Due to the increase of transportation of people and ideas during the late 19th century many of the traditional Christian ideas were challenged by new ways of thinking. New scientific studies raised questions about the authenticity of Bible stories, and anything that seemed to be a miracle was to be rejected due to a new methodology. Those who rejected the Christian miracles, but still lived by the morals of Christian thought were referred to as liberals. Liberals attempted to use the new explanations of the world hand in hand with Christian thinking. Their counterpart would be the fundamentalists, who were against the new way of thinking such as evolution. Fundamentalists continued tradition and placed barriers on who was a Christian by the use of five fundamentals: inerrancy of Scripture, divinity of Jesus, the Virgin birth, Jesus’s sacrifice for sins, and his resurrection.
In his speech Fosdick characterizes the modernists as those who accept the new knowledge provided and attempt to use it to help explain their Christian faith. They attempt to find a way to incorporate the new knowledge in their belief. The fundamentalists on the other hand try to ignore the new knowledge and instead began a system with five fundamentals that must be observed.
Fosdick then discusses how the Bible is observed in the two beliefs. The fundamentalists view the Bible as the actual work of God being told to man to produce the Bible. In this view all historical and scientific context remains static and as it is told by the Bible. Fosdick is essentially saying that fundamentalists take a more literal translation of the Bible, and those who follow this view see the finality of the world, which is told in the Bible. On the other side the liberals view the Bible as God unfolding his will on the world from the beginning until the end of Christ. This dynamic view of the Bible allows for the incorporation of new ideas and concepts, and reverting back to a static stake would be devastating.
In his liberal view Fosdick foresees the integration of new ideas into the Bible. This of course would cause problems for the Bible as well as the fundamentalists. The Bible is filled with good teachings but also miracles of wonder that would fall quickly when compared with new science. The reasoning in faith for Christians would be at a loss if the miracles performed in the Bible were proved to be superstition. Then the Bible would have no relevance besides its good moral teachings.
Moss