de vraag of hij zichzelf nog wel als evangical kan zien. In zijn boek Restless Faith geeft hij aan, dat hij geen afscheid kan nemen, omdat hij met hart en ziel verbonden is aan waar de evangelicale beweging voor stond.
Bovendien heeft hij decennialang studenten opgeleid in de evangelicale wereld- en levensbeschouwing. Wanneer hij afscheid neemt van deze beweging laat hij hen zonder oriëntatie achter. Mouw is er niet gerust op dat evangelicalen trouw blijven aan hun oorspronkelijke uitgangspunten. Zijn boek is niet alleen een verdediging waarom hij zichzelf nog als evangelical ziet, maar ook een herinnering aan wat een evangelical zou moeten zijn.
Bebbingtons kenmerken
Om aan te geven waar een evangelical voor staat, sluit Mouw zich aan bij de historicus David Bebbington, die onderzoek deed naar de evangelicale beweging. Bebbington constateerde 4 bijzonderheden, die kenmerkend zijn voor deze beweging: (1) het geloof in noodzaak van bekering, (2) geloof in het gezag van de Bijbel, (3) een theologie die de kern ziet in Christus die aan het kruis stierf, (4) een actief geloof, dat niet beperkt is tot de zondagse eredienst, maar dagelijkse discipelschap.
68101
Nu zullen christenen uit andere stromingen deze uitgangspunten kunnen onderschrijven. Het kenmerkende van de evangelical is dat hij hier de nadruk op legt. Het is volgens Mouw niet voldoende is om jezelf te beschrijven als ‘gewoon christen’. Elke christen uit een bepaalde stroming heeft kenmerken, die afwijkend zijn ten opzichte van andere stromingen.
Mormonen
Nu voldoet Mouw niet aan het standaardbeeld van de evangelical. Al vroeg in zijn studie ontwikkelt hij een openheid voor andere christelijke stromingen. Hij raakt tijdens zijn studie bevriend met rooms-katholieke en oosters-orthodoxe leeftijdsgenoten. Hij ontdekt dat wat zijn hoogleraren hem vertellen over deze andere stromingen niet kloppen. Daardoor raakt hij overtuigd van de noodzaak om niet over anderen te praten, maar met anderen. Hij veroorzaakt opschudding door bij een toespraak voor Mormomen in Salt Lake City vergeving te vragen voor hoe evangelicalen met Mormonen zijn omgegaan. Als hij ergens gevraagd wordt om een lezing te geven over de dialoog met Mormonen staat hij erop dat er ook Mormonen uitgenodigd worden om met hen de dialoog aan te gaan. Hij geeft ook voorbeelden hoe je als evangelical met moslims in dialoog kunt gaan.
Burgerrechtenbeweging
In de jaren-’60 raakt hij door zijn verzet tegen de Viëtnamoorlog en geïnspireerd door Martin Luther King betrokken bij de burgerrechtenbeweging. Tot dan toe is de evangelicale beweging a-politiek en niet betrokken op de maatschappij. Hij verkeert in progressievere kringen, maar kan zich door een andere geloofsbeleving niet aansluiten. Samen met anderen werken ze aan maatschappelijk engagement onder evangelicalen. Samen met anderen komen ze in 1973 in Chicago bij elkaar en publiceren The Chicago Declaration of Evangelical Social Concerns.
Neocalvinistische traditie
Mouw, die opgroeit binnen de Dutch Reformed traditie ontdekt dat zijn eigen neocalvinistische traditie van Calvijn, A. Kuyper en H. Bavinck volop nadenkt over de maatschappelijke betrokkenheid van christenen.
Mouw is geen relativist. Hij waardeert het robuuste van het evangelicale geloof, zodat bijvoorbeeld duidelijk is over zonde en genade. (Restless in de titel staat niet voor rusteloos, maar voor robuust, geworteld op een fundament.) Hij is wel leergierig en ziet overal om zich heen uitdaging om als evangelicaal theoloog over na te denken. Zijn calvinistische achtergrond geeft hem in zijn ogen een ontspannen houding naar andersdenkenden: hij kan hen het geloof niet geven en de (neo)calvinisten hebben via de gedachte van de algemene genade oog voor Gods werk onder andersgelovigen.
Geen afgeronde theologie
Hij wil niemand bij voorbaat uitsluiten of afschrijven. Wanneer Rob Bell de evangelicale wereld in beroering brengt door afscheid te nemen van de hel, geeft Mouw aan dat Bell belangrijke vragen stelt. Hij houdt niet van een afgeronde theologie. Zijn eigen theologie heeft iets rommeligs, een openheid voor het mysterie, dat God vaak via verrassende wegen werkt. In de loop van jaren heeft hij geleerd dat de boodschap met oog voor de context waarin mensen leven gebracht moet worden. In dat kader kan hij verrassend positief zijn over de tv-predikant Robert Schuller, die aansluiting wist te vinden vanuit het christelijk geloof met de populaire therapeutische cultuur, die in de jaren-’70 ontstond. Mouw heeft geleerd om door te vragen naar de diepste verlangens van mensen en daar vanuit het christelijk geloof bij aan te sluiten.
