Hi to my Forum Friends,

Since our Forum Friend, Ronnie P., has begun a discussion titled "How Old Are Bill's Fundamentalist Teachings?" -- and, immediately, our leading "Liberal Theology" Forum Friends jumped into the mud puddle; I will take a moment to explain about what is called by many as Fundamentalism, and called by others, Conservative Christianity.

In America in the late 1800s, the religious movement called PostModernism, another name for Liberalism, had gained a lot of support. Why? Because, in Liberalism, the Bible is not viewed as the inspired, inerrant, literal Word of God. Therefore, the proponents of Liberalism tell us that the Bible and its teachings can and should be adapted, modified, to fit our new world view, our new culture, our new society. To Liberals, the teachings of the Bible could be adapted to fit man's desires and lifestyles.

Yet, God tells us, and I paraphrase from Scripture, "This is My inspired Word to mankind. I am immutable, My Word never changes."

But, man says, "That Bible teaching makes me uncomfortable. We will change that to accommodate our new lifestyle."

Bad mistake on the part of man. In Malachi 3:6, we read, "For, I, the Lord, do not change. . ."

And, in Revelation 1:8, in the revelation from God given by Jesus Christ, through His angel, to the apostle John on the island of Patmos, "'I am the Alpha and the Omega,' says the Lord God, 'who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.'"

God does not adapt to man's ways; man adapts to God's Word. And, thus, we have the gist of the problem between Liberal Theology and Conservative, or Fundamentalist, Theology. Liberal Theology says, "Let's adapt the Word of God to fit our desires and lifestyle" -- and Conservative Theology says, "God said it. I believe it!"

Some years ago, a Friend on my Friends Ministry eNewsletters mail list, a retired school teacher in Missouri named Marna, would tease me and call me a Fundamentalist. It kind of ruffled my feathers; for I did not, at that time, fully understand what it meant to be a Fundamentalist.

About eight years ago, God made it possible for me to acquire the private library, consisting of over 200 books, of a pastor from California Baptist University. In that library I found a set of four books called "The Fundamentals." I knew enough about "The Fundamentals" to know that the original printing was twelve volumes; so, I did not get too excited about having only four. The books sat on my book shelf for several years before I ventured to open one. I found that Biola University had republished the twelve volumes into a four book set. I have the full set of "The Fundamentals." And, I have found these books to be a treasure of information on God, the Bible, and Christianity. If you have an opportunity to get this four volume set, I highly recommend it.

So, what is Fundamentalism?

First, we will look at the Wikipedia web page which Ronnie quoted -- and which he truncated to make it say what he wanted said. The first portion which is highlighted in blue text is what Ronnie posted. I will leave you to read the full paragraph so there will be no confusion.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANITY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...ntalist_Christianity

Fundamentalist Christianity, also known as Christian fundamentalism or fundamentalist evangelicalism, is a movement that arose mainly within British and American Protestantism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries among conservative evangelical Christians, who, in a reaction to liberal theology, actively affirmed a fundamental set of Christian beliefs: the inerrancy of the Bible, Sola Scriptura, the virgin birth of Christ, the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the imminent personal return of Jesus Christ. Some who hold these beliefs reject the label of "fundamentalism", seeing it as a pejorative term for historic Christian doctrine, while to others it has become a banner of pride.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A somewhat better explanation is found in this article from Encyclopedia.Com:

FUNDAMENTALIST MOVEMENT
The Oxford Companion to United States History | 2001 |
By Paul S. Boyer
http://www.encyclopedia.com/do...ntalistMovement.html

Fundamentalist Movement. American fundamentalism emerged within evangelical Protestantism in the early twentieth century in opposition to “modernism,” a term that encompassed liberal theology, the Darwinian theory of evolution, and secular culture. Fundamentalists shared with other American evangelicals an emphasis on the classical Protestant doctrines of salvation, the authority of the Bible, the importance of a personal conversion experience, and a missionary zeal to spread the gospel. What distinguished them from other evangelicals was their strident antimodernism.

