[whmatthews]

Kind of old, but I'm just reading/hearing about it...

http://www.newsadvance.com/lna/news/loc ... esto/5063/

It’s a document that a group of Christian leaders hope can rally evangelicals and ease political polarization.

But Liberty University officials feel parts of a recently released, 20-page “Evangelical Manifesto” undercuts the political activism and voice in modern culture that founder Jerry Falwell spent his life advocating.

A committee of nine pastors, seminary deans and writers from across the country released the manifesto earlier this month. Its intent is to reaffirm, and redefine, evangelicals’ identity and public involvement.

“That word evangelical has taken on increasingly political connections,” said David Neff, editor-in-chief of Christianity Today and a committee member. “That’s not what we’re about. Our identity is promoting faith in Jesus Christ and all that goes with that.”

A section that has drawn particular ire from Liberty officials states that neither the religious right nor religious left should “politicize faith.” In that case, Christians become “useful idiots” for one political party or another, it states, and beliefs become weapons for political interests.

Ergun Caner, president of the Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, said the manifesto “muddies the water” when it comes to being an evangelical.

Caner, a former Muslim who converted in 1982, defines the term as “pro-life, pro-family” and having solely Christian beliefs.

“To me, it’s like coming out to a Pittsburgh Steelers game wearing a Cleveland Browns jersey,” Caner said of the manifesto. “It’s a document that has great intentions but will never happen.”

http://erguncaner.com/home/news/manifesto.php

In recent days, I became aware that my name is on the list of “Charter Signatories” for the Evangelical Manifesto (EM) (http://www.evangelicalmanifesto.com/sign.php).

There is only one problem.
I never signed it.

A few months ago, I was consulted by a member of the steering committee, and invited to read through a rough draft. At that time, I stated in an email that I felt the language concerning the forefathers of evangelicalism was too dismissive and too harsh. Men such as the founder of our University, Dr. Jerry Falwell, acted with courage in putting evangelical Christianity on the frontlines of the American dialogue.

I was saddened to read that this language was not changed.
Then I became angered by the tone of the presentation at the National Press Club (NPC).

I must state for the record, the EM does NOT reflect my position, and the speakers at the NPC do NOT reflect my position concerning the current state of Evangelicalism.

[JMUDukes]

sorry, but the term "evangelical left" is an oxymoron.

[ALUmnus]

Yes, this is old and to some extent already proved to be fraudulant. From now on all politics and decision-making will be conducted via the online petition, you can get so much more done that way.

[phoenix]

sorry, but the term "evangelical left" is an oxymoron.

Not really. You can be evangelical theologically and be moderate-left politically. Jim Wallis is one example.

I like most of the manifesto -- it falls short in a lot of places, but it's about as good as we're going to get. The problem is that the term "evangelical" is really quite broad, when used in it's historical context. Half the people who are evangelicals want to shrink the umbrella, and the other half like it just fine how it is, but wouldn't complain if it was a bit bigger.

I was really surprised when I first saw it and noticed that Dr. Caner's name was on it. I wondered if he'd read it, then I wondered if his name was on there in error. I understand his problems with the thing (Al Mohler had more problems with it, as I recall). But I didn't see anything in it that I didn't like and couldn't agree with.

[ALUmnus]

That's partly what made it fraudulant, Caner never signed the thing, but they listed him as on of the key signatories.