It is difficult to define the word liberal, just as it would be difficult to define conservative. I myself couldn't even tell you where I would stand, most would probably consider me "Very Conservative" on facebook (but I leave it up to opinion). The fact is there are the "very conservative" "somewhat conservative" "liberal conservative" "conservative liberal" "liberal" "very liberal" "moderate", and who really knows where the line is drawn, since there is a plethora of issues and diversity of opinion on all of them.
But lets just assume we all understand what is meant by "Liberal." That being (for the most part), pro-choice, anti-death penalty, removal of religion from all government and schools, gay rights, anti-war, anti-gun, pro-welfare, etc. etc. etc. You get the idea.
Of course most of those are what might be looked as secular liberals. But then there are the "Christian Liberals," which is mostly what this note is dealing with. Christian Liberals are not always to be associated with some of the above politically stances, but many times are.
Liberal Christianity or "Liberal Theology" is imposing freedom of thought on the Holy Bible. Some idea of what Liberal Theology states:
1) The Bible is not 100% inspired. The Bible is wrong in most of what it says about geography or science or even history. It was written by men, composed by men, and therefore is susceptible to error and unauthoritative. Jesus is how one might "feel" about Him, or how someone wants Him to be, thus creating a false god and setting up an idol in their mind.
2) An approach to the Bible and Christianity is completely individualistic. There are no written creeds or confessions, and all interpretive thoughts have credibility. Christian judgment is absent therefore all ideas are valid, and there is no judgment between right or wrong dogma, simply because there is no dogma.
3) Most of the stances in the political realm are introduced into the church. The acceptance of unrepentant homosexuals as congregants, ultra-feminism, pro-choice, and a wide array of ideas of who or what "god" is. Though this is more of a result of the first two.
The meaning behind liberalism has changed throughout history. But what I am talking about is basically human reason, rationale, and logic placed over the Bible, instead of the other way around.
Almost any error can be linked to one of these ideas above.
-Arminianism = The idea that man's will is free to choose.
-Unitarianism = Denial of Trinity.
-Pelagianism = That man is born good and needs no grace.
-Arianism = Denial of the eternality of Christ.
-Universalism = Belief that all religions are equal.
-Postmodernism = Denial of absolutes truths.
So on they go.
Not everyone that falls under these errors of doctrine would be considered a liberal in the Political realm of course, but their liberal thoughts imposed on the Bible has caused a large disruption within the Church of Christ. I am sure there are many who would consider themselves "Conservatives" that wouldn't even realize that they do this to the Bible as well, especially under the Arminian category.
So then I ask (I'll say what I think, and if anyone wants to agree or disagree let me know)...
1) Can a person who denies the authoritativeness of the Bible be considered a Christian?
I have a family member who does this. He says he believes in God, and Jesus, but not how the Bible explains them. In his mind, "God would never send someone to hell, because He is a God of love," or "I think that all people are good, and as long as they try their best they will make it to heaven" (In complete denial of Biblical truths). What most people try to do is say, "I think..." or "I bet..." or "I believe...", but they do not use Scripture, it is simply the god they have created in their mind. So then they may believe in a god, but not the Christian (Biblical) God. The definition of a Christian is one who believes in the Bible, there is no other book, manual, or magazine that defines one.
2) Are all thoughts, ideas, feelings, etc. of God equally valid? Should all judgment, creeds, and confessions be left out of the church?
A common cop out in an argument for most postmodern "Christians" (yes I group them in Liberal theology), is the statement "I think you are both right" or "Lets agree to disagree." Can one person say God is unitarian and another say God is trinitarian and both be right? Martin Luther once said, "Peace if Possible, truth at all Costs." This of course has been lost, and for the sake of what some call "Christian Unity" every wind of doctrine, every worldly idea has crept into the Church (Eph. 4:14). No creeds or confessions means no dogma, no dogma means no established truth, and no established truth means the complete denial of a Holy God who commands our obedience to His Word.
