What is a liberal Christian theology?

[Sparkey]

I'm a 61 year old male attending a local Community College in order to obtain a CyberSecurity and CIS degree. The reason that I mention it is that if I were to conduct a survey that asked a bunch of demographic questions (let's say for a Soc class) -- asking questions about gender, race, etc... and if one of the questions was about religion and asked:

Religion:

• Christian
• Buddhist
• Muslim
• Other
• "I'd rather not say"

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the "Christian" tally box would be checked by the majority of responders in the United States. There are more professing Christians (in the US) than other groups, is my point.

That being said? What is the underlying belief set of most of the students on campus? By my observation this 'underlying belief set' of campus students would include most of the above listed "liberal" beliefs. We don't have to ask directly, "Is Fornication okay?" because 99% of the students seem to endorse that practice without even thinking about it. It's just a way of life, commonly accepted to the point where it has become the norm.

There are many other things that could be said about the modern day belief set and it almost goes without saying that one of the very first thinks that has to go is the idea that the Bible is God-Breathed and true. That one crumbles and the rest follow.

Jesus IS the Word. He IS the way. AND the truth and the light... NO ONE comes to the Father, except by Him.

Who believes that anymore? Sure, there are some. But they are the exception (at least in my experience). Part of that may be simply because I live in a Liberal Northern state (Washington).

Just a couple things to consider... maybe it's like that where you live and maybe your blessed and it's not. I hope the latter but those places seem to be getting fewer and farther apart.

~Sparrow

 

[evenifigoalone]

Most evangelicals do believe in the fundamental doctrines. Though I was told by a fundamentalist that evangelicals are not fundamentalists because historically the definition of a fundamentalist was someone who actively stood against and refused to fellowship with those of false doctrines. (The movement was started to confront liberal doctrines.)

While I don't condone liberal doctrines and in my own way stand for fundamental doctrines, I consider myself evangelical.

 

[Deborah13]

There must be a ton of Unitarians because I see many,many who have a liberal view.

So when I look at what I know about churches and this list from gotquestions I don't see Many that teach several or all of these things. So my response to Many denominations teaching these things are yes, I do see Many and no, for I don't see Many.

1-6) no
7) is a doctrine that has many understandings take from several scriptures and not others
Romans 1 tells me that God reveals Himself to ALL men and they choose to ignore Him.

Taking into consideration that gotquestions is a Calvinist site then what they are speaking of is the definition of "total depravity" that is the 'T' in TULIP, which does not stand on it's own without the ULIP.

 

[Deborah13]

I'm a 61 year old male attending a local Community College in order to obtain a CyberSecurity and CIS degree. The reason that I mention it is that if I were to conduct a survey that asked a bunch of demographic questions (let's say for a Soc class) -- asking questions about gender, race, etc... and if one of the questions was about religion and asked:

Religion:

• Christian
• Buddhist
• Muslim
• Other
• "I'd rather not say"

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the "Christian" tally box would be checked by the majority of responders in the United States. There are more professing Christians (in the US) than other groups, is my point.

That being said? What is the underlying belief set of most of the students on campus? By my observation this 'underlying belief set' of campus students would include most of the above listed "liberal" beliefs. We don't have to ask directly, "Is Fornication okay?" because 99% of the students seem to endorse that practice without even thinking about it. It's just a way of life, commonly accepted to the point where it has become the norm.

There are many other things that could be said about the modern day belief set and it almost goes without saying that one of the very first thinks that has to go is the idea that the Bible is God-Breathed and true. That one crumbles and the rest follow.

Jesus IS the Word. He IS the way. AND the truth and the light... NO ONE comes to the Father, except by Him.

Who believes that anymore? Sure, there are some. But they are the exception (at least in my experience). Part of that may be simply because I live in a Liberal Northern state (Washington).

Just a couple things to consider... maybe it's like that where you live and maybe your blessed and it's not. I hope the latter but those places seem to be getting fewer and farther apart.

