What do you think?
Rate this book
After Evangelicalism: The Path to a New Christianity
A building crescendo of developments, culminating in evangelical support for the Trump presidency, has led many evangelicals to question the faith they inherited. If being Christian means rejecting LGBTQ persons and supporting systemic racism, perhaps their Christian journey is over.
David Gushee offers a new way forward for disillusioned post-evangelicals by first analyzing what went wrong with U.S. white evangelicalism in areas such as evangelical identity, biblical interpretation, church life, sexuality, politics, and race. Gushee then proposes new ways of Christian believing, belonging, and behaving, helping post-evangelicals from where they are to a living relationship with Christ and an intellectually cogent and morally robust post-evangelical faith. After Evangelicalism shows that it is possible to follow Jesus out of evangelical Christianity, and more than that, it's necessary.
David Gushee offers a new way forward for disillusioned post-evangelicals by first analyzing what went wrong with U.S. white evangelicalism in areas such as evangelical identity, biblical interpretation, church life, sexuality, politics, and race. Gushee then proposes new ways of Christian believing, belonging, and behaving, helping post-evangelicals from where they are to a living relationship with Christ and an intellectually cogent and morally robust post-evangelical faith. After Evangelicalism shows that it is possible to follow Jesus out of evangelical Christianity, and more than that, it's necessary.
234 pages, Paperback
First published July 31, 2020
161 people are currently reading
1490 people want to read
About the author
David P. Gushee
65 books139 followersRev. Prof. Dr. David P. Gushee is Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics at Mercer University, Chair of Christian Social Ethics at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, and Senior Research Fellow, International Baptist Theological Study Centre. He is also the elected past-president of the American Academy of Religion and the Society of Christian Ethics. Dr. Gushee is the author, co-author, or editor of 28 books, including the bestsellers Kingdom Ethics and Changing Our Mind. His other most notable works are After Evangelicalism, Righteous Gentiles of the Holocaust, Introducing Christian Ethics, and The Sacredness of Human Life. He is widely regarded as one of the world’s leading Christian moral thinkers. Gushee and his wife, Jeanie, live in Atlanta, Georgia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 142 reviews
February 22, 2025
Over the past six months or so this book has popped up on my radar at least ten times. A few of the reviews I read seemed quite positive, but the back-page excerpt left me feeling skeptical. Finally, after someone mentioned it asking my opinion in a phone conversation I figured it was time to bite the bullet and read it for myself.
David Gushee brings up some legitimate points about the precarious state of evangelicalism in our day. He also makes a number of statements where I can see his point but I wouldn't necessarily fully agree with them. Unfortunately, the above two sentences comprise about 40% of the book. The other 60% is just plain BS. Gushee has demonstrated himself as a master of creating caricatures he can then crush or building straw men that make for easy targets. He will take a misconception of evangelicalism, stretch it to an extreme, and then completely destroy it as an example of why we all need to abandon evangelicalism. If evangelicalism were anything like what he imagines it to be in this book, then yes we all should abandon ship. But I am evangelical. Many of my friends of diverse ages and locations are also evangelical. I can't think of a single one who comes close to his portrayal. Yes, some of them, maybe on a point or two. But the overall picture he paints is a grotesque parody. Gushee is too smart of a man and it can be seen far too often for this to have been unintentional. This author is being deliberately deceptive.
Normally, when I am reading a book, I am holding a running mental conversation with the author. I am fact-checking, "amening," doubting, and debating with the author pretty much cover to cover. When it comes to non-fiction, I don't just swallow what is being fed to me but rather "handle with care." Usually, almost none of this ends up in my reviews. This time it does. I didn't carry it through to the end of the book, but the remainder of the review below is a collection of snippets from my thought process as I engaged with the book. Hopefully, these will provide plenty of evidence for why you should not waste your time with David Gushee's agenda-driven diatribe that is After Evangelicalism...
Page 20:
Right up front, Gushee asks how many items you are familiar with from a list of 25 things regarding the Christian subculture. Among these are things like Veggietales, Left Behind, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, and people like Bob Jones, John Piper, and Tim Lahaye. Then he says, “If you checked 20 or more boxes you are, or were, an evangelical.” No, if you were able to check many of these boxes, you are familiar with the 90’s Christian subculture. Many liberal or fundamentalist Christians were raised among this generation, even many non-Christians who might have had Christian friends might also be familiar with this list. From the outset, it appears that Gushee's beef is not really with Evangelicalism but rather with the "religious right" movement of the late '80s and '90s.
Page 26:
Gushee writes: "Evangelical women have often been blocked from pastoral service, and in some traditions have been consigned rather roughly to existential spiritual inferiority." He is here writing about his fundamentalist baptist background and making it the norm for all evangelicals. A quick search from Wikipedia (here) will show that a large number of evangelical denominations do ordain women. In many of those that I looked up, the percentage of female pastors runs roughly between 10% and 15%. That number could and should come up. There are multiple factors for why this is as low as it is. His reasoning does not hold much water, however, because most liberal denominations that have openly embraced and celebrated women in leadership for decades show statistical numbers only slightly better (generally between 12% and 20%).
On the flip side, on the very next page, he says, "I feel called to help shepherd the lost sheep of post evangelicalism, especially the most recent exiles. So many of them are heartbroken, angry, and alienated from their churches, their families, and their God." I can fully and wholeheartedly get behind that mission. My home church, (Two Rivers) often calls itself "the church for those who don't like church." Many, many people have been burned by negative church experiences and have walked away from God as a result. I do not think this is an exclusively evangelical problem, but we are certainly not exempt.
Page 34:
Gushee has been working through the foundations of modern Evangelicalism. He is basically trying to claim that it is what the fundamentalists decided to call themselves. He writes, "The etymological and historical appeal of the term [Evangelical]... explains why that small but talented and determined group of fundamentalists in the early 1940s advanced what amounted to, in that moment, a new religious identity."
This is incredibly misleading. Right from the start, the term "evangelical" was used to differentiate orthodox believers from fundamentalists who many believed swung too far to the other side in reaction to liberal Christianity. The Pluralism Project by Harvard University writes, "most evangelical leaders came to reject what they saw as the anti-intellectualism and parochialism of fundamentalism. The most prominent evangelical leader in the years following World War II was the evangelist Billy Graham." Graham is an excellent example of what distinguished evangelicals from fundamentalists. He was open to working with others where they were exclusivist. He was well ahead of the curve in terms of racial equality and desegregation. And when asked about women in ministry, Graham responded, "Women preach all over the world. It doesn't bother me at all from my study of the Scriptures. And there were many women preachers in the Bible." The entire premise of Gushee's chapter here that Evangelicalism is just another word for fundamentalism is wrong at its core.
Page 41:
Gushee writes, "There has never been a shared evangelical creed or confession, and therefore never much clarity about who counted as an evangelical."
I absolutely agree with this statement. But I cannot help but point out the cognitive dissonance from what he is saying here with his earlier attempt to equate evangelicalism with fundamentalism. This vagueness about evangelicalism runs against the core of what makes a fundamentalist a fundamentalist. You can't have it both ways. However, this ambiguity about evangelicalism is what makes his ability to write a book like this so easy. He can put up any strawman he likes and there is no definitive authority that can rightly say, "No, that is not what evangelicalism is."
Page 48:
"Inerrancy can be defined in various ways, but the simplest is that the Bible is without error in anything that it states."
This is a textbook case of a straw man. No theologian or truly thinking church leader would define inerrancy in this way. He later defines infallibility as "the Bible is without error or fault only on theological, moral, and spiritual matters." This would be closer to a simplistic definition of inerrancy. For a more thorough definition of inerrancy, I would suggest looking up the Chicago Declaration on Inerrancy. Merriam Webster's definition of Infallibility suffices: "not liable to mislead, deceive, or disappoint". Although I don't hold to inerrancy (loooong explanation needed to qualify that one), I highly doubt any conversation that begins talking on the subject so deceptively will be anything near honest and unbiased.
Page 58:
"What the early church did was something like digging up and replanting a rose bush out of someone else's garden without their permission. The church claimed for itself a version of the Jewish canon... and inserted this into the literature of the Christian Bible as our part 1. It was a fateful decision."
Gushee is claiming that the Church's use of the Tanakh (the Old Testament) is a form of spiritual or cultural appropriation. I honestly do not know if he is being deliberately provocative or if he is just that naive. The church began its life as a form of Judaism. It was multiple decades before it viewed itself (and the world outside viewed it) as something distinctive to Judaism. They were not stealing and misusing anyone else's holy writings. They were taking their own writings and learning to interpret them through the light of the cross and the empty tomb. I think Gushee needs to put his pen down and take a good long look at scriptures that explicitly talk about this like Romans 11 and Hebrews 8.
Page 66
"We read our Bible over coffee one morning, and we leap over two thousand years to act as if Paul is addressing us exactly as he was addressing his original readers. Sometimes reading the Bible does feel like that, and those leaps across chasms of time are dangerous."
Gushee is saying here that we need to learn and understand what a scriptural text means in its original context before we can truly understand how it might apply to us today. I cannot agree more. This is called good exegetics. But Gushee is using it as one of his points for why we need to throw away our claims of Biblical inerrancy. See above for the straw man definition he has given for inerrancy.
Page 80:
There is some good mixed in with all the bad. I fully agree with his seven points on Christian humanism on page 80. In fact, his entire section on Erasmus is brilliant. I also strongly believe that Erasmus is a much better exemplar for the Protestant church than the idolized Luther.
Chapter 5:
Gushee begins this chapter by summarizing a book by James Dunn where he presents eight different views of Jesus in the New Testament. I have not read this book so I cannot critique James Dunn but I will give Gushee the benefit of the doubt that he was oversimplifying for the sake of brevity. David Gushee then presents what he calls the four Jesuses of Evangelicalism. 1. The Crucified Jesus 2. The Hallmark Jesus 3. The Jesus who wants you to succeed and 4. The Vacant Jesus, fillable with anything we want. Personally, I call this last one the Ricky Bobby Jesus.
On the one hand, I don't know anybody who would agree on an intellectual level with the last three of these as described. But when you pay attention to how people talk and act about Jesus, there are quite a few people who subconsciously hold one of these views, at least partially. Gushee then goes on to present a largely evangelical presentation of Jesus. He first takes a closer look into the first two of Dunn's New Testament views on Jesus. Then he walks through the gospel of Matthew highlighting what it shows us of who Jesus is. Yes, I could nitpick a point or two here or there, but this is by far his most solid chapter. If the whole book were like this examination of Jesus, it would definitely be a 4 or 5-star work. I especially like what Gushee said in the end: "To my post-evangelical friends, this is my request: please do not think that the problem with the religion you are leaving behind is Jesus. If you return to serious encounter with Jesus as we meet him in the New Testament, I do not think you will be disappointed." I fully agree.
My one real issue with this chapter is the method of presentation. Gushee has pointed out a very real flaw in how Jesus is often subconsciously presented by Evangelicals (although all Christian groups are equally guilty). It should have presented this as a call to repentance. Instead, he lays it out as a cause for abandonment.
