Evangelical Alliance never considered change in response to Chalke book
-20/03/05
The Evangelical Alliance has told the Ekklesia news service that it has never considered changing its Basis of Faith in response to the debate generated by a controversial book.
The comments from David Hilborn, the Alliance’s head of theology, will come as a surprise to Evangelicals who were under the impression that the organisation was open to adopting a doctrinal statement that was more inclusive of the diverse views held by Evangelicals about the meaning of the crucifixion.
Following the work of other Evangelical scholars, Steve Chalke suggested in his book ‘The Lost Message of Jesus’ that the idea of ‘penal substitution’ – that God punished Jesus Christ through the crucifixion – was not ‘biblical’. For many Christians such a belief conflicts with the character of God revealed in the gospels, and implies an idea of justice that is both violent and far from the biblical vision.
The book’s publication provoked outcry from conservative Evangelicals and a public debate in Westminster followed, attended by 700 people, during which Steve Chalke publicly responded to his critics. However, the Alliance then announced that its own doctrinal statement implied support for penal substitution, leaving many Evangelicals unsure about whether they could remain members.
A 3-day symposium was then organised by the Evangelical Alliance to explore the idea more fully in July.
However, before the symposium could take place, the Evangelical Alliance published a new statement of faith, following a three year revision process, which continued to endorse the controversial doctrine.
When asked why the Alliance had not delayed decisions over its statement of faith to take account of the upcoming symposium and the wider debate, David Hilborn told Ekklesia; “No one on Board, Council or the Theological Commission ever suggested delaying the process, even though they had ample opportunity to do so.”
“To have delayed the schedule agreed as far back as 2002 simply in reaction to the much more recent Lost Message controversy would have been to suggest that a single book or personality is more important than a duly constituted process”.
“No one individual evangelical – whether radical or fundamentalist, baptistic or paedo-baptistic, Calvinist, Arminian or whatever – should expect his or her own specific doctrinal predilections to dictate the content of a statement designed to represent the mainstream evangelical consensus” Hilborn said.
“Those who had a hand in drafting the new Basis were well aware of various much earlier critiques of penal substitution, original sin, divine wrath and judgement which had arisen from within and beyond the evangelical community before Steve ever set pen to paper” he continued.
“These critiques were very much taken into account in the production of this new text. So again, suggestions that the adoption of the text should have been held up by arguments about the Lost Message in particular simply do not hold water.”
“Neither the October public debate nor plans for the forthcoming symposium have progressed on the basis that they would necessarily affect the substance of the new Basis of Faith” he said.
However, when the Alliance announced the symposium it made a point of recognising “the very real diversity within the evangelical family” and affirmed “devotion to Christ” and “commitment to evangelical unity”. It also affirmed “a commitment to wrestle honestly together in understanding and applying the truth of Christís substitutionary sacrifice”.
“We look forward therefore to discussing these issues in greater detail in the forthcoming symposium,” it said and invited “the whole evangelical family to walk with us in making ëevery effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.í (Ephesians 4:3)”
Some Evangelicals interpreted this as an indication that the Alliance was willing to consider changing its statement of faith on the basis of the ongoing debate provoked by Chalke’s book.
Questions have already been raised about the Evangelical Allianceís objectivity in the ongoing controversy. At the event in Westminster, three speakers were allowed on the platform to oppose Steve Chalke, whilst he had only one to support his case.
The London School of Theology, formerly the London Bible College, which will host the follow-up symposium, is known for its conservative views. It is also home to lecturer Dr Anna Robbins who opposed Steve Chalke at the Westminster debate. Dr Derek Tidball, Principal of the London School of Theology, is Chair of the Alliance’s Council.
Given the heat that the debate has generated ñ conservatives have withdrawn funding from Steve Chalkeís charity the Oasis Trust, and others have publicly suggested he can no longer be called an ìEvangelicalî ñ many saw it surprising that a more neutral venue was not chosen.
The Evangelical Alliance also publicly criticised Steve Chalke for questioning the doctrine of Penal Substitution, urged him to “think again” and said he had “insufficient appreciation” of the extent to which the idea had shaped Evangelicalism.
An editorial in a well-known denominational newspaper said that the Evangelical Alliance had “raised the stakes” with its criticism of the Baptist minister Steve Chalke, and suggested that there was little point in having the public symposium, if the Alliance had already ruled out Steve Chalke’s viewpoint.