Evangelical And Neo-Orthodox Movements

For this paper I am boiling the redemptive trend hermeneutic down to two components. First is the concept of momentum – asking if an interpretation or application of the passage continues in the spirit of previous Scripture. For example, Webb argues that both testaments “make significant modifications to the institution of slavery relative to their broader cultures” (74), therefore reading a passage such as Titus 2:9, “tell slaves to be submissive,” as pro-slavery would be a contradiction of what had previously been accomplished within God’s people. Second is the concept of now and then (with a shout out to The Blue Parakeet), where the redemptive thrust, projected by the Bible, along with general cultural ebbs and flows, may have changed our contemporary world so much that components of the original text have become confusing, dated, or perhaps even irrelevant.

One fact that must remain in consideration by any student of textual criticism is that there were many other religious and philosophical writings produced simultaneously with the Scriptures of the New Testament era. Robert J. Sargent states, “As the Bible was being written down, numerous other religious

Theology of Christianity appears in many forms. It is a concentration of the study of both the old and new testaments, as well as Christian traditions. Such theologies discussed by the author are: biblical criticism, systematic theology, historical theology, moral theology, pastoral theology, liberation theology, natural theology, liturgical studies and sacramenta theology, and mystical

The third section dissects the formation of the New Testament with more historical context and views of other writings defined as Gnostic writing. Bruce explains the spoken words of the apostles carried as much authority as their written words and gives an in depth explanation how the Gospels and Pauline writings were viewed by the Church Fathers. The rest of the section demonstrates the Church Fathers and their views of what was to be considered scripture and the councils that affirmed the inspired scripture.

Over the centuries, Christianity has organised its beliefs into a systematic theology that draws from its sacred writing and tradition. While the main beliefs of Christianity are shared by all Christian variants, there are degrees of different in the interpretation of these beliefs and how they are lived out in everyday life. This can be seen in the important of sacred text, principle belief of the concept of salvation in John 3:16, principle belief of divine and humanity in ‘John 1:14’, principle belief of resurrection in ‘Mark 16:1-8’, principle belief of revelation in ‘1 corinthians14:6’, and beliefs through the Trinity in ‘2 Corinthians 13:14’. This essay will explain the important of the sacred text and the principal beliefs of Christianity.

The evidence that exists to prove the diversity of the early Christian community is the many other writings which have been discovered by historians from the same time period (Harris 2014). In addition, the writings reveal that each separate group of Christians from this era had their own understanding of what Jesus was teaching His followers. The “fifth gospel” of Thomas paints the picture of Jesus as a guide towards His disciples by enlightening them with the message that God’s Kingdom already rules, but many people would not believe him. The portrait that Thomas provokes is an example of the diversity of the early writers and several of his ideas are similar to Matthew, Mark, and Luke (Harris 2014).

Perhaps the most powerful, fluent, and forceful paper promoting liberal Christianity is indeed Harry Emerson Fosdick's 1922 sermon “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?”. Fosdick seemed as if he was a very captivating human being in history during his time of existence. He wrote one of the most engaging papers that I have yet to read thus this far. It was definitely a wise decision to go ahead and read the two articles discussing fundamentalism to catch me up so that I did not have trouble keeping up with Fosdick's movement that he established in his sermon. Initially, I believe that the arising church is, amongst other things, is a rectifying of liberalism for a postmodern age. And I'm convinced that the same claims made by Fosdick in 1922 are just what we hear form emergents today. There is nothing new that lies under the sun today. It is only natural that the specifics argued for by the modernists are not those of the postmodern emergents.

In the study of Christian theology, scripture plays an essential role in the revelation of the Doctrine of God. Scriptures are “God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16-17) words, written by the Holy Spirit through divine inspiration of prophets. They are necessary for the proper understanding of the doctrine of God, the self-revelation of God, the proof of God’s existence, and for the discernment of false doctrines.