Page 105
For the most part, the first section in Gushee's chapter on the Church is great. He is presenting a theology of the church that pretty much every evangelical I know would wholeheartedly agree with... Except for perhaps one point. Gushee writes that we should, "honor our covenantal fellowship with Christians of every type, and reject any ideology that would narrow the bonds of Christian fellowship—including racism, homophobia, and xenophobia."
This needs a very big "yes, but..." In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul makes it very clear how we are to react to someone who claims to be a Christian and yet is proudly, publically living in unrepentant sin. He writes, " I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case, you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a [Christian] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people." When they repent we are to eagerly welcome them back. But for as long as a person claiming to be a Christian is proudly engaging in an unchristian lifestyle, we are to have nothing to do with them.
Page 111:
Gushee writes, "What are you going to do about church? I could do a lot worse than saying this: find a small group... It does not have to be in a local church if that is not something you can handle right now. Find some people and get together every week. Study, pray, eat, worship, and do kingdom work together. The Christian life does not thrive in isolation, and podcasts are not enough. Find flesh-and-blood kingdom people in a real physical space somewhere and do life together as far as you can manage it."
Yes, yes, 100 times yes! Whatever one might think of everything else in this book, this advice is gold. If you are not doing this, you aren't doing life right.
Page 124:
Gushee has just done an excellent job pointing out a very real sociological problem. These days most people are hitting puberty around 12 but they are not marrying until 30 for men and 28 for women. He rightly points out that Conservative Christianity's "purity culture" does not stand a chance against nearly two decades of raging hormones, a decadent overtly sexual culture, and easy access through the internet to harming images/ideas. He points out that the call for purity (which he acknowledges has very solid biblical grounding) does nothing more than bring shame in a modern context. I would argue that the problem is not purity, the problem is our culture. I could write a book on this but the short of it is that throughout human history until the very recent past, most people tended to marry as soon after puberty as possible. We need to stop encouraging people to wait until they are "ready" to marry. Nobody is ever ready to marry. No matter what age you are, tying that knot will be a huge shock and lifestyle change. So, if you are over 20, you aren't married yet, and you are not called by God to be single, then you have already waited too long. Hurry up and get hitched.
Page 162:
Gushee writes, "Isaac Sharp documents that the 1940's neo-evangelical movement..."
Knee jerk reaction was for me to automatically assume this is a misprint. He must have meant "neo-orthodox" and not "neo-evangelical." After all, how could you have a neo-evangelical movement before evangelicalism was really a thing? To double-check, I followed his footnote. Considering the incredibly liberal source he is using, that isn't an assumption I should make. Sharp seems far more agenda-driven than fact-based. This is a common problem I have seen in nearly all of the sources and people being referenced. Almost all the articles and individuals Gushee is using throughout this book have been far to the left. I've not done much digging into how accurately he is using them (Marcus Borg is notorious for misusing and misquoting sources), but it has become abundantly clear that his source material is not balanced in the least.
- [after writing this comment, I noticed he used "neo-evangelical" again on the very next page. It clearly was not an error. Strike that. It is an error. It just was not a typo.]
Page 178:
Gushee has bought into a commonly held mythology of colonialism and the church. In the middle of a completely misguided diatribe he writes, "They believed they were the best people on earth, the most advanced, the agents of civilization, the bearers of faith. Their church told them that they had the right and duty to conquer, colonize, and enslave non-European populations." I hear variations of this all the time but any true examination of the facts points in the opposite direction. It was largely because of missionaries that we even know of the evils committed by colonialist commercial exploiters. Men like Adoniram Judson, Hudson Taylor, William Carey, and David Livingston were social reformers ahead of their time as well as missionaries of the gospel. Of course, we all know of Mother Theresa, but also in the past century, it was missionaries like Edmund Soper and Kenneth Landon among many others who were at the forefront of exposing colonial racism and ending colonialism occupation. Pick any century and any region of the world and it would be very easy to line up many, many more examples of missionaries standing strong and hard against injustice.
David Gushee brings up some legitimate points about the precarious state of evangelicalism in our day. He also makes a number of statements where I can see his point but I wouldn't necessarily fully agree with them. Unfortunately, the above two sentences comprise about 40% of the book. The other 60% is just plain BS. Gushee has demonstrated himself as a master of creating caricatures he can then crush or building straw men that make for easy targets. He will take a misconception of evangelicalism, stretch it to an extreme, and then completely destroy it as an example of why we all need to abandon evangelicalism. If evangelicalism were anything like what he imagines it to be in this book, then yes we all should abandon ship. But I am evangelical. Many of my friends of diverse ages and locations are also evangelical. I can't think of a single one who comes close to his portrayal. Yes, some of them, maybe on a point or two. But the overall picture he paints is a grotesque parody. Gushee is too smart of a man and it can be seen far too often for this to have been unintentional. This author is being deliberately deceptive.
Normally, when I am reading a book, I am holding a running mental conversation with the author. I am fact-checking, "amening," doubting, and debating with the author pretty much cover to cover. When it comes to non-fiction, I don't just swallow what is being fed to me but rather "handle with care." Usually, almost none of this ends up in my reviews. This time it does. I didn't carry it through to the end of the book, but the remainder of the review below is a collection of snippets from my thought process as I engaged with the book. Hopefully, these will provide plenty of evidence for why you should not waste your time with David Gushee's agenda-driven diatribe that is After Evangelicalism...
Page 20:
Right up front, Gushee asks how many items you are familiar with from a list of 25 things regarding the Christian subculture. Among these are things like Veggietales, Left Behind, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, and people like Bob Jones, John Piper, and Tim Lahaye. Then he says, “If you checked 20 or more boxes you are, or were, an evangelical.” No, if you were able to check many of these boxes, you are familiar with the 90’s Christian subculture. Many liberal or fundamentalist Christians were raised among this generation, even many non-Christians who might have had Christian friends might also be familiar with this list. From the outset, it appears that Gushee's beef is not really with Evangelicalism but rather with the "religious right" movement of the late '80s and '90s.
Page 26:
Gushee writes: "Evangelical women have often been blocked from pastoral service, and in some traditions have been consigned rather roughly to existential spiritual inferiority." He is here writing about his fundamentalist baptist background and making it the norm for all evangelicals. A quick search from Wikipedia (here) will show that a large number of evangelical denominations do ordain women. In many of those that I looked up, the percentage of female pastors runs roughly between 10% and 15%. That number could and should come up. There are multiple factors for why this is as low as it is. His reasoning does not hold much water, however, because most liberal denominations that have openly embraced and celebrated women in leadership for decades show statistical numbers only slightly better (generally between 12% and 20%).
On the flip side, on the very next page, he says, "I feel called to help shepherd the lost sheep of post evangelicalism, especially the most recent exiles. So many of them are heartbroken, angry, and alienated from their churches, their families, and their God." I can fully and wholeheartedly get behind that mission. My home church, (Two Rivers) often calls itself "the church for those who don't like church." Many, many people have been burned by negative church experiences and have walked away from God as a result. I do not think this is an exclusively evangelical problem, but we are certainly not exempt.
Page 34:
Gushee has been working through the foundations of modern Evangelicalism. He is basically trying to claim that it is what the fundamentalists decided to call themselves. He writes, "The etymological and historical appeal of the term [Evangelical]... explains why that small but talented and determined group of fundamentalists in the early 1940s advanced what amounted to, in that moment, a new religious identity."
This is incredibly misleading. Right from the start, the term "evangelical" was used to differentiate orthodox believers from fundamentalists who many believed swung too far to the other side in reaction to liberal Christianity. The Pluralism Project by Harvard University writes, "most evangelical leaders came to reject what they saw as the anti-intellectualism and parochialism of fundamentalism. The most prominent evangelical leader in the years following World War II was the evangelist Billy Graham." Graham is an excellent example of what distinguished evangelicals from fundamentalists. He was open to working with others where they were exclusivist. He was well ahead of the curve in terms of racial equality and desegregation. And when asked about women in ministry, Graham responded, "Women preach all over the world. It doesn't bother me at all from my study of the Scriptures. And there were many women preachers in the Bible." The entire premise of Gushee's chapter here that Evangelicalism is just another word for fundamentalism is wrong at its core.
Page 41:
Gushee writes, "There has never been a shared evangelical creed or confession, and therefore never much clarity about who counted as an evangelical."
I absolutely agree with this statement. But I cannot help but point out the cognitive dissonance from what he is saying here with his earlier attempt to equate evangelicalism with fundamentalism. This vagueness about evangelicalism runs against the core of what makes a fundamentalist a fundamentalist. You can't have it both ways. However, this ambiguity about evangelicalism is what makes his ability to write a book like this so easy. He can put up any strawman he likes and there is no definitive authority that can rightly say, "No, that is not what evangelicalism is."
Page 48:
"Inerrancy can be defined in various ways, but the simplest is that the Bible is without error in anything that it states."
This is a textbook case of a straw man. No theologian or truly thinking church leader would define inerrancy in this way. He later defines infallibility as "the Bible is without error or fault only on theological, moral, and spiritual matters." This would be closer to a simplistic definition of inerrancy. For a more thorough definition of inerrancy, I would suggest looking up the Chicago Declaration on Inerrancy. Merriam Webster's definition of Infallibility suffices: "not liable to mislead, deceive, or disappoint". Although I don't hold to inerrancy (loooong explanation needed to qualify that one), I highly doubt any conversation that begins talking on the subject so deceptively will be anything near honest and unbiased.
Page 58:
"What the early church did was something like digging up and replanting a rose bush out of someone else's garden without their permission. The church claimed for itself a version of the Jewish canon... and inserted this into the literature of the Christian Bible as our part 1. It was a fateful decision."
Gushee is claiming that the Church's use of the Tanakh (the Old Testament) is a form of spiritual or cultural appropriation. I honestly do not know if he is being deliberately provocative or if he is just that naive. The church began its life as a form of Judaism. It was multiple decades before it viewed itself (and the world outside viewed it) as something distinctive to Judaism. They were not stealing and misusing anyone else's holy writings. They were taking their own writings and learning to interpret them through the light of the cross and the empty tomb. I think Gushee needs to put his pen down and take a good long look at scriptures that explicitly talk about this like Romans 11 and Hebrews 8.
Page 66
"We read our Bible over coffee one morning, and we leap over two thousand years to act as if Paul is addressing us exactly as he was addressing his original readers. Sometimes reading the Bible does feel like that, and those leaps across chasms of time are dangerous."
Gushee is saying here that we need to learn and understand what a scriptural text means in its original context before we can truly understand how it might apply to us today. I cannot agree more. This is called good exegetics. But Gushee is using it as one of his points for why we need to throw away our claims of Biblical inerrancy. See above for the straw man definition he has given for inerrancy.
Page 80:
There is some good mixed in with all the bad. I fully agree with his seven points on Christian humanism on page 80. In fact, his entire section on Erasmus is brilliant. I also strongly believe that Erasmus is a much better exemplar for the Protestant church than the idolized Luther.
Chapter 5:
Gushee begins this chapter by summarizing a book by James Dunn where he presents eight different views of Jesus in the New Testament. I have not read this book so I cannot critique James Dunn but I will give Gushee the benefit of the doubt that he was oversimplifying for the sake of brevity. David Gushee then presents what he calls the four Jesuses of Evangelicalism. 1. The Crucified Jesus 2. The Hallmark Jesus 3. The Jesus who wants you to succeed and 4. The Vacant Jesus, fillable with anything we want. Personally, I call this last one the Ricky Bobby Jesus.