~Sparrow

My understanding of the OP was that it was about Churches (denominations) that actually teach these things, not what individual people who identify themselves with Christianity because nothing else fits. I think that is what you are talking about. Something along the lines of... this a Christian country so....or I'm not a Muslim, a Jew, a Buddhist, so I must be a Christian because I celebrate Christmas and Easter.

 

[childeye]

The terms liberal and conservative hold there meanings in the perspectives of those who use them

The use of "liberal" as it relates to Christian theology is an acceptable term, often used by theologians themselves to distinguish between those who hold to orthodoxy and those who seek to undermine it. It is an acceptable use of the word and categorization of such people.

There are varying degrees of liberal theology and it can be found in almost every denomination but has been the most prevalent in mainstream, non-Evangelical denominations.

The use of terms like liberal or conservative to describe various Christian perspectives can only lead to ambiguity. I don't care who uses these terms or how they use them. They are wrong to use them. If we are to agree that the Holy Spirit orchestrates the body of Christ as a single body, then there cannot exist a conservative Holy Spirit and a liberal Holy Spirit. He is not divided against Himself. The Holy Spirit is a real person and does not need propaganda to persuade people of the Truth. Furthermore, there is a spirit that would cause division and it is not of God. Ambiguity serves confusion not clarity.

Christ is simple. Love God with all your heart mind and soul and Love others as yourself. Now the one practicing this conservatively means what exactly? And the one practicing this liberally means what exactly? If the orthodoxy of Christianity is all about being filled with Love and serving Love, and people have strayed from that simple faith, then it is because someone has complicated the matter and changed Christianity into something else. We should not muddy the waters with equivocations.

 

[Free]

The terms liberal and conservative hold there meanings in the perspectives of those who use them

I'm pretty sure the liberal "Christians" call themselves liberal and the rest conservative, while the conservatives do the same.

The use of terms like liberal or conservative to describe various Christian perspectives can only lead to ambiguity. I don't care who uses these terms or how they use them. They are wrong to use them. If we are to agree that the Holy Spirit orchestrates the body of Christ as a single body, then there cannot exist a conservative Holy Spirit and a liberal Holy Spirit. He is not divided against Himself. The Holy Spirit is a real person and does not need propaganda to persuade people of the Truth. Furthermore, there is a spirit that would cause division and it is not of God. Ambiguity serves confusion not clarity.

I do agree that there really is no such person as a "liberal Christian" as most of them are likely not Christian at all, which was the whole point of the OP. But since they refer to themselves as Christians, it is helpful to differentiate them from actual Christians by the use of "liberal". As for division, it has been there since the very start of the Church and it is helpful to have terms to differentiate those who believe the true gospel from those who distort it and believe a different gospel.

Christ is simple. Love God with all your heart mind and soul and Love others as yourself. Now the one practicing this conservatively means what exactly? And the one practicing this liberally means what exactly? If the orthodoxy of Christianity is all about being filled with Love and serving Love, and people have strayed from that simple faith, then it is because someone has complicated the matter and changed Christianity into something else. We should not muddy the waters with equivocations.

I find that it is your position which muddies the waters. With what you have stated here, we could throw out almost the entire NT, keeping only the gospels. It is as though you didn't even read the OP. The differences are significant, and can be pointed out with a few simple questions: Who is Christ? Who or what is God? What is the gospel? What is the Bible?

 

[childeye]

I'm pretty sure the liberal "Christians" call themselves liberal and the rest conservative, while the conservatives do the same.

Of course you are right, which is why I do not use the terms. The term conservative as inferring orthodoxy can be claimed by anyone. Eastern orthodox and Roman Catholic complicates the matter even further. All of this based on the carnal politicizing of Spiritual things.

I do agree that there really is no such person as a "liberal Christian" as most of them are likely not Christian at all, which was the whole point of the OP. But since they refer to themselves as Christians, it is helpful to differentiate them from actual Christians by the use of "liberal". As for division, it has been there since the very start of the Church and it is helpful to have terms to differentiate those who believe the true gospel from those who distort it and believe a different gospel.

I have read many early church writings. I have never heard the term liberal used to describe heresy. The term liberal is a more recent construct of division and it is carnal in it's concept. Yes there has been division, but it was not through the Holy Spirit. It is a carnal mind that says I am of Paul or I am of Peter.

