This is an excellent (and lengthy) article on the Christianity Today website that details the widely differing views on biblical inspiration and authority between the Northern and Southern spheres of Christianity.
Southern (hemisphere) Christianity in the 2/3 world interpret the Bible in ways that we in the North would label consvervative and literal. Kind of. And yet, as this article also shows, the South also engages the Bible in ways that we in the North would call liberal.
This dovetails with something I’ve been wrestling with lately. At school I’ve been increasingly leaning in what would be called liberal directions in terms of my theology of inspiration and interpretation. However, this kind of approach has not historically seemed to produce a vibrant, healthy church. Rather, it would seem (from my perspective) that a conservative theology of inspiration and interpretation is strongly correlated with a vibrant church life.
So, this is the wrestle: which comes first: intellectual conviction, or missional conviction? Is this a false duality? It would seem that the article indicates that, but I’m not sure how that works out within our own context. The journey continues…