Fundamentalism, Modernism, and the Dangerous Middle (Part 3)

In my last two posts (read them here and here), I laid out the danger of those that seek a middle ground between biblical fidelity (biblical fundamentalism) while also chasing acceptance by the liberal/modernist/progressive church and academy.

Discussion

Fundamentalism, Modernism, and the Dangerous Middle (Part 2)

In my last post, I laid out an abbreviated history of the fundamentalist/modernist controversy and a working definition of what I mean by fundamentalism. You can read my first part here. In part 2, I will give two historical examples of why this middle ground is a dangerous compromise for those that desire to stay true to the biblical doctrines. My final post will address some considerations for what this means in the Church today.

Discussion

Fundamentalism, Modernism, and the Dangerous Middle (Part 1)

In the 2017 World War II movie, The Darkest Hour, Winston Churchill cries out in frustration, “You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth!” Although these words are more than likely an artistic embellishment for cinema, they do fairly sum up Churchill’s frustration with the policies of Neville Chamberlain that sought to appease Adolph Hitler by ignoring his aggressions in Europe.

Discussion

On the Supernatural: Resisting Two Errors

Read the series.

What do you think of when you hear the word “supernatural”? For many, I suspect it’s a novel, movie, or TV series—or more than one. In the West, we have for a long time now associated “supernatural” with terms like unexplained, unusual, and paranormal.

Discussion

What Are the Fundamental Doctrines of the Faith?

Body

“The historic five fundamentals remain an important aspect of fundamentalism’s history and heritage, though they are not exclusive identifying marks of the movement.” - P&D

Discussion

Shall the Fundamentalists Win? (Part 1)

In this landmark 1922 sermon, Harry E. Fosdick, Pastor of First Presbyterian Church in New York, called for an open-minded, “tolerant” view of Christian fellowship. He delivered this address in the midst of the Fundamentalist-Modernist controversy. As is plain from his sermon, he did not want the fundamentalists to win!1

Discussion

"The Abolition of Man" at Age Seventy-Five

Body

“Since its initial publication seventy-five years ago, The Abolition of Man has served as one of the finest non-reactionary bulwarks against the faddish ideologies and various subjectivisms and other nihilistic nonsense of the political and cultural Left.” - Intellectual Takeout

Discussion