Result of:<\/h4>\n\n- Darwinism\n
- Higher Criticism\n
- Immanental subjectivism of Schleiermacher, Hegel, & Kant<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
[The roots in Darwinism and Higher Criticism are, I think, fairly well known. The philosophical background in immanental subjectivism is probably less known and understood. To understand modernism, I think one would do well to grasp especially the influence of the three men mentioned here.]<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Held to:<\/h4>\n\n- Evolution as a framework of history<\/li>\n
- Knowledge derived through experience<\/li>\n
- Man is essentially good<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Challenges facing classic liberalism:<\/h4>\n\n- Fundamentalism challenged liberalism from the standpoint of the inerrancy of the Bible<\/li>\n
- Humanism challenged liberalism from the standpoint that liberalism is not theology – i.e., liberal tenets were inconsistent with Christianity<\/li>\n
- History challenged liberalism with the advent of WWI (a blow against the notion of the inherent goodness of man)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
[The challenge from humanism is echoed by Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism<\/em>, its thesis being that Liberalism IS NOT Christianity.]<\/p>\n[Following WWI, liberalism morphed into two other movements in response to the challenge mentioned.]<\/p>\n
\n- Neo-liberalism (repentant liberalism)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nJan 3, 1924 – Christian Century<\/em> magazine: Christianity according to Fundamentalists and Christianity according to Modernists are two separate and distinct religions. [An admission]<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n- Neo-Orthodoxy: an effort to arrive at conservative conclusions on rationalistic foundations<\/li>\n
\n- Included the following philosophic influences<\/li>\n
\n- Hegelian dialectic<\/li>\n
- Rationalism<\/li>\n
- Pragmatism<\/li>\n
- Pietism<\/li>\n
- Secularism<\/li>\n
- Latitudinarian posture (“broadness”)<\/li>\n
- Empiricism<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/ul>\n<\/ul>\n
~~~<\/p>\n
Notes in [brackets] are my current additions to my old notes for (hopefully) a little clarity.<\/p>\n
As I read through this, I am struck by a couple of thoughts.<\/p>\n
One, all of this can be little understood and little appreciated without at least a cursory understanding of the history of philosophy. My senior year at university, I was required, much to my regret, to take two classes in philosophy. The two I ended up with were Introduction to Philosophy<\/em> and Modern Philosophy<\/em>. These were survey courses taught by the late George Mulfinger.<\/p>\nThough I entered these courses with a great deal of reluctance, I cannot thank the Lord enough for them. If you have a bit of a glimmer of understanding about how<\/em> the world thinks, you will pick up a little discernment about what is going on around you. We do not live in a vacuum and a great deal of the problems in the church are the direct result of being influenced by the world’s philosophy in one way or another.<\/p>\nTwo, I can’t help but be impressed again by the influence of Kant and Hegel on the unbelieving side of the church (firstly) and subsequently on a good deal of the [apparently] believing side of the church. If you don’t understand something of these two men, you will miss a lot of what is going on today.<\/p>\n
![\"don_sig\"](\"http:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/03\/don-sig22.png\")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
More from my 1980 Church History class notes: The old modernist movement came to be known as ‘classic liberalism’ (as opposed to a lesser known ‘new liberalism’ that emerged after WWI). The following is a brief outline describing them. 1850-1914 Classic Liberalism Result of: Darwinism Higher Criticism Immanental subjectivism of Schleiermacher, Hegel, & Kant [The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[78,67],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2fYWj-aS","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=674"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
[The roots in Darwinism and Higher Criticism are, I think, fairly well known. The philosophical background in immanental subjectivism is probably less known and understood. To understand modernism, I think one would do well to grasp especially the influence of the three men mentioned here.]<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Held to:<\/h4>\n\n- Evolution as a framework of history<\/li>\n
- Knowledge derived through experience<\/li>\n
- Man is essentially good<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Challenges facing classic liberalism:<\/h4>\n\n- Fundamentalism challenged liberalism from the standpoint of the inerrancy of the Bible<\/li>\n
- Humanism challenged liberalism from the standpoint that liberalism is not theology – i.e., liberal tenets were inconsistent with Christianity<\/li>\n
- History challenged liberalism with the advent of WWI (a blow against the notion of the inherent goodness of man)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
[The challenge from humanism is echoed by Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism<\/em>, its thesis being that Liberalism IS NOT Christianity.]<\/p>\n[Following WWI, liberalism morphed into two other movements in response to the challenge mentioned.]<\/p>\n
\n- Neo-liberalism (repentant liberalism)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nJan 3, 1924 – Christian Century<\/em> magazine: Christianity according to Fundamentalists and Christianity according to Modernists are two separate and distinct religions. [An admission]<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n- Neo-Orthodoxy: an effort to arrive at conservative conclusions on rationalistic foundations<\/li>\n
\n- Included the following philosophic influences<\/li>\n
\n- Hegelian dialectic<\/li>\n
- Rationalism<\/li>\n
- Pragmatism<\/li>\n
- Pietism<\/li>\n
- Secularism<\/li>\n
- Latitudinarian posture (“broadness”)<\/li>\n
- Empiricism<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/ul>\n<\/ul>\n
~~~<\/p>\n
Notes in [brackets] are my current additions to my old notes for (hopefully) a little clarity.<\/p>\n
As I read through this, I am struck by a couple of thoughts.<\/p>\n
One, all of this can be little understood and little appreciated without at least a cursory understanding of the history of philosophy. My senior year at university, I was required, much to my regret, to take two classes in philosophy. The two I ended up with were Introduction to Philosophy<\/em> and Modern Philosophy<\/em>. These were survey courses taught by the late George Mulfinger.<\/p>\nThough I entered these courses with a great deal of reluctance, I cannot thank the Lord enough for them. If you have a bit of a glimmer of understanding about how<\/em> the world thinks, you will pick up a little discernment about what is going on around you. We do not live in a vacuum and a great deal of the problems in the church are the direct result of being influenced by the world’s philosophy in one way or another.<\/p>\nTwo, I can’t help but be impressed again by the influence of Kant and Hegel on the unbelieving side of the church (firstly) and subsequently on a good deal of the [apparently] believing side of the church. If you don’t understand something of these two men, you will miss a lot of what is going on today.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
