I’m writing to see if you can recommend a good book which addresses and responds to liberal Biblical criticism. I just had coffee this morning with a retired professor of bible studies. He ran down what I take to be all of the standard criticisms of the biblical narrative. Sparing you all of the details of the conversation, I finally asked him if he believed in the literal truth of the resurrection. He attempted to obfuscate: “I believe it has a reality in a social sense." Those sorts of responses always seem to me like nice ways of saying we really don’t believe. I pressed him and he finally admitted that he was a naturalist. But these arguments trouble me and left me a little bereft. Can you suggest a good response to these sorts of arguments? I’m not sure why anyone would bother teaching a biblical studies class if you don’t believe. A bit like teaching in Icelandic folklore class: interesting to know what silly things these people believed but of course none of it is true.
I really have no recommendations, so I thought I’d ask your help here. Something addressed to the layman would be ideal.
Lewis’ triad of truth, falsehood, or insanity has always seemed apt.
Either Christianity is actually true or it’s not. If it’s an insane delusion, we’d be insane to follow it. If it’s just wrong, it’s unforgivably wrong.
Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism is a better and more full response.
I’d also suggest opening up sin and righteousness and judgment. So often, I’ve found rational arguments about this or that fact stated by Scripture, or conundrums surrounding theodicy, are set to the side when one turns the argument to our sin and God’s holiness. Love,
The book will not be as accessible as Machen, but her autobiographical introduction alone is a fascinating read. From her introduction:
“Why do you say ‘No!’ to historical-critical theology?” I have been confronted with this question, and I wish to state at the outset: My “No!” to historical-critical theology stems from my “Yes!" to my wonderful Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and to the glorious redemption he accomplished for me on Golgotha. …
Today I realize that historical-critical theology’s monopolistic character and world-wide influence is a sign of God’s judgment (Rom. 1:18-32). God predicted this in his Word: “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2 Tim. 4:3). He also promised to send “a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie” (2 Thess. 2:11). God is not dead, nor has he resigned. He reigns, and he is already executing judgment on those who declare him dead or assert that he is a false god who does nothing, either good or evil. …
By God’s grace I experienced Jesus as the one whose name is above all names. I was permitted to realize that Jesus is God’s Son, born of a virgin. He is the Messiah and the Son of Man; such titles were not merely conferred on him as the result of human deliberation. I recognized, first mentally, but then in a vital, experiential way, that Holy Scripture is inspired.
Rev. Bayly, your endorsement carries weight. Lots of liberal theologians who claim to have become evangelical are not evangelicals in an orthodox sense of the word, but are, at best, Barthians. If you endorse her, she’s a lot better than that.
I’ve never heard of her until now. (Not that people like her would have been on my assigned reading list at Calvin College or Calvin Seminary – can’t let those pesky women with doctorates criticize male theologians, can we? /sarc )