In American culture, the divide between liberals and conservatives has perhaps never been as wide as it is today. Each year, the gap between the right and the left seems to grow and our society becomes more and more polarized. This is certainly true in the political arena, but it is true in the theological realm as well.
In his recent book Against Liberal Theology, Roger Olson explores this growing divide and warns against the dangers of liberal theology as it pertains to Christian doctrine. In this book, he argues that liberal Christianity is not just a different perspective on Christian belief, but that liberal Christianity is an entirely different religion compared to historic, orthodox Christianity.
Before beginning a review of this book, a word needs to be said about the author, Roger Olson. Olson has a unique perspective on this topic, as he recounts early in the book that much of his theological education took place in settings where liberal Christian beliefs were the norm. In the preface of the book, Olson writes, “I have studied under liberal biblical scholars and theologians during my graduate studies. I do not come against liberal Christianity as an outsider; I know it and understand it and have experienced it as an insider” (Olson, x). This inside perspective is valuable as he deals with detailed and nuanced views regarding liberal theology and doctrine.
Olson is also very objective and fair in how he addresses both the topics and thinkers related to liberal theology throughout the book. He makes this clear from the beginning, writing, “I wish to emphasize that I have no ax to grind with liberal Christians; I do not hate them but love them. I just think that their theology is seriously flawed to the extent that true liberal Christianity ought not to be considered authentically Christian” (Olson, 4). Lastly, although Olson is writing against liberal theology in this book, he himself is not an overly conservative thinker (he has also authored a book titled How to Be Evangelical Without Being Conservative). This also adds to his objectivity throughout the book, as he is not necessarily advocating for extremely conservative positions on any of the issues he discusses; rather, he is simply showing the incompatibility of modern liberal theology with orthodox Christian doctrine.
This book has many strengths. The first is its clarity. Olson makes one main argument in the book, and that is that “liberal Christianity cuts the cord of continuity between itself and biblical, historical, classical, orthodox Christianity so thoroughly that it ought to call itself something other than Christian” (Olson, 14). Olson continually weaves this argument throughout the book, as it shows up in almost every chapter where different doctrines are explored. This main thesis stays as the central focus throughout the book, and this in turn makes his arguments very clear. The second major strength of the book is its organization. The book is organized like a systematic theology volume, as it has sequential chapters on the doctrines of the Bible, God, Jesus, salvation, and the future. In each chapter, Olson closely examines how liberal Christian beliefs on each doctrine differ from that of historic, orthodox Christianity, and as a result, shows how it “cuts the cord of continuity” between the two. This systematic approach from doctrine to doctrine makes the book a well-organized, easy read.
The last main strength of the book is its grounding in history. Olson does a great job of tracing the history of liberal theology back to its roots in Germany in the 19th century and then following the development of liberal doctrines to the present day. He includes contributions from several prominent liberal theologians, the chief example being Freidrich Schleiermacher. Olson shows how Schleiermacher, who became known as the “father of liberal theology,” initially sought to synthesize Christian belief with the emerging Enlightenment thinking of his time, but did this “at the expense of orthodox Christianity,” adding that, “he invented a new religion without admitting it” (Olson, 126). Olson follows this argument by showing how later liberal theologians following in Schleiermacher’s footsteps continue to add to this “new religion.” Olson also includes contributions from many more conservative scholars, most notably J. Gresham Machen. In many ways, Olson’s arguments in this book hearken back to J. Gresham Machen's classic work, Christianity and Liberalism, which was published in 1923. Just as Machen was revealing the dangers of the growing movement of liberal theology during his time, Olson modernizes many of the arguments and warnings that began with Machen in the early 20th century. The way that Olson traces these historical developments and brings them to light for the modern day makes the book a very relevant read.
The only weakness of the book is connected to one of the author’s strengths. While Roger Olson is very fair and kind as he addresses liberal theology and liberal theologians, this kindness does prevent him from making some logical connections throughout the book. Specifically, Olson refuses to connect belief in certain Christian doctrines with a judgment on whether or not an individual is a Christian, as he writes “I will not argue that liberal Christians are not Christians; I will argue that their theology is not authentically Christian” (Olson, 4). While it is true that a person’s salvation cannot be judged just by their theological beliefs, when it comes to key doctrines like the belief in a transcendent God or the resurrection of Jesus (both of which Olson addresses in the book), it is fair to say that if a person denies major Christian doctrines that the individual should not be considered a Christian. Olson himself hints at this by stating that liberal Christianity should be considered an entirely separate religion from orthodox Christianity, but he refuses to say that those who believe in this separate religion are not Christians. Similarly, he refuses to make a judgment about the status of Latter-day Saints even after acknowledging that their view of Jesus is out of line with orthodox Christian belief (Olson, 34-35). While it is admirable that he wants to withhold making judgments about salvation solely based on theological beliefs, it seems inconsistent to state that an individual’s beliefs on key doctrines are not Christian, but that the individual still might be.
Overall, this is a very timely and important read on a very important topic. For anyone interested in theology, I cannot recommend this book enough. Olson’s intimate knowledge of the topic is apparent, and his objectivity is on display on every page of the book. This book stands as an important reminder for all professing Christians on the importance of proper belief.
Sam Hitchcock (ThM, Dallas Theological Seminary) serves as the Director of Spiritual Formation at Oklahoma Christian School in Edmond, OK.