Sentences with phrase «inerrancy fundamentalists»

Steve wrote: Many biblical inerrancy fundamentalists look foolish and backward when they try to defend things that they shouldnâ $ ™ t waste their time defending.

Not exact matches

Mainline Protestants (Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and the like) and evangelical / fundamentalist Protestants (an umbrella group of conservative churches including the Pentecostal, Baptist, Anabaptist, and Reformed traditions) not only belong to distinctly different kinds of churches, but they generally hold distinctly different views on such matters as theological orthodoxy and the inerrancy of the Bible, upon which conservative Christians are predictably conservative.

(I) The neo-evangelical tradition has its roots in the fundamentalist effort to preserve intact the structure of classical post Reformation Protestant orthodoxy (indeed, it is here that the doctrine of inerrancy received its classical expression).

Similarly, fundamentalist Protestants, believing in the inerrancy of the Bible as though every word of it, dictated by God himself, was to be accepted as indubitably true, ultimately rely in all their arguments on an external authority.

Historic fundamentalists would find them compromising, adapting, walking center lines and warning on one of the two main marks — the other being biblical inerrancy — of fundamentalism.

Yet they largely agreed with the fundamentalists on such questions as biblical inerrancy, the Virgin birth and the physical resurrection of Jesus.

Evangelical theology, due to its commitment to the inerrancy of the Bible, is fundamentalist.

The forging of a full Holiness coalition in the CHA has required a blunting of fundamentalist rhetoric and doctrines like premillennialism and the inerrancy of the Scriptures.

The key issue for the fundamentalists was the inerrancy of the Scriptures, and one may trace under NAE and ETS influence a rush to beef up Holiness and Pentecostal statements on Scripture.

The moderates seek the inner light and read deeply in the Scriptures; the fundamentalists seek the inner light and defend the inerrancy of the Scriptures but do not read the Scriptures, which are iconic for them.

It began to happen a few years ago when a fundamentalist majority in the Southern Baptist Convention took control and insisted upon the inerrancy of the scriptures.

As one might expect, however, Barr is at his best when he returns again and again to his central theme — a critique of the style of biblical interpretation that follows from the fundamentalist commitment to a doctrine of the «inerrancy of Scripture.»

While I still hold to a basic idea of inerrancy and inspiration, I suspect that where I might be headed with this view will lead to a lot more flexibility on the doctrines of inspiration and inerrancy, which many fundamentalist Christians will not like one bit...

By the fundamentalist Protestant type we mean those churches which hold to the verbal inspiration and hence the literal inerrancy of the Bible, and which defend as of vital importance certain creedal dogmas, notably the virgin birth, the blood atonement, the physical resurrection of Christ, and his visible second coming.