EVILS OF SUBJECTIVISM, RELATIVISM AND GNOSTICISM IN LIBERAL THEOLOGY. The impact of all the worldly trends is reflected in modern liberal theology in the form of subjectivistic, relativistic, Gnostic and universalistic trends. HIGHER CRITICISM IDENTIFIED WITH SUBJECTIVISM. Liberals do not believe in the objectivity of truth. Hence they falsely conclude that each one can create his own reality by interpreting in accordance one’s own fantasies. In the process they PROMOTE EXISTENTIALISM AND HUMANISM. The critics based their theories largely upon their own subjective conclusions. They have based their conclusions upon the author’s style and supposed literary qualifications. Style is a very unsafe basis for the determination of a literary product. Some of the most powerful exponents of the modern Higher Critical theories have been Germans, and it is notorious to what length the German fancy can go in the direction of the subjective and of the conjectural.

RELATIVISM IS THE SIGNATURE OF HIGHER CRITICISM. The liberals tend to defend the methodological validity of relativity. The liberal theologians unconditionally submit themselves to the unproven theory of historical relativity according to which they believe that even our knowledge of God is conditioned sociologically, culturally and historically. Hence to them the knowledge of God and faith are relative and progressive and are in the process of development. The new hermeneutic (a dubious school of Biblical interpretation) argues that all knowledge is relative. Hence they are UNWILLING TO ACCEPT THAT ANYTHING IS WRONG. Thus revelation is considered as relative, progressive, partial and open-minded in nature. Hence they feel that any revelation would attain completion only at the end of history.

THE LIBERAL HAS SHIED AWAY FROM THE SCRIPTURAL ABSOLUTES AND OPTED FOR AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL RELATIVISM.  Hence the Biblical view of revelation as universally valid divine communication of absolute truth about God, and also the exclusivity of truth in Christ are out-rightly rejected. Thus they are uncertain about the most important issues of human existence. They think that the revelation of God still continues through individuals, ideologies and movements. Hence they are also always ready for open dialogue leading to compromise. But the fact is that if man cannot have a trustworthy and objective knowledge of God, theology would end up as guess work. This situation has reinvigorated false adventurism of modern theology marked by its irrational and illegitimate theological liberalism.

LIBERAL THEOLOGY IS THE HERESY OF GNOSTICISM CLAIMING ANTI-BIBLICAL SECRET KNOWLEDGE. LIBERALS ARE ANTI-CHRISTIANS CLAIMING TO BE CHRISTIANS. THEY ARE WOLVES IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING. Gnosticism was a theology of liberation which promoted unlimited human freedom. Gnosticism was the earliest expression of liberal theology. Gnostic teachers claimed to have secret knowledge about the creation of the world and the purpose of life and competed with the Apostles on the same ground. Gnosticism created "the illusion it was a Christian doctrine" by referring to the Hebrew Scriptures and the teachings of Jesus. But just like the higher critics, they were twisting and perverting the original meaning. Anti-Christians claiming to be Christians is the biggest threat to Christianity.

TYRANNY OF FALSE INTERPRETATION BY HIGHER CRITICS CLAIMING THEY ONLY HAVE THE TRUE KNOWLEDGE ON THE SUBJECT. The believers must for the sake of their safety be better aware of the tyranny of hermeneutics and the SUBVERSION OF TRUTH THROUGH FALSE INTERPRETATION. The liberal theologian TRANSFERS THE AUTHORITY from the written Word to the interpreter. They trust more on their own worldly presuppositions and perceptions than the trustworthiness of the Word of God. Many come to self-justifying and convenient conclusions based on a few verses, totally ignoring related passages which would fully reveal the truth about the particular issue. Hence there is the risk that the Word of God may be completely identified with what the interpreter understands or thinks he understands. In this way the door is thrown wide open to an EXPERIENTIALISTIC, SUBJECTIVISTIC AND EXISTENTIALISTIC VIEW OF GOD’S WORD. By preparing the way for such eventualities, a group of theologians, who promote radical biblical criticism, attempt to subtly undermine the substance of Biblical revelation and to make the Bible just one among other books.

Revelation and inspiration of the Scripture are replaced with various methods of interpretation. Higher criticism is one of the highest attempts towards this. Higher criticism is an academic crusade against the authority of the Scripture in order to lower it to the level of any other purely human book. It exemplifies the pride of human mind which exalts itself against God. It is guess criticism.  Such a rationalistic endeavor is a combination of false assumptions, pride and rebellion of man against God.

SUBJECTIVISM IN MORALITY IS DESTROYING MANY CIVILIZATIONS. The standard of ethical behavior is objective.  It falls equally on all. Stealing is wrong for all. But modern liberalism teaches that objective ethical standards are not really objective and rather depend on the individual preferences.  To them ethical standards and moral precepts are not objective, but rather subjective.