Geen profetische kritiek
Hoewel Mouw kritisch is op de recente ontwikkelingen binnen de evangelicale beweging, voelt hij niets voor profetische kritiek. Hij vindt dat te vrijblijvend. Liever besteedt hij tijd aan goed onderwijs om studenten een robuuste levensbeschouwing en toch een open, betrokken en nieuwsgierige houding naar andersdenkenden, een houding om kritisch op de eigen ontwikkeling te kunnen reflecteren en met die kritische reflectie een onbevangen houding naar de eigen uitgangspunten en die van anderen te ontwikkelen. Alleen op die manier kan de evangelicale beweging bestand zijn tegen hen, die de beweging willen kapen voor hun conservatieve of politieke belangen. Dan hoeft er ook geen afscheid genomen te worden van de evangelicale beweging, maar kan juist het waardevolle van deze beweging ingezet worden in kerk en maatschappij.
De toonaangevende evangelical Richard J. Mouw (*1940) ziet zich, nu vrienden en oud-studenten van hem afscheid nemen van de evangelicale beweging voor de vraag of hij zichzelf nog wel als evangical kan zien. In zijn boek Restless Faith geeft hij aan, dat hij geen afscheid kan nemen, omdat hij met hart en ziel verbonden is aan waar de evangelicale beweging voor stond.
Bovendien heeft hij decennialang studenten opgeleid in de evangelicale wereld- en levensbeschouwing. Wanneer hij afscheid neemt van deze beweging laat hij hen zonder oriëntatie achter. Mouw is er niet gerust op dat evangelicalen trouw blijven aan hun oorspronkelijke uitgangspunten. Zijn boek is niet alleen een verdediging waarom hij zichzelf nog als evangelical ziet, maar ook een herinnering aan wat een evangelical zou moeten zijn.
Bebbingtons kenmerken
Om aan te geven waar een evangelical voor staat, sluit Mouw zich aan bij de historicus David Bebbington, die onderzoek deed naar de evangelicale beweging. Bebbington constateerde 4 bijzonderheden, die kenmerkend zijn voor deze beweging: (1) het geloof in noodzaak van bekering, (2) geloof in het gezag van de Bijbel, (3) een theologie die de kern ziet in Christus die aan het kruis stierf, (4) een actief geloof, dat niet beperkt is tot de zondagse eredienst, maar dagelijkse discipelschap.
68101
Nu zullen christenen uit andere stromingen deze uitgangspunten kunnen onderschrijven. Het kenmerkende van de evangelical is dat hij hier de nadruk op legt. Het is volgens Mouw niet voldoende is om jezelf te beschrijven als ‘gewoon christen’. Elke christen uit een bepaalde stroming heeft kenmerken, die afwijkend zijn ten opzichte van andere stromingen.
Mormonen
Nu voldoet Mouw niet aan het standaardbeeld van de evangelical. Al vroeg in zijn studie ontwikkelt hij een openheid voor andere christelijke stromingen. Hij raakt tijdens zijn studie bevriend met rooms-katholieke en oosters-orthodoxe leeftijdsgenoten. Hij ontdekt dat wat zijn hoogleraren hem vertellen over deze andere stromingen niet kloppen. Daardoor raakt hij overtuigd van de noodzaak om niet over anderen te praten, maar met anderen. Hij veroorzaakt opschudding door bij een toespraak voor Mormomen in Salt Lake City vergeving te vragen voor hoe evangelicalen met Mormonen zijn omgegaan. Als hij ergens gevraagd wordt om een lezing te geven over de dialoog met Mormonen staat hij erop dat er ook Mormonen uitgenodigd worden om met hen de dialoog aan te gaan. Hij geeft ook voorbeelden hoe je als evangelical met moslims in dialoog kunt gaan.
Burgerrechtenbeweging
In de jaren-’60 raakt hij door zijn verzet tegen de Viëtnamoorlog en geïnspireerd door Martin Luther King betrokken bij de burgerrechtenbeweging. Tot dan toe is de evangelicale beweging a-politiek en niet betrokken op de maatschappij. Hij verkeert in progressievere kringen, maar kan zich door een andere geloofsbeleving niet aansluiten. Samen met anderen werken ze aan maatschappelijk engagement onder evangelicalen. Samen met anderen komen ze in 1973 in Chicago bij elkaar en publiceren The Chicago Declaration of Evangelical Social Concerns.
Neocalvinistische traditie
Mouw, die opgroeit binnen de Dutch Reformed traditie ontdekt dat zijn eigen neocalvinistische traditie van Calvijn, A. Kuyper en H. Bavinck volop nadenkt over de maatschappelijke betrokkenheid van christenen.
Mouw is geen relativist. Hij waardeert het robuuste van het evangelicale geloof, zodat bijvoorbeeld duidelijk is over zonde en genade. (Restless in de titel staat niet voor rusteloos, maar voor robuust, geworteld op een fundament.) Hij is wel leergierig en ziet overal om zich heen uitdaging om als evangelicaal theoloog over na te denken. Zijn calvinistische achtergrond geeft hem in zijn ogen een ontspannen houding naar andersdenkenden: hij kan hen het geloof niet geven en de (neo)calvinisten hebben via de gedachte van de algemene genade oog voor Gods werk onder andersgelovigen.
Geen afgeronde theologie
Hij wil niemand bij voorbaat uitsluiten of afschrijven. Wanneer Rob Bell de evangelicale wereld in beroering brengt door afscheid te nemen van de hel, geeft Mouw aan dat Bell belangrijke vragen stelt. Hij houdt niet van een afgeronde theologie. Zijn eigen theologie heeft iets rommeligs, een openheid voor het mysterie, dat God vaak via verrassende wegen werkt. In de loop van jaren heeft hij geleerd dat de boodschap met oog voor de context waarin mensen leven gebracht moet worden. In dat kader kan hij verrassend positief zijn over de tv-predikant Robert Schuller, die aansluiting wist te vinden vanuit het christelijk geloof met de populaire therapeutische cultuur, die in de jaren-’70 ontstond. Mouw heeft geleerd om door te vragen naar de diepste verlangens van mensen en daar vanuit het christelijk geloof bij aan te sluiten.