More from my 1980 Church History class notes: The old modernist movement came to be known as ‘classic liberalism’ (as opposed to a lesser known ‘new liberalism’ that emerged after WWI). The following is a brief outline describing them. 1850-1914 Classic Liberalism Result of: Darwinism Higher Criticism Immanental subjectivism of Schleiermacher, Hegel, & Kant [The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[78,67],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2fYWj-aS","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=674"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Challenges facing classic liberalism:<\/h4>\n\n- Fundamentalism challenged liberalism from the standpoint of the inerrancy of the Bible<\/li>\n
- Humanism challenged liberalism from the standpoint that liberalism is not theology – i.e., liberal tenets were inconsistent with Christianity<\/li>\n
- History challenged liberalism with the advent of WWI (a blow against the notion of the inherent goodness of man)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
[The challenge from humanism is echoed by Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism<\/em>, its thesis being that Liberalism IS NOT Christianity.]<\/p>\n[Following WWI, liberalism morphed into two other movements in response to the challenge mentioned.]<\/p>\n
\n- Neo-liberalism (repentant liberalism)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nJan 3, 1924 – Christian Century<\/em> magazine: Christianity according to Fundamentalists and Christianity according to Modernists are two separate and distinct religions. [An admission]<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n- Neo-Orthodoxy: an effort to arrive at conservative conclusions on rationalistic foundations<\/li>\n
\n- Included the following philosophic influences<\/li>\n
\n- Hegelian dialectic<\/li>\n
- Rationalism<\/li>\n
- Pragmatism<\/li>\n
- Pietism<\/li>\n
- Secularism<\/li>\n
- Latitudinarian posture (“broadness”)<\/li>\n
- Empiricism<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/ul>\n<\/ul>\n
~~~<\/p>\n
Notes in [brackets] are my current additions to my old notes for (hopefully) a little clarity.<\/p>\n
As I read through this, I am struck by a couple of thoughts.<\/p>\n
One, all of this can be little understood and little appreciated without at least a cursory understanding of the history of philosophy. My senior year at university, I was required, much to my regret, to take two classes in philosophy. The two I ended up with were Introduction to Philosophy<\/em> and Modern Philosophy<\/em>. These were survey courses taught by the late George Mulfinger.<\/p>\nThough I entered these courses with a great deal of reluctance, I cannot thank the Lord enough for them. If you have a bit of a glimmer of understanding about how<\/em> the world thinks, you will pick up a little discernment about what is going on around you. We do not live in a vacuum and a great deal of the problems in the church are the direct result of being influenced by the world’s philosophy in one way or another.<\/p>\nTwo, I can’t help but be impressed again by the influence of Kant and Hegel on the unbelieving side of the church (firstly) and subsequently on a good deal of the [apparently] believing side of the church. If you don’t understand something of these two men, you will miss a lot of what is going on today.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
More from my 1980 Church History class notes: The old modernist movement came to be known as ‘classic liberalism’ (as opposed to a lesser known ‘new liberalism’ that emerged after WWI). The following is a brief outline describing them. 1850-1914 Classic Liberalism Result of: Darwinism Higher Criticism Immanental subjectivism of Schleiermacher, Hegel, & Kant [The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[78,67],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2fYWj-aS","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=674"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
[The challenge from humanism is echoed by Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism<\/em>, its thesis being that Liberalism IS NOT Christianity.]<\/p>\n [Following WWI, liberalism morphed into two other movements in response to the challenge mentioned.]<\/p>\n Jan 3, 1924 – Christian Century<\/em> magazine: Christianity according to Fundamentalists and Christianity according to Modernists are two separate and distinct religions. [An admission]<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n ~~~<\/p>\n Notes in [brackets] are my current additions to my old notes for (hopefully) a little clarity.<\/p>\n As I read through this, I am struck by a couple of thoughts.<\/p>\n One, all of this can be little understood and little appreciated without at least a cursory understanding of the history of philosophy. My senior year at university, I was required, much to my regret, to take two classes in philosophy. The two I ended up with were Introduction to Philosophy<\/em> and Modern Philosophy<\/em>. These were survey courses taught by the late George Mulfinger.<\/p>\n Though I entered these courses with a great deal of reluctance, I cannot thank the Lord enough for them. If you have a bit of a glimmer of understanding about how<\/em> the world thinks, you will pick up a little discernment about what is going on around you. We do not live in a vacuum and a great deal of the problems in the church are the direct result of being influenced by the world’s philosophy in one way or another.<\/p>\n Two, I can’t help but be impressed again by the influence of Kant and Hegel on the unbelieving side of the church (firstly) and subsequently on a good deal of the [apparently] believing side of the church. If you don’t understand something of these two men, you will miss a lot of what is going on today.<\/p>\n More from my 1980 Church History class notes: The old modernist movement came to be known as ‘classic liberalism’ (as opposed to a lesser known ‘new liberalism’ that emerged after WWI). The following is a brief outline describing them. 1850-1914 Classic Liberalism Result of: Darwinism Higher Criticism Immanental subjectivism of Schleiermacher, Hegel, & Kant [The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[78,67],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2fYWj-aS","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=674"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/674\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"