The post he is referring to:
Lately, I have encountered among many Christians a desire to rename and re-identify themselves. This desire usually manifests itself as attempting to forge a new way between so-called, conservative Evangelicalism and Liberalism. The contexts for these terms is both theological and political. These proposals can be seen in the writings of Jim Wallis in politics or Stan Grenz or Brian McLaren in theology. Indeed, much of the so-called emergent movement can be conceived of in this fashion.Read the rest here.
Not only are they critical of specific positions within both Evangelicalism and Liberalism, but also of the entire framework. They see both groups (conservative and liberal) as being stuck in the modern mindset of being able to have a corner on truth and therefore excluding others from that claim. They are quick to point out that modernity is dead and so we need to move beyond the problems which plagued it....
1 comment:
Very interesting and he has made a good historical analysis (if somewhat limited in scope). What he says about definitions is true:
"Furthermore, they give the impression that their "new" third way can only be defined by negation and lacks any positive proposals. Instead of just saying that Evangelicals hold too high a view of Scripture, propose for us then a positive sketch of what you would like to see in its place. Or do not just dance around the question of whether or not Christianity is true (as Grenz does in Renewing the Center pgs 280-286). If one’s position is to be taken seriously, they must answer the questions which are asked of them instead of avoiding a response by dismissing the question.
The other comment I would like to make about these calls for new options is that they are oddly familiar of the calls of recent history."
Post a Comment