The relevance and authority of scripture from three different viewpoints first evangelical with its strong emphasis on the Word of God it left little room to advance with the ever changing culture. Second the Liberal movement was all about cultural relevance and used only as a record of history. Each holds a valid argument Neo-Orthodox however is a good blend of both cultural relevance and scriptural foundation.
The Issues
Evangelical
Evangelicalism carried a strong emphasis on the Word of God. Which is in its own right a positive to the movement. Bible is used as the center of the Christian faith, however where they went wrong was saying that God is not moving anymore and what we have in this book is all that there is. There is no need for any more revelation because the Bible is complete. Actions will be based on the foundations of the Scriptures and things that do not directly align with this scriptures will not be tolerated. The evangelical movement held to the truth that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God. However, aloud no room for experiential or cultural relevance of the Bible. They did believe that the Bible was “the only infallible, authoritative Word of God” (qtd. in “Church History”) the evangelical movement joined people together out of other random religions and formed a cohesive bond between churches.
Liberal
Friedrich Schleiermacher believed that a person’s private revelations of God took precedence over their revelations from Scripture. Schleiermacher claimed the Bible was nothing more than a record of others’ religious experiences, as opposed to the inspired Word of God (Lane 238) He taught that one’s experiences and feelings brought about the religious aspects of today. There external sources employe...
... middle of paper ...
...ationship with God I can say that I lean more to the Neo-Orthodox movement. God gives us the ability to think and make choices, hi gives us His word to be a guide on how to live life. I believe that there is a place for modern thinking and ideas however under no circumstances should the authority of the scriptures be denied as in Liberalism. Nor the cultural relevance of the bible in evangelical thinking.
Works Cited
“Church History and Christian Thought: Lesson 132.” Introduction to Christian History and
Thought. Regent University. Virginia, Virginia Beach. Lecture.
Lane, Tony. A Concise History of Christian Thought. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
Print.
The Holy Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996. Print.
Houdmann, Michael S. "What Is Neo-orthodoxy?" GotQuestions.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Nov. 2013. .
Rauschenbusch has introduced many new ideas into the theological point of view. He still uses many of the same ideas of the “old theology”, but has just made some important changes to add his own thoughts on what theology should be about and how it should be used to influence people’s daily lives throughout the world. Rauschenbusch says,
Evangelicalism by its very nature is hard to define. In fact, Douglas Sweeney, Chair of the Church History and the History of Christian Thought Department at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School states, “precious little consensus exists among those who have tried to describe the evangelical movement.” Nevertheless, Sweeney does an excellent attempt by briefly explicating the diverse history of the evangelical movement in his book, The American Evangelical Story: A History of the Movement. Sweeney, a Lutheran and expert in American religion and culture not only introduces
The Bible is read and interpreted by many people all over the world. Regardless, no one knows the absolute truth behind scripture. Walter Brueggemann, professor of Old Testament, wrote “Biblical Authority” to help people understand what he describes as six different parts that make up the foundation to ones understanding of scripture. He defines these six features as being: inherency, interpretation, imagination, ideology, inspiration, and importance. As Brueggemann explains each individual part, it is easy to see that they are all interconnected because no one can practice one facet without involuntarily practicing at least one other part.
At the time of Edwards’ sermon, the height of the great awakening to Christianity had peaked (Farley ). Considering this period and his audience, Edwards use of the Bible as evidence for his arguments is practical. His cla...
However, both groups consciously reshaped the organizing framework of religion to diminish its ordering of their lives within the public and private sphere. Prothero posits that while “The Bible remained authoritative [. . .] Americans insisted on interpreting it for themselves” (47), especially women who lived under its patriarchal construction. “In that effort,” Prothero continues “they were assisted by a new culture hero: the populist preacher, who combined evangelicalism and egalitarianism in daring new ways” (47). Prothero maintains that it was “the rise of pulpit storytelling” (51) that allowed such reimagining of religious ideology. Prothero goes on to argue that the “story sermon” (51) as a rhetorical style “did not catch on as fast in New England as it did in the South and the West (51),” a point ...
...ir political issues being supported or not. Non-evangelicals supported the moral cod of the evangelicals. When the evangelicals isolated themselves, they let the American culture to grew more secular. Evangelicals did not notice the change in American politics nor did they involve themselves in politics till their subculture was attacked. In academics, though they still did not care for it, they started to be more accepting of secular ideology. Though they are involved with the American culture and politics, evangelicals today are still partially isolated, like they still refrain from immoral music, television, and dancing. They are also involved with church activities. But the isolation of the ‘Christian Bubble’ does not do God’s will of showing God’s love to the world.