On the one hand, I don't know anybody who would agree on an intellectual level with the last three of these as described. But when you pay attention to how people talk and act about Jesus, there are quite a few people who subconsciously hold one of these views, at least partially. Gushee then goes on to present a largely evangelical presentation of Jesus. He first takes a closer look into the first two of Dunn's New Testament views on Jesus. Then he walks through the gospel of Matthew highlighting what it shows us of who Jesus is. Yes, I could nitpick a point or two here or there, but this is by far his most solid chapter. If the whole book were like this examination of Jesus, it would definitely be a 4 or 5-star work. I especially like what Gushee said in the end: "To my post-evangelical friends, this is my request: please do not think that the problem with the religion you are leaving behind is Jesus. If you return to serious encounter with Jesus as we meet him in the New Testament, I do not think you will be disappointed." I fully agree.
My one real issue with this chapter is the method of presentation. Gushee has pointed out a very real flaw in how Jesus is often subconsciously presented by Evangelicals (although all Christian groups are equally guilty). It should have presented this as a call to repentance. Instead, he lays it out as a cause for abandonment.
Page 105
For the most part, the first section in Gushee's chapter on the Church is great. He is presenting a theology of the church that pretty much every evangelical I know would wholeheartedly agree with... Except for perhaps one point. Gushee writes that we should, "honor our covenantal fellowship with Christians of every type, and reject any ideology that would narrow the bonds of Christian fellowship—including racism, homophobia, and xenophobia."
This needs a very big "yes, but..." In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul makes it very clear how we are to react to someone who claims to be a Christian and yet is proudly, publically living in unrepentant sin. He writes, " I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case, you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a [Christian] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people." When they repent we are to eagerly welcome them back. But for as long as a person claiming to be a Christian is proudly engaging in an unchristian lifestyle, we are to have nothing to do with them.
Page 111:
Gushee writes, "What are you going to do about church? I could do a lot worse than saying this: find a small group... It does not have to be in a local church if that is not something you can handle right now. Find some people and get together every week. Study, pray, eat, worship, and do kingdom work together. The Christian life does not thrive in isolation, and podcasts are not enough. Find flesh-and-blood kingdom people in a real physical space somewhere and do life together as far as you can manage it."
Yes, yes, 100 times yes! Whatever one might think of everything else in this book, this advice is gold. If you are not doing this, you aren't doing life right.
Page 124:
Gushee has just done an excellent job pointing out a very real sociological problem. These days most people are hitting puberty around 12 but they are not marrying until 30 for men and 28 for women. He rightly points out that Conservative Christianity's "purity culture" does not stand a chance against nearly two decades of raging hormones, a decadent overtly sexual culture, and easy access through the internet to harming images/ideas. He points out that the call for purity (which he acknowledges has very solid biblical grounding) does nothing more than bring shame in a modern context. I would argue that the problem is not purity, the problem is our culture. I could write a book on this but the short of it is that throughout human history until the very recent past, most people tended to marry as soon after puberty as possible. We need to stop encouraging people to wait until they are "ready" to marry. Nobody is ever ready to marry. No matter what age you are, tying that knot will be a huge shock and lifestyle change. So, if you are over 20, you aren't married yet, and you are not called by God to be single, then you have already waited too long. Hurry up and get hitched.
Page 162:
Gushee writes, "Isaac Sharp documents that the 1940's neo-evangelical movement..."
Knee jerk reaction was for me to automatically assume this is a misprint. He must have meant "neo-orthodox" and not "neo-evangelical." After all, how could you have a neo-evangelical movement before evangelicalism was really a thing? To double-check, I followed his footnote. Considering the incredibly liberal source he is using, that isn't an assumption I should make. Sharp seems far more agenda-driven than fact-based. This is a common problem I have seen in nearly all of the sources and people being referenced. Almost all the articles and individuals Gushee is using throughout this book have been far to the left. I've not done much digging into how accurately he is using them (Marcus Borg is notorious for misusing and misquoting sources), but it has become abundantly clear that his source material is not balanced in the least.
- [after writing this comment, I noticed he used "neo-evangelical" again on the very next page. It clearly was not an error. Strike that. It is an error. It just was not a typo.]
Page 178:
Gushee has bought into a commonly held mythology of colonialism and the church. In the middle of a completely misguided diatribe he writes, "They believed they were the best people on earth, the most advanced, the agents of civilization, the bearers of faith. Their church told them that they had the right and duty to conquer, colonize, and enslave non-European populations." I hear variations of this all the time but any true examination of the facts points in the opposite direction. It was largely because of missionaries that we even know of the evils committed by colonialist commercial exploiters. Men like Adoniram Judson, Hudson Taylor, William Carey, and David Livingston were social reformers ahead of their time as well as missionaries of the gospel. Of course, we all know of Mother Theresa, but also in the past century, it was missionaries like Edmund Soper and Kenneth Landon among many others who were at the forefront of exposing colonial racism and ending colonialism occupation. Pick any century and any region of the world and it would be very easy to line up many, many more examples of missionaries standing strong and hard against injustice.
October 2, 2020
Thank you to Netgalley and the publisher for giving me a free e-ARC of this book in exchange for an honest review.
“After Evangelicalism” was a powerful and moving book. It shined a light on many of the contradictions and errors of evangelicalism and white Christianity. As someone who grew up in an Anglican, white, conservative church much of this book reflected beliefs that I had been taught growing up: women are less than men, the Bible is flawless, LGBTQ+ individuals are sinners and dirty. These mindsets were inundated so thoroughly into me that I had no doubt that they were the truth, I never heard anything contrary.
It took a lot of bravery to start to inch myself outside of the box that was built around me. I started little by little as I grew older, as I began to feel unsatisfied with the version of Christianity I was being sold. It didn’t feel right. I was being taught to hate people because they didn’t look like me, or dress like me, or talk like me, or love like me. I am now the opposite of who I ever thought I would become and most parts of that don’t align with the version of Christianity I was brought up with.
It has been a long time since I have felt comfortable with my faith, since I have felt settled. I am thankful to this book for helping me navigate this confusion, for allowing me solid ground. I have always wanted Jesus to be my foundation and this book allowed me to realize that the prejudices I was told to adopt are what is keeping me from Jesus being that foundation.
As for the book itself, it is extremely relevant to right now especially because we are in the middle of an election. It speaks knowledgeably on sexism, racism and homophobia and where churches and Christians fail in those regards. It teaches us how to do better, and how to heal. There were certain parts of this book I found inaccessible, where I felt lost and confused. In addition, there were parts I wish had been expanded, had been more thorough not so much with historical information but new ways to see the old things we were taught. But these aspects don’t take away from the overall importance and relevance of this text.
I thoroughly encourage you to read this book if you are any sort of believer. It will no doubt change your perspective. In these polarizing times it is important that we find a compass, a space of solid ground on which we can root ourselves and our beliefs. This book will point you in the right direction and guide you back to that solid spot.
“After Evangelicalism” was a powerful and moving book. It shined a light on many of the contradictions and errors of evangelicalism and white Christianity. As someone who grew up in an Anglican, white, conservative church much of this book reflected beliefs that I had been taught growing up: women are less than men, the Bible is flawless, LGBTQ+ individuals are sinners and dirty. These mindsets were inundated so thoroughly into me that I had no doubt that they were the truth, I never heard anything contrary.
It took a lot of bravery to start to inch myself outside of the box that was built around me. I started little by little as I grew older, as I began to feel unsatisfied with the version of Christianity I was being sold. It didn’t feel right. I was being taught to hate people because they didn’t look like me, or dress like me, or talk like me, or love like me. I am now the opposite of who I ever thought I would become and most parts of that don’t align with the version of Christianity I was brought up with.
It has been a long time since I have felt comfortable with my faith, since I have felt settled. I am thankful to this book for helping me navigate this confusion, for allowing me solid ground. I have always wanted Jesus to be my foundation and this book allowed me to realize that the prejudices I was told to adopt are what is keeping me from Jesus being that foundation.
As for the book itself, it is extremely relevant to right now especially because we are in the middle of an election. It speaks knowledgeably on sexism, racism and homophobia and where churches and Christians fail in those regards. It teaches us how to do better, and how to heal. There were certain parts of this book I found inaccessible, where I felt lost and confused. In addition, there were parts I wish had been expanded, had been more thorough not so much with historical information but new ways to see the old things we were taught. But these aspects don’t take away from the overall importance and relevance of this text.
I thoroughly encourage you to read this book if you are any sort of believer. It will no doubt change your perspective. In these polarizing times it is important that we find a compass, a space of solid ground on which we can root ourselves and our beliefs. This book will point you in the right direction and guide you back to that solid spot.
November 4, 2020
"Post-evangelicals are abandoning the church too... [some] leave for reasons peculiar to the American evangelical experience. Those reasons begin with disillusionment over teachings that are viewed as harmful to the vulnerable. Some leave over the harm LGBTQ people and their families have experienced. Others leave over patriarchal teachings. Some leave over the damaging effects of purity culture. Others leave over white evangelical racism. Some say: all of the above."
It feels appropriate that I finished this book on election night, four years after Trump's 2016 victory. I had already started moving away from my evangelical upbringing, but the enthusiastic support of 81% of white evangelicals for this man was the nail in the coffin.
I wish I had a book like this five years ago. Hell, I wish I had a book like this 14 years ago when I struggled with the idea of election (theologically as it relates to salvation). How much needless wrestling with my faith could I have avoided if I had known there are other ways of being a faithful Christian that are not entangled with the political right and/or fundamentalism and/or Biblical literalism-in-all-cases?
I don't think there's much else that needs to be said about this book. It's by the grace of God that I had spiritual mentors back in the days before I had access to books like this that helped me see another picture of Christianity. In another universe where I didn't have these friends, I might have walked away from God entirely. This book has the potential of being life-changing for disillusioned ex-vangelicals like me who still want to follow Jesus, and I'm so thankful.
It feels appropriate that I finished this book on election night, four years after Trump's 2016 victory. I had already started moving away from my evangelical upbringing, but the enthusiastic support of 81% of white evangelicals for this man was the nail in the coffin.
I wish I had a book like this five years ago. Hell, I wish I had a book like this 14 years ago when I struggled with the idea of election (theologically as it relates to salvation). How much needless wrestling with my faith could I have avoided if I had known there are other ways of being a faithful Christian that are not entangled with the political right and/or fundamentalism and/or Biblical literalism-in-all-cases?
I don't think there's much else that needs to be said about this book. It's by the grace of God that I had spiritual mentors back in the days before I had access to books like this that helped me see another picture of Christianity. In another universe where I didn't have these friends, I might have walked away from God entirely. This book has the potential of being life-changing for disillusioned ex-vangelicals like me who still want to follow Jesus, and I'm so thankful.
August 18, 2020
Thank you to Westminster John Knox Press and NetGalley for an advanced reader copy of this book. I am providing an honest review in exchange.