I find that it is your position which muddies the waters. With what you have stated here, we could throw out almost the entire NT, keeping only the gospels. It is as though you didn't even read the OP. The differences are significant, and can be pointed out with a few simple questions: Who is Christ? Who or what is God? What is the gospel? What is the Bible?

I understand your point, but I respectfully disagree. The Christ himself taught that all the prophets and the laws can be summed up with Love God with all your heart mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself. God is Love Whose Spirit is of the Highest value. The Gospel is the power of salvation through belief in an Eternal Kingdom that is ruled by God. The Christ is the Word of God made flesh, the true image of God sent by God to preach the good news of the kingdom of God and suffer and die so that sins may be forgiven. The bible is the testimony of men who have heard and followed the Word of God. I see no ambiguity here.

I did read the op. I understand there are those who call themselves christian and are not. Such was foretold that there would be, without the misleading term liberal being applied. Please understand that if I respond to the op without disclaiming the built in premise of the existence of a liberal Christianity, I am accepting the premise that is proposed as valid. There is no such thing as a liberal or conservative Christian. The meanings of the terms liberal and conservative are actually held in the perspectives of those who use them. They are therefore subjective in their applications and don't really have any precise meaning. There are many denominations that would count themselves the orthodoxy while counting all others as liberal. No one owns God.

 

[KevinK]

There is no such thing as a liberal or conservative Christian. The meanings of the terms liberal and conservative are actually held in the perspectives of those who use them. They are therefore subjective in their applications and don't really have any precise meaning.

Is anyone saying those terms have precise meanings? I know I'm not. They're descriptive terms, not precise categorizations, and not intended otherwise. They simply provide a point-of-departure for anyone who wishes to engage in a comparative discussion. A liberal Christian is one who is more liberal than one we might call a conservative Christian, and vice versa.

Should we stop using the terms "liberal" and "conservative" when discussing politics as well? Or dogs. You could say there's no such thing as a big dog or a little dog. It's all relative. Well, perhaps, but you won't see me offering my lap to a 200-lb St. Bernard.

 

[childeye]

The way to make the case against any heresy is through exposing the inevitable hypocrisy. In other words any reasoning that is founded upon a lie ends in a contradiction.

For example, no one can claim to be Christian without admitting their is a Christ.. The term Christ means the True image of God sent by God. The implications are that there are false images of god that do not represent God. The Christ was foretold which cannot be denied by any sane reasoning. The Christ came which is why there exists Christians and a New Covenant. If there is no Christ, there is no God Who sent Him. If there is no God there is no sin. If there is sin, then a virgin birth must take place so as to produce a sinless man apart from the seed of Adam.

For without a sinless man there is no Christ. If God does not exist as the moral authority, then there is no judgment. If there is no judgment, then cheaters do prosper and get away with it. If there is judgment then there is a resurrection. If God is Love and Love is not Eternal, then nothing is Eternal and Love amounts to nothing. If Love is Eternal then there is eternal life since those who Love and die in the service of Love, cannot ever really die.

Ultimately, if one believes God exists as the Creator of time and space and all life and purpose therein, then it would be silly to believe He can create an entire universe and yet can't perform a miracle.

 

[KevinK]

I'm a bit lost where this conversation has gone at this point. And doesn't "Christ" mean "annointed one"?

 

[childeye]

Is anyone saying those terms have precise meanings? I know I'm not. They're descriptive terms, not precise categorizations, and not intended otherwise. They simply provide a point-of-departure for anyone who wishes to engage in a comparative discussion. A liberal Christian is one who is more liberal than one we might call a conservative Christian, and vice versa.

Left and right change directions depending upon which way one is facing, so that the opposite is true after turning 180%. Since all things revolve around the Truth, no one who sees the Truth in circumference would ever use such terms as conservative or liberal since they hold opposite meanings depending upon which side of the circle you are on. Enemies and wars all happen because of misunderstandings. Semantics are the playground of the devil and he deceives by such means. Until the true language is given by God, every word we say, can be, and will be misconstrued and spun to mean something other than what was intended. All darkness depends upon confusion.

