Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Church History from the Civil War to the Present

Since Together for the Gospel, there's been a lot of talk over at Paleoevangelical about whether, and in what sense, the T4G gang acknowledge a biblical mandate to separate from disobedient Christians. This article by Al Mohler, cited in this post, gives us a glimpse into the T4G understanding of this issue.

I think my Fundamentalist friends are asking and saying this: "Are these guys REALLY neo-evangelicals? Because they don't sound like it. They're openly critical of evangelicalism and eager to contend for doctrinal purity, teach personal holiness and separation from worldliness, and they're committed to establishing and recovering biblical local churches. I like these guys - a lot!"

But at the same time they're wanting some evidence that the T4G guys have each parted ways with their neo-evangelical forerunners in some OFFICIAL way, or that they're now self-consciously opposed to the neo-evangelical philosophy of engagement.

I don't think they're going to find what they want. Why? One possible reason can be found in THIS TALK given by Mark Dever.

The reason is this: they don't think it's necessary to disassociate themselves from neo-evangelicalism because neo-evangelicalism belongs to the past. Neo-evangelicalism, at least in Dever's mind, was the movement against Neo-orthodoxy.

Give it a listen and let me know what you think.

No comments: