Then secondly – I more or less agree with Steffan on his last point – deal with concerns? yes, absolutely. On a blog? well maybe not the best place. They’re not always opinionated rants – they can be used for other things – e.g. sharing experiences and things we’re learning or pointing to some good material on the tinternet. But they do run the risk of becoming opinionated rants in the context of voicing and dealing with concerns. Maybe (I don’t know) it feels like the comfort of one’s blog is the only place one can voice them at the moment, but let’s be patient and try to encourage discussion and maybe little by little it’ll get better.

Of course there are issues to be dealt with, and to be discussed (and I think they are being considered). I agree that we should seek to be aware of many of the dangers you highlight.

I’m not happy however with an approach that caricatures a movement, group, or church, in order to make one’s point. I really do believe that you are over-egging the weaknesses of evangelical churches and groups, and in doing this, reinforcing prejudices in the wider society, thereby damaging its witness.

Also, personally (but I’m sure others will disagree) I’m not convinced, that blogs are the best forum for this. Here are my reasons:

- It is never a good thing to air each other’s dirty clothing in public, especially in a medium that is notoriously black and white. If there are issues, let’s discuss them with people face to face, let’s chat over coffee, let’s write articles and books that require research and reasoned approach (more of that below).

- To be bloggish, I’ll now make a sweeping comment: Blogs are, ultimately, opinionated rants written on the spur of the moment.

This is why a critique in a book, such as Bobi Jones’ (which I haven’t read) is very different.

Good books are fruits of months of research and reflection, footnotes and references are expected, there is space and time to be nuanced, and there is an accountability as the books are reviewed, etc.

A reasoned, well-argued, fair and constructive critique, given from a loving and humble heart, will be received in most cases.

Blogs are the opposite. Black and white, generalised rants, tend to alienate and polarise.

Dyfed, thanks. Two things I’d like to say in response. First of all I do find it odd that us evangelicals are more than willing to critique what is obviously wrong within more liberal denominational churches but that we’re scared when it comes to critiquing our own scene. Thanks for pointing out also that I’m not giving a critique from the outside because I am a’n evangelical myself – I’m a product of welsh evangelicalism. Also, my critique of the evangelical scene is nothing new. Most of my arguments stem from the work of Bobi Jones especially the final chapter of ‘Mawl a Gelynion ei Elynion’ (2002); I suppose the difference between me saying them here on the blog and Bobi saying them in his book is that, sadly, more people read my blog than read Bobi’s complex books!

Gethin, with regard to your idea of accountability. You’d be surprised how much my posts get toned down after phone calls from my Mother!

It appears to me – from a far removed standpoint – that the Welsh speaking movement is struggling these days as some leave to return to the older denominations and as little real growth is experienced. In times such as these toes stretch – thus making it easier for others to tread on them.

Keep going – your views are valid.

I think there’s a fifth option, and it is to do with HOW controversial issues are discussed, not whether they are discussed or not.

It is good to be challenged to think about how and why we believe and act as we do.

Can I make a few suggestions Rhys?

(they are implications of Colossians 1:25-28 and 4:4-6 – principles I’d like to follow personally, by God’s grace)

(a) Take us to Scripture. Argue your point from there. We can then reason together from the Bible. Let the Word challenge and build us up. Use positive examples, and other people’s teachings, but I’d really appreciate it, and I think you would be doing something worthwhile, if you spent time telling us about your reflections on the Word in the areas under discussion. This would prevent blog entries appearing like rants reacting against this or the other.

If I was offended by your post (that is probably too strong a word) it wasn’t because I took it personally (I know I’m a sinner prone to mistakes and wrong emphases), or that I disagreed with your general principle, it’s because it followed a tendency to use a criticism of other groups who are sincerely aiming to honour Christ and be faithful to Scripture, as a launchpad to make a point. It’s a weak and negative – and lazy? – form of argumentation.

(b) If you are going to refer to others, and use them as examples, make sure that you represent their views in a way that they would consider fair. In other words, get your facts straight, and be nuanced in your presentation of others’ views and practice. It is very easy to create caricatures so that your argument appears stronger, but it is not honourable, and in the end undermines the argument.

(c) I think it was the prognosis boys who said that every blog entry must seek to build others up in the Lord, ultimately by pointing others to Christ. If you do this, Rhys, you will do doing something special.

(b)

(c) Is it naiive to th

“That sums up pretty much all the doing I ever had with UCCF at university. I’m know it’s not universally true about UCCF but that was my experience of UCCF. And I’m not talking about individuals now, just UCCF the organisation and it’s vision as i saw it at the time.”

I choose my words carefully, I was referring to my OWN experience of UCCF as I saw it at the time. I made that clear I though, so to save further wrong impression I have taken the reference out all together now.

To respond to your questions:

1. We are all influenced by our experience I can’t deny that. I have made a point for some time now of not referring specifically too EMW but as you did refer I shall respond to your specific reference to EMW. I became a Christian through the work of the EMW, a point I always make in articles and sermons. But I also felt that I never got further than ‘how to get to heven when I die’ in a lot (not all) of EMW teaching. The post on The Resurgence explains what the problem with that mentality is – the only thing I did was to identify where I saw the phenomenon at work in Wales through my own experience. The true casualties of this teaching is not myself but rather all those nominal Christians and more importantly all those who went to EMW camps and, as of yet, have not come to faith. If you only teach sin management theology I believe that the gospel is reduced, as the post of The Resurgence explains, to nothing more than an equation. And nobody gets saved through a’n equation. People get saved through the power of Christ and what he did on the cross ond what he does today. I took the initiative (or rather the Spirit lead me) to read the Scriptures and read a wide range of Christian books and through that I saw what the implications of ‘going to heaven when I die’ had to me life here on this earth – I saw that the gospel was more than an equation – I saw it was power.

With regard to welsh evangelicalism = American fundamentalism. I outlined the differences I saw between evangelicalism and fundamentalism in a post on my Welsh blog which can be read here: http://blog.rhysllwyd.com/?p=1057 Even you Steffan can’t deny that some of what is listed in the fundamentalism column can be seen amongst, if not even prevalent, amongst Welsh evangelicalism. Or at least in the circles of evangelicalism I was brought up in.

2. As you know my involvement with UCCF was only at local level; mainly because of other commitments. But as I said above, I made it clear that I was talking about my own experience and how I perceived things at the time.

3. I’m sorry if I come over arrogant and aloof. Those that know me know that my bark is worse than my bite! I assure you that I try my best to choose my words carefully, this I will try harder on in the future. It is fairly obvious that this blog is written to a’n evangelical audience – my Welsh blog is written to a general Welsh speaking audience. My series in Welsh denominational magazine Cristion is aimed at religious people, my contributions defending the divinity of Christ o’n Cristnogaeth 21 is aimed at plain heretics and my preaching on a Sunday is aimed at whoever is there! The gospel is central always I hope, but I do change my style depending if I’m at an evangelical Church or a denominational church. My point being: if you were to balance everything I say and look at the context of where I say it I hope you would find that I have a’n as balanced view as you can get from a 24 year old, over-educated, too-opinionated boy! On a blog aimed at evangelicals I offered in this post a challenge about how we (yes “we”, I still count my self as an evangelical if you would have me!) do and view mission. In a sermon on Sunday to a religious congregations I preach about the need to be born again out of Effesiaid 2.