Liberal Christian Interpretation

One of the most controversial aspects of Christianity is the interpretations gathered by its followers because multiple sects formed based on different opinions of how to correctly interpret and comprehend the scripture. While not he was not the first to question how to interpret the scripture, the third century scholar Origen had significant influence on how Christians should decipher their religion within his text, Origen: On First Principles. Origen describes the scriptures as having three meanings behind them: bodily, spiritual, and soul meanings. Each intended to illuminate the Christian understanding of how to practice the faith correctly. However, this is not to say that each piece of scripture has each layer of meaning behind it. For instance, each passage of scripture could have only one type of interpretation or any combination of the three.

If ten bystanders were to witness the same crime, how many different interpretations of the scene would there be? All the opinions and viewpoints that arise from one scenario are very dependant on different variables. The same can be applied when analyzing the book of Genesis. One controversial topic is whether to take it literally or figuratively. Some of the different arguments supporting and opposing either side include; the original beliefs of the interpreter, the historical time frame, the different genres of writing in the book, and more. There are many perceptions of the book of Genesis being literal or figurative.

Because of aspects like how someone was raised and what type of culture they lived in, individuals interpret the Bible differently. This means that even if an individual believes the Bible is the inherent word of God, they may not have the same beliefs as someone who declares the same claim.

To have a productive and constructive understanding of God it is a requirement for the reader to pay attention to context or risk missing the fundamental messages from God. To read as a contextualist one must process understanding of the scripture by consistently asking questions about context. To be a Fundamentalist is to not consider context and either believe a word for word literal account of the stories regardless of scientific evidence or to look and scientific evidence and regard the stories as untrue or implausible, completely missing the meanings carried within those stories. The important difference to determining meaning can be found in a reader who considers context in order to find these

The main message in Christianity & Liberalism is what the only object of faith is Christ. Machen composes his book into doctrine, God and man, the Bible, Christ, Salvation, and the Church; he shows all of this doctrine should be directly connected with the faith in Christ. If not, he declares that that should not be Christianity. In chapter 1 and 2, Machen emphasizes that how maintaining traditional doctrine is important. The reason for that is classical conservatives tried to keep the doctrine upon the Bible; however, classical liberalism attacked the traditional doctrine because Machen points out that liberal theologians and preachers want to interpret the truth from the point of a human. Machen even warns that the liberalism is shaking the faith in Christianity. In other words, it could be proper understanding that the liberalism rebelled against the truth and God’s word.

The foundation of Christianity is doctrine. Machen described doctrine as “the setting forth of the event with the meaning of the event.” (PAGE 25) Christianity is based on the truth of the Gospel of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ as the only sacrifice for sin. On the other hand, liberalism does not have doctrine and the foundation is on the individual experience and feelings. Liberalism is independent from standard or historical foundation of Christianity. Thus, Christianity and liberalism are totally different kinds of religions.

The association further believes there is only one true interpretation of Scripture, although there may be several applications. The true meaning lies in the text and is that which the divinely-guided author willed to convey. It is recoverable through careful application of a literal (grammatical, historical, contextual) method of interpretation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and in the community of Christ. The Holy Spirit illumines the text, enabling the reader to embrace the significance of what God has communicated, and to see the glory of Christ in the Word of God. To sum this up, they believe they are right about

The bible is an old book written a long time ago for an ancient audience. God is the divine author of the bible and he intended for us to be able to read and understand it, even in these current times. However, those ancient years in the time of the roman empire was were Christianity, as we know it, began its first steps. For this to happen, the authors who were inspired, had to make sure that their audience could understand and relate with their words. While we have learned to translate the language of the bible over the years the words and meanings are still the same. Which is why it is important to understand the context in which the Bible was written.

In sharp contrast, both Progressive Evangelicals and Liberal Protestants do not hold to the idea of biblical inerrancy, recognizing that human authors were capable of error. However, Progressive Evangelicals still highly esteem Scriptures, unlike Liberal Protestants. Progressive Evangelicals follow closely the teachings of Jesus while reading the Bible in light of general themes found in the Scriptures. According to Sparks (n.d.), Progressive Evangelicals would argue that “one cannot simply read theology off of the Bible’s pages; one must understand the text and then reflect theologically on what is said in light of other biblical texts, and in light of God’s voice as it speaks to us through tradition, cosmos, experience and Spirit” ( p. 8). While the Bible has authority, it is not the only way God speaks and thus must be put into dialogue with other sources of

In the Catholic Church, there are four senses in which the bible can be viewed: literal, allegorical, moral and anagogical. The literal sense presents a historical account, and can be viewed by anyone as a historical document. The other three senses reflect the religious nature of the bible, showing believers a more profound meaning that can influence one’s spiritual lives. While each of the four senses of scripture can reveal different things to the reader, it is the four senses together that provide the complete view of this divinely inspired book.

Considering that this view overcomes the apparent contradictions in the Bible by, for example, claiming that the account of God sending the Israelites to fight is intended to portray his desire for justice, it holds strong. Nevertheless, it fails to account for the fact that teaching within the Bible itself asserts that Biblical text is the word of God. Interpreters must be wary before referring to 'the teaching of the Bible,' for as John Locke asserts, [3]"the scripture serves but,

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;

In its most basic definition, biblical hermeneutics refers to the art and science of biblical interpretation. It is considered an art because understanding, which is required for interpretation, requires a feel for the subject matter being interpreted, not just an analyzation of data. Biblical hermeneutics is also considered a science due to the fact that some aspects of the interpretation process resemble the activities of natural science. Because of this dual nature of hermeneutics, it is almost impossible for an interpreter to arrive at a neutral conclusion. Good or bad, most biblical interpreters translate scripture based upon

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.