How to Be Evangelical without Being Conservative

by Roger E. Olson

Many people equate evangelical Christianity with conservatism in religion, politics, theology and social attitudes. Some are scandalized by any separation between them. As one evangelical pastor's wife declared to a church group 'We are a conservative people!' In fact, however, evangelicals have not always been conservative; radical stances on doctrines, worship, social norms, politics and church leadership have often marked evangelicalism in the past. The 2007 movie Amazing Grace about William Wilberforce's protracted battle against the slave trade featured a small group of British evangelicals committed to abolition. The same radicalism characterized much of American evangelicalism in the years before the Civil War. In recent years the American media have portrayed the evangelical movement as a conservative force in society sometimes equating it with fundamentalism and puritanism. The missing piece of the story is, however, that both fundamentalism and puritanism contained radical elements that opposed the status quo. This book sets forth evidence that the link between evangelicalism and conservatism has not always been as strong as it is today in the popular mind and it will provide suggestions for contemporary evangelicals who want to remain evangelical (and not become 'post-evangelical') without identifying with conservatism in every way.

Genres: Theology, Religion, Christian, Politics, Christianity, Nonfiction, Audiobook

208 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 2008

About the author

Roger E. Olson (PhD, Rice University) is professor of theology at George W. Truett Theological Seminary, Baylor University. He is a prolific author whose volumes include The Story of Christian Theology and The Mosaic of Christian Belief. He is also coauthor of 20th-Century Theology. Olsen identifies as an Arminian and a Baptist.

Reviews

[Austin Silvus · Rating 1 out of 5]

Pretty bad

[Jonathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

How to Be Evangelical without Being Conservative
By Roger E. Olson

(A review/synopsis by Jonathan W. Lee, March 2009)

The title of the book cries out for two words to be defined – evangelical and conservative. Dr. Olson defines “evangelicals” as Protestant Christians who display five characteristics: Biblicism (belief in the supreme authority of Scripture for faith and life), conversionism (belief that authentic Christianity always includes a radical conversion to Jesus Christ by personal repentance and faith that begins a lifelong personal relationship with him), crucicentrism (piety, devotional life, and worship centered around the cross of Jesus Christ), activism (concern for and involvement in social transformation through evangelism and social action), and respect for the great tradition of Christian doctrine. He is not as clear when defining “conservative” because it is such a contextual term. But he equates it most often to “traditional” (defensive of the past and the status quo).

This book raised several of the same issues as the book Unchristian. Unchristian is in many respects a “don’t shoot the messenger” report on young people’s views of Christianity that seeks to interpret survey data. Dr. Olson addresses many of the same issues, but offers a bit more subjective opinion on how the church should rethink and broaden their views.

The book is divided into twelve chapters that deal with separate issues. Each chapter is organized in the style of “Let’s retain the baby of evangelicalism, but throw out the bathwater of conservatism.” I’m not sure why the author didn’t order the chapters in a more coherent fashion. They basically fit into three categories – discovering truth, living truth in community, and proclaiming truth to the world.

Discovering Truth:
Chapter 4: Seeking Truth without Certainty
Chapter 1: Being Biblical Without Orthodoxy
Chapter 5: Taking the Bible Seriously without Literalism
Chapter 9: Relativizing without Rejecting Theology

Living Truth in Community:
Chapter 6: Being Religionless without Secularism
Chapter 10: Updating without Trivializing Worship
Chapter 11: Accepting without Affirming Flawed People
Chapter 12: Practicing Equality without Sacrificing Difference

Proclaiming Truth to the World:
Chapter 2: Building Character without Moralism
Chapter 3: Celebrating America without Nationalism
Chapter 7: Transforming Culture without Domination
Chapter 8: Redistributing Wealth without Socialism


I wouldn’t call this a scholarly book. (The absence of footnotes probably indicates that it wasn’t intended to be.) Most topics deserved deeper discussion than what could be accomplished in one chapter.

The book comes across as a manifesto for progressive evangelicals. It contains lots of opinions that will probably encourage those like-minded individuals who read the book. But the opinions were quite subjective with only a smattering of Biblical evidence for them. I doubt that there is enough persuasive evidence to change the opinions of those who disagree with him. Nevertheless, I agreed more than disagreed with the author’s conclusions.