Geen profetische kritiek
Hoewel Mouw kritisch is op de recente ontwikkelingen binnen de evangelicale beweging, voelt hij niets voor profetische kritiek. Hij vindt dat te vrijblijvend. Liever besteedt hij tijd aan goed onderwijs om studenten een robuuste levensbeschouwing en toch een open, betrokken en nieuwsgierige houding naar andersdenkenden, een houding om kritisch op de eigen ontwikkeling te kunnen reflecteren en met die kritische reflectie een onbevangen houding naar de eigen uitgangspunten en die van anderen te ontwikkelen. Alleen op die manier kan de evangelicale beweging bestand zijn tegen hen, die de beweging willen kapen voor hun conservatieve of politieke belangen. Dan hoeft er ook geen afscheid genomen te worden van de evangelicale beweging, maar kan juist het waardevolle van deze beweging ingezet worden in kerk en maatschappij.
May 8, 2019
Clear and compelling call to hold on to the evangelical distinctive (focuses on the authority of the Bible, the centrality of the cross, the necessity of personal conversion, and an active faith) whether or not we hold on to the label "evangelical." Labels are only useful if they can accurately help you understand someone, so we may need to give up the label "evangelical" if people associate it with the religious right rather than the above distinctives. Yet there is always the possibility of renewal, and a return to an understand of "evangelical" that is not associated purely with the religious right.
February 22, 2019
Read in one setting. It's not that long but it's packed with insights by an evangelical for evangelicals who want to understand themselves in light of this present day. Richard Mouw illustrates succinctly this idea: "For me, the only way to be a properly functioning evangelical is to keep arguing about what it means to *be* an evangelical. 'Restless Faith' (p. 174).
This book does deliver.
This book does deliver.
August 6, 2019
I've read some of Dr. Mouw's work in the past, and when I saw this new book I grabbed it as quick as I could. I, with many others, find myself still having an affection towards the primary tenants of evangelicalism that can be traced throughout the centuries of Church History, while simultaneously feeling as if I have very little in common with some things today that are associated with the label "evangelical." Has the label wore out its use? Is it time to abandon the term and begin distancing ourselves from the politically charged Religious Right? Has it become unhelpful for us?
He does not land on an answer, hence keeping true with his 40+ year relationship with evangelicalism that he describes as "restless." At the end of the book he says,
"For me, the only way to be a properly functioning evangelical is to keep arguing about what it means to be an evangelical. Restlessness in claiming that label has long been the way I have kept moving. I hope that many onus can stay restless as we hold on while exploring together whether the best way to remain faithful to the legacy is to let go of the label." - pg. 174
In this book, he lays his case for pursuing this questioning by asking as expected as series of questions throughout the book. I found his discussions of the "first" and "second" naivete" most helpful in chapter 4. I do empathize. Often there can be a fear as a Christian within evangelicalism of asking questions and being misunderstood by others. It's amazing how quick we can to label some as "heretics" or "off the orthodox coo-koo next" by reading snippets of information about what some theologian or pastor said. What we initially hear is "that doesn't fit into my evangelical framework" and thus "something is wrong." Then, we don't actually hear them out, but write them off. That's the first naivete. It's been happening all throughout Church History. But it's often those very misunderstood people that wind up being correct, and eventually bringing much needed reform in various stages of Church History. We desperately need to embrace this, as theologians and pastors throughout all of the Christian spectrum have things to say that are much needed for the conservative evangelical types like myself. Maybe some of their questions and practices are actually the very hope we need in reforming ourselves.
This book has continued to spark my excited associations with evangelicalism. The quadrilateral definition given early in the book by english evangelical historian David Bebbington in 1989 is helpful to cling to as defining what historic evangelicalism actually is, and the legacy that should continue:
1) We believe in the need for conversion, making a personal commitment to Christ as Savior and Lord
2) We hold to the Bible's supreme authority, the sola scriptura theme of the Reformation
3) We emphasize a cross-centered theology - at the heart the gospel is the atoning work of Jesus on the Cross at Calvary
4) We insist on an active faith, not just Sunday worship, but daily discipleship.
The fun part of this definition is that, across various spectrums of Christianity, Catholics/Orthodox/Protestants and others would hear this and say "yes! I agree with this." And maybe that's the needed future for American Evangelicalism and the American Church - rather than defining ourselves by what we do not agree with, is there a more fruitful future ahead of us in defining ourselves by what we do agree with? Of course the need for pure historic Christian doctrine is utterly necessary, and preservation of it must be had at all costs, and if Truth is ever diminished, we must condemn such teachings. But bridges connecting the Gospel to the World need to be built on positive conversations rather than negative conversations.
He gave the example of a muslim (my paraphrase of the story belo) who claimed in a room of Christian theologians to be "a muslim for Jesus" after reading the Gospels and becoming enamored with Jesus' teachings on love. A Christian theologian stood up and said, "How could you say that if you do not embrace Jesus as the Son of God and believe in his atoning work on the Cross for your sins?" The Muslim responded, "Why do you Christians always go there? I have a friend who was a Christian missionary to my muslim friends and only saw 6 converts in decades of ministry because he was stuck on the same thing. If you Christians led us to read the Gospels and of the love of Jesus, you would have thousands of Muslims reading your Bible."
