In Part I of this two-part essay, I examined Aaron Renn’s historical argument in his influential article “The Three Worlds of Evangelicalism.” In short, I believe his positive-neutral-negative framework is incorrect and risks misleading evangelicals both about their history and the demands of the current moment. In that post I offered reasons for skepticism both toward Renn’s analysis and some of his prescriptions. In this part, I want to pivot away from a pure critique of Renn’s position and offer some alternative paths forward for evangelicals.
Renewing Evangelical Witness in a Sexual Revolution World
Part II of my response to Aaron Renn on the "three worlds of evangelicalism."
