It’s been a couple of years since I’ve read this book, so I’m not going to offer any detailed description of it. As a review of recent trends among some evangelical theologians, I found the book informative and stimulating. As a warning against those theologians, I found it less convincing.

I have nothing against Erickson – I found his Theology quite helpful when in Bible college. And, to his credit, Erickson is often even-handed in this book, highlighting the valid points of each theologian he reviews. Yet his prejudice is obvious just from the title, as calling someone “Left” is not really an endearment in the US cultural scene, and less so among evangelicals. Erickson wants to warn against the theological trends he reviews.

Unfortunately for Millard, I came away from this volume more attracted to those trends than to Erickson’s warnings. Certainly, new theological trends have to be critically examined, and anyone in the evangelical camp would do well to consider the wisdom of a senior theologian like Erickson. Yet I was frustrated with his reluctance to consider some of the insights that new approaches would bring. If the one of the jobs of theologians is to think about and relate Biblical and Christian doctrine to contemporary life, then I am concerned at the defensive and reactionary stances many evangelicals take. In rejecting anything too postmodern, evangelical theologians show how modernist they are.

Another concern is the evangelical love of infighting, of which books like this may be symptomatic. As one Amazon reviewer writes, “Evangelicals are often slandered in today's culture, and this is sad, since many of their best thinkers (Grenz and Stott, for example) are truly intelligent people. To see them eating their own in this book is frightening.” (http://www.amazon.com/review/RKGA8JT58CX6N/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm)

My own bottom line is that the Bible—God’s word and an infallible guide to life and belief—is not as cut-and-dried about doctrine as many Christians are. Evangelicals shouldn’t run off and become the wooly-headed liberals of whom they are so scared. But they might do well to abandon some of the drawing of boundary lines (who’s in and who’s out) which they so love, and instead talk about the God, who is larger than our attempts to describe him, who revealed himself in Jesus Christ in his passionate desire to know and save us. Our society won’t be attracted by die-hard defenders of the truth. Nor will they be attracted to an anaemic Christianity that merely mirrors our culture’s morals and beliefs. They may be attracted by faithful disciples of Christ willing to engage God, scripture and our society.

Here endeth the sermon.

Addendum (9 Feb 2010)

"Not long after my article mapping out postconservative theology appeared in The Christian Century, conservative theologian Millard Erickson published The Evangelical Left: Encountering Postconservative Evangelical Theology. I found the title ironic since postconservative evangelical theology seeks to escape the "left/right" categorization into which all theologies have been forced during the modern age by the Enlightenment. Erickson treated postconservatives as accommodators to the Enlightenment when, in fact, they are by and large trying to disentangle theology from the influence of the Enlightenment and modernity. It is postmodernity rather than modernity with which most postconservatives engage in critical and constructive dialogue. Postconservatives emphatically do not consider themselves part of an "evangelical left." To them "left" and "right" in theology are both defined by the Enlightenment and modernity, which are increasingly being challenged and marginalized by postmodernity. I did not recognize in Erickson's book a fair elucidation or critique of what I understand to be postconservative evangelical thought."
(Roger E. Olson, Reformed and Always Reforming: the Postconservative Approach to Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007, p. 12) ( )