Bible Students

A reflection based on “The Story of Christian Theology” by Olson (chapters 32-35)

Chapter thirty-two covers the reaction of Liberalism and Conservatism on Christianity in Modernity. Both attempted to reconstruct Christianity apart from lifeless Protestantism. The Christianity of the time had become stale. In the past, Pietism had arisen to confront the stale Lutheranism, and I am sure this positive reformation of the Christian orthopraxy is what was hoped for. However, the liberal and conservative reforms on Protestantism were anything but clear-cut positive advances. The first reformation was liberal, attempting to reconstruct Christianity in a post-Christian world. Conservative reformation came as a response to the left-shift of western Christianity. Conservative fundamentalism was the response to the liberalism, which eventually resulted in the reconstruction of Christianity into a hard set of dogmas. Two liberal reformer thinkers of the time were Immanuel Kant, who presented the idea of enlightened theism, and Shleiermacher, who believed the Bible was a good book but the result of humans attempting to relate to God. Their theological thought led to the belief that Scripture only talks about the experience with God, and is not the inspired revelation of God. In fact, everything in history is seen as an act of God on the same level as the biblical record. Jesus was not the full revelation of God, but rather the spearhead of God-consciousness. One does not need to choose between Christianity and Modernism in the liberalistic view, which ends up smelling a bit like panantheism. Jesus brought the God-consciousness to humanity, which all people will eventually attain and be saved. 

In chapter thirty-three, a focus is given to the conservative reformation. Conservatives gave a strong effort to turn the tide of modern Christianity toward biblical inspiration. Strong emphasis was given to inspiration of Scripture as the full authority for living and understanding God. This eventually went so far as to believe the Masoretic text is inspired and inerrant. This places modern translations closer to the inspired text, if they are translations of the Masoretic. They aimed to avoid any sort of theological experimentation or speculation, contrasted to the liberal approach of high speculation. Instead of speculation, fundamentalists focused on the biblical revelation of God’s character through history. Originally, fundamentalism seemed neutral to the scientific community on the topic of evolution. They seemed to not make evolution a dividing issue between Christianity and atheism. In fact, some leaders may have even believed in some form of theistically spurred evolution. Regardless of whether some sort of evolution is what occurred, the Bible was to be viewed as absolutely inspired. I personally hold to this view. Evolution may or may not be mostly historically accurate, but the Bible must remain absolutely inspired in the view, no matter what is believed. In time, evolution was seen as an antagonist to Christianity. Some Christians made an absolute fool of the movement by discrediting any sort of scientific understanding in their debate against evolution, when some fundamentalists went on stand in a trial against evolution in the context of school legislation. 

Chapter thirty-four, Neoorthodoxy attempts to bring together liberalism and fundamentalism. Two major figures of the movement were Kierkegaard and Hegel, who created a neoorthodoxy which viewed God’s Word as any personal encounter with Him, which would result in the salvation of the individual. Neoorthodoxy is not a strain of sympathetic atheism, but is a Christian or semi-Christian movement which attempted to bring the Enlightened thought of the West into the realm of Christianity. Karl Barth was one of the major contributors to the early movement. He did not find correct orthodoxy in either the fundamental or liberal camps, though he appreciated the attempt at modernizing the Christian faith, and so took his own spin on modernization. One of Barth’s most famous students was Deidright Bonhoffer. Neoorthodoxy viewed Jesus as the most full revelation of God. He also believed tradition and the church gives reliable revelation of God. Scripture as well gives reliable revelation of God, though Scripture is not viewed as inerrant, but rather a result of humans attempting to write down their personal encounters with God. They do view Jesus as Lord of each Christian’s life, and also view God as a mystery which can not be fully understood. One interesting part of Barth’s theology is that he was actually a supralapsarian. On the conservative side, Barth fought against the “evil of universalism,” which was a view held by the fundamentalist camp. On the liberal side, Barth fought against double predestination. Barth was somewhat in the middle of both conservatism and liberalism. 

Finally, chapter thirty-five covers the contemporary struggles of Christianity with diversity. The history of the church has been complex, to say the least, and Christianity has suffered through the splintering of different camps. Different beliefs have arisen in Christianity which pull different groups apart, especially over culture-specific issues, such as evolution and fundamentalism. In another culture, evolution would not be problem, even if syncretized with Christianity. However, because evolution is viewed as a threat, many groups have rallied against it and created a young-earth dogma which divides Christian sects. This is not good or bad, but can be used negatively when rivaling other Christian groups. In reflection on church history, many modern thinkers see actions which are not positive reflections of Christianity, and have aimed to reform these actions to create a more positive orthopraxy. On the other side, many modern thinkers see emotions which are not positive reflections of Christianity, and have aimed to reform these emotions to create a more positive orthopathy. One of the more modern reformations of thought involves process theology, which holds that Christian theology needs to change and become more finely tuned as history goes on. The biblical revelation of doctrine is not the final word, and must be aided through seeking God in history. An example of when theology would be revised is in reflection on the Holocaust. Where was God when the Jews were being killed by Nazis? Liberation theology is another modern theological framework that seeks to view theology through the lens of liberating individuals from social or spiritual systems, especially oppression of economic, class, racial, or sexist nature. 

Overall, this book has presented a fun and practical survey of the entirety of Christian history from the early church to the modern era. The principles found throughout the groups in this book are helpful in many ways, though I believe the Pietists, Puritans, Methodists, and Neoorthodox present some of the more reflected-upon thought, in my own experience.