This is definitely not an easy “fluff” read but I loved it! There was so much background and history given on not just evangelical but other branches of Christianity. I did not grow up in an evangelical church and as an adult attend a non denominational church but this was such a relief to read. I have struggled with my faith in the past because I wasn’t sure if I was “Christian” enough because I wasn’t conservative enough. Honestly, In the last four years since Trump was elected I have been tempted to walk away from church all together because I can’t wrap my head around the idea that Christians would support a man who so clearly goes against everything Jesus stands for.
Not only was this book so informative and educational, it was also a great reminder of who I follow and serve, Jesus.
This is definitely not an easy “fluff” read but I loved it! There was so much background and history given on not just evangelical but other branches of Christianity. I did not grow up in an evangelical church and as an adult attend a non denominational church but this was such a relief to read. I have struggled with my faith in the past because I wasn’t sure if I was “Christian” enough because I wasn’t conservative enough. Honestly, In the last four years since Trump was elected I have been tempted to walk away from church all together because I can’t wrap my head around the idea that Christians would support a man who so clearly goes against everything Jesus stands for.
Not only was this book so informative and educational, it was also a great reminder of who I follow and serve, Jesus.
September 3, 2020
What a sad book! The author is not a Christian and he does not speak about Christianity. He's a wolf!
October 23, 2020
I thought this book did a good job of laying out an honest critique of American Evangelicalism, covering its ties with Conservatism, theological issues, and a history of how it came to be. I found it helpful to see all that laid out as someone who grew up in that space. The author was fair and direct in his critiques.
I also enjoyed that the author talked about his own experience, where he has found himself now, and some of his heroes that in fact were Evangelical. I appreciated his effort in making this book more than just a critique by offering new ways forward, and suggestions for handholds in moving into a new form of Christianity. His appreciation for the diversity within Christianity was really refreshing.
I also enjoyed that the author talked about his own experience, where he has found himself now, and some of his heroes that in fact were Evangelical. I appreciated his effort in making this book more than just a critique by offering new ways forward, and suggestions for handholds in moving into a new form of Christianity. His appreciation for the diversity within Christianity was really refreshing.
November 26, 2020
I was once a white evangelical. I'm still white, but I'm now a post-evangelical living among liberal Protestants. There are parts of me that still reflect that evangelical period of my life. I have a high Christology, am Trinitarian, and love the Bible. At the same time, I long ago rejected the anti-science part as well as the political and social elements of that past reality. At times I've identified as post-liberal, but I was never so fully committed to the liberal cause that I could truly be classified as post-liberal. It's just that my post-evangelical self had a lot in common with some parts of the post-liberal movement -- mostly the influence of Karl Barth on my theological development.
I am not alone in my migration out of white evangelicalism. My journey began long ago, while a student at a leading evangelical seminary (Fuller). It was there that I imbibed Barth and Liberation Theology. It was there that I came to support egalitarianism when it came to male-female roles as well as the full inclusion of women in ministry. I worked for evangelical institutions until being fired as a theology professor for being too liberal. It was then that my move into post-evangelicalism really began to take shape. The final straw that broke my connection with white evangelicalism came with the reealtion on my brother's part that he is gay. That led to a soul-searching moment and a realization that I had crossed a rubicon into the post-evangelical world. I could still value elements of that previous formation, but I couldn't go back.
I write this lengthy preface to my review of David Gushee's latest book "After Evangelicalism." What he writes here describes much of my own journey, though my break with evangelicalism came earlier than did his. Nevertheless, considering that he has been a leading evangelical ethicist teaching at Baptist institutions, his break has proven ground-breaking for so many. It is in this book that Gushee fully expresses his reasoning behind this break from the past. In many ways, the cause of his break is similar to mine. Like me, it was the realization that to follow Jesus meant embracing the full inclusion of LGBTQ persons in the life of the church. That vision was expressed in his book Changing Our Mind: Definitive 3rd Edition of the Landmark Call for Inclusion of LGBTQ Christians with Response to Critics.
"After Evangelicalism" is in many ways a polemical work. I don't mean that in a pejorative way. In this book, Gushee answers critics, reveals the negative elements of white evangelicalism, and offers a way forward out of evangelicalism. He wrote this in large part because he was encountering so many ex-evangelicals who didn't know what to do next. They no longer embraced evangelicalism but weren't sure about other options other than simply walking away from Christianity as a whole.
Gushee divides the book into three parts. First, he focuses on the question of authorities, beginning with Scripture and then exploring other authorities, including Tradition, Reason, and Experience. What he offers is often known as the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, though these four elements are embraced by many outside the Wesleyan movement (including my own Disciples movement). Considering that evangelicals are rooted in the Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura, this is an important starting point.
Part 2 is an exploration of theology, with chapters dealing with doctrines of God, Christology, and church. He explores these doctrinal concepts in conversation with the biblical narrative. In the chapter on the church, he offers post-evangelicals some guidance on the question of the nature of the church. Since many evangelicals' experiences are highly parachurch, they often don't have a strongly developed ecclesiology. He seeks to offer some guidance as to how they might go about doing this.
The final part has to do with ethics, and this is where Gushee feels most at home since he has been teaching Christian ethics his entire academic career. The chapters deal with matters of behavior and character in relation to sex, politics, and race. It is the first that was the true sticking point for Gushee since he decided to fully embrace the cause of LGBTQ persons. The section on sex reveals his own changes in viewpoint, recognizing that the cultural changes require adaptation, though he still holds out the premise of covenant marriage as the long-term place of sexual expression (for both straight and gay folks). Regarding politics, he addresses the unfortunate alliance of white evangelicalism with conservative Republican politics, such that the politics tends to drive the religious expressions (as seen in the alliance with Donald Trump). Finally, there is the matter of race, which is truly sad. He addresses each of these areas with great care and seriousness.
He notes that when it comes to the three sections of the book, it is the first two sections that exhibit the newest ground for him, as he has been teaching ethics for years. But, it's the wrestling with authorities and theology that pushes him into new areas of exploration. That being said, he does an excellent job laying out a foundation for the Christian humanism he is offering to post-evangelicals as a way forward.
In his epilogue, he writes that the purpose of the book isn't simply to "dissect what I believe to be the failures of white evangelicalism," though he does that with great precision. Rather, he offers the book as a path toward clarity of understanding so that he and others like him might find solid ground upon which to build "a Christ-honoring life as a post-evangelical" (p. 170). That is the key, he writes this as a means of reaching out to those who aren't sure there is Christian life after evangelicalism. Some of us found that life in other places (for me that was Mainline Protestantism). Hopefully, this book will be a welcome guide to those seeking a way out of the maze that they've been caught in so they can find new life in Christ.
I am not alone in my migration out of white evangelicalism. My journey began long ago, while a student at a leading evangelical seminary (Fuller). It was there that I imbibed Barth and Liberation Theology. It was there that I came to support egalitarianism when it came to male-female roles as well as the full inclusion of women in ministry. I worked for evangelical institutions until being fired as a theology professor for being too liberal. It was then that my move into post-evangelicalism really began to take shape. The final straw that broke my connection with white evangelicalism came with the reealtion on my brother's part that he is gay. That led to a soul-searching moment and a realization that I had crossed a rubicon into the post-evangelical world. I could still value elements of that previous formation, but I couldn't go back.
I write this lengthy preface to my review of David Gushee's latest book "After Evangelicalism." What he writes here describes much of my own journey, though my break with evangelicalism came earlier than did his. Nevertheless, considering that he has been a leading evangelical ethicist teaching at Baptist institutions, his break has proven ground-breaking for so many. It is in this book that Gushee fully expresses his reasoning behind this break from the past. In many ways, the cause of his break is similar to mine. Like me, it was the realization that to follow Jesus meant embracing the full inclusion of LGBTQ persons in the life of the church. That vision was expressed in his book Changing Our Mind: Definitive 3rd Edition of the Landmark Call for Inclusion of LGBTQ Christians with Response to Critics.
"After Evangelicalism" is in many ways a polemical work. I don't mean that in a pejorative way. In this book, Gushee answers critics, reveals the negative elements of white evangelicalism, and offers a way forward out of evangelicalism. He wrote this in large part because he was encountering so many ex-evangelicals who didn't know what to do next. They no longer embraced evangelicalism but weren't sure about other options other than simply walking away from Christianity as a whole.
Gushee divides the book into three parts. First, he focuses on the question of authorities, beginning with Scripture and then exploring other authorities, including Tradition, Reason, and Experience. What he offers is often known as the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, though these four elements are embraced by many outside the Wesleyan movement (including my own Disciples movement). Considering that evangelicals are rooted in the Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura, this is an important starting point.
Part 2 is an exploration of theology, with chapters dealing with doctrines of God, Christology, and church. He explores these doctrinal concepts in conversation with the biblical narrative. In the chapter on the church, he offers post-evangelicals some guidance on the question of the nature of the church. Since many evangelicals' experiences are highly parachurch, they often don't have a strongly developed ecclesiology. He seeks to offer some guidance as to how they might go about doing this.
The final part has to do with ethics, and this is where Gushee feels most at home since he has been teaching Christian ethics his entire academic career. The chapters deal with matters of behavior and character in relation to sex, politics, and race. It is the first that was the true sticking point for Gushee since he decided to fully embrace the cause of LGBTQ persons. The section on sex reveals his own changes in viewpoint, recognizing that the cultural changes require adaptation, though he still holds out the premise of covenant marriage as the long-term place of sexual expression (for both straight and gay folks). Regarding politics, he addresses the unfortunate alliance of white evangelicalism with conservative Republican politics, such that the politics tends to drive the religious expressions (as seen in the alliance with Donald Trump). Finally, there is the matter of race, which is truly sad. He addresses each of these areas with great care and seriousness.
He notes that when it comes to the three sections of the book, it is the first two sections that exhibit the newest ground for him, as he has been teaching ethics for years. But, it's the wrestling with authorities and theology that pushes him into new areas of exploration. That being said, he does an excellent job laying out a foundation for the Christian humanism he is offering to post-evangelicals as a way forward.
In his epilogue, he writes that the purpose of the book isn't simply to "dissect what I believe to be the failures of white evangelicalism," though he does that with great precision. Rather, he offers the book as a path toward clarity of understanding so that he and others like him might find solid ground upon which to build "a Christ-honoring life as a post-evangelical" (p. 170). That is the key, he writes this as a means of reaching out to those who aren't sure there is Christian life after evangelicalism. Some of us found that life in other places (for me that was Mainline Protestantism). Hopefully, this book will be a welcome guide to those seeking a way out of the maze that they've been caught in so they can find new life in Christ.
September 21, 2020
I would like to thank NetGalley and Westminster John Knox Press for the opportunity to read After Evangelicalism in exchange for an honest review.
Non-fiction books about theology are not usually at the top of my to-read list, but the premise of After Evangelism was too intriguing to ignore. Now I’m glad I put this book on the top of my stack.
Before I requested the book through NetGalley I did some light googling of the author, David P Gushee. It seems natural to me that someone who is interested in a book with the subtitle “The Path to a New Christianity” would need to understand a little bit about the author’s background before reading the book. Thankfully, my online search quelled my skepticism and I picked up the book.
