SQ10: No. 2

Are any of the characteristics of the liberal scholars’ approach to the Bible valid? Explain.

Most of the liberal scholars didn’t accept the Bible. They just depend on the natural thinking and scientific outlook. They didn’t the existing of the Bible. They just depend on rational thinking. They just think the Bible is history or human thinking. Liberal scholars depend on the knowledge. They rejected the miracles and physical environment. So, their conscientiousness intended for sin is decrease and doctrine of depravity is rejected. The liberalism is extremist for their thinking on the things that happened in the universal. Liberal scholars’ approaches are not valid.

The liberal interpret the word of God is based on the evolutionary presuppositions. The Bible does not contain special divine revelation. The Bible is the record book of the Israel background and religious development. Their concept is too far away to the other thinking and human philosophy. The death of Christ has to be described in term of the bloody Jewish sacrifices or the rituals of mystery religious. Since the concept of “the shedding of blood” is no longer relevant, the interpreter needs other ways of expressing the meaning of Christ’s life and death.
The liberal believed that Jesus Christ is just as an ethical teacher, he just gives the guideline for the disciple through the people. I do not agree that the Bible does not mention Jesus as a teacher only. The Bible mention about Jesus is God, the Son of God. This is really out of human thinking. And Paul and apostles are the founder of the Christianity.

The theologian Karl Barth said that Jesus did not give human need and adequate answers to man’s deep problems. The liberal education made it impossible for him to accept the orthodox position regarding inspiration and revelation.

So that, the liberal concepts are not from the bible, it is from the human thinking and not biblical.