The chief pillars of fundamentalist theology, such as biblical inerrancy, reflected this sentiment. The doctrine of inerrancy developed most fully by Presbyterian conservatives at Princeton Theological Seminary in the late nineteenth century in response to “higher criticism,” a sociohistorical approach to the Bible advocated by theological liberals. Believers in inerrancy view the Bible as the infallible product of the Holy Spirit's guidance; as the Word of God it contains no errors of any sort and must be read “literally”.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now, let's take a look at where we Conservative "Fundamentalist" Christians derive our belief in the inspiration, the inerrancy, and the literalism of the Word of God, our Bible.

This is taken from my personal Statement Of Beliefs:

The Bible, consisting of the books of the Old Testament and the New Testament, is the word of God; is a supernaturally given revelation from God Himself; and reveals to all believers the nature, character, will, and purposes of God -- and the nature, need, duty, and destiny of man:

2 Timothy 3:16-17 -- All Scripture is inspired by God.
2 Peter 1:20-21 -- All prophecy was made by men who were moved by the Holy Spirit.
Isaiah 46:9-10 -- I am God and there is no other.
Malachi 3:6 -- I, the Lord, do not change.

The Bible is without error in its moral and spiritual teaching and in its record of historical facts:

2 Timothy 3:16 -- All Scripture is inspired by God.
1 Samuel 15:29 -- God does not lie nor change His mind.
Titus 1:2 -- God cannot lie.
John 10:34-36 -- Scripture cannot be broken.

So, Ronnie, where and when did Conservative "Fundamentalist" Christianity begin? First, it began with the virgin birth, earthly ministry, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Without this chain of supernatural events; there would be no Christianity; there would be no salvation for any of mankind.

After these things, when did the first spark of the Fundamentalist Christian church happen? It happened in the Upper Room, where 120 disciples of Jesus Christ were obeying His command to wait upon the working of God. The Holy Spirit came upon them, empowered them, and they went out to the street of Jerusalem and began to teach the Gospel: Day One of the Christian church.

That day, three thousand believed and were added to the new Christian church. And, the fire of Christianity has spread around the world since -- through the efforts of Christians who are not afraid to evangelize; who are not afraid to tell folks the truth about their need for Jesus Christ and salvation; who are not afraid to refute false teachings of atheist, agnostic, and New Age, i.e., Gnostic, teachings. And, we will continue to grow in number until He, Jesus Christ, comes to Rapture His church and take us to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb in heaven.

But, the early church was not initially called Christian. This happened later in Antioch, where antagonists were trying to denigrate or slander the new believers by calling them a derogatory name: Christian, Christ Followers.

Yes, the name was initially meant to shame the new believers -- just as the name "Fundamentalist" is meant by Liberals and non-believers to shame or defame Conservative Christians. But, just as the early church saw the name "Christian" as a crown of honor -- we Conservative Christians today see the name "Fundamentalist" as a badge of honor.

So, when you want to call Bill Gray a Fundamentalist; all I can say to you is, "THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!"

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

There MUST be a category in the DSM IV for this type of thinking.

+1 to the proud ranks of fundies!

Praise report Bill, we had 20 young people give their lives to Christ at church last week. More proud fundies!

250 years ago Bill was there anyone being "saved" in church or any discussion of "the rapture"? I'll save you the trouble. NO. You aren't a fundamentalist you are a revisionist.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronnie P.:
250 years ago Bill was there anyone being "saved" in church or any discussion of "the rapture"? I'll save you the trouble. NO. You aren't a fundamentalist you are a revisionist.

People have been getting "saved" since the days of Christ. They may have called it something different, but accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior and believing he is the Son of God and was cruxified and rose again is being "saved" by today's definition of said word. A rose by any other name is still a rose.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Praise report Bill, we had 20 young people give their lives to Christ at church last week. More proud fundies!

GOD INDEED IS AWESOME!

quote:

Originally posted by Ronnie P.:
250 years ago Bill was there anyone being "saved" in church or any discussion of "the rapture"? I'll save you the trouble. NO. You aren't a fundamentalist you are a revisionist.

Hi Ronnie,

For almost three years on the Religion Forum, everyone has been calling me a Fundamentalist. Now, you tell me I am not a Fundamentalist! Boy, I wish you guys could get together with your act.

First, let's talk about folks being "saved" in church. Before we begin, we must define "church." Church is not a building, not a facility, and most definitely not a cathedral. Church is not Baptist; church is not Episcopalian, Methodist, or Presbyterian; church is not Roman Catholic; church is not any denominational group. "Church" is the body of believers, the followers of Jesus Christ. All believers in the body of Christ around the world make up the "church."