After Evangelicalism is a primer for those curious about post-evangelism. Each chapter builds on itself beginning with defining evangelism and Gushee’s personal story. The chapter about the history of evangelical churches and institutions was fascinating. Then the author dives into subjects about the Bible, Jesus, church, sexuality, politics, and race.
I appreciated the academic tone of the book even when I needed to look up the definitions of words or phrases. Gushee shares his personal story and his own research without patronizing the reader. It’s up to the reader to make up their own minds about the ideas he is presenting.
There are plenty of references to other texts and footnotes to encourage the reader to read more about each subject.
I read this book for two reasons. One, I wanted to know why evangelicals are voting for Trump. I’m so confused why people I know are voting for this person. After reading this book I listened to a podcast and the hosts repeated the same reasons listed in this book. I don’t agree with these voters, but now I understand a little more about their thought process.
I also read this book, because I want to pass on to my kids a faith in Jesus that will stay with them as they grow into adulthood. I don’t feel like the church faith I grew up with is good enough to pass on to my kids. This quote states exactly what I am doing for my kids.
The parts in the book about Christians needing to embrace science and humanities are refreshing, because I’ve already walked through this process with my homeschool. In the beginning of my homeschool journey I would buy Christian curriculum without questioning it’s bias or theology. As my kids have grown I know now that I need to use texts that embrace science and different points of views from BIPOC authors.
I don’t know if I agree with every idea or theology presented in the book, but it did help to answer my questions about why people believe these ideas. My advanced reader copy is a limited electronic book, but I plan to purchase the hardcopy so I can highlight passages and refer to this book again.
I would recommend this book to anyone who has questions about church and post-evangelism.
Non-fiction books about theology are not usually at the top of my to-read list, but the premise of After Evangelism was too intriguing to ignore. Now I’m glad I put this book on the top of my stack.
Before I requested the book through NetGalley I did some light googling of the author, David P Gushee. It seems natural to me that someone who is interested in a book with the subtitle “The Path to a New Christianity” would need to understand a little bit about the author’s background before reading the book. Thankfully, my online search quelled my skepticism and I picked up the book.
After Evangelicalism is a primer for those curious about post-evangelism. Each chapter builds on itself beginning with defining evangelism and Gushee’s personal story. The chapter about the history of evangelical churches and institutions was fascinating. Then the author dives into subjects about the Bible, Jesus, church, sexuality, politics, and race.
I appreciated the academic tone of the book even when I needed to look up the definitions of words or phrases. Gushee shares his personal story and his own research without patronizing the reader. It’s up to the reader to make up their own minds about the ideas he is presenting.
There are plenty of references to other texts and footnotes to encourage the reader to read more about each subject.
I read this book for two reasons. One, I wanted to know why evangelicals are voting for Trump. I’m so confused why people I know are voting for this person. After reading this book I listened to a podcast and the hosts repeated the same reasons listed in this book. I don’t agree with these voters, but now I understand a little more about their thought process.
I also read this book, because I want to pass on to my kids a faith in Jesus that will stay with them as they grow into adulthood. I don’t feel like the church faith I grew up with is good enough to pass on to my kids. This quote states exactly what I am doing for my kids.
“We can situate ourselves within the flow of Christian history, better understand where our particular version of Christianity fits within the broader tradition, and think seriously about the responsible transmission of Christian faith to the next generation ought to look like.”
The parts in the book about Christians needing to embrace science and humanities are refreshing, because I’ve already walked through this process with my homeschool. In the beginning of my homeschool journey I would buy Christian curriculum without questioning it’s bias or theology. As my kids have grown I know now that I need to use texts that embrace science and different points of views from BIPOC authors.
I don’t know if I agree with every idea or theology presented in the book, but it did help to answer my questions about why people believe these ideas. My advanced reader copy is a limited electronic book, but I plan to purchase the hardcopy so I can highlight passages and refer to this book again.
I would recommend this book to anyone who has questions about church and post-evangelism.
March 23, 2021
I'm more than a little disappointed by this – Gushee's project seems less "the path to a new Christianity" and more an attempt to steer those fleeing evangelicalism towards mainline protestantism. (Gushee calls it "Christian humanism," but functionally, it's mainline protestantism with some Catholic social doctrine.) Which isn't unfair — we all love Marilynne Robinson— but did leave me wondering the entire book "who on earth is this for?"
I have friends who left evangelicalism (or in some cases the church entirely) over the reasons Gushee discusses – Trump, purity culture, persistent white supremacy, evangelical distrust of science, and theological doubts. They are the sort of people Gushee explicitly says he's writing for, but I'm not sure I would feel comfortable recommending this book to any of them.
For one, Gushee has read and cites most of the right people, from Mark Noll to Linda Kay Klein to Peter Enns, but tends to present their work as a summary, or assumes familiarity with it, and then presents some reflections of his own. In most cases your time would be better spent reading the original authors.
A bigger issue is the way Gushee seems to write at, rather than with, his audience. The worst example was the chapter on church. Gushee opens with an acknowledgement that his readers may have left evangelicalism for a long list of good reasons, including sexual abuse and religious trauma, and then promptly says, basically, "nevertheless you should stay in church." The theological argument he goes on to make may be valid, but if you're attentive to and concerned about the trauma folks have suffered, you know that the last thing they need is a theological lecture encouraging them to stay or return to a potentially triggering situation. Maybe that's possible after therapy/healing, and maybe not, but a lecture will not be helpful.
On a more positive note, there is a very strong chapter on doing theology in light of the Holocaust that was the clear highlight of the book. It seemed obvious that Gushee connected to the material in a more personal, existential way than he did the other topics, and his passion showed. If that chapter was expanded into a book, I'd be interested in reading it.
I do hope After Evangelicalism proves helpful for some, but personally, I think there are better options.
I have friends who left evangelicalism (or in some cases the church entirely) over the reasons Gushee discusses – Trump, purity culture, persistent white supremacy, evangelical distrust of science, and theological doubts. They are the sort of people Gushee explicitly says he's writing for, but I'm not sure I would feel comfortable recommending this book to any of them.
For one, Gushee has read and cites most of the right people, from Mark Noll to Linda Kay Klein to Peter Enns, but tends to present their work as a summary, or assumes familiarity with it, and then presents some reflections of his own. In most cases your time would be better spent reading the original authors.
A bigger issue is the way Gushee seems to write at, rather than with, his audience. The worst example was the chapter on church. Gushee opens with an acknowledgement that his readers may have left evangelicalism for a long list of good reasons, including sexual abuse and religious trauma, and then promptly says, basically, "nevertheless you should stay in church." The theological argument he goes on to make may be valid, but if you're attentive to and concerned about the trauma folks have suffered, you know that the last thing they need is a theological lecture encouraging them to stay or return to a potentially triggering situation. Maybe that's possible after therapy/healing, and maybe not, but a lecture will not be helpful.
On a more positive note, there is a very strong chapter on doing theology in light of the Holocaust that was the clear highlight of the book. It seemed obvious that Gushee connected to the material in a more personal, existential way than he did the other topics, and his passion showed. If that chapter was expanded into a book, I'd be interested in reading it.
I do hope After Evangelicalism proves helpful for some, but personally, I think there are better options.
October 2, 2020
Provided by the publisher, Westminster John Knox Press, in exchange for an honest review.
After Evangelicalism is an interesting blend of academic examinations and casual explorations, all culminating in the argument that, not only is it possible to follow Jesus out of evangelicalism, but it is necessary to do so.
The author sets up his proposal against the backdrop of the current cultural climate we find ourselves in here in Trump's 2020 America. Then, he dives into subjects about the Bible, Jesus, the Church, sexuality, politics, and race. In each of these individual sections, Gushee communicates the historical evangelical stance on the issue, clarifies the problems with that stance, then suggests a way forward. At the end of each chapter, Gushee provides some key takeaways that help to summarize some of the major thoughts in that chapter.
As I read, I found myself going back and forth, at times being annoyed by what I felt were flagrant attempts to counterattack historical Christian beliefs and practices and at other times wholeheartedly agreeing with the defenses and suggestions posed. At the book's end, I still couldn't help but feel like Gushee had a serious axe to grind. Time and time again he took jabs at how evangelical Christianity in America has been. And believe me, I get it. I have, myself, identified as an evangelical Christian so I have seen firsthand the brokenness of the system. And while I agree with many of Gushee's points, I'm not sure if I will arrive at the same conclusions that he makes in this book.
While I don't think After Evangelicalism should be taken as Bible (sorry for the pun), I do think it is a worthy read that is generally well-researched and written, and will hopefully help spark many necessary conversations amongst pre-, current, and post-evangelicals in the shifting landscape of American Christianity.
After Evangelicalism is an interesting blend of academic examinations and casual explorations, all culminating in the argument that, not only is it possible to follow Jesus out of evangelicalism, but it is necessary to do so.
The author sets up his proposal against the backdrop of the current cultural climate we find ourselves in here in Trump's 2020 America. Then, he dives into subjects about the Bible, Jesus, the Church, sexuality, politics, and race. In each of these individual sections, Gushee communicates the historical evangelical stance on the issue, clarifies the problems with that stance, then suggests a way forward. At the end of each chapter, Gushee provides some key takeaways that help to summarize some of the major thoughts in that chapter.
As I read, I found myself going back and forth, at times being annoyed by what I felt were flagrant attempts to counterattack historical Christian beliefs and practices and at other times wholeheartedly agreeing with the defenses and suggestions posed. At the book's end, I still couldn't help but feel like Gushee had a serious axe to grind. Time and time again he took jabs at how evangelical Christianity in America has been. And believe me, I get it. I have, myself, identified as an evangelical Christian so I have seen firsthand the brokenness of the system. And while I agree with many of Gushee's points, I'm not sure if I will arrive at the same conclusions that he makes in this book.
While I don't think After Evangelicalism should be taken as Bible (sorry for the pun), I do think it is a worthy read that is generally well-researched and written, and will hopefully help spark many necessary conversations amongst pre-, current, and post-evangelicals in the shifting landscape of American Christianity.
August 30, 2020
David Gushee has been one of the scholars of this post-evangelical moment, and with this book, he is one of our leading pastors as well. Gushee is helping us find a way to stay Christian while leaving modern evangelicalism behind. I find three chapters especially helpful. On the Bible, in discussing evangelicalism's historically naive rigidity, Gushee suggests an honest alternative: continuing to read the Bible as the church's book, being honest about our "canons within the canon," the scripture we look to with most authority, while honoring all the other ways we learn and discern as well. In his chapter on God, Gushee writes of Rabbi Irving Greenberg's "burning children" test for speaking about God, that anything we say about God should be able to be said in the presence of the descendants of the victims of unspeakable human evil. The Christian humanism Gushee develops meets this test in a way that the Neo-Calvinism and much else within evangelicalism never will. Lastly, Gushee's chapter on sex - encouraging a sexual ethic that prizes covenant and commitment while being realistic about today's complexities and realities - is really useful.
Like Gushee, I too want to live for Jesus until I die, and to do so in ways that are honest, humble, and decent, living for the well-being of others and this earth as well. I'm thankful in Dr. Gushee's work for another partner who helps chart that course.