Mouw writes this story, not disregarding the need to believe in the atoning work of Jesus. But he writes it, asking the question: what's better - having thousands of Muslims reading the Gospels? Or having thousands of Muslims not reading the Gospels because we are stuck on receiving a very specific response of faith in very specific doctrines as the only front door to Christianity?
Of course we need to believe in such doctrines in order to be saved. But maybe the journey could begin by simply showing and revealing to others the beauty of Jesus' love as shown in the Gospels. Isn't that a great first step in introducing Christianity to a Muslim? Or to expand it - to any one else living in America in the 21st Century?
I'm excited to be pastoring in this day and age. The next 40 years of my career will indeed be interesting in our Christian story in America.
He does not land on an answer, hence keeping true with his 40+ year relationship with evangelicalism that he describes as "restless." At the end of the book he says,
"For me, the only way to be a properly functioning evangelical is to keep arguing about what it means to be an evangelical. Restlessness in claiming that label has long been the way I have kept moving. I hope that many onus can stay restless as we hold on while exploring together whether the best way to remain faithful to the legacy is to let go of the label." - pg. 174
In this book, he lays his case for pursuing this questioning by asking as expected as series of questions throughout the book. I found his discussions of the "first" and "second" naivete" most helpful in chapter 4. I do empathize. Often there can be a fear as a Christian within evangelicalism of asking questions and being misunderstood by others. It's amazing how quick we can to label some as "heretics" or "off the orthodox coo-koo next" by reading snippets of information about what some theologian or pastor said. What we initially hear is "that doesn't fit into my evangelical framework" and thus "something is wrong." Then, we don't actually hear them out, but write them off. That's the first naivete. It's been happening all throughout Church History. But it's often those very misunderstood people that wind up being correct, and eventually bringing much needed reform in various stages of Church History. We desperately need to embrace this, as theologians and pastors throughout all of the Christian spectrum have things to say that are much needed for the conservative evangelical types like myself. Maybe some of their questions and practices are actually the very hope we need in reforming ourselves.
This book has continued to spark my excited associations with evangelicalism. The quadrilateral definition given early in the book by english evangelical historian David Bebbington in 1989 is helpful to cling to as defining what historic evangelicalism actually is, and the legacy that should continue:
1) We believe in the need for conversion, making a personal commitment to Christ as Savior and Lord
2) We hold to the Bible's supreme authority, the sola scriptura theme of the Reformation
3) We emphasize a cross-centered theology - at the heart the gospel is the atoning work of Jesus on the Cross at Calvary
4) We insist on an active faith, not just Sunday worship, but daily discipleship.
The fun part of this definition is that, across various spectrums of Christianity, Catholics/Orthodox/Protestants and others would hear this and say "yes! I agree with this." And maybe that's the needed future for American Evangelicalism and the American Church - rather than defining ourselves by what we do not agree with, is there a more fruitful future ahead of us in defining ourselves by what we do agree with? Of course the need for pure historic Christian doctrine is utterly necessary, and preservation of it must be had at all costs, and if Truth is ever diminished, we must condemn such teachings. But bridges connecting the Gospel to the World need to be built on positive conversations rather than negative conversations.
He gave the example of a muslim (my paraphrase of the story belo) who claimed in a room of Christian theologians to be "a muslim for Jesus" after reading the Gospels and becoming enamored with Jesus' teachings on love. A Christian theologian stood up and said, "How could you say that if you do not embrace Jesus as the Son of God and believe in his atoning work on the Cross for your sins?" The Muslim responded, "Why do you Christians always go there? I have a friend who was a Christian missionary to my muslim friends and only saw 6 converts in decades of ministry because he was stuck on the same thing. If you Christians led us to read the Gospels and of the love of Jesus, you would have thousands of Muslims reading your Bible."
Mouw writes this story, not disregarding the need to believe in the atoning work of Jesus. But he writes it, asking the question: what's better - having thousands of Muslims reading the Gospels? Or having thousands of Muslims not reading the Gospels because we are stuck on receiving a very specific response of faith in very specific doctrines as the only front door to Christianity?
Of course we need to believe in such doctrines in order to be saved. But maybe the journey could begin by simply showing and revealing to others the beauty of Jesus' love as shown in the Gospels. Isn't that a great first step in introducing Christianity to a Muslim? Or to expand it - to any one else living in America in the 21st Century?
I'm excited to be pastoring in this day and age. The next 40 years of my career will indeed be interesting in our Christian story in America.
July 16, 2020
Винаги съм харесвал Ричард Моу. Според мен той е един от най-интелигентните съвременни християнски гласове. Новата му книга не прави изключение.Restless faith е сборник с естета свързани с по-голямата тема за същността понятието евангелско християнство, към което авторът се определя.
Оттук нататък започва интересната част.
Първо, темите, които Моу засяга са много интересни – и изключително разнообрази. Той говори за авторитета на Библията, баланса между индивид и общност, политическата ангажираност на християните, начина, по който те трябва да общуват с други религии, евангелието на просперитета и положителното смислене, музиката, изкуплението калвинизма и за някогашната му пристрастеност към алкохола – да спомена само няколко въпроса.
Второ, един от основните мотиви на книгата е личното препозициониране в християнската вяра, ако мога да се изразя така. В заглавието тази идея е изразена с английската дума restless. Моу е много честен в своето признание, че с течение на годините неговото християнство е извървяло дълъг път и развитие, при което той е бил изправен пред необходимостта да променя вижданията си по много въпроси. Тази постоянна незадоволеност, неяснота, постоянен диалог е една от характеристиките на живата вяра. Обратно, когато нашето християнство стане статично, когато имаме всички отговори и можем винаги да се позовем на „вярната формула” и когато диалогът се приема за неверие и се обезкуражава ние сме стъпили на един опасен път.
