Maybe you are like me, I grew up in a kind of quasi-Fundy/Evangelical Christian home (back in the late 70’s, 80’s and 90’s), and woven deep into this fabric was a kind of Christianity that ebbed and flowed from a very defensive and reactive posture; a posture that stood against the world at large. So my bible was true because fulfilled prophecy made it so, the nation of Israel was back in the land (as of 1948), evolution was a sham (which I still am not a fan of macro-evolution), and 6 day young earth creationism was where it was at, my bible as innerrant was all that mattered, etc. As you can see, I grew up, like many of you, as a pure-bred Christian Fundy. Don’t get me wrong, Jesus was surely present in the midst of all this, and I have quite a few fond memories of his presence in therein and in the lives of so many dear people. And to be honest, there is still a sense of security about all of this past of mine, not so much because of the ideas and cultural location, but because of the people and relationships established in the middle of all of this kind of North American Christian Fundyism.
But beyond all of the above, what the really close observant can see, is that God is contingent or dependent upon our defense of him. Whether that be through appeal to fulfillment of prophecy, or asserting that the scriptures are inerrant, or what have you. What all of this Fundyism is in reaction to, is the ‘Liberal’ and positivist attack on the veracity of Christianity (see George Marsden), and the reality that somehow Christianity is dependent upon some sort of transcendent power that is outside of man and woman. And this is really the problem, as I see it. Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism–as it carries on Fundamentalism’s mode, even if it is redressed in contemporary flare–has allowed the ‘Liberal’ categories and procedures to dictate the way that they are going to engage theology and scripture.
But is this really Christian? Does the Christian need to prove God before they can believe in Him; or does the Christian need to be proven by God, so they can believe in Him? I opt for the latter. This makes a massive difference in the way we exegete Scripture (no longer trying to always prove the ‘Liberal’ wrong), and think theologically (no longer trying to prop up God’s existence through the Laws of probability or through Kalam’s Cosmological argument, etc.). We are free to start where God has started for us, in His Son, Jesus Christ, as God’s Self-revelation of Himself. It is either Christ or Nature; Un-Apologetics or Apologetics.