Like Gushee, I too want to live for Jesus until I die, and to do so in ways that are honest, humble, and decent, living for the well-being of others and this earth as well. I'm thankful in Dr. Gushee's work for another partner who helps chart that course.
April 8, 2021
I've read a lot of books in this genre. This is the most comprehensive and thorough for sure. I loved the takeaways in each chapter, the level of research that went into this book, and the post-evangelical section in the back. A great read for ex=evangelicals and I think for evangelicals who are wondering why people are leaving evangelicalism.
August 30, 2020
The book plots a healthy course for former evangelicals or post-evangelicals, a path that can end wanderings and bring renewal and flourishing.
The assessment of Evangelicalism’s history and character is well-done and like the rest of the book, thoroughly documented. The theological proposals on Scripture, God, Jesus, and the church are sound and persuasive. The Jesus chapter was especially stimulating and helpful. The chapters on politics, sex, and race are insightful and call us to wise and gracious stances. If you have read several of his previous works, the race presentation will be newest. I’m grateful for the careful, profound analyses and the challenging calls to faithful kingdom living.
The “Takeaways” summary ending each chapter is a splendid teaching device and should be very helpful for discussions.
The assessment of Evangelicalism’s history and character is well-done and like the rest of the book, thoroughly documented. The theological proposals on Scripture, God, Jesus, and the church are sound and persuasive. The Jesus chapter was especially stimulating and helpful. The chapters on politics, sex, and race are insightful and call us to wise and gracious stances. If you have read several of his previous works, the race presentation will be newest. I’m grateful for the careful, profound analyses and the challenging calls to faithful kingdom living.
The “Takeaways” summary ending each chapter is a splendid teaching device and should be very helpful for discussions.
September 11, 2020
I really wanted to like this book. Gushee's diagnoses of the problems of American Evangelicalism are spot on. But if you're going to use the subtitle, "The Path To a NEW Christianity," (emphasis mine) you better bring the heat and Gushee simply does not. The "path" he describes is basically just a call to mainline protestantism with some cherry picking from Catholic social dogma and a nod to liberation theology. In the end, the book is yet another tired call to leave the Egypt of Evangelicalism for the Promised Land of Mainline Protestantism (cleverly packaged as "Christian humanism.") Post-Evangelicals may want to consider spending more time in the Sinai Wilderness.
September 15, 2020
Before I review what I believe to be a useful and insightful book, I must make it clear that I have never been an Evangelical Christian. I was raised Broad- to High- Church Episcopalean, and have been a Celtic Catholic (with emphasis on the “Catholic”) for forty years. I am not Gushee’s target audience, and I have spent my life looking at Evangelicals from outside, not always liking what I saw of their theology and politics. So I write this as a fellow Christian but definitely an outsider.
The author, on the other hand, is most definitely writing as an insider, to people like himself. He is not writing, “Please don’t go!”, but rather “Welcome to the big world outside the Evangelical tent! Where can you do now that you are out here?”
Rather than just jumping into the here-and-now, Gushee provides the outsider (and, I suppose, most lifelong Evangelicals) with a necessary tour of the history of the movement, starting way back before it was a department of the Republican party (!), back when it was not unusual for Evangelicals to be what would now be called progressive on social issues. In line with his general attitude toward Tradition and history—it matters a lot, but the future matters even more—he does not stop there, but he spends the rest of the book offering practical ways forward by helping the reader think differently about what authentic Christianity can be and can look like.
He offers Christian Humanism as a framework upon which to build a vibrant post-Evangelical Christianity in which the Christian can feel at home by maintaining core moral values. It is these moral values, which are often at odds with the limited morality taught by Evangelicalism, which Gushee sees as the impelling force driving intelligent, loving people out of their former church hones. Values like belief in Truth as represented by science (i.e., the real world), compassion for LGBTQ+ people, hatred of systemic racism, and others.
Gushee elevates compassion and real-world concerns over rigid traditions of biblical interpretation. As the keystone of this, he suggest that no theological statement should be made which could not be made in the presence of a child being burned to death at Auschwitz. I would add: or a black man being lynched by a white mob, or a gay teen dying on the street after his Christian parents disowned him.
Gushee spends the third and final part of his book dealing with specific theological issues relating to sex, politics, and race. These discussions are, it seems to me, perhaps an addendum to the book. Having talked about his own experience and that of others, and having offered the outlines of a way forward with new ways of thinking about the meaning of the Bible and the Christian Faith, he has actually ended his thesis. “But wait! There’s more!”
As a gift to the reader he offers the detailed discussions of sex, politics, and race. To the poor ex-Evangelical who has an inkling of right from wrong but no idea of how to process that idea within a Christian context—to this sad person who has fled what he or she now sees as a repressive and unrealistic, even immoral, system of thought—he says: “Look! It is possible to think about and act on these issues from a genuinely Christian perspective without rigidity, moralism, superiority, or fear of the real world.” I think his handling of these touchy matters works well. I think he would convince me, were I the one to whom he writes. I hope it is as convincing for those who need this book.
If you are an ex-Evangelical, I highly recommend After Evangelicalism, especially if you are willing to read through a bit of academic writing (the author is a professor of Christian ethics, and, sadly, it shows.) Not having been in your shoes I can not vouch for the helpfulness of his arguments, but I hope they will prove useful.
The author, on the other hand, is most definitely writing as an insider, to people like himself. He is not writing, “Please don’t go!”, but rather “Welcome to the big world outside the Evangelical tent! Where can you do now that you are out here?”
Rather than just jumping into the here-and-now, Gushee provides the outsider (and, I suppose, most lifelong Evangelicals) with a necessary tour of the history of the movement, starting way back before it was a department of the Republican party (!), back when it was not unusual for Evangelicals to be what would now be called progressive on social issues. In line with his general attitude toward Tradition and history—it matters a lot, but the future matters even more—he does not stop there, but he spends the rest of the book offering practical ways forward by helping the reader think differently about what authentic Christianity can be and can look like.
He offers Christian Humanism as a framework upon which to build a vibrant post-Evangelical Christianity in which the Christian can feel at home by maintaining core moral values. It is these moral values, which are often at odds with the limited morality taught by Evangelicalism, which Gushee sees as the impelling force driving intelligent, loving people out of their former church hones. Values like belief in Truth as represented by science (i.e., the real world), compassion for LGBTQ+ people, hatred of systemic racism, and others.
Gushee elevates compassion and real-world concerns over rigid traditions of biblical interpretation. As the keystone of this, he suggest that no theological statement should be made which could not be made in the presence of a child being burned to death at Auschwitz. I would add: or a black man being lynched by a white mob, or a gay teen dying on the street after his Christian parents disowned him.
Gushee spends the third and final part of his book dealing with specific theological issues relating to sex, politics, and race. These discussions are, it seems to me, perhaps an addendum to the book. Having talked about his own experience and that of others, and having offered the outlines of a way forward with new ways of thinking about the meaning of the Bible and the Christian Faith, he has actually ended his thesis. “But wait! There’s more!”
As a gift to the reader he offers the detailed discussions of sex, politics, and race. To the poor ex-Evangelical who has an inkling of right from wrong but no idea of how to process that idea within a Christian context—to this sad person who has fled what he or she now sees as a repressive and unrealistic, even immoral, system of thought—he says: “Look! It is possible to think about and act on these issues from a genuinely Christian perspective without rigidity, moralism, superiority, or fear of the real world.” I think his handling of these touchy matters works well. I think he would convince me, were I the one to whom he writes. I hope it is as convincing for those who need this book.
If you are an ex-Evangelical, I highly recommend After Evangelicalism, especially if you are willing to read through a bit of academic writing (the author is a professor of Christian ethics, and, sadly, it shows.) Not having been in your shoes I can not vouch for the helpfulness of his arguments, but I hope they will prove useful.
August 23, 2020
I'm embarrassed to admit that David Gushee, Distinguished University Professor Christian Ethics at Mercer University and the current president of the American Academy of Religion, wasn't on my radar despite what I would like to consider to be a rather pronounced effort to recognize and become familiar with contemporary Christianity's more progressive voices.
However, I saw Gushee's name cross my Twitter feed when someone talked about this book, "After Evangelicalism: The Path to a New Christianity," and after a quick browsing of its subject matter decided to check out the book for myself.
If you've followed my writing for any length of time at all, you know that I've had a rather chaotic and not particularly positive journey with the world of organized religion. From a childhood spent as a Jehovah's Witness, the first of two paths to kick me out, into John Wimber's Vineyard movement, second of two paths to kick me out, I then moved toward an extended period in a New Thought church, where I was ordained, and, with a couple diversions, a seminary journey of licensed ministry with Church of the Brethren before my current tiptoeing between the Unitarian-Universalists and the Presbyterians (USA).
It wasn't really until reading Kate Bowler's "Blessed" that I could solidly identify some of the patterns, mostly dysfunctional, that led me to repeatedly head down theological roads that I inevitably found disappointing and from which I seemed to inevitably get hurt.
"After Evangelical" does, indeed, serve up Gushee's proposal for a path to a new Christianity, a way to set aside our disillusionment with an increasingly ego-driven and decidedly non-Jesus centered evangelical path and move toward a living relationship with Christ that is intellectually consistent and morally robust.
Quite simply, "After Evangelicalism" enthusiastically proposes that it is not just possible to follow Jesus out of evangelicalism but it is necessary to do so.
Thus, how you feel about evangelicalism may very well help determine how you receive "After Evangelicalism." If you're offended by anything I've already written, then it's unlikely you'll find Gushee's proposal satisfying. After all, you'll be unlikely to believe there needs to be life after evangelicalism.
In fact, you're probably thinking evangelicalism is just fine...maybe even better than ever.
On the other hand, if you're troubled by the evangelical embrace of President Trump and if you have more than a few concerns about the evangelical rejection of climate change and the seemingly inconsistent messages about what seems to qualify as "pro-life," then "After Evangelicalism" may very well help you put words to those feelings you've been having about faith, church, your own journey, and how to make sense of it all.
Truthfully, Gushee spends very little time talking about President Trump, though it's pretty clear that, as the old saying goes, that's likely the straw that broke the camel's back. Gushee, who spent a good majority of his life in the evangelical world via his Southern Baptist tradition, began veering away from identifying as evangelical the more progressive his writings and his theological voice became including his call for full acceptance and inclusion of the LGBTQ community that pretty much rendered him an untouchable in the evangelical world.
"After Evangelicalism" is a fairly weird mishmash of a book. It's simultaneously an academic endeavor and a surprisingly casual one. In fact, in terms of style Bowler and Gushee could easily be literary cousins given their abilities to write with both remarkable intellectual depth and emotional honesty.
Gushee spends a good amount of "After Evangelicalism" exploring precisely what went wrong with U.S. white evangelicalism by exploring such relevant areas as evangelical identity, biblical interpretation, church life, sexuality, politics, and race. Gushee packs an awful lot of information into "After Evangelicalism," thus at times the collection is both more of a primer to subjects that inevitably require more depth and also a bit of an overview of Gushee's previous writings. Once he's explored these subjects, Gushee begins vividly and passionately proposing new ways of living, belonging, and believing. Each chapter ends rather nicely with a sort of summarized collection of "takeaways," offering a solid framework for the material at hand.
