Why is traditional Protestantism so affected by liberal theology?

Charlie7399 said:

One can argue that the RCC doesn't fall in the same trap because it's a worldwide organisation, with a bigger conservative population. The liberal attitude of a good part of their Western European and North American clergy makes me think they wouldn't be any different if they were geographically limited like the Protestants are.

What about the less traditional Protestants though, like the Baptists and the Pentecostals? Why aren't they affected by liberalism like the Lutherans or the Anglicans?

Click to expand...

Well first, I don't know that given the current state of the RCC that I'd say that it isn't affected by liberalism. The current pope is for all intents and purposes a Marxist, supported by a cabal of homosexual cardinals and archbishops, and the lay Catholic is completely powerless to rid him or herself of this situation given the structure of that organization.

As far as Baptists, I'd say that it's incorrect to say that they aren't affected. Independent baptists aren't, but the largest Baptist denomination - the SBC - passed resolutions in the last convention supporting liberal talking points.

In Lutheranism, the ELCA for all intents and purposes has fallen out of the realm of historic Christianity while the LCMS and WELS persist in the faith.

Orthodoxy is thus far the least affected, but perhaps that's because it has the smallest presence in western culture.

This is really a human nature issue.

Newtheran said:

As far as Baptists, I'd say that it's incorrect to say that they aren't affected. Independent baptists aren't, but the largest Baptist denomination - the SBC - passed resolutions in the last convention supporting liberal talking points.
Orthodoxy is thus far the least affected, but perhaps that's because it has the smallest presence in western culture.

This is really a human nature issue.

Click to expand...

New, I appreciate your thoughts.. I'm curious what u mean by 'human nature issue'. Do you mean a human propensity to mimic popular cultural trends (?) I guess in this case cultural-Marxist social causes (?)

Regarding SBC, weren't they discussing the idea of (hysterically) eliminating the word 'Southern' (?) Because cultural-Marxists have demonized anything associated w/the historical South.. or am I remembering that wrong.

Babe Ruth said:

New, I appreciate your thoughts.. I'm curious what u mean by 'human nature issue'. Do you mean a human propensity to mimic popular cultural trends (?) I guess in this case cultural-Marxist social causes (?)

Click to expand...

Pretty much. As Jesus said, broad is the road that leads to destruction, and narrow is the road that leads to life. Broad roads are easy to find, are easy to travel at high rates of speed, and can accomodate a lot of traffic. Human nature is such that we seek them out. Narrow roads, on the other hand are hard to find, require one to slow down and navigate them carefully, and can accomodate relatively little traffic.

Living counter culturally is a difficult thing. As our culture moves first into the post-Christian phase (which I'd argue it has been in for some time) and then into an overtly anti-Christian phase you're going to see churches that for a generation or two try and accomodate those traveling the broad road - whether it is out of a misguided sense of being nice/seeker sensitive or simply an accounting matter trying to keep more warm buttocks in the pews than cold ones in the cemetary.

Then, as the lukewarm generation is replaced by another, they go extinct. In the end, any atheist can have more "fun" at a rock concert and bar on a Saturday night than he'll ever have at even the most seeker sensitive praise bandy worship service on a Sunday morning and he won't even have to get up early to do it.

Regarding SBC, weren't they discussing the idea of (hysterically) eliminating the word 'Southern' (?) Because cultural-Marxists have demonized anything associated w/the historical South.. or am I remembering that wrong.

Click to expand...

They were, I don't think they actually took that step, although they pushed the women in ministry thing, expressed solidarity with the gay nightclub folks, embraced illegals/muslim refugees, and found time to condemn the flag of the army of northern Virginia.

@Newtheran did you leave IFB to become conservative Lutheran? I did back in March/April (confirmed member of LCMS as of May). I never was 'officially' a member of the IFB church I went to, though; I just attended services for six months.

kdm1984 said:

@Newtheran did you leave IFB to become conservative Lutheran? I did back in March/April (confirmed member of LCMS as of May). I never was 'officially' a member of the IFB church I went to, though; I just attended services for six months.