I agree with Dr. Olson’s call for broadening the spectrum of evangelicals to include non-conservatives; although at times, he seemed more interested in moving a narrow spectrum from the right to the left. I thought that at times he was dismissive of conservatives, especially to complementarians in chapter 12. His arguments for egalitarianism were largely sociological opinions without addressing the related Biblical passages. I also didn’t find chapter 8 on redistributing wealth to be very convincing in economic theory, although all evangelicals would agree that we are to treat the poor with dignity and concern.

This was a book worth reading, but not what I hoped for when I bought it. Each chapter is merely a starting point for more in-depth reading.

For those who are interested, a synopsis of each chapter is given below.

Chapter 4: Seeking Truth without Certainty

Roger Olson asserts that conservative Christians “have long treated doubt as a sign of lack of faith and held up certainty as the signal of mature Christianity.” But absolute proof of the truth of Christianity and its doctrines is not available to us because of our finiteness and fallenness. The author (with Kierkegaard) advocates “certitude over certainty in matters of Christian faith and belief.” Certitude is based on the transforming power of God and resulting faith, unlike certainty which requires incontrovertible evidence and rational arguments. Theologian Paul Tillich wrote that doubt is an essential aspect of faith. We can learn to live with “mystery, ambiguity, and uncertainty without wallowing in chronic skepticism.” We must say “I believe; help, Thou my unbelief.”

Chapter 1: Being Biblical Without Orthodoxy

After showing that the word orthodoxy has different meanings in different contexts, Dr. Olson limits his discussion to orthodoxy in the sense of “enforced adherence to a written doctrinal system under threat of punishment for daring to question it.” He says that orthodoxy and tradition are not bad in and of themselves. But all orthodoxies need fresh and faithful reexamination in light of God’s Word. It needs to be “reformed and always reforming.”

Chapter 5: Taking the Bible Seriously without Literalism

Conservatives believe that the Bible should be taken as literally as possible or its truthfulness and authority will be diminished. Dr. Olson points out that it is not easy to discern what part of the Bible is to be taken literally and what part is to be taken figuratively. We should first ask “What kind of literature is the passage or entire book?” Then we should ask “Is anything crucial to the biblical drama and its theological message lost if the passage is interpreted nonliterally?” (The author argues that the historicity of Abraham, Moses, and David is crucial while the historicity of Jonah is not.) We take the Bible seriously when we “struggle to hear and obey its message as one that comes genuinely from God.”

Chapter 9: Relativizing without Rejecting Theology

Conservative theologians believe that all-important questions about God have been answered and they are suspicious of any new discoveries. Their task is to defend the received tradition and restate it in modern language so contemporary people can understand and receive it. The author sees another model for theology that he calls the pilgrimage model (or narrative theology). In this model stories that cannot be reduced to information bring transformation to people. The Bible is an unfinished drama and we are the actors. Theology is not our primary language. That’s God’s speech to us and our response in worship and devotion.

One example of a pilgrimage theology is “open theism” which questions the traditional view of God’s relationship with time and the future. Dr. Olson does not claim to be an open theist, but argues that they deserve the opportunity to take a fresh look at the Scriptures without being branded heretics. He argues that open theists are within the “Wesleyan quadrilateral” that says that Scripture and tradition are the two sources and norms of theology and reason and experience are interpretive tools to help us sort out and understand Scripture and tradition. Conservatives oppose them at the peril of elevating tradition above Scripture.

Chapter 6: Being Religionless without Secularism

The author defines religion as “a fairly formalized, institutionalized, tradition-bound worship and spirituality (churchiness).” He defines secularism as functional atheism – God is privatized and not central to life. “Too often religion is an information delivery system whereas authentic evangelical Christianity is about personal and communal transformation by God’s Spirit, bringing people to Jesus Christ with repentance and the resulting miracle of regeneration – the new life that loves God and the things of God and people.” Religionless evangelicalism is focused on being missional more than informational. It is unlike secularism because placing God at the center is necessary.


Chapter 10: Updating without Trivializing Worship

“One of the great ironies of contemporary evangelicalism in America is that theologically conservative churches are often the first ones to update worship while more liberal churches tend to hold onto traditional liturgies or even return to older forms of worship. An entire spectrum of evangelical worship styles exists. My hunch is that many conservative churches risk trivializing worship because they are so passionate about reaching the younger generation with the gospel. Much contemporary worship is trivial because it aims more at entertainment than real worship. What is necessary is careful thought and reflection on how all the elements of worship come together to magnify and glorify God and lift up the worshipping community into His presence.”