Many who write from a more progressive theological space tend to shy aware from more "churchy" language, but Gushee embraces it. Now attending a more progressive Baptist church along with his wife's Catholic Mass, Gushee clearly still embraces the beliefs and practices of his organized faith while also accepting that the word evangelical no longer applies and, in fact, he defines and embraces the path of a Christian humanist.
"After Evangelicalism" is not likely to be a book with which you'll always agree. Gushee's relentlessly pushing forward here and boldly embracing subjects that most churches don't even talk about let alone actually take a position on. Indeed, I didn't always find myself in agreement with Gushee - I was particularly troubled, for example, by his open embrace of LGBTQ and transgender Christians but then somehow finding space to remove polyamorists from the circle with tremendous intention. To be honest, it just felt unnecessarily mean-spirited to be so specific about it.
There were other times I found myself mumbling "Yes!" or "I don't agree," but that's really part of the joy of a book like "After Evangelicalism." It's a joy hearing and exploring new ideas and following that up with thought, prayer, research, and discussion.
Indeed, "After Evangelicalism" is a book that practically begs to be studied and discussed.
To use Gushee's own language, if there's one thing I take away from "After Evangelicalism," and it's a huge takeaway, it's this central idea of Christian humanism. Gushee explains it beautifully and it explains so much so perfectly about my own journey, beliefs, practices, and why despite multiple challenging experiences I continue to believe, explore, follow, and worship. It feels, on a certain level, like I have words to describe my faith journey.
While at times I wished "After Evangelicalism" would dig even deeper within its subjects and there were times I wished for a lengthier book that would have allowed for a more relaxed presentation, "After Evangelicalism" is undoubtedly a book I will refer to again and again and a book that has already left me in deep contemplation and feeling more peaceful than ever with my chaotic spiritual past and a present that feels like it was worth all that chaos.
However, I saw Gushee's name cross my Twitter feed when someone talked about this book, "After Evangelicalism: The Path to a New Christianity," and after a quick browsing of its subject matter decided to check out the book for myself.
If you've followed my writing for any length of time at all, you know that I've had a rather chaotic and not particularly positive journey with the world of organized religion. From a childhood spent as a Jehovah's Witness, the first of two paths to kick me out, into John Wimber's Vineyard movement, second of two paths to kick me out, I then moved toward an extended period in a New Thought church, where I was ordained, and, with a couple diversions, a seminary journey of licensed ministry with Church of the Brethren before my current tiptoeing between the Unitarian-Universalists and the Presbyterians (USA).
It wasn't really until reading Kate Bowler's "Blessed" that I could solidly identify some of the patterns, mostly dysfunctional, that led me to repeatedly head down theological roads that I inevitably found disappointing and from which I seemed to inevitably get hurt.
"After Evangelical" does, indeed, serve up Gushee's proposal for a path to a new Christianity, a way to set aside our disillusionment with an increasingly ego-driven and decidedly non-Jesus centered evangelical path and move toward a living relationship with Christ that is intellectually consistent and morally robust.
Quite simply, "After Evangelicalism" enthusiastically proposes that it is not just possible to follow Jesus out of evangelicalism but it is necessary to do so.
Thus, how you feel about evangelicalism may very well help determine how you receive "After Evangelicalism." If you're offended by anything I've already written, then it's unlikely you'll find Gushee's proposal satisfying. After all, you'll be unlikely to believe there needs to be life after evangelicalism.
In fact, you're probably thinking evangelicalism is just fine...maybe even better than ever.
On the other hand, if you're troubled by the evangelical embrace of President Trump and if you have more than a few concerns about the evangelical rejection of climate change and the seemingly inconsistent messages about what seems to qualify as "pro-life," then "After Evangelicalism" may very well help you put words to those feelings you've been having about faith, church, your own journey, and how to make sense of it all.
Truthfully, Gushee spends very little time talking about President Trump, though it's pretty clear that, as the old saying goes, that's likely the straw that broke the camel's back. Gushee, who spent a good majority of his life in the evangelical world via his Southern Baptist tradition, began veering away from identifying as evangelical the more progressive his writings and his theological voice became including his call for full acceptance and inclusion of the LGBTQ community that pretty much rendered him an untouchable in the evangelical world.
"After Evangelicalism" is a fairly weird mishmash of a book. It's simultaneously an academic endeavor and a surprisingly casual one. In fact, in terms of style Bowler and Gushee could easily be literary cousins given their abilities to write with both remarkable intellectual depth and emotional honesty.
Gushee spends a good amount of "After Evangelicalism" exploring precisely what went wrong with U.S. white evangelicalism by exploring such relevant areas as evangelical identity, biblical interpretation, church life, sexuality, politics, and race. Gushee packs an awful lot of information into "After Evangelicalism," thus at times the collection is both more of a primer to subjects that inevitably require more depth and also a bit of an overview of Gushee's previous writings. Once he's explored these subjects, Gushee begins vividly and passionately proposing new ways of living, belonging, and believing. Each chapter ends rather nicely with a sort of summarized collection of "takeaways," offering a solid framework for the material at hand.
Many who write from a more progressive theological space tend to shy aware from more "churchy" language, but Gushee embraces it. Now attending a more progressive Baptist church along with his wife's Catholic Mass, Gushee clearly still embraces the beliefs and practices of his organized faith while also accepting that the word evangelical no longer applies and, in fact, he defines and embraces the path of a Christian humanist.
"After Evangelicalism" is not likely to be a book with which you'll always agree. Gushee's relentlessly pushing forward here and boldly embracing subjects that most churches don't even talk about let alone actually take a position on. Indeed, I didn't always find myself in agreement with Gushee - I was particularly troubled, for example, by his open embrace of LGBTQ and transgender Christians but then somehow finding space to remove polyamorists from the circle with tremendous intention. To be honest, it just felt unnecessarily mean-spirited to be so specific about it.
There were other times I found myself mumbling "Yes!" or "I don't agree," but that's really part of the joy of a book like "After Evangelicalism." It's a joy hearing and exploring new ideas and following that up with thought, prayer, research, and discussion.
Indeed, "After Evangelicalism" is a book that practically begs to be studied and discussed.
To use Gushee's own language, if there's one thing I take away from "After Evangelicalism," and it's a huge takeaway, it's this central idea of Christian humanism. Gushee explains it beautifully and it explains so much so perfectly about my own journey, beliefs, practices, and why despite multiple challenging experiences I continue to believe, explore, follow, and worship. It feels, on a certain level, like I have words to describe my faith journey.
While at times I wished "After Evangelicalism" would dig even deeper within its subjects and there were times I wished for a lengthier book that would have allowed for a more relaxed presentation, "After Evangelicalism" is undoubtedly a book I will refer to again and again and a book that has already left me in deep contemplation and feeling more peaceful than ever with my chaotic spiritual past and a present that feels like it was worth all that chaos.
August 21, 2020
After Evangelicalisn: The Path to a New Christianity
by David P. Gushee
David P. Gushee is a Christian Ethicist who has written a scholarly and challenging look at the story of Evangelicalism. Like the writer, I am an “Exvangelical” compelled to speak up about where we’ve gone wrong. Gushee covers his topic honestly and intelligently, without preachiness.
I’m pretty sure I’m right in the sweet spot for Gushee’s target audience: a lifelong Christian, raised in a conservative, evangelical, Swedish Baptist Church tradition. I had difficulty remaining in the evangelical camp, and found myself in exile for about 20 years. The moment Gushee invoked the names of Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, the late Rachel Held Evans, and Nadia Bolz-Weber, I felt at home.
The book is carefully and thoughtfully organized, and is thoroughly footnoted from beginning to end. Composed of three sections, with three chapters per section,
this book is willing to confront today’s issues head-on: biblical inerrancy, patriarchy, climate change, women’s rights, social justice, racism, and sexuality. He does not shy away from uncomfortable topics. There is also an excellent “Takeaways” section at the end of each chapter. His vision of Christian Humanism is enormously appealing.
I read through the book quickly at first, but will want to circle back around for a much more leisurely exploration of Gushee’s ideas, notes, and scripture references. I loved this book, and highly recommend it to anyone wishing to better understand the history, impact, and possible future of this influential subculture.
by David P. Gushee
David P. Gushee is a Christian Ethicist who has written a scholarly and challenging look at the story of Evangelicalism. Like the writer, I am an “Exvangelical” compelled to speak up about where we’ve gone wrong. Gushee covers his topic honestly and intelligently, without preachiness.
I’m pretty sure I’m right in the sweet spot for Gushee’s target audience: a lifelong Christian, raised in a conservative, evangelical, Swedish Baptist Church tradition. I had difficulty remaining in the evangelical camp, and found myself in exile for about 20 years. The moment Gushee invoked the names of Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, the late Rachel Held Evans, and Nadia Bolz-Weber, I felt at home.
The book is carefully and thoughtfully organized, and is thoroughly footnoted from beginning to end. Composed of three sections, with three chapters per section,
this book is willing to confront today’s issues head-on: biblical inerrancy, patriarchy, climate change, women’s rights, social justice, racism, and sexuality. He does not shy away from uncomfortable topics. There is also an excellent “Takeaways” section at the end of each chapter. His vision of Christian Humanism is enormously appealing.
I read through the book quickly at first, but will want to circle back around for a much more leisurely exploration of Gushee’s ideas, notes, and scripture references. I loved this book, and highly recommend it to anyone wishing to better understand the history, impact, and possible future of this influential subculture.
September 29, 2020
3.5⭐️
*Release date August 25, 2020
*234 pages
*Westminster John Knox Press
This is my first book by this author and I had no idea what he was going to talk about. I will give him credit for feeling convicted enough to share his passion about these issues. They do need to be thought through. But I don’t think we should relabel ourselves because of it.
I live in SC, but grew up in Los Angeles. I’ve often been labeled a liberal Christian. And I get it. Things could of been handled better. I haven’t done all the biblical research that he suggested, but after finishing this I don’t agree with most of what he said.
I would like for us to really see people and their struggles. We spend to much time trying to fix people when we need to let God do that through his word.
I’ve personally been shamed, molested, abused physically, mentally and wasn’t a Christian most of my life. I’ve also done a lot of drugs and have hurt many people with all my damage. I don’t have Christian parents and didn’t even think about God as a child. So, the last thing I need is a lecture. God meets us with these issues right where we are. Biblical truth guides us. I have great comfort in that.
Thank you NETGALLEY and the publisher for this ARC, in exchange for my honest review. ♥️
*Release date August 25, 2020
*234 pages
*Westminster John Knox Press
This is my first book by this author and I had no idea what he was going to talk about. I will give him credit for feeling convicted enough to share his passion about these issues. They do need to be thought through. But I don’t think we should relabel ourselves because of it.
I live in SC, but grew up in Los Angeles. I’ve often been labeled a liberal Christian. And I get it. Things could of been handled better. I haven’t done all the biblical research that he suggested, but after finishing this I don’t agree with most of what he said.
I would like for us to really see people and their struggles. We spend to much time trying to fix people when we need to let God do that through his word.
