|The Liberal's Bible|
|Author: A. Allison Lewis|
There are basically only four views concerning the Bible. ONE--it is essentially irrelevant and no more authoritative or inspired than the writings of Plato or Shakespeare. TWO--it is relevant but must be reinterpreted in the light of modern science and in large measure it is composed of myths, legends, and faulty history. THREE--it is not only relevant but also authoritative in religion and morals though it may contain errors in matters of science and history. FOUR--it is absolutely infallible or without error of any kind in the original autographs. One can, of course, find every shade of variation in the spectrum from the far left to the far right.
The far left is the position of the Liberal. In religion, Liberalism is a faith built on some form of philosophical idealism and naturalism. It denies that there is anything essential to their religion in the person of Christ or the Bible. The Liberal may include Jesus and the Bible in his system, but only because He shares in Western culture--certainly not from principle or necessity. Most of todays Unitarians would fall in this category. Those who hold to what is known as "Liberation" and "Radical Theology" are the outstanding teachers of Liberalism in our day. The Bible to them is simply a human, fallible book, having no more authority than the writings of Plato, Shakespeare or any other philosopher or writer. These people are not Christians. We discuss these servants of the Devil because they are spewing forth their blasphemy in churches, schools, books, papers and TV today.
William Hamilton and Thomas J. J. Altizer are two representatives of this Liberal position. They have received a hearing at such prominent places as Princeton Theological Seminary (Presbyterian), Drew Graduate School (Methodist) and Colgate-Rochester Divinity School (Baptist). In the 1990's Robert Funk and those taking part in his "Jesus Seminars" are another example of the Liberal position.
The Liberal's radical infidelity staggers the imagination. Here is what Hamilton and Altizer have written in the preface to their book, Radical Theology and the Death of God which was published in 1966:
Radical theology is a contemporary development within Protestantism--with some Jewish, Roman Catholic and non-religious response and participation already forming--which is carrying the careful openness of the older theologies toward atheism a step further. It is, in effect, an attempt to set an atheist point of view within the spectrum of Christian possibilities.
That should be enough to curl any Christians hair and raise the eyebrows of anyone who knows anything about the meaning of words. How could an atheist have a theology when "atheism" means no God and "theology" is the study about God? They tell us also that,
radical theology . . . has gained the interest and in part the commitment of a large number of Christians in America, particularly from students of all disciplines, and from the younger ranks of teachers and pastors.
The field of study for these Liberals is the thought and literature from the time of the French Revolution, rather than the Bible [see pages xi and xii of their preface]. We give one last quote from these Hell-bound rascals in which they write:
The death of God radical theologians are men without God who do not anticipate his return And this group persists, in the face of both bewilderment and fury, in calling itself Christian.
The Psalmist truly said, The fool has said in his heart, There is no God [PSA 14:1]. For the Liberal the Bible is simply an ancient book of myths.
Return To Main Page
This Page Last Updated: 05/09/00 A. Allison Lewis email@example.com