Chapter 11: Accepting without Affirming Flawed People

How does the church maintain holy standards without expelling everyone in the church? The author gives two wrong solutions – ignore it (“It’s between them and God.”) and denounce sinners (especially those outside the church). He then gives three prescriptions:
First, don’t enforce traditional standards of moral and ethical standards from a different era. Second, admit that nobody is free from some besetting sin in the form of a bad habit. (Raising moral and ethical standards means including among the list of sins those with which evangelicals have become comfortable: gluttony, gossip, greed, racism, sexism, uncontrolled anger, and bitterness.) Third, focus less on people’s behavior and more on their attitudes toward sin. The problem is not being a sinner, which we all are; the problem is calling evil good.

Dr. Olson suggests that churches too often put belonging after believing and behaving. But because nobody believes or behaves perfectly, he says that belonging should come first. However, he does not advocate belonging without restrictions. He proposes that anyone who wishes to belong should confess that he or she is a forgiven sinner who wants to change, then confess “Lord I believe, help Thou my unbelief.”, and promise to embark on a journey of faith and discipleship toward holiness together with all the other sinners.

Chapter 12: Practicing Equality without Sacrificing Difference

Dr. Olson gives a brief overview of the two competing camps in gender roles – complementarianism (espoused by the Biblical Council on Manhood and Womanhood) and egalitarianism (espoused by Christians for Biblical Equality). He is firmly in the egalitarian camp in both viewpoint and practice (attending a church where women are in the majority in leadership positions including the elder board and pastorate). He states that egalitarianism is a necessary step toward healthy Christian organizational life. (“Power must not be concentrated in the hands of any one gender, race, class, or age group.”)


Chapter 2: Building Character without Moralism

The author defines moralism as the habit of the heart and mind that elevates right behavior, judged by a set of absolute standards, to extreme importance and determines the extent to which people are acceptable to God or society by their conformity to the rules of conduct. In contrast, character is about inward goodness through transformation of the heart. He notes that conservative evangelicals emphasize moralism toward society outside the church, but largely neglect discipleship and church discipline to develop character inside the church. “Our approach to ethics should focus on God’s power to change people’s lives.”

Dr. Olson briefly addresses the issue of legislating morality in society “to make the world a better place.” He seems to favor political action that is based on rational, secular arguments but does not favor political action based solely on Christian faith because “we cannot change the world into the church by law.” He acknowledges that many Christians would disagree with him, but doesn’t go any farther. Other people like Chuck Colson and Nancy Pearcey have dealt more deeply with this issue.

Chapter 3: Celebrating America without Nationalism

The author distinguishes between patriotism (“love of country and desire to see it flourish and prosper”) and nationalism (“the belief that America is especially chosen and raised up by God to be a “Christian nation” bringing the whole world to God and the American way”). He says it is ambiguous at best whether the founding fathers based the new American republic on Christian or even Judeo-Christian concepts. He goes on to give a fairly accurate explanation of what “separation of church and state” is and is not.

Chapter 7: Transforming Culture without Domination

The author gives a brief overview of the Puritan and Anabaptist views of the relationship between the church and the world. Puritans were called to transform the culture into the Kingdom of God insofar as possible. Anabaptists withdrew from society and sought to transform the world indirectly by creating communities of light that show the world outside the church a better way. They eschew use of political power to do that, as does Dr. Olson. He believes it is the Church’s job to reform itself and God’s job to manage history and society.

Chapter 8: Redistributing Wealth without Socialism

Dr. Olson quotes several Old Testament passages that condemn injustice toward the poor and especially the wealthy getting rich off the labor of the poor. He concludes that redistribution of wealth is biblical; an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor is not. He is less committal on whether it should be voluntary or mandatory under the power of the state.

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although perhaps a 2nd edition is needed in the post-Trump era of North American Christianity, I found this book to be very encouraging and refreshing (especially coming from a historical theologian). Olson's attention to the Bible, social ethics and redistributing wealth were especially helpful. Very explicitly written for the USA context. Olson sometimes comes off more conservative than the title might imply. Always love Olson's punchy writing style too.

[Marcas · Rating 2 out of 5]

Olson has good instincts and there is a lot of common sense in here. However, many chapters are sloppily argued or barely argued at all. While I actually agree with many of his instincts and points, he did not do a good job making his case - chapter after chapter. The chapter on socialism was particularly weak, and frustrating for me. He didn't really engage with well-established, or recent Christian scholarship on this topic: Michael Novak, Gerard Casey, Kevin D. Williamson, Dylan Pahman, and others have made great inroads into issues of political theology for Christians - much better than the half-baked platitudes in this book. The chapter on gender was also very weak - even though I'd agree with him on a lot. He did not back up quite strong claims about egalitarian and complementarian perspectives.