With that understanding, the first folks "saved" in the church were the 120 disciples in the Upper Room who were following Jesus instructions to wait for the working of God. The Holy Spirit came upon that 120, indwelling them. Saving number one. This was 33 AD, the Day of Pentecost.

After this, in Acts 2, we see that Peter and the apostles went into the street of Jerusalem and share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Three thousand folks were "saved" that day. In Acts 4:4, we read that four thousand more were "saved." So, within a few days of the church being born -- we see seven thousand people "saved" in the church.

Reading further, we read of Philip leading the Ethiopian eunuch to Jesus Christ. One more "saved" in the church.

We read of Saul's meeting with Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus. Saul was "saved" and became Paul.

We read of Peter visiting the home of Cornelius -- and all in Cornelius' household were "saved."

And, over the past two thousand plus years -- many millions more have been "saved" in the church.

Now, let's talk about the "Rapture."

John 14:1-3, "Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also."

The Rapture: Jesus Christ went to prepare a place for us -- and He will come again and receive us, Rapture us, to Himself.

1 Corinthians 15:51-53, "Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality."

The Rapture: In the twinkling of an eye -- we will be changed from our mortal bodies into our immortal bodies.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-18, "For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words."

The Rapture: Jesus is coming in the clouds and we will be "caught up" -- harpazo in Greek, rapiemur in Latin from which we get our English word "rapture.'

So, Ronnie, do we find people being "saved" in the church? You bet -- starting on the Day of Pentecost 33 AD.

Do we find the Rapture being taught in the early church? You bet -- starting with Jesus in John 14.

Once more, Ronnie, I will ask what church you attend; for you seem to have some pretty different ideas about the Christian faith and the Bible. I am not asking this to ridicule you or your church; only to better understand where you are coming from -- and better know where our discussions should take us.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

What does it mean?

Religious fundamentalism, plain and simple, is the form of extremism the gives rise and cover to apocalyptic violence and terrorism. It seeks to replace governments with theocracies (see Islam/Al-Qaeda and Christian/Dominionism here in the US). It defies reason, common sense and notions of human rights.

Even the Rutherford Institute recognizes this. Clearly it is one of (if not the most dangerous) ideologies on our planet today.

That verse cited sounds like the final judgment to me, but that is a plain reading. I suppose if I broke out a copy of Scofield I would be shown how it is not.

By the way, how does it matter theologically when or how the world ends? Is our Christian mission not to love the Lord with all our hearts and souls and to obey His commandments, and to love one another as the Lord loved us? I think that is where the "Let not your hearts be troubled" stuff comes in play.

When believers ever been spared the pain of the world as we are in the world and try not to be part of it? Does the rain not fall upon the just and the unjust alike? Is God not a non-respecter of people, and we all the fruit of Adam, each one of us subject to the same free will as one another? Free to accept or reject the Lord's message?

I'm just not up on Uber Protestant claptrap as I ought to be, only becoming aware of such things as "once saved always saved" within the last two decades, as I thought that stuff died with Calvin for the most part, and that that tribulation stuff was alongside snake handling and faith healing, the hallmarks of small obscure cults and that no clergyman who could read would preach such nonsense from a pulpit. Was I ever wrong! Well, at least we don't have witch trials any longer do we? Is the Pope the Antichrist still, that was the last talking point I had with any familiarity in crazy cultland.

Who ever knew there was such a huge subculture out there! Who could a thunk it?

Hi Neal,

You say, "That verse cited sounds like the final judgment to me, but that is a plain reading. I suppose if I broke out a copy of Scofield I would be shown how it is not."

It is not clear which verse you mean. However, I assume you are referring to my reference to John 14:1-3, "Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also."

What is wrong with "plain reading" this passage? Jesus tells all believers that He is going, i.e., He ascended into heaven -- to prepare a home for us. Sounds straightforward to me. Then, He tells us that because He went into heaven and made preparations for our homecoming -- He will come again and receive us to Himself. Sure sounds like He fully intends to come and get all His church, all believers. Now, many of us call this the Rapture; you can call it the Bullet Train if you like -- it still means that He is coming to "catch up" -- harpazo in Greek, rapiemur in Latin (from which we get our English word "rapture") -- His believers.

