Friedrich Schleiermacher: History, Science and the Bible
September 12, 2009
Friedrich Schleiermacher, born November 21, 1763 in Breslau, Prussia, was a religious man with a high view of God; however, his understanding of God and the Bible were quite liberal. These views were fashioned out of his upbringing and were predisposed by the liberal teaching of his day. Ultimately, Friedrich’s understanding of God was born out of the “Romanticism” movement of the day and he eventually became an “influential spokesman for ‘Christian experience’” , a movement whose teaching brought God to simply feelings.
A Brief Look at the History That Swirled Around Schleiermacher
Even the greatest thinkers of history seldom conceived their ideas in a vacuum; Friedrich did not either. Let’s look at some key events and people who influenced Friedrich.
Scripture Alone
In the early 1500’s, Martin Luther unwaveringly defended his views of the Bible and the injustices of his day against the Catholic Church. In defense of his position, he uttered these words, “Unless I am convinced by the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures or evident reason, I am bound by the Scriptures adduced by me, and my conscience has been taken captive by the Word of God, and I am neither able nor willing to recant, since it is neither safe nor right to act against conscience. God help me. Amen" . Luther took a bold and firm stand upon the authority of the Word of God. But this stand was not to last within the culture of Europe…
Scripture Questioned
Moving into the period known as The Age of Enlightenment (1600’s to 1800’s), thinking shifted and men started questioning the Bible’s doctrines on history and science. The world of history and science were making new discoveries, and some of these discoveries were in direct conflict with clear Biblical teaching. This age is vast and complex to unfold, but in summary, many were now taking the position that the Bible no longer had anything of value to add to the history and science of the day and, at best, the Bible’s voice on these subjects was limited and easily questioned.
The Biblical view of the origin of the earth was specifically questioned. “Geologists and astronomers on the one hand, and biologists and anthropologists on the other, combined to present a historical picture of the earth’s origin (read history here), and of man’s habitation of it, which was wholly incompatible with the historical account in the Old Testament.” This was a sad turn of events. The impact of this questioning is still felt today.
Throughout history, men have influenced and shaped worldviews. Using his newly invented telescope, Galileo’s discoveries of the universe brought the church’s belief of the earth being the center of the solar system into a poor light and ridicule. Scientist Francis Bacon argued that the Bible was not needed to understand the world.
With new attempts to place the origin of the earth at several million years ago, theologians began reinterpreting Scripture. Some of these men were Hugh Miller and Thomas Chalmers. Both preachers, they questioned certain aspects of the creation account and what the word “day” meant in Genesis 1. In doing so, they taught an old age of the earth based upon the science of the day, thus altering the Bible and bringing into question its authority when dealing with history.
In the field of science, Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin are two men who pushed the “questioning of the Bible" way down the road with their theories. These theories were being promoted in their writings “Principles of Geology” and “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, for the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”.
Stepping away from the authority of the Bible, new assumptions were being made about the age of the earth and religious leaders were being forced to fight, abandon the Bible or reinterpret its teaching. These great battles and compromise, I believe, negatively influenced Friedrich and his ability to trust what the Bible said. Therefore, it became easy to reject the Bible’s teaching of history and science.
Scripture Abandoned
Moving into the early days of the 20th century, we begin to see the impact of questioning the Bible. In Dayton, Tennessee, on July 1925, the world looked in at the “trial of the century”, the Scopes Monkey Trial, where the Bible was not just questioned, but openly mocked and criticized. Clarence Darrow questioned William Jennings Bryan about the history and science of the Bible and because of Bryan’s poor understanding of the strength of the science and history of the Bible, the world saw what a “foundation being destroyed” looked like. The Bible was now clearly viewed as not having any importance for a “natural world” understanding. This thinking was spoken about by the apostle Paul,
God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness
18 "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
(Romans 1:18-23, New King James Version).”
The questioning of the Bible led to a rejection of the Bible. One of the more prominent casualties was Charles Templeton. In the 1950’s, he was a more popular evangelist than Billy Graham; however, when he could no longer reconcile the liberal teaching he had received in seminary about the earth being millions of years old, Charles rejected what he had once believed. Abandoning God and preaching, Charles eventually died in disbelief.
The casualties are many when we look back over the history of compromise of the Bible. I believe that Friedrich Schleiermacher’s life was not one who simply influenced the thought of others, but was taken up in the wash of an already growing liberal thought of the day.
Friedrich Schleiermacher
Friedrich was born in a religious home. He was an “unusually bright child” with a sensitive heart toward the things of eternity and the happiness of men. It seems as though his mother offered little guidance as he sought her direction and his father was distant in their relationship. Most of young Friedrich’s understanding of God and the Bible came through mentors and teachers he encountered through his formative years.
As a teenager, he was overcome with “a strange skepticism,” believing that ancient history was unreal. He seemed to know nothing of the proof of this ancient history. I wonder if Friedrich’s life would have gone a different course if he had been aware of some of the great discoveries we enjoy today. Unfortunately, as Friedrich grew, he came to view orthodox Christians poorly. He saw “great debates over proofs of God, the authority of Scriptures, and the possibility of miracles were all on the fringe of religion.”
It has been said that the way we view our earthly father is the way we view our Heavenly Father. Could this have been true for Friedrich? He believed “the heart of religion was and always had been feeling, not rational proofs.”
Through his teaching, preaching and writings, Schleiermacher influenced religion to shift “from the Bible to the experience of the believer.” Schleiermacher was known as the “father of modern theology”, because he influenced people away from the Bible and its clear truths as they related to history and science to a “religious experience.” This religious experience seems to be where so many churches are today.
Conclusion
Shifting away from the Bible to religious experience is so dangerous. A Christian who does not know the Scriptures is primed for deception. A Christian who enters into a relationship with God based mainly upon emotions is subject to being easily blown by the next great wind of change. While we cannot make our relationship with God or our understanding of the Bible an intellectual pursuit only, to be driven by the experience of the moment or culture leaves us quite vulnerable.
I do not perceive that Friedrich’s teaching brought about a positive change in religion. I see someone who viewed the history and science of the Bible as without real value to society. Instead of trusting the authority of God’s Word, Friedrich chose to find stability in the one thing that science and history could not take away; he clung to his emotions.
Schleiermacher, like all of us, will be measured against the One who is perfection, Jesus Christ. Jesus was a man who had a heart of great sensitivity, but He was also a man of great strength and authority. He knew when and how to demonstrate them all. May we all be like Jesus!
Bibliography
1) Cross, George. A Sketch of Schleiermacher’s Life. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/cross_g/theology.ii.i.html?highlight=friedrich,schleiermacher#highlight
2) English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles 2001
3) Johnson, Paul. A History of Christianity. Simon & Schuster, New York, NY 1976
4) Shelley, Bruce L. Church History in Plain Language Word, Inc. 1982
5) Schwiebert, E. G. A Life of Martin Luther and His Times