|
 Now
hold your hat! I am not going to recommend a study of Karl Barth,
or Emil Brunner — or any other teachers of Neo orthodoxy; but
would like to review some points of their philosophy, to alert
us to modernistic influences in current thinking. These popular
theologians, despite their reaction to classical liberalism,
have imbibed much of its subjective approach to the
Scriptures, and have had a profound effect upon our day.
Schleiermacher,
father of modern liberalism, found his authority in the “soul’s
experience” rather than in the Scriptures. Inspiration was
redefined in terms of the author instead of the writing. (It
became the task of the liberal critic to determine at what
points the Bible was true.) Neo orthodoxy retains this concept,
believing that the Bible only “becomes” the Word of God as
it relates to our “experiences.” God’s Word, to me, may be
in the Bible, in a sermon, “or even in things.” Whatever “overpowers”
me, leads me to Jesus Christ, This is God’s Word for me. (Of
course without some fixed way for knowing that I am in Christ,
this makes each man his own ultimate authority; and he must
practice a high tolerance (what is the limit?) for all who claim
to an “experience.”)
Emphasis
upon being “in Christ” but accepting no objective standard
for deter-
|
|
-mining when one is faithful to
Christ, is but one of many examples of “double-talk” in this
“new” orthodoxy. Bible terminology is given new meanings,
and a conservative fundamentalist may find himself greatly
confused by it all — which is, to the neo orthodox,
proof-positive of his intellectual superiority. His attitude
will likely be most condescending — they bathe in love, but
they also bite while they caress.
Faith
becomes, not man’s response to external evidence (Rom. 10:17)
but a “work of Grace” which God performs in us. A
Calvinistic background re. the Holy Spirit is here displayed.
“Understanding” is, as one would expect, possible only
through further working of the H.S. in us. Thus one looks inward
for confirmation, rather than looking objectively to the Word.
Many of “us older preachers” met this long ago in the “spiritual
discernment” of early Baptist debaters.
Keep
the above in mind as you read excerpts from an article by bro.
Carl Ketcherside, p. 6. I do not believe Carl is knowingly
following the neo- orthodox line. He would deny many of its
tenets. But the spirit and style of subjective theology,
with words to match, is knocking at the door.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