The radical evangelicals acknowledge themselves as a spiritual family they included every person in the co...
Marsden’s analysis denotes the development of fundamentalism to particular intellectual progressions, particularly within the evangelical revivalism which took place within the late eighteenth to early nineteenth century (Marsden pg 11-12). After the civil war, Marsden elaborates on the consanguinity between evangelicals faith, morality, society, scripture, and science. However due to the introduction of Darwinian evolution, which was a major determinant within the fundamentalist movement, brought significant breaks within the evangelical body. Marsden points to two major theologians, Charles Hodge and James McCosh as representatives of these divisions. Charles Hodge, which represents the conservative position, could not reconcile the naturalism that was present within Darwinism (Marsden pg 19). As for McCosh, science and scripture correlate and verify one another, “Both reveal order in the world, the one appointed by God; the other discovered by man” (Marsden pg 19). The latter along with the cultural developm...
For centuries now Christians have claimed to possess the special revelation of an omnipotent, loving Deity who is sovereign over all of His creation. This special revelation is in written form and is what has come to be known as The Bible which consists of two books. The first book is the Hebrew Scriptures, written by prophets in a time that was before Christ, and the second book is the New Testament, which was written by Apostles and disciples of the risen Lord after His ascension. It is well documented that Christians in the context of the early first century were used to viewing a set of writings as being not only authoritative, but divinely inspired. The fact that there were certain books out in the public that were written by followers of Jesus and recognized as being just as authoritative as the Hebrew Scriptures was never under debate. The disagreement between some groups of Christians and Gnostics centered on which exact group of books were divinely inspired and which were not. The debate also took place over the way we can know for sure what God would have us include in a book of divinely inspired writings. This ultimately led to the formation of the Biblical canon in the next centuries. Some may ask, “Isn’t Jesus really the only thing that we can and should call God’s Word?” and “Isn’t the Bible just a man made collection of writings all centered on the same thing, Jesus Christ?” This paper summarizes some of the evidences for the Old and New Testament canon’s accuracy in choosing God breathed, authoritative writings and then reflects on the wide ranging
Is the language in the New Testament problematic for the modern world view? Rudolf Bultmann’s argument in the article, “The Task of Demythologizing,” in Philosophy and Faith: A Philosophy and Religion Reader, believes it is. He challenges the theologian to strip away the elements in the language of the mythical world image and the event of redemption, and then, suggests theology needs to examine the truths in the New Testament. Theology must discover whether the New Testament offers people a better understanding of themselves leading them to a genuine existential decision. Keeping in mind, the New Testament was written for humankind’s comprehension of the world view during the pre-scientific age, Bultmann stipulates theologians may want to
Boyd, Gregory A., and Paul R. Eddy. Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009.
Inspiration can be defined as God’s ongoing and dynamic revelation of truths to humans in order for us to know how to live and deal with spiritual and ethical encounters, by instilling wisdom and understanding of his word. Since humans wrote the Bible there is room for idiosyncrasies, intelligence, historic context, social context, and geographical context to influence scripture. However, God’s revelation of himself and his character prevails through the Bible. There is a dimension of God that can only be reached through personal encounters of His truths, through prayerful reflection of the Bible.
To attempt to address these questions, Gundry compiles a collection of responses from the views of five scholars representing the Weslyan (Melvin E. Dieter), Reformed (Anthony A. Hoekema), Pentecostal (Stanley M. Horton), Keswick (J. Robertson McQuilkin), and Augustinian-Dispensational (John F. Walvoord). Each contributor provides an overview and introduction to their specific evangelical position and at the same time compare and critique as they response to the other views presented. This is an excellent study as it helps to clarify the essentials as well as the distinctiveness of each position.
Evangelical believers need to always be looking for an opportunity to tell others about Christ and share with them about the love and compassion that Christ has for them. The only way to extend such invitation is to extend love and compassion to them in building a relationship with them. Many other views such as the Liberalism view and the Neo-orthodoxy view will place focus on their own personal life, rather than focusing on others and building a relationship with them over time live Christ did with his disciples.
Answering these questions is the purpose of this essay. I begin by arguing that the Bible cannot be adequately understood independent of its historical context. I concede later that historical context alone however is insufficient, for the Bible is a living-breathing document as relevant to us today as it was the day it was scribed. I conclude we need both testimonies of God at work to fully appreciate how the Bible speaks to us.