Here are a couple of statements that contrast evangelical theology with ‘evangelical liberalism,’ as it is developing.
Albert Mohler’s review of ‘Love Wins’ includes this statement about the Gospel:
We have no right to determine which “story” of the Gospel we prefer or think is most compelling. We must deal with the Gospel that we received from Christ and the Apostles, the faith once for all delivered to the church. Suggesting that some other story is better or more attractive than that story is an audacity of breathtaking proportions. The church is bound to the story revealed in the Bible — and in all of the Bible … every word of it.
Brian McLaren offers a defense of Rob Bell (and a critique of Mohler) which revolves around this remarkable assertion:
Our versions (mine included) are all, then, human interpretations of the gospel of Christ and the apostles, and human interpretations of the original message are not exactly the same thing as the original message. Some are more true to the original and some less, but no articulation of the gospel today can presume to be exactly identical to the original meaning Christ and the apostles proclaimed. That doesn’t mean we can’t proclaim anything with confidence, but it demands a proper and humble confidence rather than a naive and excessive confidence.
So we have a committment to mutual belief in a truth revealed in the Scriptures with a committment to mutual seeking of truth which can be derived from Scripture.
These are not the same thing.
I affirm the first position.