Hello, everyone! I'm going through Ryrie's Basic Theology and discussing what I find there. Feel free to join in. Or something. Anyway.
Hope this is in the right forum. Hope nobody gets offended. Hope I'm generally doing this right...
There are three distinct categories when it comes to deciding where authority over truth rests, which can be divvied up into a number of subcategories. The first major category is Liberalism, which generally places the authority and responsibility on the reader. Liberal theists can be generally divided into three categories based on where in the reader the authority lies. The first is Reason; many liberal science professors fall into this category. According to this group, logic and reason are the ultimate judge of truth. The problem with this is that reason and science can lead in more than one direction; this causes the ancient it may be true for you, but its not true for me chant. The result is that there is no consistent, universal truth. This standpoint conflicts with Gods consistent, universal nature.
The second category of liberals is those who place the authority in feelingsreligion based on how you feel. As we all know, humans are fickle creatures, and truth based on their momentary emotions has a tendency to flicker from one moment to the next.
The third category is based on conscience. Conscience, it should be noted, is basic to all human beings, not specifically Christians. Although undoubtedly the Holy Spirit collaborates with the conscience to influence us, the conscience is not directly dependant on Godit is often, if not always, shaped by cultural norms and a persons surroundings. In addition, it can become either seared or hyperactive. Obviously, the conscience cannot be relied on to produce universal truth.
A middle ground between liberals and conservatives is Neo-Orthodoxy. As we all know, standing between two armies will get you shot at from both sides, and neo-orthodoxy is no exception: its too liberal for conservatives and too conservative for liberals; (Rather like Arnold Schwarzenegger in his bid for governor ) the only group neo-orthodoxists please are themselves. Neo-orthodoxists teach that Jesus, the Man who inspired the Bible, is infallible, but the Biblical account is not; in other words, we should strive for Jesus, but not trust the Bible any more than we would a newspaper account of the events. Trying to find Jesus under this system is like wandering through a giant darkened maze with a light at one end; you know which direction you need to be going, but not how to get there.
With Conservatism, were on more solid ground. Even it, however, has its divisions. Conservative Catholicism puts authority on the Bible, but only in parallel with the Church. Common mortals are not allowed to read and interpret the Bible for themselves; instead, the Church interprets and spoon-feeds the Scriptures to the huddled masses. Whats more, the Bible is not even the final authority: whatever the Pope or ecumenical councils have decreed in the past qualifies as absolute truth, even if they contradict the Scriptures or each other. This was demonstrated when Joan of Arc was declared a witch by the Church and burned at the stake, only to be declared a saint several hundred years later by the same Church.
Finally, we come to Conservative Protestantism. While using logic and rationalism (in their place), CP takes the Bible as the 100% inspired Word of God.
Hope this is in the right forum. Hope nobody gets offended. Hope I'm generally doing this right...
<<text follows>>
Basic Theology, Chapter 3
Basic Theology, Chapter 3
There are three distinct categories when it comes to deciding where authority over truth rests, which can be divvied up into a number of subcategories. The first major category is Liberalism, which generally places the authority and responsibility on the reader. Liberal theists can be generally divided into three categories based on where in the reader the authority lies. The first is Reason; many liberal science professors fall into this category. According to this group, logic and reason are the ultimate judge of truth. The problem with this is that reason and science can lead in more than one direction; this causes the ancient it may be true for you, but its not true for me chant. The result is that there is no consistent, universal truth. This standpoint conflicts with Gods consistent, universal nature.
The second category of liberals is those who place the authority in feelingsreligion based on how you feel. As we all know, humans are fickle creatures, and truth based on their momentary emotions has a tendency to flicker from one moment to the next.
The third category is based on conscience. Conscience, it should be noted, is basic to all human beings, not specifically Christians. Although undoubtedly the Holy Spirit collaborates with the conscience to influence us, the conscience is not directly dependant on Godit is often, if not always, shaped by cultural norms and a persons surroundings. In addition, it can become either seared or hyperactive. Obviously, the conscience cannot be relied on to produce universal truth.
A middle ground between liberals and conservatives is Neo-Orthodoxy. As we all know, standing between two armies will get you shot at from both sides, and neo-orthodoxy is no exception: its too liberal for conservatives and too conservative for liberals; (Rather like Arnold Schwarzenegger in his bid for governor ) the only group neo-orthodoxists please are themselves. Neo-orthodoxists teach that Jesus, the Man who inspired the Bible, is infallible, but the Biblical account is not; in other words, we should strive for Jesus, but not trust the Bible any more than we would a newspaper account of the events. Trying to find Jesus under this system is like wandering through a giant darkened maze with a light at one end; you know which direction you need to be going, but not how to get there.
With Conservatism, were on more solid ground. Even it, however, has its divisions. Conservative Catholicism puts authority on the Bible, but only in parallel with the Church. Common mortals are not allowed to read and interpret the Bible for themselves; instead, the Church interprets and spoon-feeds the Scriptures to the huddled masses. Whats more, the Bible is not even the final authority: whatever the Pope or ecumenical councils have decreed in the past qualifies as absolute truth, even if they contradict the Scriptures or each other. This was demonstrated when Joan of Arc was declared a witch by the Church and burned at the stake, only to be declared a saint several hundred years later by the same Church.
Finally, we come to Conservative Protestantism. While using logic and rationalism (in their place), CP takes the Bible as the 100% inspired Word of God.
