It is erroneous to call such people "Bible-believing."
Has anyone else noticed the sudden appearance of these articles trying to compromise the Evangelicals? What's up with this?
People want entertainment and family activities from churches today. People shop around for the church with the best laser light show and largest gym.
The Bible? Didn't the Supreme Court rule that illegal?
Do any of these progressives realize or care that God is Constant?
A fair enough critique.
They want the Ten Commandments in the public square, but are unconcerned when those commandments are replaced with principles for living' from the pulpit.
"Principles for living" are derived from the 10 Commandments and other Biblical teachings. There's a place for both - as I recall, Christ's "principles for living" were, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and all your soul, and all your mind, and all your strength" and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Sounds like Christ wasn't averse to the "principles for living" concept, was he???
To the Bible-believing liberal, ceremonies of a presidential inauguration are meaningful and inspiring, but the Sunday morning liturgy is boring.
Maybe the Sunday morning liturgy is boring. Nothing wrong with that; the Christian Faith predates the liturgy. The liturgy may be an outdated cultural relic that is irrelevant and incomprehensible to post-modern minds.
For the Bible-believing liberal, the differences between political parties are serious, but the differences between Christian denominations are petty.
Quick: can you give me the key, critical differences between the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Bible Presbyterian Church? Between the OPC and the Reformed Baptists? Between the Reformed Baptists and the Southern Baptist Colition? Many of the differences between those groups are trivial.
Even with the differences between the Evangelicals, the Catholics, the Orthodox, and the Mainline Protestants, it must be realized that, in the end, all are ultimately Christian denominations that affirm, or at least believe everything in, the old Creeds. It's a cliche, but it works - what we, as Christians, have in common is far greater than our theological disagreements. No, we should not trivialize our differences - as an Evangelical, I have very significant and real differences in my theology from a Catholic, for instance, and to claim otherwise would be denial. On the hand, we should not magnify those differences so that they seem greater than they are.
"Conserving their churches"? Is that the new Great Commission? Because my church is more interested in reaching the world and making disciples. And yes, our music and style are rather modern - spare me the blather about how the music of the 1600's (much of it wonderful and timeless, by the way) is somehow "Biblical" while newer music is somehow wrong. Psalm 98 says "Sing to the Lord a new song".
These people are not conservative and are definitely not Christian