First, a clarification of terms. To me, the term 'Leftist Christianity', or 'Christian Leftists', denotes those who are within the Faith, who hold to various orthodox doctrines (bodily Resurrection, Virgin Birth, Jesus actually existed), and yet filter these through slavish devotion to the Marxist Left. Like old conservative Evangelicals were accused of doing with Republican politics, so these allow for no spiritual affirmation or growth unless it is done before the altar of the political Left.
'Liberal Christianity', however, is what I use to reference that branch of Christianity that can scarcely be called Christianity. Baptized in the name of Rudolf Bultmann and devoted to the last couple centuries of critical scholarship, there is often little remaining of the Faith other than a name. An excellent example of this comes from an interview with the Reverend Serene Jones, who heads the uber-liberal Union Theological Seminary, whose religious musings are as bona fide heretical as you can get. You can read the whole thing here.
Key excerpts that leap out at me are these:
"I find the virgin birth a bizarre claim. It has nothing to do with Jesus’ message. The virgin birth only becomes important if you have a theology in which sexuality is considered sinful. It also promotes this notion that the pure, untouched female body is the best body, and that idea has led to centuries of oppressing women."Of course it's a vast, male conspiracy. Or this little Q&A:
"What happens when we die?
I don’t know! There may be something, there may be nothing. My faith is not tied to some divine promise about the afterlife. …"The hope of the agnostic. Or this:
"For me, the message of Easter is that love is stronger than life or death. That’s a much more awesome claim than that they put Jesus in the tomb and three days later he wasn’t there. For Christians for whom the physical resurrection becomes a sort of obsession, that seems to me to be a pretty wobbly faith."
For most of liberal Christianity, about 90%-95% of the Bible is false, wrong, lies, or fairy tales. That includes, by the way, Jesus' own message. As much as they cling to 'if Jesus didn't say it, it isn't important', the fact is they're just as willing to cast aside what Jesus is reported to have said when needed. I saw that happen in debates about homosexuality back in the day. Something Jesus said about God making man and woman to be joined together? Bah. Just discard that as a later interpolation (with no evidence needed of course).
Calling this Christianity is like calling the New England Patriots a baseball team. It means nothing. It is a form of Gnosticism; a sort of 'I'm just spiritual enough to know everyone else got it wrong, and since my faith is based on my faith, nothing can happen to change it.'
The good news is that, like most heresies, those who embrace this tend to dwindle away. The denominations following this line of denial are dying. It's not really a question of if, it's merely a question of when they will cease to exist. The sad part is that it affirms the non-belief of the world at large. Many souls reject the Gospel with the firm stamp of 'Liberal Christians approve this message.'
I thought this was appropriate to blog about on what is Orthodoxy's Spy Wednesday, the hour of shadows, when Satan enters Judas, and a disciple sells the Son of God for thirty pieces of silver.
Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:22-23
Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:22-23
No comments:
Post a Comment
Let me know your thoughts