Трето, Моу няколко пъти говори за нещо, което нарича „втора наивност” – едно преутвърждаване на своята ранна вяра, след като тя е била изпитана и преминала през цялата критика и съмнения, на които може да бъде подложена. Примерът, който той дава е популярният лозунг „Библията го казва затова го вярвам”. Едно нещо е това да бъде казано от новоповярвал християнин, който все още няма и понятие от купищата сложни въпроси свързани с библейския авторитет, археологическата достоверност и споровете за същността на откровението, а съвсем друго от човек, който се е борил с години с тях. Такава „втора наивност,” казва Моу, е възможна, но тя е много по-различна от първата.
Четвърто, както и обикновено, Моу намира начин да изрази мнение както в същото време винаги запазва своите “добри обноски: – още една тема, която преминава през голяма част от неговото творчество. През последните години все повече се убеждавам,ч е това е качество, което изключително липсва на голяма част от християните. То не е нито липса на страст нито конформизъм на всяка цена, която замита неудобните неща под килима, а по-скоро изказване на ясно убеждение с подчертано уважение към хората, които са на различно мнение. В самата си същност то включва едновременно смирение, желание да разберем преди да говорим и готовност да се учим дори от хора, с които не сме съгласни. И това е единственият начин да водим полезен и смислен диалог.
За книгата на Моу може да се каже още много, но със сигурност е по-добре тод а бъде прочетено от източника. Обемът й не е голям, стилът е ясен и лек и се чете за доста кратко време.
Оттук нататък започва интересната част.
Първо, темите, които Моу засяга са много интересни – и изключително разнообрази. Той говори за авторитета на Библията, баланса между индивид и общност, политическата ангажираност на християните, начина, по който те трябва да общуват с други религии, евангелието на просперитета и положителното смислене, музиката, изкуплението калвинизма и за някогашната му пристрастеност към алкохола – да спомена само няколко въпроса.
Второ, един от основните мотиви на книгата е личното препозициониране в християнската вяра, ако мога да се изразя така. В заглавието тази идея е изразена с английската дума restless. Моу е много честен в своето признание, че с течение на годините неговото християнство е извървяло дълъг път и развитие, при което той е бил изправен пред необходимостта да променя вижданията си по много въпроси. Тази постоянна незадоволеност, неяснота, постоянен диалог е една от характеристиките на живата вяра. Обратно, когато нашето християнство стане статично, когато имаме всички отговори и можем винаги да се позовем на „вярната формула” и когато диалогът се приема за неверие и се обезкуражава ние сме стъпили на един опасен път.
Трето, Моу няколко пъти говори за нещо, което нарича „втора наивност” – едно преутвърждаване на своята ранна вяра, след като тя е била изпитана и преминала през цялата критика и съмнения, на които може да бъде подложена. Примерът, който той дава е популярният лозунг „Библията го казва затова го вярвам”. Едно нещо е това да бъде казано от новоповярвал християнин, който все още няма и понятие от купищата сложни въпроси свързани с библейския авторитет, археологическата достоверност и споровете за същността на откровението, а съвсем друго от човек, който се е борил с години с тях. Такава „втора наивност,” казва Моу, е възможна, но тя е много по-различна от първата.
Четвърто, както и обикновено, Моу намира начин да изрази мнение както в същото време винаги запазва своите “добри обноски: – още една тема, която преминава през голяма част от неговото творчество. През последните години все повече се убеждавам,ч е това е качество, което изключително липсва на голяма част от християните. То не е нито липса на страст нито конформизъм на всяка цена, която замита неудобните неща под килима, а по-скоро изказване на ясно убеждение с подчертано уважение към хората, които са на различно мнение. В самата си същност то включва едновременно смирение, желание да разберем преди да говорим и готовност да се учим дори от хора, с които не сме съгласни. И това е единственият начин да водим полезен и смислен диалог.
За книгата на Моу може да се каже още много, но със сигурност е по-добре тод а бъде прочетено от източника. Обемът й не е голям, стилът е ясен и лек и се чете за доста кратко време.
February 25, 2020
This review is by someone who, like Mouw, is struggling with the label “evangelical.” Is the label “evangelical” worth keeping? Especially in light of the abuse of that label by evangelicals who have fallen in love with Donald Trump? Although Trump’s name is mentioned only once in the book, there is no doubt that this is one of the big issues that Mouw is addressing, in addition to other challenges to the evangelical label. The book includes very personal reflections on what it means to be “evangelical.” Mouw argues that we should work for evangelical renewal, rather than simply allowing the movement’s label to be co-opted by leaders “who have departed from the best of the legacy.”
Among other recommendations, Mouw pleads for humility, and the “persistent habit of careful self-examination.” He defends his personal faith in Jesus that is a hallmark of evangelicalism, as well as the need for evangelicals to be much more socially active.
I have two serious questions: The first has to do with Mouw’s determination to retain the label “evangelical.” He writes, “Like many of my friends these days, I don’t want to be called an evangelical if that gives the impression I am a mean-spirited right-winger. If that is what the label has come to, I am willing to give it up. The cause of the gospel is too important to be impeded by nostalgia or stubbornness.” (p. 173) However, Mouw is unwilling to give up the label for important reasons. I respect his reasons but I’m very uneasy with his decision. One wonders if he has under-estimated the pejorative smell that vocal "mean-spirited right-wingers" have given to the label? Mouw assumes that non-Christians who detest the Trumpish evangelicals will be willing to dialogue with those of us who also carry that label. I’m not so sure. Can we just call ourselves Followers of Jesus?
