Karl Dahlfred

In the early twentieth century, theological modernism was gaining ground in the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. Conservatives claimed that there were modernists on the mission field but that the Board of Foreign Missions was doing nothing about it. In Thailand, the executive secretary of the American Presbyterian mission did not want to address the issue, claiming that ""almost all of our Mission . . . are conservative in their theology, and liberal in their spirit."" But was it true? In this book, Karl Dahlfred explores letters, reports, and other primary sources to reveal instances and indicators of modernism among Presbyterian missionaries in Thailand. Officially committed to making disciples of Jesus Christ, American Presbyterian missionaries were increasingly divided over what that meant, and how to carry out their task. Were schools or evangelism the best mode of Christian influence? Did the gospel need adjustment for the modern world? The mission formally maintained a conservative consensus, yet modernism was present. And fundamentalist-minded missionaries were not happy about it. Scholars, missionaries, Thai Christians, and anyone interested in mission history or the long-term trajectory of Protestant work in Thailand will enjoy this exploration of an overlooked chapter in the history of Christianity in Thailand.

In the early twentieth century, theological modernism was gaining ground in the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. Conservatives claimed that there were modernists on the mission field but that the Board of Foreign Missions was doing nothing about it. In Thailand, the executive secretary of the American Presbyterian mission did not want to address the issue, claiming that "almost all of our Mission . . . are conservative in their theology, and liberal in their spirit." But was it true? In this book, Karl Dahlfred explores letters, reports, and other primary sources to reveal instances and indicators of modernism among Presbyterian missionaries in Thailand. Officially committed to making disciples of Jesus Christ, American Presbyterian missionaries were increasingly divided over what that meant, and how to carry out their task. Were schools or evangelism the best mode of Christian influence? Did the gospel need adjustment for the modern world? The mission formally maintained a conservative consensus, yet modernism was present. And fundamentalist-minded missionaries were not happy about it. Scholars, missionaries, Thai Christians, and anyone interested in mission history or the long-term trajectory of Protestant work in Thailand will enjoy this exploration of an overlooked chapter in the history of Christianity in Thailand.

Are evangelistic methods neutral? Or is there a connection between what we believe and how we evangelize? In "Theology Drives Methodology", Karl Dahlfred examines the theology and methods of Charles Finney and John Nevin, demonstrating how the different beliefs of these two men led them to radically different conclusions about the best methods to use in promoting the Gospel. Finney's beliefs led him to use high-pressure revival meetings to induce conversions. Nevin's beliefs led him to emphasize preaching, catechism, and pastoral care as the means that would produce conversions through the everyday ministry of the local church. Which man's methods were correct? Your answer to that question all depends on what you believe about God, man, conversion, and the nature of the Gospel itself. After an historical and theological survey of Finney & Nevin's beliefs and methods, the author draws out implications of each man's views and makes applications for the contemporary church.