Changes

Neither strictly Christian left nor right were members of the Christian '''neo-orthodoxy''' movement. These theologians have characteristics in commmon with both the [[Religious Left|left]] and the [[Religious right|right]]. Its members include the Swiss theologian Karl Barth and the first generation American theologian [[Reinhold Niebuhr]]. They rejected much of the [[Liberal Christianity#Origins of liberal Christianity|liberalism]] of the [[social gospel]], emphatically embracing the doctrine of original sin, but still held biblical criticism in high regard and never fully questioned the liberal foundations of science and academia—unlike [[fundamentalism|anti-modernism]], which discredits, ignores, or soft pedals biblical criticism and has always, continues to, and never shys away from such questioning. The origins of the neo-orthodoxy movement stem from Karl Barth's initial preaching in the way he had been taught at seminary, soon believing many of his own thoughts and words to be hypocrises, and then, subsequently rejecting and refuting 350 years of German, Swiss Protestant teaching—almost everything after or outside of [[Martin Luther]] and [[John Calvin]]. Karl Barth asserted that [[God]] is "wholly other" and that man must reshape himself to [[God]]'s design and not the other way around as had become the norm in 19th century Swiss, German Christian theology<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,949287,00.html "Thunder and Lightning in a Pen"], Richard N. Ostling, ''[[Time magazine]]'', Monday, Aug. 03, 1981 </ref>. The movement was by no means unified. Still, one common characteristic is an enthusiam for the thought of the Russian [[Fedor Dostoevski]] and the Dane [[Soren Kierkegaard]] and a rejection of 19th century German theological thought (e.g., [[Wilhelm Herrmann]]).

Neo-orthodox is a major Protestant theological development in the 20th century.  Originating in Europe after World War I, it spread to the U.S. in the 1940s and 1950s and to some extent displaced [[Liberal Christianity]] with its emphasis on God as the centerpiece of religion.

 

Neo Orthodox theologians have characteristics in commmon with both the [[Religious Left]] and the [[Religious right]]. Its members include the Swiss theologian [[Karl Barth]] and the first generation American theologian [[Reinhold Niebuhr]]. They rejected much of the [[Liberal Christianity#Origins of liberal Christianity|liberalism]] of the [[social gospel]], emphatically embracing the doctrine of original sin, but still held modernist biblical criticism in high regard and never fully questioned the liberal foundations of science—unlike [[fundamentalism|anti-modernism]], which rejects biblical criticism and never shies away from such confrontation.  

 

The origins of the neo-orthodoxy movement stem from Karl Barth's initial preaching in the way he had been taught at seminary, soon believing many of his own thoughts and words to be hypocrises, and then, subsequently rejecting and refuting 350 years of German, Swiss Protestant teaching—almost everything after or outside of [[Martin Luther]] and [[John Calvin]]. Karl Barth asserted that God is "wholly other" and that man must reshape himself to God's design and not the other way around as had become the norm in 19th century Swiss, German Christian theology<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,949287,00.html "Thunder and Lightning in a Pen"], Richard N. Ostling, ''[[Time magazine]]'', Monday, Aug. 03, 1981 </ref>. The movement was by no means unified. Still, one common characteristic is an enthusiam for the thought of the Russian [[Fedor Dostoevski]] and the Dane [[Soren Kierkegaard]] and a rejection of 19th century German theological thought (e.g., [[Wilhelm Herrmann]]).

==American branch==

==American branch==

The American branch of neo-orthodoxy is the theological literature ''by'' and ''on'' [[Reinhold Niebuhr]], his brother [[H. Richard Niebuhr]], and his friend whom he helped extract from Nazi Germany [[Paul Tillich]].  Within the American Academy and mainline churches from the 1930's through the 1960's the theological work of these three men eclipsed that of any others.

The American branch of neo-orthodoxy is the theological literature ''by'' and ''on'' [[Reinhold Niebuhr]], his brother [[H. Richard Niebuhr]], and his friend whom he helped extract from Nazi Germany [[Paul Tillich]].  Within the American Academy and mainline churches from the 1930's through the 1960's the theological work of these three men eclipsed that of any others.

==Neo-orthodoxy and Christian Antimodernism==

==Neo-orthodoxy and Christian Antimodernism==

A useful but somewhat simplistic way of defining neo-orthodoxy is to define it as the rejection of Professor [[Wilhelm Herrmann]] teachings by some of his students&mdash;in this sense [[fundamentalism|antimodernism]] is a branch of neo-orthodoxy.  For [[John Gresham Machen]], who traveled to Germany and studied with Herrmann in 1905, is a key figure in the formation of Christian Conservativism.  Above all, the common ground between [[fundamentalism|anti-modernism]], and Neo-orthodoxy is the acceptance and evangelism of the [[sin|doctrine of Sin]].  A significant difference is the solution to the problem of sin. [[fundamentalism|Antimodernism]] espouses the [[Salvation|doctrine of Salvation]], while neo-orthodoxy remains eerily silent on such a solution despite all its vociferousness about the [[sin|doctrine of Sin]].

A useful but somewhat simplistic way of defining neo-orthodoxy is to define it as the rejection of Professor [[Wilhelm Herrmann]] teachings by some of his students&mdash;in this sense [[fundamentalism|antimodernism]] is a branch of neo-orthodoxy.  For [[John Gresham Machen]], who traveled to Germany and studied with Herrmann in 1905, is a key figure in the formation of Christian Conservativism.  Above all, the common ground between [[fundamentalism|anti-modernism]], and Neo-orthodoxy is the acceptance and evangelism of the [[sin|doctrine of Sin]].  A significant difference is the solution to the problem of sin. [[fundamentalism|Antimodernism]] espouses the [[Salvation|doctrine of Salvation]], while neo-orthodoxy remains eerily silent on such a solution despite all its vociferousness about the sin.