Difference between revisions of "Liberal Christianity"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Liberal Christianity's Anti-semitism: ++Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism)
m
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
As a result Liberal Theologians view the Bible as a text to be [[hermeneutics|interpreted]] in its [[history|historical]] context through critical analysis.<ref>http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/liberalism.htm</ref> Examples include some churches within [[Anglicanism|Anglican]]/[[Episcopalian]], [[Lutheran]], [[Methodism|Methodist]], [[Presbyterian]], and [[United Church of Christ]] churches.<ref>[http://www.beliefnet.com/story/80/story_8028_1.html ''What Liberal Protestants Believe''] Beliefnet. Accessed 15 March 2008</ref> The word "liberal" in liberal Christianity does not refer to any political agenda or set of beliefs, although liberal theological beliefs will often form the basis of liberal political beliefs.
 
As a result Liberal Theologians view the Bible as a text to be [[hermeneutics|interpreted]] in its [[history|historical]] context through critical analysis.<ref>http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/liberalism.htm</ref> Examples include some churches within [[Anglicanism|Anglican]]/[[Episcopalian]], [[Lutheran]], [[Methodism|Methodist]], [[Presbyterian]], and [[United Church of Christ]] churches.<ref>[http://www.beliefnet.com/story/80/story_8028_1.html ''What Liberal Protestants Believe''] Beliefnet. Accessed 15 March 2008</ref> The word "liberal" in liberal Christianity does not refer to any political agenda or set of beliefs, although liberal theological beliefs will often form the basis of liberal political beliefs.
−
 
−
As a further result, liberal Christians tend to take a [[Cafeteria Christianity|pick-and-choose]] approach to the Bible, declaring that those passages that they like were intended by God to be followed today, while other parts are outdated or need to be interpreted correctly.  Many liberal Christians believe that the Bible was [[Documentary Hypothesis|combined from multiple sources]]<ref>[http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html Documentary Hypothesis]</ref> or even that certain parts of the Bible that do not agree with liberal theology are later additions that do not belong in the Bible at all.<ref>[http://www.chick.com/ask/articles/1john57.asp Is it true that 1 John 5:7...?]</ref>  In extreme cases, some liberal Christians even engage in [[politically correct]] [[censorship]] against those who quote Bible verses that tend to disprove a liberal Christian position.
 
  
 
===Economic and historical aspects===
 
===Economic and historical aspects===
 
In terms of economics, liberal Christianity grossly oversimplifies New Testament [[eschatology]] towards the [[Kingdom of God]] into the liberal "law of progress."  History does indeed show a growing maturity in technology, thought, and social relations, but there is nothing within the academy's forces of history or its figures of history to suggest that good triumphs over evil. [[Bomb|Bombs]], [[NAFTA]], and [[feminism]] are indeed evidence of the [[liberal]] law of progress, but in so far as these things are merely the will of man, their development involves  [[sin]], i.e. evil triumphing over good.<ref> ''Basic idea for this paragraph is from'' April 26, 1939 ''The Christian Century'', Reinhold Niebuhr, "Ten Years That Shook My World", pages 542-546 </ref> A quote from the [[liberal]] Christian scholar Edgar S. Brightman provides an example of this sort of thinking: "I believe in God because I believe that history represents a steady, moral progress."  This was turned around by the [[neo-orthodoxy|neo-orthodox]] scholar Langdon Gilkey when he stated "I believe in God because to me history precisely does not represent such a progress."<ref> [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3049-2004Nov21.html Washingtonpost Obit of Langdon Gilkey] </ref>  
 
In terms of economics, liberal Christianity grossly oversimplifies New Testament [[eschatology]] towards the [[Kingdom of God]] into the liberal "law of progress."  History does indeed show a growing maturity in technology, thought, and social relations, but there is nothing within the academy's forces of history or its figures of history to suggest that good triumphs over evil. [[Bomb|Bombs]], [[NAFTA]], and [[feminism]] are indeed evidence of the [[liberal]] law of progress, but in so far as these things are merely the will of man, their development involves  [[sin]], i.e. evil triumphing over good.<ref> ''Basic idea for this paragraph is from'' April 26, 1939 ''The Christian Century'', Reinhold Niebuhr, "Ten Years That Shook My World", pages 542-546 </ref> A quote from the [[liberal]] Christian scholar Edgar S. Brightman provides an example of this sort of thinking: "I believe in God because I believe that history represents a steady, moral progress."  This was turned around by the [[neo-orthodoxy|neo-orthodox]] scholar Langdon Gilkey when he stated "I believe in God because to me history precisely does not represent such a progress."<ref> [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3049-2004Nov21.html Washingtonpost Obit of Langdon Gilkey] </ref>  
−
Also, liberal Christian economic theories tend to place undue emphasis on selected portions of Scripture, such as [[the parable of the sheep and the goats]] and other passages on [[charity]], while ignoring other Scripture passages that do not support economic liberalism.
 