The second question: Besides deciding what label to wear, what additional actions can we take to implement the principles and perspectives that Mouw has argued in this book? Listing more practical outcomes would have helped the reader to understand where Mouw is coming from and where we should be going. The book did not leave me with an action plan.
I have known Mouw from my days as a student at both places where he taught: Calvin University and Fuller Theological Seminary. I was encouraged to read his focus on his personal relationship with Jesus, his acknowledgment that Jesus is alive, and his determination to speak out for the evangelical and Reformed worldview. I was surprised and heartened by his confession to being an alcoholic and having enjoyed four decades of sobriety. All of this is relevant for the “restless faith” that he professes, including the wonder, mystery, and messiness of the Christian Way. We need more leaders like Mouw.
Among other recommendations, Mouw pleads for humility, and the “persistent habit of careful self-examination.” He defends his personal faith in Jesus that is a hallmark of evangelicalism, as well as the need for evangelicals to be much more socially active.
I have two serious questions: The first has to do with Mouw’s determination to retain the label “evangelical.” He writes, “Like many of my friends these days, I don’t want to be called an evangelical if that gives the impression I am a mean-spirited right-winger. If that is what the label has come to, I am willing to give it up. The cause of the gospel is too important to be impeded by nostalgia or stubbornness.” (p. 173) However, Mouw is unwilling to give up the label for important reasons. I respect his reasons but I’m very uneasy with his decision. One wonders if he has under-estimated the pejorative smell that vocal "mean-spirited right-wingers" have given to the label? Mouw assumes that non-Christians who detest the Trumpish evangelicals will be willing to dialogue with those of us who also carry that label. I’m not so sure. Can we just call ourselves Followers of Jesus?
The second question: Besides deciding what label to wear, what additional actions can we take to implement the principles and perspectives that Mouw has argued in this book? Listing more practical outcomes would have helped the reader to understand where Mouw is coming from and where we should be going. The book did not leave me with an action plan.
I have known Mouw from my days as a student at both places where he taught: Calvin University and Fuller Theological Seminary. I was encouraged to read his focus on his personal relationship with Jesus, his acknowledgment that Jesus is alive, and his determination to speak out for the evangelical and Reformed worldview. I was surprised and heartened by his confession to being an alcoholic and having enjoyed four decades of sobriety. All of this is relevant for the “restless faith” that he professes, including the wonder, mystery, and messiness of the Christian Way. We need more leaders like Mouw.
December 23, 2018
Restless Faith
Holding Evangelical Beliefs in a World of Contested Labels
by Richard J. Mouw
Baker Academic & Brazos Press
Brazos Press
Christian
Pub Date 19 Feb 2019
I am reviewing a copy of Restless Faith through Brazos Press and Netgalley:
Richard Mouw tells the readers of this book what it meant for him to spend the past five decades as a restless evangelical as a way of maintaining his identity at a time when the term Evangelical has become so politicized that many believe the term is no longer viable.
In this book Richard Mouw ope and candidly reflects on wrestling with traditional evangelical beliefs over the years and shows that altho he has changed his mind in some areas he has not changed his core beliefs. He reminds us that we should hold on to the legacy that has enriched evangelicalism in the past.
Mouw tells us that the Christian Life In it’s healthiest form is always a matter of holding on to essentials while constantly moving along paths that we can walk in faithfulness only by seeking God’s Guidance.
I give Restless Faith five out of five star!
Happy Reading!
August 16, 2019
Title: Restless Faith: holding evangelical beliefs in a world of contested labels
Author: Richard J. Mouw
Publisher: Brazos Press
Date: 2019
Richard Mouw is a respected leader within the evangelical community for many years. He has often been a voice of reason. So when I saw this book on an important topic for these turbulent days, I wanted to read it. And wanted to like it.
But I couldn’t. Not because he doesn’t come to a clear conclusion. I somewhat expected that with a title like Restless Faith. But more because I didn’t find he really engaged with the issues. While his emphasis on dialogue is important, I didn’t find much in this book that will help evangelicals dialogue around the cultural and biblical themes that shape evangelicals.
Mouw concludes by saying: “For me, the only way to be a properly functioning evangelical is to keep arguing about what it means to be an evangelical.” Restless Faith (p. 174). Agreed. But, I’m not sure this book moves the dialogue along very far.
This book was been provided courtesy of Baker Publishing Group
and Graf-Martin Communications, Inc.
This is my honest review. All opinions are strictly my own.
Author: Richard J. Mouw
Publisher: Brazos Press
Date: 2019
Richard Mouw is a respected leader within the evangelical community for many years. He has often been a voice of reason. So when I saw this book on an important topic for these turbulent days, I wanted to read it. And wanted to like it.
But I couldn’t. Not because he doesn’t come to a clear conclusion. I somewhat expected that with a title like Restless Faith. But more because I didn’t find he really engaged with the issues. While his emphasis on dialogue is important, I didn’t find much in this book that will help evangelicals dialogue around the cultural and biblical themes that shape evangelicals.
Mouw concludes by saying: “For me, the only way to be a properly functioning evangelical is to keep arguing about what it means to be an evangelical.” Restless Faith (p. 174). Agreed. But, I’m not sure this book moves the dialogue along very far.
This book was been provided courtesy of Baker Publishing Group
and Graf-Martin Communications, Inc.
