The formation of identity groups has divided people throughout history. Whether by geography, biology or idealogical identification, the creation of the \u2018we\u2019 is simultaneously dependent on the creation of a \u2018them\u2019. The bulk of scripture leans heavily on the \u2018we\u2019 being the chosen people of God\u2014the Israelites who grow to identify as the Jewish people. Every one else becomes identified as a Gentile. A Gentile is most simply defined by negation: \u2018not us\u2019, \u2018not chosen\u2019 or \u2018not Jewish\u2019. When Jesus throws the door open pointing toward a crumbling of this simplified binary there is resistance because the Jewish identity group becomes destabilized. Genealogy is no longer a primary factor in being \u2018in\u2019, but the boundaries for this new identity group are unclear. Establishing the criterion for the new identity group, the Christian, has become a significant work of the church. The project has been influenced by power, theology, politics and local culture to name but a few.<\/p>\n
Expert church historian David Bebbington traced patterns within the evangelical movement, identifying the key features which distinguish it from other Christian streams and produced the much used Evangelical<\/em> Quadrilateral<\/em>. The four criterion are: biblicism, crucicentrism (centred on Jesus activity on the cross), activism (action) and conversionism[<\/span>1]<\/span>\u00a0. The emphasis on conversionism establishes an evangelical understanding of a new binary delineating Christian<\/em> identity. Bebbington points to Russell for the differentiation: there are those who have \u201ca converted character\u201d and there is everyone else[2]<\/span> . It is very similar to the original notion of \u2018Jew and Gentile\u2019 found in scripture. Though there is a significant shift in identifying markers.<\/p>\n The notion of conversion embraces some key aspects of the enlightenment while at the same time working to reject it by asserting that the Bible rather than reason be the foundation to understanding. \u201cThe grand sin of these days, according to an Albury report, was \u2018scepticism, infidelity, the deification of the intellect of man, reasoning pride, disbelief in the Word of God\u2019\u201d [3]<\/span>. Just the same, conversion began to encompass an element of critical thinking. \u201cThe idea of critical thinking is to learn to think for oneself\u2026evaluating beliefs on the basis of reason and evidence, to question when it is rational to question, to believe when it is rational to believe and to conform when it is rational to conform.\u201d [4]<\/span>\u00a0Wesley posited that knowledge about God could be verified through the senses as was critical to enlightenment thinkers, but introduced the idea of a \u2018sixth sense\u2019 to add a supernatural element to the criteria. \u201cConfirmation of the knowledge can be derived from reasoning about experience, (and) the evaluation of the marks of a true believer\u201d[5]<\/span> . As such, supernatural experiences which were beyond reason and might suggest conversion could thus be retrospectively confirmed by reason. To then proceed in the required \u2018converted character\u2019 was to exert control over oneself. Elliott\u2019s examination of Social Theory recognizes the shift towards a belief in the capacity for self-mastery as replacing earlier belief of being enslaved to human nature. [6]<\/span>\u00a0These elements contributed to the evangelical agenda to see unconverted people converted and assimilated as there emerged an identifiable process that both accommodated reason while maintaining distinctive supernatural characteristics.<\/p>\n Conversions at an increased rate, known as revival, often coincided with an external crises, or times of uncertainty. For example times of political unrest frequently contributed to an increase chance of revival breaking out. Similarly, increases in death rates such as in times of disease outbreak would increase existential introspection. Two possible ways to view this are out of fear and a desire for the security that faith offered in eternal life or more positively, that people would be open to considering the deeper meaning of life and the suggestion that there is a supernatural realm amidst or beyond the painful and finite natural realm. Regardless, the certainty that comes with clear identity boundaries through conversion and the resulting guaranteed benefits meant that such clarity was welcomed in contrast to the anxiety produced by death and social unrest. [7]\u00a0<\/span>It may have been an extension of the desire for security that drew so many middle class people to the growing movement. Whether this was the case or not, the rise in this demographic meant financial security and social influence for the evangelicals.\u00a0[8]<\/span><\/p>\n While evangelicalism was not always linked to specific denominations and was rather a characteristic of practicing faith in a particular way, they were drawn together by the common desire to see more conversions. A second aspect of the Evangelical quadrilateral was often incorporated in the form of Activation of faith. Outreach to the poorer classes took various forms with two primary emphases: to see the poor converted and to see the poor upwardly mobilized.[9]<\/span> The motivation to respond to this philanthropic work was a mixture of genuine desire to become a Christian and the hope that being part of a community that was made of up of a higher class might lead to a more economically stable position. \u201cEvangelical religion, as many commented at the time, was itself an avenue of upward social mobility.\u201d[10]<\/span><\/p>\n The expansion of generous faith and philanthropic care is a beautiful continued legacy of the evangelical movement. There are however a number of cautions that might be gleaned from these moments in evangelical history. While supernatural experience may not be under the control of an individual, the ability to testify to it rationally demands an ability to reason unavailable to all. Further, the self-control that becomes evidence of a \u2018changed character\u2019 may also be inaccessible to some. Finally, linking faith with upward social mobility will further marginalize the economically vulnerable if financial security becomes a necessary hallmark of \u2018changed character\u2019. Such complicating factors necessitate ongoing critique of an over simplification of a binary \u2018converted\u2019 verses \u2018non-converted\u2019, \u2018us\u2019 verses \u2018them\u2019 identity system and explore Paul\u2019s declaration that \u201cthere is neither Jew nor Gentile.\u201d[11]\u00a0Could it be that Jesus was pointing to something even greater than a new binary?<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 1. David W. Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s (London: Routledge, 2015), Google Play. 10.<\/p>\n 2. G.W. E.Russell, \u2018Recollections of the Evangelicals\u2019, The Household of Faith (London, 1902), pp. 240 f., 245. The formation of identity groups has divided people throughout history. Whether by geography, biology or idealogical identification, the creation of the \u2018we\u2019 is simultaneously dependent on the creation of a \u2018them\u2019. The bulk of scripture leans heavily on the \u2018we\u2019 being the chosen people of God\u2014the Israelites who grow to identify as the Jewish people. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":109,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[12,1321],"class_list":["post-20820","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-bebbington","tag-dminlgp9","cohort-lgp9"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20820","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/109"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20820"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20820\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20832,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20820\/revisions\/20832"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20820"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20820"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20820"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n3. David W. Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s (London: Routledge, 2015). Google Play. 193.
\n4. Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools (Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2009). iBooks. 27.
\n5. Bebbington, 84.
\n6. Anthony Elliott. Contemporary Social Theory: An Introduction. (New York: Routledge, 2009) GooglePlay. 45.
\n7. Bebbington. 147.
\n8. Bebbington. 181.
\n9. Bebbington. 183
\n10. Bebbington. 183.
\n11.Galatians 3:28 NIV<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"