The essential problem Wright identifies in the introduction can be documented most clearly in six ordinary, but unsatisfactory responses often provided by the church to the query "What are the Gospels all about?, ” which are: 1) teaching people how to go to Heaven, 2) recording Jesus's exclusive ethical teaching, 3) depicting Jesus as a moral prototype for the people, 4) exhibiting Jesus as the perfect sacrifice, 5) telling stories with which humans can recognize and then find direction, and 6) signifying Jesus's spirituality. While each of these answers contains a portion of truth, Wright contends they all fail to hold the heart of the Gospel accounts. According to Wright, “the gospels tell of Jesus who embodied the living God of Israel and whose cross and resurrection really did unveil and initiate the Kingdom of God.” Wright then claims that the kingdom is apart of a greater eschatological theology, which is concerned with what is believed to be the final events of history, or the definitive destiny of humanity.

The purpose of the paper is to differentiate between Christ of faith and Jesus of history. New Testament biblical scholars from the 19th Century have been preoccupied by the notion of Christ of faith versus Jesus of History. Jesus of history can be described as the quest for historical Jesus, while the Christ of Faith is the Christ of Christian belief either through the Church or historically. Some traditions even went ahead to argue that the Jesus of History could never be found and therefore the Christ of faith is the only way forward for Christians. On the other hand, those who have been promoting the Jesus of History have often assumed that the historical Jesus is much superior as compared to the Christ of Faith. Despite the key differences between Christ of faith and the historical Jesus, both these aspect have an implication for Western Christianity.

In doing so, we can discover that final authority is not in and of scripture itself but of the Triune God who is the Author of scripture. The second obstacle to consider is that many have dismissed scripture as a book of Israelitic & Christian stories. Wright contends that these stories are told to inform us of “internal dynamics” of the past so as to engage us in the present for transformation into Christ-likeness. (p.25). Thirdly, Wright asserts that the question of scripture’s authority should not be viewed as a list of rules where God condescends to man. Rather, scripture should be received as God’s purpose to save and renew the entire world by authorizing the church—God’s agent in the world—with His mission through the work of the Holy Spirit. Thus, it is imperative that biblical scholars “see the role of scripture not simply as being [informative about or revelatory of God’s truth] but as a means of God’s action in and through us.” (p.28)

Church history reveals that a number of serious biblical doctrinal controversies occurred during the late 1800s and early 1900s that gave occasion for the formulation of certain fundamentalist principals to be implemented as a clarification and remedy against unbiblical manifestations. The authority of the Bible was brought into serious question.

The third school of interpretation is Traditionalism. Traditionalists maintain that the Bible is full of truth, God is revealed within the Bible and that it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. One of the key characteristics of their approach to the Bible is its emphasis on the need to understand the nature of the different types of literature within the bible. However, traditionalists would not accept the fundamentalist’s notion of inerrancy as many would acknowledge that there are mistakes in the Bible. These are seen as a reflection of both the historical context in which they are written and the human fallibility of the authors. As with Liberals, traditionalists believe that some aspects of the Bible need to be reinterpreted for today. Traditionalists place a lot of emphasis on the process of exegesis. However, after establishing the intended meaning of the author the next step in the traditional approach is the question of how it should be applied to Christian today. However, whereas fundamentalists believe that the true meaning of a text should be clear to each reader;

Before the gospels and Pauline epistles, early church Christians related to the Old Testament as Scripture and viewed their Christian walk as the fulfillment of the promises made to Israel from the Old Testament, which foretold of the coming age of the Messiah. The first New Testament Christians understood the importance of the Old Testament; it was their “Bible” they preached from. Just as in the early church, Christians today need the Old Testament for preaching and in which to reference and understand Christ’s purpose for why he came.

Biblical Interpretation is important and necessary so that we can understand what the text is saying, what the intended theological message is, and how to personally apply and teach these Scriptural truths to carry forward the Gospel in rescuing others from despair and death to hope and life, thus displaying His glory and growing His Kingdom. It is about finding what God is revealing about Himself and His Son Jesus Christ. Moreover, it is for us to know that God desires to have a relationship with us and for us to be set apart in a covenant relationship with Him to display holy lives that bring Him glory. Interpretation, using hermeneutical principles, help guide us in proper boundaries for interpreting Scripture so that we can reveal the intended meaning of the text. Without this, we run the risk of imposing our own ideas on the text, therefore misinterpreting. Misinterpreting can cause us to miss theological truths, administer the wrong application, and neglect or overlook the meaning of the text which weakens the impact of God’s truth in our personal lives as well as others we are teaching.