−
 
−
===Liberal Christianity's Anti-Semitism===
 
−
In ''American Protestantism and a Jewish State'' (1973) an Israeli government official [[Hertzel Fishman]] analyzed several years (1937-1967) worth of ''[[Christian Century]]'' and concluded that the magazine is [[Anti-Semitism|Anti-Semitic]], stating "[[Liberal Christianity|Liberal Protestanism]] consistently and historically opposed a Jewish State in Palestine, obstructed immigration of Jewish refugees, minimized the Holocaust, tried to reduce Israel's boundaries and supported Arab 'rights'." Although Dr. Fishman found instances of the magazine denouncing individual acts of anti-semitism, he found that the magazine was consistent in its intolerance and opposition to collective acts of a Jewish "peoplehood."<ref>''[http://books.google.com/books?id=-BPjHQAACAAJ Zionism Within Early American Fundamentalism 1878-1918: A Convergence of Two Traditions]'', [[David A. Rausch]], Edwin Mellen Press, 1979, ISBN 9-88946-875-3, ISBN 0-88946-976-8, page 23-25 </ref> In this sense and in theological senses, the modern [[Coptic Church]] is part of liberal Christianity. The ''Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism'' is a document written and endorsed by several [[liberal]] Christian churches. <ref> [http://www.pcusa.org/peacemaking/jerusalemdeclaration.pdf ''Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism''] </ref>
 
  
 
===Origins of liberal Christianity===
 
===Origins of liberal Christianity===

Revision as of 01:17, February 4, 2009

Liberal Christianity refers to Protestant denominations, or churches within denominations, that view the Bible as the witness of God rather than the word of God. Strangely the view is supported by a rather literal interpretation of the words of Paul in his second letter to Timothy:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,... 2_Timothy 3:16

Here Paul supports the view that scripture is a direct result of the authors contact with God ("witness") whilst stopping short of claiming actual divine authorship ("word"). Conservative Christians would answer that the Bible records God's promise to preserve His words, not merely His ideas.[1]

As a result Liberal Theologians view the Bible as a text to be interpreted in its historical context through critical analysis.[2] Examples include some churches within Anglican/Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, and United Church of Christ churches.[3] The word "liberal" in liberal Christianity does not refer to any political agenda or set of beliefs, although liberal theological beliefs will often form the basis of liberal political beliefs.

Economic and historical aspects

In terms of economics, liberal Christianity grossly oversimplifies New Testament eschatology towards the Kingdom of God into the liberal "law of progress." History does indeed show a growing maturity in technology, thought, and social relations, but there is nothing within the academy's forces of history or its figures of history to suggest that good triumphs over evil. Bombs, NAFTA, and feminism are indeed evidence of the liberal law of progress, but in so far as these things are merely the will of man, their development involves sin, i.e. evil triumphing over good.[4] A quote from the liberal Christian scholar Edgar S. Brightman provides an example of this sort of thinking: "I believe in God because I believe that history represents a steady, moral progress." This was turned around by the neo-orthodox scholar Langdon Gilkey when he stated "I believe in God because to me history precisely does not represent such a progress."[5]

Origins of liberal Christianity

Liberal Christian theology is the result of these three 19th century theologians: Friedrich Schleiermacher, Albrecht Ritschl, and Hegel. Their work and that of others who followed them was a response to 19th century scientific interpretations that seemed to question the validity of many basic Christian doctrines: doctrine of creation, doctrine of Incarnation, doctrine of eternal life, etc. Schleiermacher sought to re-establish the authority of the doctrines using Christian religious experience rather than scientific knowledge. Ritschl rejected Schleirmacher's idea and tried to re-establish their authority using Kant's idea of moral experience and in the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God. Hegel simply tried to re-establish their authority by basing Christian Faith on rational and philosophical inquiry.[6] Doctrines that couldn't follow one of these three new theological paths—religious experience, moral experience, or philosophical inquiry— tended to disappear. The first-quarter 20th century neo-orthodoxy movement was a renewal of Christian doctrines that had been neglected by liberal Christianity within the American and European academy. At the heart of the neo-orthodox renewal appeals to symbolic and aesthetic interpretations of long forgotten Christian doctrines can found in the works of Karl Barth, the Niebuhr brothers, and Paul Tillich.

See also

External Links

References

  1. ↑ God's promise to preserve His Word
  2. ↑ http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/liberalism.htm
  3. ↑ What Liberal Protestants Believe Beliefnet. Accessed 15 March 2008
  4. ↑ Basic idea for this paragraph is from April 26, 1939 The Christian Century, Reinhold Niebuhr, "Ten Years That Shook My World", pages 542-546
  5. ↑ Washingtonpost Obit of Langdon Gilkey
  6. ↑ Naming the Whirlwind: The Renewal of God-Language, Langdon Gilkey, Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1969, 73, 74, and 75
v • d • e
Liberal Characteristics and Traits
Ideology
Policy
Tools
Traits
Other
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal_Christianity&oldid=618510"