Should we stop using the terms "liberal" and "conservative" when discussing politics as well?

If they were used correctly, that would be fine to use them. To use them correctly would be to erase hypocrisy. Hence there would be such things as too conservative or too liberal for everyone in search of the proper balance between the two. To count yourself only conservative or only liberal, or count others as such, is hypocritical. We all give and take and should admit that. The proper balance is to not take more than we give. However, there are those who deem being liberal a bad thing and being conservative as a good thing and visa versa. You will then see in politics, two dogs tied to the same leash using all their energy against the other to go nowhere and accomplish nothing. This is not being led by the Light but is the result of being led by darkness. The spirit of blame, pride, hatred and anger, then prevails and war and destruction follow. All because we couldn't get the words right and end hypocrisy.

 

[childeye]

I'm a bit lost where this conversation has gone at this point. And doesn't "Christ" mean "annointed one"?

Yes, the term "anointed" means sent by God with the authority of God to represent God. Hence he is the Light, the Word of God made flesh, the true image of God sent by God. As opposed to a false image of god invented and declared by any man or Angel and particularly Satan.
2Co 4:4
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Col 1:15
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Heb 1:3
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
2Co 4:6
For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[Kathi]

Most evangelicals do believe in the fundamental doctrines. Though I was told by a fundamentalist that evangelicals are not fundamentalists because historically the definition of a fundamentalist was someone who actively stood against and refused to fellowship with those of false doctrines. (The movement was started to confront liberal doctrines.)

While I don't condone liberal doctrines and in my own way stand for fundamental doctrines, I consider myself evangelical.

No it is rather unpopular right now to say you are a fundamentalist Christian.You are look at as a fanatic.

 

[childeye]

No it is rather unpopular right now to say you are a fundamentalist Christian.You are look at as a fanatic.

Oh yes, that is so true even because such words are easily misconstrued, misappropriated, misapplied, misused, misunderstood. Which is why one either believes there is a Christ and all the following implications, or else they simply are not Christian.

 

[evenifigoalone]

No it is rather unpopular right now to say you are a fundamentalist Christian.You are look at as a fanatic.

I think people tend to associate fundamentalists with legalists and that's a big reason why. Not all fundamentalists are legalists, though. The legalists just tend to get the most attention.

 

[Kathi]

I think people tend to associate fundamentalists with legalists and that's a big reason why. Not all fundamentalists are legalists, though. The legalists just tend to get the most attention.

Fundamentalists are very conservative.And they always read Scripture literally.

 

[jasonc]

Fundamentalists are very conservative.And they always read Scripture literally.

I wonder what you think of liberatians. I know that some of them are in my church and others are in those fundamentalist churches. I do know a friend who attends one and is a libertarian.

 

[Kathi]

I wonder what you think of liberatians. I know that some of them are in my church and others are in those fundamentalist churches. I do know a friend who attends one and is a libertarian.

I really don't think anything of them.I don't think liberal and Christianity mix well.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Fundamentalists are very conservative.And they always read Scripture literally.

Reading the Bible literally is considered one of the five fundamental doctrines. Most evangelicals do read the Bible literally. It's just that, according to this one guy, I talked to, just adhering to the fundamental doctrines isn't enough to make one a fundamentalist. He said you have to fit the historical definition as well. But, it depends on one's definition, I guess.

 

[childeye]

In the church, (the body of Christ), there are no fundamentalists, evangelicals, libertarians, Calvinists, Arminians, liberals, conservatives. There are no I am of Paul, and I of Appollos. There is no Jew, Greek, male, female, etc, etc... There is only one church, not many churches. So why do we all speak in terms as if there are? Because there is division, not by the Holy Spirit that causes us to Love our enemies and see them as ourselves, but by the enemy who uses carnal pride to scatter the sheep and false doctrines that devour one another. The simplicity of Christ is in the self evident divine Love that is a righteousness that would suffer and die in the place of the unrighteous. You don't even need understand scripture to believe in that.
One thing is sure, Christ knows his sheep and they know Him.