I think the key here is to understand that ideas associated with the ‘conservative revivalist’ movement should be considered preferential, but Biblical truth is just that, objective truth. I would describe ideas in the conservative revivalist realm using terms like “I feel” or “I think”, whereas the term in the Biblicist realm would be “The Bible says.”

Thanks for the post Brother. God bless.

I agree with both posts, knowing full well that you don’t mean “preaching that is exciting” or “preaching that is intellectual;” rather, you mean “preaching in which the emphasis is placed on excitement” and “preaching in which the emphasis is placed on intellectualism.” These are indeed two extremes, and ought to be avoided.

I do wonder about saying evangelicals try to sound smart. I’m not here to constantly vindicate evangelicalism, by the way; I’m just concerned about statements about Christianity that aren’t well founded. You see, I used to feel the same way before I jumped ship – until I started reading and listening to Protestants other than those in my own circle. I realized soon that I needed to venture into evangelicalism for good, solid, meaty material (I’m certainly not getting systematic theology from the Sword of the Lord). But what I found there wasn’t people “trying to sound smart” but people who were actually well-studied and used their research to help edify the Church at large. Are there puffed up, over-intellectualized evangelicals out there? I’m sure there are being that we’re all prone to such prideful behavior, but I wonder if you can give any examples to justify the “overrun with people trying to sound smart” comment.

If I were asked to prove that many (certainly not all) fundamentalists border on anti-intellectualism, I can point you to dozens of sermons and books where this is made clear. Can the same be done for the super-intellectuals of evangelicalism?