Changes

[[Image:lighterstill.jpg]]

[[Image:lighterstill.jpg]][[Image:Berlin2.jpg|right|frame]]

'''Adolf von Harnack''' was a German (Lutheran) theologian of the late ninteenth and early twentieth centuries who taught at the University of Berlin.  Harnack was one of a select few theologians who could be collectively regarded as the fathers of Protestant liberalism, a distinctively German movement whose influence rapidly spread throughout Europe, Britain, and North America.  His academic carreer was a spectacular success even though he labored under constant critical fire from the ecclesiastical authorities for his controversial ideas.  Nonetheless, his many students eventually went on to spread the ideas of liberalism throughout the church, thus setting the primary theological stage for the entirety of the twentieth century, particularly in the United States.   

'''Adolf von Harnack''' was a German (Lutheran) theologian of the late ninteenth and early twentieth centuries who taught at the University of Berlin.  Harnack was one of a select few theologians who could be collectively regarded as the fathers of Protestant liberalism, a distinctively German movement whose influence rapidly spread throughout Europe, Britain, and North America.  His academic carreer was a spectacular success even though he labored under constant critical fire from the ecclesiastical authorities for his controversial ideas.  Nonetheless, his many students eventually went on to spread the ideas of liberalism throughout the church, thus setting the primary theological stage for the entirety of the twentieth century, particularly in the United States.   

Based on this understanding of the primacy of reason for Christian faith and theology, the German liberals introduced the historical-critical method to the field of biblical studies.  Basically this academic approach to the Bible has two components:  (1) the Bible, like any other document,  is a product of history and therefore can only be properly studied and understood within its own historical context, and (2) the Bible must be subjected to the critical scrutiny of reason in the same way that we would treat any other object of examination.  This method obviously presents a formidable challenge to the popular and devout use of the Bible in which it is read purely in the context of one's personal faith, and in which one is to be judged by the Bible, and not vice-versa.  The liberals, faithful churchmen that they were, would agree that for the puposes of faith one may be judged by the Bible, but only after the Bible has been ['''critically'''] judged by reason to determine its actual ['''historical'''] meaning.  One important example of the kind of work the historical-critical method pursued was the effort to establish the authorship of the various books of the Bible.  Genesis, for instance, was traditionally attributed to Moses but critical scolars have established that it is in fact a collection of sources redacted by several editors.  Typically the historical-critical method was accompanied by the denial of miracles such as the virgin birth and the resurrection.  The presence of miracles in the biblical narrative were attributed to the pre-scientific understanding of the biblical writers.  Not surprisingly, the church often went to great lengths to distance itself from university theology over the next one hundred years.   

[[Image:bible2.jpg|left|frame]]Based on this understanding of the primacy of reason for Christian faith and theology, the German liberals introduced the historical-critical method to the field of biblical studies.  Basically this academic approach to the Bible has two components:  (1) the Bible, like any other document,  is a product of history and therefore can only be properly studied and understood within its own historical context, and (2) the Bible must be subjected to the critical scrutiny of reason in the same way that we would treat any other object of examination.  This method obviously presents a formidable challenge to the popular and devout use of the Bible in which it is read purely in the context of one's personal faith, and in which one is to be judged by the Bible, and not vice-versa.  The liberals, faithful churchmen that they were, would agree that for the puposes of faith one may be judged by the Bible, but only after the Bible has been ['''critically'''] judged by reason to determine its actual ['''historical'''] meaning.  One important example of the kind of work the historical-critical method pursued was the effort to establish the authorship of the various books of the Bible.  Genesis, for instance, was traditionally attributed to Moses but critical scolars have established that it is in fact a collection of sources redacted by several editors.  Typically the historical-critical method was accompanied by the denial of miracles such as the virgin birth and the resurrection.  The presence of miracles in the biblical narrative were attributed to the pre-scientific understanding of the biblical writers.  Not surprisingly, the church often went to great lengths to distance itself from university theology over the next one hundred years.