ON BELONGING, BELIEVING, AND BECOMING
Another contemporary discussion that Olson address is is the process of church interaction.
The debate centers on the proper ordering of three key words; believe, belong, and become. There are proponents for each of the three orderings of the words, and Olson advocates for the belong, believe, and become ordering. It is indeed a tough line to draw between accepting people as they are and challenging conformity into the image of Christ. As Olson points out “we are a group of people little different in our lifestyle from the world around us.”
Certainly a double standard has operated within the church for those outside the walls and for those inside the walls. Typically this is seen by sweeping the “sins of the congregation” underneath the rug, and a form of exploiting the sins of those outside the community.
The cardinal of all sins within all evangelical circles is sexual sin. Usually, most of the attention both inside and outside of the church is directed towards these issues. Other sins such as lying, bitterness, hatred, and injustice take a backseat to these. Olson argues that we must “blur the boundaries between the sinners in the church and the sinners outside the church.” and goes on to say “There is no line between “them” and “us” when it comes to being sinners.”
Olson’s thesis in this chapter is quite convincing and has support, what however fails to persuade, is his failure to distinguish between sinners who have repented and those who have not. In reference to us all being sinners, that it true, however it is also true that not all sinners are alike in their response to sin. It would have been nice to see Olson comment on this aspect of sinners and repentance. In all other regards, Olson is to be commended for highlighting the church’s tendency to focus on the “hot button issues” and not speaking out against all sin.
CONCLUSION
Overall Olson issues a challenging call to all of those who would call themselves evangelical. He confronts those who have turned evangelicalism into a new form of fundamentalism and issues a call to return for those who have ridded themselves of the term. Olson in his book argues for a return to the third way that evangelicalism has historically been, the middle ground between fundamentalism and liberalism. Olson’s call to return to the historic roots of evangelicalism needs to be heeded in order to be truly evangelical.
The solution for Olson is that “progressive evangelicals move beyond conservatism into what I call “postconservative evangelicalism.”
While not all of Olson’s arguments are persuasive as others, he does put forth a coherent argument on several key issues. We would do well to listen with open ears and open hearts to the concerns, critiques, and the credibility that Olson’s argument brings.