I finished the book feeling that he had a great thesis, but didn't deliver the goods. It was a real missed opportunity. There is certainly a place for a radical Christian worldview and way of living today, which transcends conservative and progressive shibboleths, and this is relevant outside the U.S.A. - where many of us have been influenced by such categories. At least here, Olson is not the guide to that radical way unfortunately.

[Joseph Sverker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Olson makes some very good points. He really likes to come back to the definition of evangelical and his fifth point to Bebbington's four. A liberating point that he makes is that he thinks that being evangelical doesn't mean that one should legislate evangelical morality into the society. He also makes good distinctions between cultural conservatism (which liberal theology is just a prone towards), political conservatism (which is what Olson means evangelical doesn't have to be as I understand him) and theological conservatism (which an evangelical doesn't have to be either even though an evangelical should respect the tradition).

[Andrew · Rating 2 out of 5]

I expected more from this book. Parts of it were helpful, a few parts were weak, but mostly it was just cheesy. The author comes across as more conservative than he pretends to be, and he probably only thinks he's not conservative because he spends so much time in conservative circles. I suppose the divide between conservative and liberal has also widened since the book was written ten years ago, which also makes his writing seem more conservative than he claims. Plenty of straw men too, which disincline me from reading any of his other books, as interesting as they may be titled.

[Nathan · Rating 2 out of 5]

There were certain aspects of this book that provided some solid insight into how a church can be forward thinking. Unfortunately, when the author sought to make an argument, he set up straw men and engaged neither with actual scripture, nor the real reasons for certain beliefs. As a result, his assertions were not particularly convincing.

[Dave Papendorf · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was better than I thought. Olson is not always the easiest to read on social or contemporary theological matters due to his strongly-stated opinions (however, this is admirable); however, this book was surprisingly pleasant and not unfairly critical of those evangelicals who claim conservatism.

[Salomon · Rating 4 out of 5]

3,5 stars. Some great thoughts, overall I liked it. But I think it was too watered down so conservatives would not be very mad. Oh irony.

[Nathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I always enjoy reading Roger Olson. I do not always agree with him, but I find few people are so clear and winsome in explaining their own position while remaining truly charitable to those who disagree. The title has everything you need to put off someone like me from reading it. I would generally identify as conservative. But there are things called "conservative" that I find repellant. And it was more often these things than the things I actually hold dear (as a conservative) that Olson has usually got in his sights. And when he did have someone like me in his sights, I felt like I was fairly represented, understood. I felt like we could actually disagree, rather than just keep misunderstanding each other.

Perhaps times have changed. I think I have read people generally more "conservative" than Olson who have been more willing than he was at the time of writing this book to throw off the label Evangelical. But even if Olson might have changed his mind in the meantime (I have no idea either way), it was nice to read a book of this sort that didn't have an angst toward the term.

[John Martindale · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love Olson's blog and I enjoyed this book. Though, theologically speaking, Olson seems very conservative, he is opposed to that “conservative” mentality that dogmatically entrenches itself in certain traditions while paying lip service to sola scriptura. Olson is one of those rare-souls, who despite disagreeing with Open-theism, can actually recognize that we Open Theist, are so because the overwhelming scriptural evidence. Unlike other Calvinist and Arminians, Olson can actually mention and disagree with what open theist believe without creating laughable caricatures and attacking a strawman. This is quite refreshing, I so wish this could become the norm in evangelical circles.

The only chapter of which I really took issue with was “Redistribution without socialism.” which will be the focus in the remainder of this review.

Blood letting was once a common practice among doctors, in fact, it likely hastened the death of George Washington. Isn't it tragic that the concerned doctors favorite and most trusted solution, actually made things worst? Imagine, if at this time in history, one took a stand against blood letting because of its ill effects. One would likely be accused of not caring for the sick and wanting the ill to die.
So this is how it seems to be with liberal progressives, oh they care, they care just like these doctors care. But in their zealousness concern, they apply methods which sometimes exacerbate and make the problem worse. Anyone who opposes “progressive” solutions since they greatly hurt the poor and increase poverty, are considered to be uncompassionate and hateful against the poor. Today, the liberal solutions to poverty are so equated with concern for the poor, that to be against their disastrous “solutions” is taken as not caring about the poor!
To me it is a frightening thing that liberals “care” so much, because their good intentioned solutions have a historic track-record of being much more like blood-letting than helpful treatment.