On the outside chance that you were referring to 1 Corinthians 15:51-53 or 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 -- these just elaborate upon what He told us in John 14 about His coming back to get His church.

So, Neal, has your ticket been punched yet for that Glory Train ride?

Next, you ask, "By the way, how does it matter theologically when or how the world ends? Is our Christian mission not to love the Lord with all our hearts and souls and to obey His commandments, and to love one another as the Lord loved us? I think that is where the 'Let not your hearts be troubled' stuff comes in play."

Does our view of eschatology affect our salvation? No.

Does it matter theologically when or how the world ends? Yes. For, God, in the Bible gives us the End Times prophecies. To date, over 1800 prophecies He has given us have been fulfilled -- without fail. If the End Times prophecies He gave us fail to be fulfilled just as He told us -- then, His prophecies would be a lie, He would be a liar. And, if that were the case; He could not be God -- for God does not lie (Titus 1:2).

So, Neal, if you believe in God; then you must also believe His Written Word.

Is our Christian mission only to love one another? Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that we must love one another enough to be willing to show all people the truth of the Gospel, that He is the ONLY WAY to salvation and to eternal life with God. If we fail to love our fellow man enough to tell him/her about Jesus; then we are not showing Godly love.

And, no. No, loving one another is not all Jesus has told us to do. In Matthew 28:19-20, He tells us to GO (take off you liturgical robes, lay down your Prayer Book, get off your liturgical duff -- and GO to the people who need Jesus Christ in their lives) -- MAKE DISCIPLES (share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with all the unsaved in the world, lead them to Jesus Christ -- just as Andrew led his brother, Simon Peter, to Jesus Christ [John 1:35-42] -- we are to lead our families and friends to Jesus).

Then, He continues: BAPTIZE THEM (do it yourself if necessary; but, better yet, guide them to a local Christian fellowship where they can be involved with other Christian believers and be baptized in that fellowship) -- TEACH THEM (help them to a better understanding of God's Word, the Bible; get them involved in a local Bible study group; have one-on-one Bible studies with them; help them to mature in their knowledge of God's Word).

Then, He tells all believers, in Acts 1:8, that we are to be His Witnesses -- in our Jerusalem (our home, our family, our friends, our community) -- in our Judea (our state) -- in our Samaria (our nation) -- and in all of our world.

No, Neal, Jesus is not telling us just to love one another. He is telling us to love folks all the way to the cross.

Then, you ask, "When (have) believers ever been spared the pain of the world, as we are in the world and try not to be part of it? Does the rain not fall upon the just and the unjust alike? Is God not a non-respecter of people, and we all the fruit of Adam, each one of us subject to the same free will as one another? Free to accept or reject the Lord's message?"

Yes, Jesus tells us, in John 16:33, "These things I have spoken to you, so that in Me you may have peace. In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world." But, these tribulations are mild compared to the tribulations prophesied for the End Times.

Jesus, in Matthew 24:22, warns us of the wraths to come in the Tribulation which is prophesied, "Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short." The Tribulation will be cut short upon His Second Coming, His return to judge the Tribulation survivors and to establish His Millennial Kingdom, the Kingdom of God on earth -- for one thousand years.

So, Neal, it is obvious that the tribulations we have in this world today, are nothing compared to those which will happen during the seven year Tribulation described in the book of Revelation.

Yes, we are free to accept or to reject the Lord's message. However, when we who are believers have, through our own free will, received His free gift of salvation; He tells us to Go, Make Disciples, Baptize Them, Teach Them -- and be His witnesses in all the world. That is how we show the love of Jesus Christ to the lost world. This is the fruit of our personal salvation.

And, we are told by the apostle Paul, who surely suffered many tribulations during his Christian ministry, "And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us" (Romans 5:3).

Then, Neal, you must have taken your Nasty Pill, for you revert to your old way of putting down all who do not worship in your liberal liturgical church, "I'm just not up on Uber Protestant claptrap as I ought to be, only becoming aware of such things as "once saved always saved" within the last two decades, as I thought that stuff died with Calvin for the most part, and that that tribulation stuff was alongside snake handling and faith healing, the hallmarks of small obscure cults and that no clergyman who could read would preach such nonsense from a pulpit. Was I ever wrong! Well, at least we don't have witch trials any longer do we? Is the Pope the Antichrist still, that was the last talking point I had with any familiarity in crazy cultland."

