The mystical element in theological liberalism

Status
Not open for further replies.

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
From George Smeaton's volume on Christ's Doctrine of the Atonement, p. 17. He gives an insightful analysis of the anti-doctrinal sentiment of the time. He notes how it arises from those who "exalt the inner life." He also indicates that there is a tendency to lay hold of that which ministers "assurance" while avoiding clear definition and statement of fact; but ultimately anti-doctrinal sentiment leads one away from the Scriptures of truth to follow "a process of unlearning" which leaves "all in uncertainty." His comment is as follows:

"Yet many in these days who exalt the inner life at the expense of true and proper doctrine, are not slow to say that it is indifferent whether the death of Christ be regarded as the procuring cause and ground of pardon, or as the mere assurance of it. They will not inquire how the atonement was effected; they avoid the definition of terms and all biblical precision of thought, as if it could be of little moment to a Christian, whether the death of Jesus is considered as a vicarious sacrifice, or an expression of divine love, whether it display the evil of sin, or merely stand on a solemn revocation of the Old Testament sacrifices. They will have it, that these points are but theological debates or human speculations, from which they do well to stand aloof in the discussion of the doctrine. That is a process of unlearning, or of leaving all in uncertainty, which does not spring from a commendable zeal for truth, but from a wish to blunt its edge; and it is tantamount to saying, that there is in Scripture no doctrine on the subject. This is the watchword of a tendency which is adverse to clearly-defined views of doctrine or of Scripture truth."
 
Last edited:
I have heard this passage to argue against the truth of what Smeaton notes.

2Ti 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

2Ti 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,

Thank You for all the things you post Reverend Winzer. I use them in other places. They are always noteworthy and edifying to the soul. Thank You, thank you, thank you.
 
Thank You for all the things you post Reverend Winzer. I use them in other places. They are always noteworthy and edifying to the soul. Thank You, thank you, thank you.

Thankyou for the encouragement, dear brother. All thanks belongs to the Lord for the blessing of His truth. Genesis 32:10.
 
Rev Winzer, is this quote from Smeaton a passing comment or does he speak at length regarding the exaltation of the inner life? I think it is a timely quote, I'd read the book at length if he had more to say on that topic particularly. This inner life movement and subsequent distrust for a system of doctrine is not only the fruit of liberalism but also what I'm seeing come out of some influential charismatic circles as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Rev Winzer, is this quote from Smeaton a passing comment or does he speak at length regarding the exaltation of the inner life? I think it is a timely quote, I'd read the book at length if he had more to say on that topic particularly. This inner life movement and subsequent distrust for a system of doctrine is not only the fruit of liberalism but also what I'm seeing come out of some influential charismatic circles as well.

Kaleb, I think it would be accurate to call it a passing comment at that point, but he repeatedly addresses this school of thought and its claim that religious "consciousness" is the rule of faith and life. Prof. Smeaton shows how Christ Himself expressed a "consciousness" of what He was doing, and that the work of the interpreter is to simply reproduce what Christ thought and said.

The connection with charismatics is not accidental. They emerged out of the liberalising, higher life, spiritualist vacuum which had been created by the turn of the 20th century. Prof. Smeaton's book on the Holy Spirit might better address the doctrinal deficiencies of the charismatics.
 
"That is a process of unlearning, or of leaving all in uncertainty, which does not spring from a commendable zeal for truth, but from a wish to blunt its edge."

This is what drove me crazy when reading the neoorthodox and liberal guys before coming to Christ. The writings seemed so erudite, but there was nothing to dig your fork into.
 
Speaking of "unlearning" reminds me of "unknowing." Is apophaticism in theology necessarily "mystical"?

There is an apophatic or negative aspect to all theology just by virtue that we negate all that belongs to creaturely limitation when speaking of God as He is in Himself. But I would say theology is more than speaking about God as He is in Himself; it also speaks of God as He relates and acts towards His creatures, and this involves a positive, communicative revelation which is adapted to our creaturely limitations and addresses our sinful condition. To choose to live in a cloud of unknowing despite this objective, authoritative, sufficient, and clear revelation of God's word is mystically deceptive and destructive. At the very least such unknowing will require an individual to look inward for the consciousness of God which he craves; and then, ultimately, nothing short of being like God as He is in Himself will satisfy him.
 
Agreed. I, too, am wary of extreme apophaticism. I just no some traditions take apophatic theology as a gateway to mysticism
 
Professed anosticism or disinterest about the clear teaching of Scripture is just an excuse to make room for unbelief.

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top