I'm not a liberal, phew!

I went to a lecture today. It was for the frosh class but still useful and insightful to the common student. The lecture was about getting the most out of your education and the integration of faith and learning (how very Tyndale) but all that goes too far too fast. Let me explain where I'm going...

Will and I have made it a habit, a bad one, of staying up late to write papers or rather intending to write papers. The problem is that often at about 1:30 or 2 I go to say hello, make a witty remark or two and allow Will the same. That usually ends around 4. Thus we get no work done and are far more tired than intended.

In one of our last conversations we realized that we were most likely closer to liberals (of the theological nature) then that of fundamentalists. This means that we were close to end of the spectrum than either of us really wanted.

But today, thankfully, I learned I wasn't a liberal but there was another option.

To sum up Craig Carter's lecture I'll say this:

He presented four different view of integration (integration: taking the fountain of knowledge we have and doing something with it in our faith)

The first view: Fundamentalist- takes the bible at face value. One requires and uses no external information to interpret the bible. This, according to Carter, allows for no use of hermeneutical practices. (I will note that I think this can be done but only in significantly limiting ways and by ignoring all external sources because once you learn something it then becomes a matter of integration)

The second view:Liberalism- In light of Modern thought one must reanalyze the Bible for its value. Since the people at the time were limited, unsophisticated and unlearned (compared to us now) their worldview was dramatically skewed. This means that certain things in the bible must be taken to mean very different things then what actually happens in the world. This perspective serves to force the bible into Modern thought and compromises the bible in favor of modern thought.

The third view: Evangelicalism- In light of modern thought and biblical thought we must co-exist. Learning to compromise or even ignore our ideological differences and just try to find the common ground. This view seems to compromise both biblical views and modern views homogenizing them into a watered down synthesis of both. (much of the church has through cultural upbringing, media influence and poor teaching of critical analysis has this perspective sometimes without knowing it is the case)

The fourth view: Postmodern Orthodoxy- In light of Biblical thought one must reinterpret Modern thought for its value. We must take the biblical narrative as true and use modern viewpoints and understanding only where it brings revelation to the already existing foundation and reject it where it comes into direct conflict with biblical ideology. For example: Modern thought says that as humanity we can strive to overcome our destructive nature (e.g. war and poverty) through means of social reconstructions and unified efforts for good. Biblical thought says that God's purposes are working in the world and its only through divine intervention (seen in Christ) that we will overcome evil for good and end our destructive nature. Thus we must abandon the modern hopes for the reality of the bible.

This is a summary of the end of Carter's lecture which I thought was great.

I would like to then go on record as a Postmodern Orthodoxist.

Patman the Postmodern Orthodoxian Pat.

(it seems the phrase Postmodern Orthodoxy has no current way of describing its followers. i.e one who is liberal is a liberal. One who is from Britain is British. One who understands them self to align with postmodern orthodoxy is?)

I would also recommend Craig Crater's blog located to the left and feel free to pick up his books advertised therein.