Evangelical Free Church

[RileyG]

What are the basic tenants of the Evangelical Free Church? Are they restorationist in theology? Or have they been influenced by Lutheran pietism?

God bless

 

[WolfGate]

Pretty typical evangelical in doctrine with regards to Nicene Creed issues. Lots of variety in other areas depending on congregation. I would not call them restorationist.

 

[St_Worm2]

What are the basic tenants of the Evangelical Free Church?

Statement of Faith - The Evangelical Free Church of America

 

[RileyG]

Pretty typical evangelical in doctrine with regards to Nicene Creed issues. Lots of variety in other areas depending on congregation. I would not call them restorationist.

Thanks to you both!

 

[9Rock9]

What are the basic tenants of the Evangelical Free Church? Are they restorationist in theology? Or have they been influenced by Lutheran pietism?

God bless

They're evangelical Protestants, although there could be some overlap with the Restoration movement.

They are similar to Southern Baptists in what they believe. The biggest differences is that the Evangelical Free Church does not insist on believer's baptism. Both denominations reject infant baptism and only perform baptism by full immersion for confessing believers, but the EFC does not require credobaptism for membership if someone was baptized as an infant. They get converts from Catholicism and Lutheranism, so presumably it's so they don't alienate new members from those denominations.

 

[RileyG]

They're evangelical Protestants, although there could be some overlap with the Restoration movement.

They are similar to Southern Baptists in what they believe. The biggest differences is that the Evangelical Free Church does not insist on believer's baptism. Both denominations reject infant baptism and only perform baptism by full immersion for confessing believers, but the EFC does not require credobaptism for membership if someone was baptized as an infant. They get converts from Catholicism and Lutheranism, so presumably it's so they don't alienate new members from those sects.

thanks for the info

 

[St_Worm2]

They're evangelical Protestants, although there could be some overlap with the Restoration movement.

Hello 9Rock9, et al, actually, there is very little overlap, and none where the Restoration Movement's main (some say "controversial") principles are concerned. We do not, for instance, believe that water baptism is 'required' for salvation.

They are similar to Southern Baptists in what they believe. The biggest differences is that the Evangelical Free Church does not insist on believer's baptism. Both denominations reject infant baptism and only perform baptism by full immersion for confessing believers, but the EFC does not require credobaptism for membership if someone was baptized as an infant. They get converts from Catholicism and Lutheranism, so presumably it's so they don't alienate new members from those denominations.

All of the above is true, except for the fact that we allow our churches the option to use pedobaptism as a means of child dedication, as long as it is CLEARLY understood that pedobaptism (which would be done in this case by sprinkling water on the baby, obviously), just like credobaptism, is NEVER salvific.

God bless you!

--David

 

[RileyG]

Thank you to everyone for the clarification

 

[bbbbbbb]

Thank you to everyone for the clarification

The Evangelical Free Church is not at all affiliated with the Restoration Movement. It is of Swedish origin. The word "Evangelical" is standard nomenclature meaning "Protestant". Thus, you will find Evangelical Lutheran Churches in Germany and elsewhere.

"Free" comes from the nineteenth century when there was significant dissension within the Swedish state Lutheran Church. One of the issues was the role of government in the church. As in England, with the Anglican Church, there were dissenters from the state church in Sweden. In time, one group coalesced as being "free" (that is, free of government support and control). Needless to say, the state Lutheran Church did not take kindly to these folks and their ideas. The net result was that many migrated, mostly to the United States where they have enjoyed freedom of religion.

They were a rather small and somnolent denomination, not unlike the Evangelical Covenant Church (also of Swedish extraction) until the latter decades of the twentieth century when they artfully drew in numbers of disaffected traditional Christians from mainline Protestant denominations which were (and continue to be) drifting into theological and political liberalism. They also made inroads among disaffected Roman Catholics, but for other reasons.

Their primary preacher is Chuck Swindoll and their success has rested largely on his popularity. They do not seem to have found a successor to him as he is now 87 years old, but seems to be in relatively good health.

 

[WolfGate]

Their primary preacher is Chuck Swindoll and their success has rested largely on his popularity. They do not seem to have found a successor to him as he is now 87 years old, but seems to be in relatively good health.

Fascinating to me only because that statement is not at all in alignment with my perspective. Granted, that perspective comes from 25 years at a single large EFCA church, which included terms as chairman of the elder board (and hence considered the lay leader of the church). Does mean I had communication with other regional EFCA churches but it also means I was not aware of much with churches outside our immediate geographical region.

In our church and those I interacted with, Swindoll was certainly not viewed as the EFCA's primary preacher. While he was an EFCA pastor in his early churches, his longtime church that he founded, Stonebrier, is not EFCA. We didn't see anyone as the EFCA's primary preacher. In our circle Swindoll was referenced and viewed essentially the same as many other theologically aligned pastors who were prolific writers of solid theology. IMO, the reason for that may be due to both the autonomous nature of the EFCA and the relatively few congregations in our area of the country. Other areas where there are more congregations (CA or the midwest) may have a different view and presentation of Chuck Swindoll. In our case, I am sure nobody or almost nobody joined us because Chuck had 30+ years ago been an EFCA pastor.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Fascinating to me only because that statement is not at all in alignment with my perspective. Granted, that perspective comes from 25 years at a single large EFCA church, which included terms as chairman of the elder board (and hence considered the lay leader of the church). Does mean I had communication with other regional EFCA churches but it also means I was not aware of much with churches outside our immediate geographical region.

In our church and those I interacted with, Swindoll was certainly not viewed as the EFCA's primary preacher. While he was an EFCA pastor in his early churches, his longtime church that he founded, Stonebrier, is not EFCA. We didn't see anyone as the EFCA's primary preacher. In our circle Swindoll was referenced and viewed essentially the same as many other theologically aligned pastors who were prolific writers of solid theology. IMO, the reason for that may be due to both the autonomous nature of the EFCA and the relatively few congregations in our area of the country. Other areas where there are more congregations (CA or the midwest) may have a different view and presentation of Chuck Swindoll. In our case, I am sure nobody or almost nobody joined us because Chuck had 30+ years ago been an EFCA pastor.

Thanks! As an outsider to the EFCA I have viewed as Chuck Swindoll as the epitome of the EFCA.

Curiously, there are many in the Plymouth Brethren who secretly desire to be part of the EFCA. When these folks do leave the Brethren chapels they frequently migrate to the EFCA. In fact in know of one Brethren chapel which, on its sign, states "A Free Evangelical Church". I have been puzzled by that because the Brethren are theologically quite different from the EFCA.