ACCC warns on the "Danger of Neo-fundamentalism," Kevin Bauder, Sharper Iron

@Larry,

I agree with the gist of your post. I am against pejorative treatments of opposing views from either camp. As much as some would bristle over being pigeonholed as “literalistic” for upholding literal interpretation, others bristle over being dismissed as allegorical when they in actuality uphold a grammatical literal view, just not as literal or as consistently literal in certain passages as the other view. The question relates to whether it is legitmate to see the land promise as a type, and how to interpret the OT prophetic passages, and how to see them in light of the NT use of the OT. This is where the debate lies and to one-up the opposition and declare your view “biblical” or “literal” and their view as less than that, is to claim the high ground without actually having taken it. I agree both sides can do this, and it’s human to do this but as you conclude we need to “exercise caution and grace in how we talk about others” — whether in official denominationalish statements or in private conversation.