I’ve personally been shamed, molested, abused physically, mentally and wasn’t a Christian most of my life. I’ve also done a lot of drugs and have hurt many people with all my damage. I don’t have Christian parents and didn’t even think about God as a child. So, the last thing I need is a lecture. God meets us with these issues right where we are. Biblical truth guides us. I have great comfort in that.
Thank you NETGALLEY and the publisher for this ARC, in exchange for my honest review. ♥️
July 12, 2024
Pretty good. Made me realize the broader community that has rejected the predominant evangelical white church since the 90s.
The 81% white evangelical vote for Trump is still mind boggling to me.
This book denounces a lot and affirms that we should meet people where they are at, which I appreciated.
I’m reading about incarceration right now too, which also has some troubling crossover with Trump supporters.
The 81% white evangelical vote for Trump is still mind boggling to me.
This book denounces a lot and affirms that we should meet people where they are at, which I appreciated.
I’m reading about incarceration right now too, which also has some troubling crossover with Trump supporters.
Read
September 1, 2023This one is complicated for me to rate. Therefore I won't. This book is incredibly readable and engaging. His criticism of evangelicalism is solid and valuable. That being said I largely disagreed with his solutions as I feel they went too far. If Evangelism is a ditch on the side of the road then his proposals feel like another ditch all together. That doesn't mean these ideas shouldn't be engaged and listened to though. I found value in many of his suggestions in listening to others. Be that tradition and history, or the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament or Catholic thought. There is much that can be learned from others. Something white evangelism has failed to do.
May 12, 2021
Many evangelicals have become dissatisfied with where the movement has gone. For some it is the politics, but there are other issues as well. Is there something after evangelicalism? Gushee does a good job of looking at the problems of evangelicalism and sharing his journey. Many diehard evangelicals will hate this book but I believe there is something for even committed evangelicals to learn from this book.
February 20, 2021
7/10
The purpose of this book is to decouple Christianity from evangelicalism, and many of the presumptions within Evangelicalism that are confused with Christianity. Simply put, Jesus was not an evangelical. What then is the difference between Christs theology and the American evangelicals? This is the question Gushee attempts to answer here.
He tackles a variety of issues from and reasons for leaving like the following: “Some leave over the harm LGBTQ people and their families have experienced. Others leave over patriarchal teachings. Some leave over the damaging effects of purity culture. Others leave over white evangelical racism. Some say: all of the above."
“We need to discard the belief that the Bible is inerrant.” I agree with this provisionally. If he means that there are legitimate textual errors in the Bible, that much is obvious. If he means there is a real possibility that some passages we take as history are more literary and symbolic, even then I’m inclined not to argue. If however, he means (as he says for certain later), that the Bible must be reinterpreted by each individual, essentially putting my critique above its authority, then yeah, I’m out.
I agree with much of his process, and specifically the churches ties to the political right are extremely troubling for me as the church should be apolitical. Much of what he says is valuable, and a harsh mirror for an evangelical worldview that rarely analyzes itself. The issue however, is that Gushee does not take a non-biased perspective. He does not approach the issue from an open neutrality (which is impossible of course) but injects a more liberal (theologically) perspective into the conversation. I don’t disagree with much of what he says, and don’t necessarily have an issue with this, but the manifestation with Gushee tends towards a person centric worldview, rather than Christ centric. Specifically Gushee calls Christians to discard difficult passages regarding God commanding deaths, and rulings on homosexuality, rather then wrestle with these sections. That’s a dangerous path that I can’t follow him on.
“Students at Christian colleges have higher rates of crisis of faith then those at secular colleges.”
“But under then-youthful new president R. Albert Mohler Jr., the school lurched to the right and threw many of us off the bus.” Did not expect Al to catch a stray here but I laughed.
The purpose of this book is to decouple Christianity from evangelicalism, and many of the presumptions within Evangelicalism that are confused with Christianity. Simply put, Jesus was not an evangelical. What then is the difference between Christs theology and the American evangelicals? This is the question Gushee attempts to answer here.
He tackles a variety of issues from and reasons for leaving like the following: “Some leave over the harm LGBTQ people and their families have experienced. Others leave over patriarchal teachings. Some leave over the damaging effects of purity culture. Others leave over white evangelical racism. Some say: all of the above."
“We need to discard the belief that the Bible is inerrant.” I agree with this provisionally. If he means that there are legitimate textual errors in the Bible, that much is obvious. If he means there is a real possibility that some passages we take as history are more literary and symbolic, even then I’m inclined not to argue. If however, he means (as he says for certain later), that the Bible must be reinterpreted by each individual, essentially putting my critique above its authority, then yeah, I’m out.
I agree with much of his process, and specifically the churches ties to the political right are extremely troubling for me as the church should be apolitical. Much of what he says is valuable, and a harsh mirror for an evangelical worldview that rarely analyzes itself. The issue however, is that Gushee does not take a non-biased perspective. He does not approach the issue from an open neutrality (which is impossible of course) but injects a more liberal (theologically) perspective into the conversation. I don’t disagree with much of what he says, and don’t necessarily have an issue with this, but the manifestation with Gushee tends towards a person centric worldview, rather than Christ centric. Specifically Gushee calls Christians to discard difficult passages regarding God commanding deaths, and rulings on homosexuality, rather then wrestle with these sections. That’s a dangerous path that I can’t follow him on.
“Students at Christian colleges have higher rates of crisis of faith then those at secular colleges.”
“But under then-youthful new president R. Albert Mohler Jr., the school lurched to the right and threw many of us off the bus.” Did not expect Al to catch a stray here but I laughed.
October 19, 2020
There are few books that do as good of a job in clearly and concisely tackling a topic with sincerity and wisdom as After Evangelicalism. With copious notes that reveal a great deal of study but are not overly scholarly, David Gushee offers a resource for anyone and everyone with questions about or mighty struggles with evangelicalism.
Some of the subjects that stand out to me are the way he presents evangelicalism as, ultimately, a rebranding of the fundamentalism of the early 1900s. He offers a good review of the posturing of biblical inerrancy. Not to be missed is a review of paleo-orthodoxy, that is, the movement within evangelicalism to legitimate itself based only on early church tradition. Both approaches discount real-lived human experience and knowledge, and our capacity to interpret scripture, tradition, and experience with reason, or some would say, common sense.
There is so much worth exploring and slowly considering in this book. For this reviewer, my biggest takeaway is that evangelicalism in the US is a highly conditioned identity. It’s an identity embedded in power relationships (you know what they are), and it often has nothing to do with being a disciple of Jesus, which is clearly of paramount importance to the author. Christian faith is so much more than evangelicalism, and, after reading this potent book, it becomes odd to think the two have been used interchangeably.
Some of the subjects that stand out to me are the way he presents evangelicalism as, ultimately, a rebranding of the fundamentalism of the early 1900s. He offers a good review of the posturing of biblical inerrancy. Not to be missed is a review of paleo-orthodoxy, that is, the movement within evangelicalism to legitimate itself based only on early church tradition. Both approaches discount real-lived human experience and knowledge, and our capacity to interpret scripture, tradition, and experience with reason, or some would say, common sense.
There is so much worth exploring and slowly considering in this book. For this reviewer, my biggest takeaway is that evangelicalism in the US is a highly conditioned identity. It’s an identity embedded in power relationships (you know what they are), and it often has nothing to do with being a disciple of Jesus, which is clearly of paramount importance to the author. Christian faith is so much more than evangelicalism, and, after reading this potent book, it becomes odd to think the two have been used interchangeably.
August 13, 2020
Liberal (Maybe Even Post-Christian?) Baptist Faith And Message. The Southern Baptist Convention's Baptist Faith and Message is the doctrinal screed for the group, listing various points of beliefs with proof-texted "reference verses" claiming to provide "evidence" that this belief is grounded in their view of the Bible. As someone who was a Southern Baptist for the first couple decades of my life, it is a document I'm pretty familiar with. Here, Gushee effectively recreates it for the more anti-white-male crowd, arguing (correctly) against prosperity theology while openly embracing humanist and liberation theology. Ultimately, he makes enough solid points to be worthy of discussion, but due to the constant proof-texting (a flaw in many similar works, and one that in my own personal war against is an automatic one star deduction in my reviews) and near-constant near straw man level attacks against more conservative theologies is to be read with a healthy amount of skepticism. That noted, as I generally try to do with such texts, I'm trying to be a bit balanced here. A much more conservative reader will probably find much more to attack in this text, and a much more liberal reader will probably find much more to love. Overall a solid work of its type, and recommended for any interested in such discussions.
August 17, 2020
This is a very informative read that will challenge some people’s beliefs. It was eye opening for me for sure. I am a strong believer in separation of church & state & love when Gushee says, “The church’s role under God is to pre Co & live the gospel, & to love God & neighbor. Church & state have overlapping arenas of concern but different responsibilities. When they meet, both need to remember who they are, & what their respective responsibilities are, & to respect the boundaries.” Also when he mentions that we have missed our opportunity to repent, it makes me sad. I’m hopeful that we are working toward repentance with a black female vice presidential candidate. We will see where that leads us.
Recommend reading this book if you think you might need your eyes opened to where Evangelical Christianity is headed.
Recommend reading this book if you think you might need your eyes opened to where Evangelical Christianity is headed.
September 9, 2020
I am fairly confident that Dr. Gushee and I disagree on a number of things, many of which will likely relate back to my operating out of a broadly radicalist anarcho-pacifist framework where he seems to situate himself as a principled political centrist.
Despite that I am eager to recommend this book across the board. Gushee's analysis of American Evangelicalism is spot on and his proposals for moving forward are broadly compelling and will serve well as a starting point for the the many people who are finding their way out of white American Evangelicalism. And I believe that that is his hope with this book. After Evangelicalism is neither a book of questions without answers or of strongly asserted confident answers, rather it is a book or reflection and informed recommendations.
Despite that I am eager to recommend this book across the board. Gushee's analysis of American Evangelicalism is spot on and his proposals for moving forward are broadly compelling and will serve well as a starting point for the the many people who are finding their way out of white American Evangelicalism. And I believe that that is his hope with this book. After Evangelicalism is neither a book of questions without answers or of strongly asserted confident answers, rather it is a book or reflection and informed recommendations.
September 17, 2020
I have received this title via NetGalley and publishers in exchange for an honest review
This book was surprising in a lot of ways. The writing was almost flawless. The author explained his points very clearly. He provided ample support for each argument. I liked how he incorporated other parts of life to justify and support what he was saying, including science and politics.
This book was surprising in a lot of ways. The writing was almost flawless. The author explained his points very clearly. He provided ample support for each argument. I liked how he incorporated other parts of life to justify and support what he was saying, including science and politics.
December 7, 2020
This book was very helpful in my late-life quest to find a foothold for my faith without using the "Evangelical" tag. I can't call myself by that label anymore. Gushee uses the term "Christian Humanist" and that is pretty close to home for me. I highly recommend this book to anyone on a similar journey to mine.
September 8, 2020
Really solid work. Quite compatible with the revised theology I've been building up over the last few years, and definitely fills in some important gaps. David Gushee, to me, represents the very best in post-evangelical thought from my former tradition (SBC).
December 15, 2020
For people who need a way to distinguish their faith from the culturally entrenched position evangelicalism finds itself in, Gushee offers a way to rethink what being a believer is.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 142 reviews