3) Can a Christian be liberal?
With doctrine. I say no. With politics. I say no. In both a Christian is to profess the Lordship of Jesus Christ in all realms. He does not just reside in the Church or at your Bible Study, but over all realms of life. Liberality implies that men can make the most rationale choice, and that God is no longer needed for the establishment of law or doctrine.
Are there Christians who are liberal in thought, I am sure there are. But should they be is the question?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I found your website after browsing a former co-worker's (Christian woman)new business website. I was surprised to see all of the Barack Obama support on the page, so I went to her facebook page and saw that she is a "Liberal" and a "Christian".
I'm not doubting her faith, and I think she loves the Lord, but I don't see how you can LOVE the Lord, follow the Bible, and be liberal at the same time. By their nature, they contradict each other.
A quick google search of "liberal christians" took me to what I think is the authoritative liberal christian website, where part of their mission statement is "Conservative Christians are often content to answer religious questions by appealing to the absolute authority of Scripture. Liberal Christians, on the other hand, find such an approach to be flawed. Many see the Bible as a witness to revelation, or generally inspired, rather than completely inspired in all its parts. Just as Jesus was fully human and wholey divine, so one must also see the Bible as a product of both human and divine influences. Indeed, liberal Christians are quick to point out that the falleness and imperfection of its human authors gives the Bible an imperfect quality and authority."
And that's where they lost me. It's very apparent that they completely ignore 2 Timothy 3:14-17, where it says ALL scripture is GOD breathed. Liberal Christians seem to forget that, and seem to ignore it.
There is absolute truth in the Bible, and I don't see anything at all wrong with using passages from the bible as my answer to life's questions, issues and political stances. God is infallible. He doesn't change. So who are we as humans to say the bible is open to interpretation? We can't. We shouldn't. Because in doing so, we're saying that what we think and how we interpret things are better/smarter/above what God says.
No. You cannot be a liberal Christian.
ricky,
Thanks for the thoughts.
"There is absolute truth in the Bible..."
These kinds of statements, and a belief in their truth, would solve a lot of problems in the modern church.
To Ricky,
There is a big problem with your view of 2 Timothy 3:14-17; It nowhere lists what "ALL scripture" is. At the time Paul wrote that, not ALL of the scriptures were written or completed yet. How do you know that the 27 letters which now compose the New Testament are the "inspired scripture"? Why not only 20, or maybe 30 letters? We get those 27 letters from Church Tradition.
It was 300 years later that the Catholic Church chose those 27 letters to be the only New Testament inspired scripture. Let me ask this; did the Catholic Church make a fallible decision, or an infallible decision, regarding the choice of those 27 letters? If they made an infallible decision, and you accept their authority on those particular 27 letters, then the authority of the Catholic Church stands above the scripture which does not say what books are inspired.
There is absolute truth in the Bible, yes, but there is wide disagreement as to the interpretation of it. Does the Sun rise and set, as scripture says, or is the Earth revolving as science says? Must we come to Jesus as a little child in order to enter the Kingdom of God as Jesus said? Do not adults have a chance? Is baptism necessary for salvation? There is much disagreement there too. There are so many things in the bible that can be viewed different ways that there are now some 20,000 denominations believing they have the answer. If the bible is not open to interpretation as you say, are YOU the infallible interpreter?
The bible says that the Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth – not scripture. At the time that was written, only the Catholic Church existed. The same Church that Jesus said “I will never leave you, nor forsake you”. The Holy Spirit was sent to that Church to lead it into all truth, not error. That Catholic Church is the one that chose those 27 New Testament letters. There needs to be an authoritative interpreter of that scripture to get to the truth of the matter. How about the Church that Christ sent the Spirit to?
The Catholic Church is generally liberal on social issues and conservative on moral issues. By the way, the Catholic Church is only infallible on matters of faith and morals – nothing else. For 1500 years of Church history, Protestants didn’t even exist. They couldn’t possibly be the authority on scripture.
Post a Comment