This is my honest review. All opinions are strictly my own.
August 23, 2019
If being an evangelical means to be willing to...
- Engage in humble and respectful dialogue with other Christian traditions in the pursuit of Christian unity
- Hold in tension both the cosmic as well as the personal implications of the cross
- Emphasize both individual discipleship and social engagement
- Embrace mystery, yes even in theological discourse (something evangelicals are known for to be nervous about)
...and if it allows to me wrestle with (not deny, but wrestle with)
- sola fide
- sola scriptura
- hell
- the wrath/love question (tension?) in God’s character
- and a bunch of other things (evolution, whatever we should call sin today, what “political witness” should look like,etc)
...then, I think I’m on board.
Quick observation: I’m sure Mouw would have more or less straight forward answers to most of these later issues in my “wrestling list”. So, it seems to me that for him, not every answer you give here keeps you in the evangelical world.
- Engage in humble and respectful dialogue with other Christian traditions in the pursuit of Christian unity
- Hold in tension both the cosmic as well as the personal implications of the cross
- Emphasize both individual discipleship and social engagement
- Embrace mystery, yes even in theological discourse (something evangelicals are known for to be nervous about)
...and if it allows to me wrestle with (not deny, but wrestle with)
- sola fide
- sola scriptura
- hell
- the wrath/love question (tension?) in God’s character
- and a bunch of other things (evolution, whatever we should call sin today, what “political witness” should look like,etc)
...then, I think I’m on board.
Quick observation: I’m sure Mouw would have more or less straight forward answers to most of these later issues in my “wrestling list”. So, it seems to me that for him, not every answer you give here keeps you in the evangelical world.
February 5, 2019
I received an ARC of this book from NetGalley.
What an insightful read! Richard Mouw's incredible wisdom and experience speaks loudly in this book. While being an evangelical Christian is challenging in today's world - and many of us feel disillusioned with the label - Mouw offers encouragement, honesty and a challenge. Mouw says - "I hope that many of us can stay restless as we hold on while exploring together whether the best way to remain faithful to the legacy is to let go of the label." His book helps to start that exploration and serves as a guide of sorts from someone who has been in this for decades and cares deeply about Christ, the Kingdom.and His church.
What an insightful read! Richard Mouw's incredible wisdom and experience speaks loudly in this book. While being an evangelical Christian is challenging in today's world - and many of us feel disillusioned with the label - Mouw offers encouragement, honesty and a challenge. Mouw says - "I hope that many of us can stay restless as we hold on while exploring together whether the best way to remain faithful to the legacy is to let go of the label." His book helps to start that exploration and serves as a guide of sorts from someone who has been in this for decades and cares deeply about Christ, the Kingdom.and His church.
November 25, 2019
Superb. In this day when the label "evangelical" has been largely co-opted by the American religious right, is it time to abandon the label? Fuller Seminary president Richard J. Mouw argues that it is not. It is time rather to reclame it as it was used up until the last thirty years or so.
Mouw agrees with the four-part definition proposed by David Bebbington, that evangelicals emphasize the need for conversion, the Bible's supreme authority, a cross-centered theology, and an active faith.
Mouw explores what it means to be evangelical for those who are committed to the sort of embracing, self-sacrificing love proclaimed in the Bible and demonstrated by Jesus.
Highly recommended.
Mouw agrees with the four-part definition proposed by David Bebbington, that evangelicals emphasize the need for conversion, the Bible's supreme authority, a cross-centered theology, and an active faith.
Mouw explores what it means to be evangelical for those who are committed to the sort of embracing, self-sacrificing love proclaimed in the Bible and demonstrated by Jesus.
Highly recommended.
February 16, 2019
Mouw is no stranger to writing great little books. These include:
Kuyper: A Short and Personal Introduction
Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport
When the Kings Come Marching In
Political Evangelism
Restless Faith is a very welcome addition to these other great little books. Mouw is a philosopher, an academic, a former president of a prestigious evangelical seminary - it is this that has kept him grounded and in touch with the younger more radical evangelicalism.
Here Mouw examines a series of fascinating topics all exploring evangelical identity. He begins by reexamining the label evangelical. Unlike others, he reluctantly affirms the use of the label - despite the recent politicisation of the term.
What does it mean to be an evangelical in a world of drones and clones? This is the issue that Mouw examines. Unlike Russ Douat he doesn't see a split between the elite (the evangelical academics) and the pew.
He sees a restlessness in many younger people's evangelicalism - this he sees as a good thing. Particularly, as Mouw's background was one where thinking was not encouraged and there was a climate of anti-intellectualism, where the refrain you don't need exegesis you need Jesus was heard.
Mouw draws upon his own experiences to provide wisdom and insight into new issues and problems that face contemporary evangelicals. He shares insights he received from Carl Henry, Edward Carnell, Billy Graham.
Through it all Mouw still holds to the age-old fundamentalist adage: if the Bible says it, I believe it. But he does so in a post-critical rather than a naive form. Mouw may have a child-like faith but it is certainly not childish.
Mouw is never pompous, pontificating or patronising. He listens, affirms, critiques and then enriches others' views. This is seen particularly in his examination and discussion of Robert Schuller, the Mormons, Rob Bell and several others in the fringes of evangelicalism. His use of xxx's notion of bounded and unbounded sets is helpful.
The book bleeds insight. Mouw helps us see the grey in the black and whiteness of evangelicalism. It provides a good justification for the continued use of the evangelical label.