DIFFERENT CULTURES HAVE CULTURALLY GENERATED DIFFERENT MORAL CODES, RIGHT AND WRONG ETC. Herodotus in his History illustrates a story in which particular a tribe of people customarily ate the bodies of their dead fathers. Whereas some other groups practiced cremation, and some others burial.In some cultures like that of the Eskimo, marriage and sexual practices that were different. They also seemed to have less regard for human life. Infanticide, for example, was common. Old people also, when they became too feeble to contribute to the family, were left out in the snow to die. Some will not eat cows. May be because they believe that, after death the souls of humans inhabit the bodies of animals, especially cows, so that a cow may be someone's ancestor. There were social customs of widows being burnt alive or cremated with her dead husband, Human Child sacrifice, not allowing women to wear upper cloth, not allowing some group to wear chapels. Degrees of nakedness are allowed in different societies. Complete nakedness is allowed only in few societies. Some consider homosexuality is immoral, and some consider it as their right. Some go for many wives at home, and some for many husbands etc. The number of practices could be innumerable. But there is an absolute law which is God’s view in which one man, one woman marriage proven as in the case of Adam and Eve, comes out as the clear winner. What is thought right within one group may be utterly abhorrent to the members of another group, and vice versa. Some people love the strangers, some others kill them. Some love people of their own communities, but hate people of other communities. The "right" way for them, is the way which the ancestors used and which has been handed down. The tradition is its own warrant. This is because they are traditional, and therefore contain in themselves the authority of the ancestral spirits. Some ethnic or social communities are addicted to the systematic commission of offences such as thefts, murder. They were 'habitually criminal'. They are devoted to certain gods and pray to them for the success of their mission. BUT IF THE THEFT COMMUNITIES GO AND ROB FROM THE HOUSES OF CULTURAL RELATIVISTS THEY WOULD FILE CASE. BECAUSE THE CULTURAL RELATIVISTS THEMSELVES KNOW THAT DO NOT STEAL AND DO NOT KILL, LOVE ONE ANOTHER ARE SOME OF THE ABSOLUTE MORAL LAWS FOR ALL MANKIND. EVEN IF SOME ARE NOT CULTURALLY USED TO THESE, THEY MUST COME UNDER THESE.

DANGERS BEHIND RELATIVISM. Relativism is an offense to rational thinking, that makes people confused and ultimately itself intolerant. Relativism is the trend that denies the existence of absolute truth. It claims that all ideas/beliefs are equal, is self-contradictory, foolish, intolerant and dangerous. In the real life struggle between right and wrong, justice and injustice, life and death, we all realize that truth does and always will matter.

TRUTH IS ABOLUTE. Truth as a category must exist even if some are denying its existence and truth must also afford the possibility of being known. But these days there are people who believe there are no absolutes – no moral absolutes, no religious absolutes, no absolutes whatsoever. These people usually claim that all absolutists claims are arrogant, narrow-minded and unjust and should be condemned. When saying this, they totally disregard the fact that their own strong claim against absolutes is itself an absolutist claim. But this specific category of people doesn’t seem to care much about the inconsistency of its views. If 2 different views contradict one another, then one of them must be true and the other false (absolutism). The three words Pluralism, Relativism, and Tolerance’, are the source of spectacular confusion in the current times. While both pluralism and tolerance are at the same time facts and necessities, relativism is a real trouble for the society. Relativism discourages any serious analysis, comparison and discussion of the most important issues we face. Life’s most important questions are no longer significant, since they are matters not of truth, but only of private opinion and preference, and have no final consequence. THIS IS A TRAGIC SITUATION.

What you believe is true for you, what I believe is true for me, all truth is relative, your beliefs and my beliefs are equal. Since there are multiple descriptions of reality, no one view can be true in an ultimate sense. Relativism says that truth is rooted in the individual hearer/ receiver/ observer rather than the source/ author/ fact. It is subjective rather than objective. It says that truth is determined by whatever you want it to be, that all truths are the same, and all truths are equally valid. The great mistake here is in the unjustifiable leap from toleration of differing opinions to the granting of equal veracity to contradictory truth claims. But relativists can never have any reason for changing their beliefs, since relativism says that at every point their beliefs are already true (for them). In short, relativism implies that the right attitude toward our beliefs is always one of total self-complacency.”

Relativism claims to be the opposite thing from authoritarianism, dogmatism, closed-mindedness and intolerance. But in fact relativism is just another version of all the above things. Finally from a strictly logical point of view the statement that all beliefs are equally true is irrational in its essence since it implies its own denial, i.e. it is also true that all beliefs cannot be true. But in matters of worldviews, belief systems, the only necessary condition to avoid conflicts is that one has enough respect of others and of their universal rights to believe whatever they desire to. BUT WHAT THEY ALL BELIEVE MAY NOT BE RIGHT. HENCE ROLE OF PERSUASION IS ALWAYS THERE.

Embracing relativism is not a way to avoid conflicts. Not sharing ideas and not investigating the truth behind worldviews on the other hand is far more dangerous AND UNKIND at both individual and collective levels. E.G. NOT TREATING MADNESS OR OTHER SICKNESS IS UNKIND. Religions may have brought many conflicts in the world but history shows that during the 20th century alone, secularist/atheist regimes are responsible for more killings than all the religious persecutions of human history.