I ran across a blog that is new to me. On this blog there is an ongoing series of articles with this title:
Considerations Concerning the Proclamation of a Post-Fundamentalism Era and the Foundations for Paleo-Evangelicalism
The author explains his purpose in the first Part:
In this series of posts I shall attempt to give answers concerning the following:
- Whether Fundamentalism was flawed from its beginning by Scottish Common Sense Realism, sentimentalism, and populism or whether it rests more squarely upon Biblical principles;
- Whether Fundamentalism was only a “partial and uneducated” return to the Biblical faith because it lacks in its appreciation for the history of theological development in contrast to those who are primarily interested in defending the Reformed faith;
- Whether Fundamentalism should be broader in its vision and burden and be more culturally concerned as is the amillennialist because of his kingdom-is-now theology and the post-millennialist because of his establish-the-kingdom theology;
- Whether Fundamentalism should be actively listening to, dialoguing with, or learning from those outside of itself for the purpose of better spiritual growth and maturity;
- Whether the historical lines of separation for Fundamentalists should be scrapped in favor of fresh approaches meant to allow fellowship and cooperation with Conservative Evangelicals; and
- Whether we are actually now in a post-Fundamentalism era and in need of something new namely Paleo-evangelicalism.
This series is a response to Bauder’s recent series of articles trying to tell the history and philosophy of Fundamentalism (and making several errors along the way). I think the whole series is worth your attention and so I am providing links to each article below:
There is more to come. You should subscribe to the RSS feed on this blog and catch the rest.
UPDATE: Here is Part Nine (the last)
Related posts on oxgoad:
Comments