Kuyper: A Short and Personal Introduction
Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport
When the Kings Come Marching In
Political Evangelism
Restless Faith is a very welcome addition to these other great little books. Mouw is a philosopher, an academic, a former president of a prestigious evangelical seminary - it is this that has kept him grounded and in touch with the younger more radical evangelicalism.
Here Mouw examines a series of fascinating topics all exploring evangelical identity. He begins by reexamining the label evangelical. Unlike others, he reluctantly affirms the use of the label - despite the recent politicisation of the term.
What does it mean to be an evangelical in a world of drones and clones? This is the issue that Mouw examines. Unlike Russ Douat he doesn't see a split between the elite (the evangelical academics) and the pew.
He sees a restlessness in many younger people's evangelicalism - this he sees as a good thing. Particularly, as Mouw's background was one where thinking was not encouraged and there was a climate of anti-intellectualism, where the refrain you don't need exegesis you need Jesus was heard.
Mouw draws upon his own experiences to provide wisdom and insight into new issues and problems that face contemporary evangelicals. He shares insights he received from Carl Henry, Edward Carnell, Billy Graham.
Through it all Mouw still holds to the age-old fundamentalist adage: if the Bible says it, I believe it. But he does so in a post-critical rather than a naive form. Mouw may have a child-like faith but it is certainly not childish.
Mouw is never pompous, pontificating or patronising. He listens, affirms, critiques and then enriches others' views. This is seen particularly in his examination and discussion of Robert Schuller, the Mormons, Rob Bell and several others in the fringes of evangelicalism. His use of xxx's notion of bounded and unbounded sets is helpful.
The book bleeds insight. Mouw helps us see the grey in the black and whiteness of evangelicalism. It provides a good justification for the continued use of the evangelical label.
June 7, 2019
Struggling with the label of Evangelical
I appreciate a leader who has spent decades in the evangelical movement trying to reclaim that label for what is good. I grew up Pentecostal/Evangelical and have recently joined an Anglican Church. What one of my pastors says on being Anglican is he is Catholic. Not Roman. He refuses to surrender Catholic. We struggle to hold on the GOOD that has come out of early definitions. Mouw is walking through that struggle.
I appreciate a leader who has spent decades in the evangelical movement trying to reclaim that label for what is good. I grew up Pentecostal/Evangelical and have recently joined an Anglican Church. What one of my pastors says on being Anglican is he is Catholic. Not Roman. He refuses to surrender Catholic. We struggle to hold on the GOOD that has come out of early definitions. Mouw is walking through that struggle.
July 2, 2019
If you are interested in Evangelical theology and are a Calvinist, as I am, you may be troubled by many Right Wing Christian leaders claiming to be Evangelicals. Dr Mouw, an Alum of the college I attended, carefully and fully explains why he still feels Conservative Kuiperian Calvinists should continue to use the term. This new book is as insightful as the many other theological books he has written. Take the time to slowly read and study this fine book. If you do you won’t be sorry.
March 21, 2024
Encouraging, thought provoking
Reading this was a highlight of my YL intro to youth ministry class. I appreciated reading about the history and benefits of evangelicalism, especially coming out of a college environment in which many were up in arms about the evangelical movement. Certainly, there are still warts to how evangelism has been and is expressed in the U.S. - however, this book makes a compelling argument for the movement's continued merit when expressed well.
Reading this was a highlight of my YL intro to youth ministry class. I appreciated reading about the history and benefits of evangelicalism, especially coming out of a college environment in which many were up in arms about the evangelical movement. Certainly, there are still warts to how evangelism has been and is expressed in the U.S. - however, this book makes a compelling argument for the movement's continued merit when expressed well.
May 17, 2020
Mouw has been one of the unsung heroes for me when it comes to being an academic for the people. I would say this is a quick read because there is no real argument that I believe holds the book together with other than these are the reflections of a man who has learned the hard lessons of leaning in within his Reformed tradition while being with the Evangelical coalition.
Read
March 27, 2023I liked this guy. He jokes in the beginning of the book that he's thinking about how Prince went with a new moniker when he was known as "the Artist Formerly Known As Prince." What do good old evangelicals do with the "evangelical" label when it starts to feel a bit, um, "not right." What to do about labels?
I felt like Mouw understands the discomfort and clings to the good.
I felt like Mouw understands the discomfort and clings to the good.
July 22, 2024
This was interesting and made some thought-provoking points on labels like evangelical, on Christian “engagement” with politics and culture and why that term may not be the best, the place of parachurch organizations, etc. I would say that this book was also a little rambly and I didn’t feel that the thesis or direction was completely clear.
April 26, 2019
As a moderate evangelical, I really appreciated this book. I have often felt too liberal for conservatives and too conservative for liberals. Mouw presents a generous evangelicalism that is not limited to the narrow definition that has become so unpopular.
July 26, 2019
This is a great read by a wise leader with decades of experience in Evangelicalism. Mouw makes the case for staying plugged in to the Evangelical movement, even when we can't agree with the political commitments of everyone involved.
June 19, 2020
I read Mouw's defense of the term evangelical with interest. AS he defines it, I can be called an evangelical--an emphasis on Scripture, conversion, the cross, and telling others. As the media defines it these days, I want to avoid the term because I am not a conservative and a Trump follower. Mouw isn't either of those but wants to keep the term at least for now.
December 7, 2020
A little boring and not quite what I expected; I didn't finish it.
March 15, 2021
A gift for any and all who feel caught in a tension between (or simply confused by) the good, the bad, and the ugly of evangelicalism.
September 18, 2022
Read waiting in line for Smallpools + Judah & The Lion
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews