Sounds like the strawman characterizations fabricated by those most hostile.
I would start with something more objective like… " Fundamentalists argued that 19th-century modernist theologians had misinterpreted or rejected certain doctrines, especially biblical inerrancy, which they considered the fundamentals of the Christian faith." from Wikipedia. And THEN I would observe that this definition fits the bill for something highly reactionary. In other words, I think they were completely right that many modernist theologians had indeed gone off the deep end tossing out the fundamentals of the Christian faith. But then I think they went overboard themselves in reaction against this.
As for liberalism, that goes back to the promotion of the democratic ideals that are now widely accepted throughout the world. From Wikipedia again, " Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law." The problem here is that this has become a constantly moving goal post – and most of it still quite good. We are just not so sure where it is leading if that goal post keeps moving without end. If you argue that this is political rather than theological, then I would claim that the theological situation is closely related and analogous, only the issue is the liberty of thought in the face of new scientific discoveries.
I actually believe that verse means sort of the opposite.
The chapter is focused on spiritual gifts and how those gifts are to be used. Such as right before it , it states that prophecies will fail. Nothing around there seems centered on Christ’s return.
Before the final revelation of God came to humanity , people relied in part on the special powers concerning knowledge. James talked about this as well.
James 1:23-25 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror; 24 for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was. 25 But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does.
So the verses seem to be pointing towards the fact that God will stop giving knowledge for the church once he’s given the final words. Such as there won’t be any new books wrote this year to be added to the word of God.
Before it was completed, we could only see dimly. Afterwards we could potentially see all wisdom God is sharing with humanity through the word.
2 Likes
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
23
The definitions are somewhat fluid and reflect his theology, but is a good jumping off place. I am not sure it is a middle ground, but he presents traditional evangelical as a middle ground, though it has become synonymous with fundamentalism in recent years, and no longer would work as that. I like the term Olsen coined “post-evangelical” but it never took off.
Richard Beck’s label of post-progressive seems to resonate with me. Note his use of post-evangelical in this blog is just a desciptive term and not a position as Olsen uses it.