Neal, if only you could accept the fact that your church is not the only Christian church -- and that it is not true that all churches which do not hold liturgical masses are cult churches. You say that Jesus taught us to love one another; then you start calling all who are not Anglican/Episcopalian -- snake handlers and cults. Is that truly showing the love of God?

Whether you want to believe in End Time prophecies or not, that is your choice. However, in denying what the Bible teaches; you are denying God. By placing the authority of man-made traditions and other teachings above the authority of the Word of God, the Bible, you are saying that God is not the ultimate authority. And, if He is not the ultimate authority; then He is not God.

Yes, in past centuries there have been atrocities committed in the name of Christianity. Yes, the Salem Witch Trials did occur with the Christians in early America. Yes, the Roman Catholic church and the Anglican church are both guilty of great atrocities in the name of God in past centuries. Those were all the works of men, mostly men following their own man-made traditions and attributing their actions to God. But, no, those were not the works, nor the actions, of God or Christianity. Those were the actions of men who let their worldly desires and fears overrule the teachings of the Holy Spirit.

They crucified people for not believing and worshiping as they did. Neal, are you not doing the same?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Am I to take seriously someone who claims the following: "In America in the late 1800s, the religious movement called PostModernism, another name for Liberalism, had gained a lot of support."?

You do not even know what Postmodernism even is, much less can cite the influence of Lacan, Fouccault and Derrida upon the philosophical movement that entails Postmodernism!

It sounded good and scary so you ran with it -- as I do after a bout of ice cream with my lactose intolerant bowels.

You can take your tribulation, your rapture and your magic get out of hell for free prayers and do as you wish with with them, along with your 6000 year old earth, talking snake, and the Pharisees whom you seem to idolize and do with them as you wish. You would not like what I would like to do with them. Actually, you probably would enjoy it very, very, very much, being the ardent antihomosensualist you are, which usually means "the louder the bark the lighter the loafers."

quote:

Originally posted by Aude Sapere: Am I to take seriously someone who claims the following: "In America in the late 1800s, the religious movement called PostModernism, another name for Liberalism, had gained a lot of support."? You do not even know what Postmodernism even is, much less can cite the influence of Lacan, Fouccault and Derrida upon the philosophical movement that entails Postmodernism!

Hi Neal,

It is sad that you hate all Christians except those in your church. You challenge what I say about Liberalism and Fundamentalism; so, I will let the excerpts below from the Wikipedia article answer your question regarding the PostModern Christian Movement. This is the movement which brought Conservative Christians together to document in written form the beliefs of Conservative Christians. This set of documents was titled "The Fundamentals" -- meaning the fundamentals of Conservative Christian theology.

It was not meant to make Liberals hate Conservative or the reverse. It was meant to delineate our beliefs based upon the Bible; which we DO believe is the Written Word of God. Most Liberals and Conservatives can live together in peace, respecting the others right to believe as they see right. Yet, you cannot get past your hatred of all who do not worship as you do. That, my Friend, is sad.

I do not believe as Liberal Christians believe; but, I do not say they are a cult or not Christian. They are my Christian brothers and sisters.

I do not worship as the Pentecostals do; but, they are still my Christian brothers and sisters.

I do not worship as you do; but, if you truly have a relationship with Jesus Christ, you are my Christian brother.

However, with the degree of hatred you display on the Forum for all who do not worship as you do -- I must ask: Are you sure you have a relationship with Jesus Christ? Or, is your relationship with your church?

Your church cannot save you. Jesus Christ can!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

LIBERAL CHRISTIANITY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Christianity

Liberal Christianity, sometimes called liberal theology, is an umbrella term covering diverse, philosophically informed religious movements and ideas within Christianity from the late 18th century and onwards. The word "liberal" in liberal Christianity does not refer to a progressive political agenda or set of beliefs, but rather to the manner of thought and belief associated with the philosophical and religious paradigms developed during the Age of Enlightenment.

