The tussle between the liberal and the evangelical church is again on display here.
So the question is, why are the evangelical churches winning the race?

Put simply, man longs for a perfect world which is impossible on this one. The human longing is satisfied with an evangelical belief in good heaven verses bad earth.

There has to be some hope!

Dan

Man was created with a free will and God's will isn't necessarily what the fundamental fanatics say it is! For those who rely on faith based belief alone. They are obliged to hold open in their mind the possibility of the opposite being true!

If you would know the will of a God of love, then learn to meditate and via that method, still the endless chatter of the conscious mind. When you've done that you can learn to listen to wisdom as old as time with your subconscious mind. One does not need to fear a God of love!

The ten claimed commandments, claimed to have been handed to a MAN without a single confirming eyewitness, during a also claimed exodus may all be fable rather than fact.

And this fable the claimed authority of the church or rather church elders and officials.

This " claimed " authority used to burn "claimed" witches at the stake and punish others for failing to comply with the wishes of men!

If we must believe in something? Then let it be the mighty irrefutable truth! And that needs confirming proof not hearsay, myth and legend!
Alan B.

Thank you, Peter, for an interesting article. In response to you comment on Ray Barraclough’s article I suggested you answer your question ‘The task now is for the church to explain what it means when, after the bible is read, proclaims "For the Word of the Lord!"’ in your next article, but this one in fact goes some way to doing that, in particular the observation that “God may be the same from the beginning of eternity, but it is also true that humanity progresses into further understanding.”

I notice you use the term “liberal” for the softer strand of Christianity that evangelicals oppose. Is that a label you would accept for yourself? As I recall you have been quite a fan of Barth’s theology, and Barth’s critique of the liberal theology of the late 19th and early 20th centuries was fierce. Nowadays the term “liberal” is also used for a broad range of theologies that evangelicals reject. But as someone who will happily own the label theological "liberal", I still haven’t fully answered to my own satisfaction Barth’s warning that liberalism allows us to make God in our own image, which goes to the heart of the authority questions which both you and Dr Barraclough touch upon. That is also why I said that I expected you take on the issue to be a little different to Dr Barraclough’s.

Rhian, good have have an intelligent comment! You are right of course that I would describe myself as a post-liberal in the Barthian sense . I have experienced liberal churches, one threw me out of ministry and the other refused to say any of the creeds during worship in the fear that "the man in the street" would be offended. Liberal Protestantism is a limp thing that steers away from any confrontation between the gospel and the comfortable life. Unlike for Luther, who felt the gospel strike at his heart during Mass, liberals are a sort of benign social club. I think Barth was right when he saw the German church bowing first the the Kaiser and then to Hitler, that this manifestation of Christianity was entirely at our mercy and that indeed we had built a god that suited ourselves.

I like Ray's article but it is very easy to do a hatchet job on biblical authority and not approach the real question of how God reveals himself.

Thank you Peter for your response.

I agree that liberal theology can be a limp and ineffectual thing (I’m also an Anglican and know the kind of thing you’re talking about!) but this is not necessarily the case. I’d say the liberation theologians were “liberal” in their approach to scriptural authority and in evaluating theology according to its social consequences and political usefulness, but for all their faults they were hardly a benign social club intent on avoiding offence.

An excellent essay - easily the best that Sells has written for this forum.
This set of essays provides a profound (Divine) criticism of Biblical religiosity.
http://www.aboutadidam.org/articles/secret_identity

Speaking of the benighted John Calvin it could be said that he is easily the worlds most influential "philosopher"/theologian. Especially in the USA and increasingly throughout the entire world too as described in the recent book by Elle Hardy titled Beyond Belief.

Perhaps one of the most extreme statements of Calvinism can be found in the worse-than-awful book by Nancy Pearsey titled Total Truth - Liberating Christianity from its Cultural Captivity. Its Amazon review contains over 400 reviews most of which are in the 4 to 5 star category

.

Dear Peter,

.

Of course, Calvin and Luther both believed in the God hypothesis conceived by primeval man as an explanation of natural phenomena.

I understand that Bowsma depicts Calvin as an extraordinarily anxious person. Does the author suggest that it is this anxiety that led Calvin to place his faith in the God hypothesis despite his avowed inability to conceive of an “all-powerful, inscrutable, totally transcendent, judgmental God” ?

.

Rhian,
Christianity represents the ultimate reality of freedom. Paul: It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. The freedom of Christ is quite difference from modern liberalism. I looked up an old OLO piece from 2019 and found it quite good, even if I do say so myself.

https://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8724&page=2

The self obsession of modern liberalism is the tightest captivity and a dead end.

Peter

.

Dear Peter,

.

Though they were two of the major Christian reformers of the 16th century, Luther and Calvin arrived too early on the scene to receive any benefit from the impending scientific revolution.

Their cosmological outlook remained firmly entrenched in a largely archaic religious magma – little evolved from that of primeval man – in which thunder was the voice of God, lightening his avenging missile, a river contained a spirit, a tree meant a man’s life, a snake embodied wisdom, and a mountain harboured a demon, a volcano … an earthquake … a bushfire … a snowstorm … a flood … a drought … etc.

It resulted in pleading, supplication, submission, prayer, worship, offerings, sacrifices … Jesus of Nazareth.

Psychology has always played a major role in mankind’s vision and interpretation of natural phenomena. It produced the God concept and religion – both of which continue to evolve and develop, adapting to scientific inroads and intellectual creativity, constantly occupying the vast, inexhaustible domain of the unknown.

The simple fact is religious faith has its roots firmly entrenched in the human psyche.

.