In a talk with my pastor concerning our theological positions I labelled myself as post-evangelical. He said post-modern evangelical. We discussed another pastor nearyby whom he labelled as neo-orthodox. I think post-evangelical and post-modern evangelical are the same thing. However, I think Evangelicalism, in general, differs from neo-orthodoxy in that the evangelicals believe that Christianity is a rational faith. Evangelicals tend to shy away from the concept of a gigantic leap of faith to believe in Christianity. However, I do not think that evangelicals, as a whole endorse the rationalism of Modernist theology. Post-evangelicals have taken a step back from evangelicals and neo-evangelicals to re-evaluate the cultural and political assumptions that have so characterized the presentation of the gospel that they have been given the same status as the gospel message itself. This re-evaluation is needed as the Church struggles to legitimately present the Gospel of Christ to today's generation.There is a significant portion of post-evangelicalism that maintains a strong christology and soteriology, but is more open to dialogue on a lot of these issues than the various categories of evangelicalism.claimman75 (talk) 20:18, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
The article states that Post-Evangelicals tend to be more liberal politically "than might be expressed in the mainstream church."
This confuses me since "mainstream" is close to "mainline," which since the mid 1800s has been applied to the historic Protestant denominations, that now are usually pretty liberal politically. So I wonder if the author meant "mainstream evangelicals" or did mean to say that post-evangelicals are actually more liberal than the non-evangelical mainline Churches?