Olson sadly creates a caricature of the political Right, as if they only care about the rich. He seemed to believe free-market capitalism is anti- the poor and only helps the rich. It is just so upsetting, here the very thing (when combined with rule of law and moral people) that has factually lifted the standard of living and raised more people out of poverty then any other system, is disparaged. If there was a choice between fighting a fire with water or gasoline, it would seem Olson has so bought into liberal propaganda that water is declared the enemy and gasoline is declared the way to help.

In this chapter, Olson is all about redistribution and claims the tax rates are not “fair” (that incredibly slippery term, which means something different to everyone). So tax rates should be raised on the rich, and the government should redistributed their money to the poor. And this isn't socialism. Okay, lets suppose, this is the governments job, and it is fine for them to take other people's money and give it to other people for the sake equality. What is the best way for the government to actually get more money to redistribute? Once again, Olson is convinced the way is higher taxes on the rich, which historically, over the long run, greatly REDUCES tax revenue to redistribute. The rich are the golden goose, and Olson seems to think the best way to get more of their money and help the poor with it, is by killing the golden goose in the name of fairness.
The Reagan tax cuts for the rich, increased tax revenue by billions, The Russian flat tax of 13% increased revenue by billions. I know it is a very tough pill to swallow, but the best way for the so trustworthy beneficent and noble government to actually have MORE money to redistribute to the poor, is by freaking lowering taxes on the rich!!! But envy just won't allow for this, the evil rich must be punished in the name of fairness. But as we bring them down, we bring the poor further down too.

Historically, NOTHING has proven more successful in helping the poor than the free-market, if combined with rule of law and good character among the people. It is precisely because I care about the poor that I am not a liberal progressive! And no, I am not rich! I've never even made it up to the poverty line income wise. Using Rawls method of not knowing if I'd come out on top or on the bottom, I'd choose free-market capitalism, because, I'd know if on the bottom, I'd be better off than in the system Olson describes.

[Jolene · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am on a journey of examining long held beliefs and traditions and one of them is the idea that if you are a Christian you must be a conservative. This book was helpful in showing how that isn’t necessarily so. Olson is an engaging writer with many anecdotes from his own life. I especially appreciated the chapter dealing with politics and Christian nationalism early in the book. I understand that the author was giving his opinion and that this isn’t a scholarly work but I do wish he would have given sources for his arguments. I would recommend this book as an introduction or summary of these ideas.

[Rebecca · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent and quite readable.

Mr. Olson speaks to many of the issues I've been thinking about in my journey away from hardline conservatism. In particular, topics that are often characterized as either/or choices are discussed in greater detail. It's a refreshing change from the harsh rhetoric with which evangelicals are often associated, often unfairly.

I found the book helpful in coalescing several stances for which I have had differences of opinion with fellow believers. Of course, most of them are no longer interested in conversational engagement (having given me up as hopelessly liberal) but it's nice to know I could articulate my thoughts, should such an occasion ever arise.

[Pat · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great book for anyone that at times feels caught between two worlds -- evangelical and conservative -- neither of which is always synonymous with the other. For the purposes of his book, the author describes conservative as "a tendency to defend whatever is perceived as traditional and a reluctance to move away from the status quo even under trememdous pressure from new insights, discoveries, and viewpoints provided by experience, including fresh interpretations of the Bible".

[Jonathan Hughes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Roger Olson does a good job of illuminating terms like conservative and evangelical, which are distorted and made fuzzy by those that self identify with those terms and by the inappropriate usage of those terms by the media. If you're frustrated with the theological and political options of "conservative" and "liberal" and wondered if there is a "third" way, this would be a good place to begin.

[Eric Black · Rating 3 out of 5]

Olson has provided a very accessible plan for maintaining classic evangelical principles while avoiding the negative connotations of conservatism. Each chapter stands alone so readers can start anywhere and even skip parts.

I find the book too repetitive for my taste and not detailed enough in its prescriptions. However, for someone approaching this issue for the first time, it is a friendly introduction.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an intelligent look at conservatism and evangelicalism in America, and points out that they have not always been good bedfellows. I even wonder why so many Christians today are conservative knowing the radical nature of the teachings on Jesus Christ.

[Andrew Linderer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Loved this book. There were a couple topics in the last third of the book that didn't really hit as close to home for me which is why I only gave it 4 stars but it was really good.

[Sem · Rating 4 out of 5]

Speaking as a non-evangelical, I found this illuminating and clear-sighted.