Doctrine
Liberalism does not reject doctrine. It has its own doctrines to which it wants you to subscribe. Machen identifies them as:
- The Fatherhood of God
- The universal brotherhood of man
- All creeds are equally true.
But point (3) cannot be true, since some creeds, especially those that appeal to history, make claims that can either be proven true or false. Moreover, Paul’s epistles claim a fundamental unity with the early history of Jesus’s companions (26). Either Christianity’s origin deals with facts or it does not, for “The narration of the facts is history; the narration of the meaning of the facts is doctrine” (29).
Even if we get rid of “doctrines” and “propositions,” and say Christianity is merely “life,” the problem does not go away. If I say something is “life,” I place it in the realm of history and fact.
Main idea: “It must be admitted, then, that if we are going to have a non-doctrinal religion, or a doctrinal religion founded merely on general truth, we must give up not only Paul, not only the primitive early church, but also Jesus himself” (45).
To state the issue another way, if all you want is “general truth” or “universal ethics,” you do not need history or Jesus for that. If the basis of religion is to be kind to one another, why did Jesus have to die as a political rival?
“Liberalism is altogether in the imperative mood, while Christianity begins with a triumphant indicative; liberalism first announces appeals to man’s will, while Christianity announces, first, a gracious act of God” (47).
In other words, progressive Christianity is law without gospel.
By attacking the “propositional Christianity” of Paul and seeking refuge in the timeless truths of Jesus, the liberal has not escaped all the dangers. He thinks this message is “life,” not doctrine. If it is life, then it takes place in history, from which it can either be verified or falsified.
A Patriot King 