The theology of liberal Christianity was prominent in the biblical criticism of the 19th and 20th centuries. The style of scriptural hermeneutics within liberal theology is often characterized as non-propositional. This means that the Bible is not considered a collection of factual statements but instead documents the human authors' beliefs and feelings about God at the time of its writing — within a historic/cultural context. Thus, liberal Christian theologians do not claim to discover truth propositions but rather create religious models and concepts that reflect the class, gender, social, and political contexts from which they emerge. Liberal Christianity looks upon the Bible as a collection of narratives that explain, epitomize, or symbolize the essence and significance of Christian understanding.

Liberal Christianity was most influential with mainline Protestant churches in the early 20th century, when proponents believed the changes it would bring would be the future of the Christian church. Despite that optimism, its influence in mainline churches waned in the wake of World War II, as the more conservative, yet radical, alternative of neo-orthodoxy (and later postliberalism) began to supplant the earlier modernism. Other subsequent theological movements within the Protestant mainline included political liberation theology, philosophical forms of postmodern Christianity such as Christian existentialism, and conservative movements such as neo-evangelicalism and paleo-orthodoxy.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

MODERNISM (Roman Catholicism)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...m_(Roman_Catholicism)

Modernism refers to theological opinions expressed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries which are characterized by a break with the past. Catholic modernists form an amorphous group. The term "modernist" appears in Pope Pius X's 1907 encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis. Modernists, and what are now termed "Neo Modernists," generally, do not openly use this label in describing themselves.

Modernists came to prominence in French and British intellectual circles and, to a lesser extent, in Italy. The Modernist movement was influenced by Protestant theologians and clergy, starting with the Tübingen school in the mid-19th century.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

POSTMODERN CHRISTIANITY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_Christianity

Postmodern Christianity is an outlook of Christianity that is closely associated with the body of writings known as postmodern philosophy. Although it is a relatively recent development in the Christian religion, some Christian postmodernists assert that their style of thought has an affinity with foundational Christian thinkers such as Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas, and famed Christian mystics such as Meister Eckhart and Angelus Silesius

In addition to Christian theology, postmodern Christianity has its roots in post-Heideggerian continental philosophy. Many people eschew the label "postmodern Christianity" because the idea of postmodernity has almost no determinate meaning and, in the United States, serves largely to symbolize an emotionally charged battle of ideologies. Moreover, such alleged postmodern heavyweights as Jacques Derrida and Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe have refused to operate under a so-called postmodern rubric, preferring instead to specifically embrace a single project stemming from the European Enlightenment and its precursors. Nevertheless, postmodern Christianity and its constituent schools of thought continue to be relevant.

Liberal Christianity — sometimes called liberal theology — has an affinity with certain current forms of postmodern Christianity, although postmodern thought was originally a reaction against mainstream Protestant liberalism. Liberal Christianity is an umbrella term covering diverse, philosophically informed movements and moods within 19th and 20th century Christianity.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So, Neal, was I correct is stating, "In America in the late 1800s, the religious movement called PostModernism, another name for Liberalism, had gained a lot of support. Why? Because, in Liberalism, the Bible is not viewed as the inspired, inerrant, literal Word of God."? YES.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

No you are not. You cannot even read wikis properly, if that is possible.

Post Modern is an adjective applied to a late 20th century school of design and critical theory.

p.s. Most of it is as dense as you are, and vastly boring, as are your ideas -- and I honor you with suggesting you have thought when I use the word.

p.p.s. I ought to have known the likes of you would have sprung "postmodern" from a tertiary source. You could not possibly understand things like social construction of race, gender, the text as non-autonomous, etc.

You see, you are a lazy butt blowhard who throws around words like a drunk who hit the lottery does rounds of the house. You would never try to read French to get the nuance of Derrida. You have never even read the name before. You did not know he wrote in French! Because you are not well educated formally or well read. Because you are lazy. Too lazy to find out what post modern even means beyond google. Go do what Cheney told Leahy to do to himself on the Senate floor. Go on a rant on the President signing the hate crime bill today, two things at which you would excel.

Hi Neal,

I truly feel sorry for you. It must be very difficult to carry that much hatred inside. So, I guess, in a weird way, I am helping you. I give you a target toward which to vent your hatred. And, my Friend, it is better to get it out -- than to allow it to eat you up inside.

It is just too bad that you have to find others toward whom you vent your anger and hatred. Have you ever considered some form of physical exercise as an alternate way to vent that anger and hatred? Better for you -- and it would make you a much more pleasant person.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill