Liberal Theology In The Churches – Address Number 4 Series

This small series continues with the 4th address in Liberal Theology

LIBERAL THEOLOGY IN THE CHURCHES – ADDRESS NUMBER 4

OPENING UP SOME ELEMENTS OF LIBERAL THEOLOGY - MY UNDERSTANDING OF SOME COMPONENTS OF LIBERAL THEOLOGY:

EXPLANATION

In 2015 I had the request to address a group in Boston, England on Liberal Theology which was starting to gain inroads in the Methodist Church structure of England. This was a timely warning to the sincere Christians in the churches, mainly the Methodist church, as it was causing concern among the true believers in the Methodist Circuit. This was not meant to be a complex talk but simple enough for the folk at that time. Those who want a deeper examination with deeper theological arguments can look elsewhere.

I will present some of that material because what was taking hold just 7 years ago, is now an avalanche. In 2015, on the internet, there was a longer comment written by a writer called Joel in a blog maintained by Richard Hall, a Methodist minister in Shropshire, who now in 2022, is the Methodist Superintendent in Shropshire, England. I am taking the 22 points made by this contributor Joel, and explaining each one with reference to Liberal Theology. I did search for this original comment on the blog (October 2022) but could not find it.

For those who will read this in text form, because of the loss of formatting on the site, I have put the comments of the writer, Joel, in capital letters and my comments follow in brackets. I personally do not know the position of Joel on the issues he puts in note form. Nevertheless I am examining each one.

==============================================================================

==============================================================================

I wish to acquaint this group here today with the brief summary points of another, and using his thoughts to add a deeper perspective in our examination of Liberal Theology.

The following is from a posting on The blog of Richard Hall, a Methodist Minister in Shropshire, by a writer on that blog called Joel. What Joel wrote is capitalised. My comments are contained in (( ))

==============================================================================

1. VIEW OF THE BIBLE AS INSPIRED AND NOT INERRANT

((Inspired means breathed into, and in the case of the biblical writers, it means the writers were “breathed into” by the Holy Spirit. Put in layman’s terms it means the writers wrote under the control of the Holy Spirit so what they wrote was directly from God. The word “inerrant” means without error, and that means in the original writing (language), not in the translation of the Greek and Hebrew. I will only use literal translations such as the NASB and ESV and the KJV (the revised version is better than the KJV for a number of reasons.)

The Liberal position on these two words is confused with all sorts of opinions expressed. Some hold God inspired man to write it, but it contains errors. In that way liberals can pick and choose what to believe and what to reject. Liberal Theology from the start, is a position of denial. No liberal will believe the entire bible is inspired and inerrant.))

2. AN UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME PASSAGES IN THE BIBLE ARE METAPHORICAL OR ‘MYTH BASED

(If it does not appeal to humanism, or to modern thinking, then it is dismiss or explained away by the liberal camp, like the creation account, Eden, the Flood, Jonah and the miracles of the New Testament. For some liberals, if it can not be answered by science, then it can’t be proved, so it must be axed. This stance shows that the proponents of that way of thinking do not have faith as the basis of belief and this verse applies to them – {{Hebrews 11:6 “Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.”}} Before that verse, Paul speaks of Abel and Enoch and after it he cites Noah, Abraham and Sarah. Liberals dismiss all those names to the “mythology rubbish bin” of the bible. These men and women belong to the father of lies, the devil.))

3. AN EMPHASIS ON THE NEED TO APPLY HUMAN REASON, EXPERIENCE AND TRADITION IN INTERPRETING THE BIBLE

((These take preference over the Bible. If it does not seem reasonable then the Bible is in error. This is the greatest denial of faith. Humanism and man’s reasoning dominate all examination these people give to the bible. I have heard it taught that the plagues of Egypt in Moses’ time were merely a strings of natural happenings from recorded incidents they claim. It had nothing to do with miracles from God. Also the feeding of the 5 000 happened when a boy took out his lunch and all the others followed suite. I think it is so sad that people like Karl Barth and these German higher critics had so much influence because a lot of it remains. Prevailing views on evolution, sexuality, marriage and human behaviour, etc. all take precedence over the bible. The liberal view is that our experience rides over biblical revelation.))