Click to expand...

Yes. Got involved in reading church history extensively. I'm still "fundamental" in a sense, it's just that it's the sort of fundamentalism that is actually informed by the past rather than a 20th century attempt to re-invent the wheel.

Sounds like I'm not the only one who traveled that road.

Newtheran said:

Yes. Got involved in reading church history extensively. I'm still "fundamental" in a sense, it's just that it's the sort of fundamentalism that is actually informed by the past rather than a 20th century attempt to re-invent the wheel.

Sounds like I'm not the only one who traveled that road.

Click to expand...

Indeed.

While I respect a lot of the things I heard in the IFB church, the focus on trying to "win souls" in very large numbers via door-knocking and small group badgering -- at the expense of proper focus on solid Biblical discipleship -- became too much of a concern for me to continue.

It did lead me to study much about decision theology vs monergism, as well as women's roles in the Great Commission, I will say that for sure...

Yes. While I'll always respect the instruction in and respect for the scriptures I received as a Baptist, I agree with you about the lack of proper discipleship...and in the end, it came down to the fact that the historic church was a liturgical church and the two finalists were Orthodoxy and Confessional Lutheranism. In my final year, I realized I had casserole 4 times as often as communion.

Newtheran said:

Well first, I don't know that given the current state of the RCC that I'd say that it isn't affected by liberalism. The current pope is for all intents and purposes a Marxist, supported by a cabal of homosexual cardinals and archbishops, and the lay Catholic is completely powerless to rid him or herself of this situation given the structure of that organization.

Click to expand...

This is very true. The Catholic Church is plunging into apostasy and the heretical Francis is driving the bus over the cliff. You're quite right on Francis being a Marxist (in contradiction of numerous past Popes who have condemned Marxism in no uncertain terms).

I think if you "mash" up what two previous posters stated, you'll have a pretty good answer. A previous poster (Athanasius) that that when scripture and the confessions of a particular church are made optional, the slide into theological chaos begins. Another post stated (Newtheran) that some denominations try to mimic society and become more accommodating and seeker friendly to attract members, especially as society becomes more secular. I think both are spot on and I'd just state that the seeker friendly approach isn't working for the exact reasons that Newtheran stated. They run off what good members they have in order to accommodate people who will mostly never darken the door or will only do so short term. I saw this type of thing happen first hand when I was a part of the Episcopal Church.

I'm very thankful for my confessional LCMS parish, but the LCMS has its issues too. Church growth movement evangelical Christianity has a foothold in the LCMS and it is no small or insignificant problem. Just my .2 cents!

Charlie7399 said:

That's a question I keep asking myself. Even though this happens mostly in the developed world, I can't help but feel a bit awkward about it.

One can argue that the RCC doesn't fall in the same trap because it's a worldwide organisation, with a bigger conservative population. The liberal attitude of a good part of their Western European and North American clergy makes me think they wouldn't be any different if they were geographically limited like the Protestants are.

What about the less traditional Protestants though, like the Baptists and the Pentecostals? Why aren't they affected by liberalism like the Lutherans or the Anglicans? The only traditional denomination that seems to get away with this (sort of) are the Methodists. I know that you can find a conservative, traditional Protestant church even in places where the larger churches are liberal, but I still wonder about it. What do you guys think?

Click to expand...

Clearly many Protestant institutions are inundated by liberal theology. In Catholicism most Jesuits are liberal and diverge significantly from their own time honored traditions. Most of this is from textual criticism. Thats where it starts but seldom where it ends. It is rather odd that traditionally Hebrews has always been attributed to Paul while in modern times scholars Catholic and Protestant deny this. Every paper I had to write in Bibke College required a discussion of text variation. This gets into doctrine after a while and more liberal views tend to be more permissive about gay life styles. Churches that stand on Scripture tend to rely on the clear testimony of Scripture and thus your evangelical and fundamentalists take less stock in modernism and emerging church theology.