Friedrich Schleiermacher: The Father of Liberal Protestant Christianity

This essay is part of the Religious Reformers Series. By studying the past attempts to reform traditional Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc., we can better fight against the contemporary programs to reform our Deen. Read other entries in the series here.

﴾أَمْ تَحْسَبُ أَنَّ أَكْثَرَهُمْ يَسْمَعُونَ أَوْ يَعْقِلُونَ ۚ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا كَالْأَنْعَامِ ۖ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ سَبِيلًا﴿

Or do you [really] think that most of them [even] listen or understand? In fact, they are like nothing but cattle. Rather, they are even further astray from [God’s] way![1]

Friedrich Schleiermacher is held in high regard by Christian professors and thinkers alike. There is hardly anything negative associated with his name. This is, however, very intriguing, especially due to the significant impact he had in liberalising Christianity. Today, not many Christians know who Schleiermacher is. The reason for this is that they have embraced his liberal ideology and continue to propagate it.

This piece will be focused on analyzing the core issues surrounding the liberal agenda of Friedrich Schleiermacher along with how liberal Muslims are now emulating his liberalization blueprint.

Most liberals will deny being liberal. Many even describe themselves as conservative, not realizing that they’re basically just yesterday’s liberals, a mere few steps behind the liberals of today. The mindset of the liberal has been warped completely.

Liberals are, of course, not born liberal. Human beings are born upon the fitrah, i.e., with an innate natural disposition. Thereafter they are influenced into Christianity, Judaism, Magianism, etc., by their parents and those around them. In the same way, with the rising tide of liberalism and modernism, people end up adopting liberal and modernist ideas. These ideas then crystallize, resulting in the individuals becoming fully fledged liberals and modernists.

The thought of Schleiermacher is complex and can be difficult to grasp, with various ideas overlapping with others. Let’s explore his main ideas on reforming Christianity in a systematic fashion.

Early Life

Friedrich Schleiermacher was born in Prussia, where he spent most of his life. He was named after Friedrich II, who ruled from 1740 to 1786. Schleiermacher came from a line of Reformed ministers from both his father’s side and his mother’s side. He was influenced by the German Enlightenment[2] in the tradition of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 – 1716).[3]

Schleiermacher was enrolled into a Moravian boarding school when he was fourteen and a half. The school had a reputation for piety and excellent pedagogy. He spent four years at school⁠—two years at Niesky and two years at Barby⁠—where he received a sterling education and religious training. He wrote in his book, On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers (1799):

‘Religion was the maternal womb in whose holy darkness my young life was nourished and prepared for the world still closed to it. Religion helped me when I began to examine the ancestral faith and to purify my heart of the rubble of primitive times. It remained with me when God and immorality disappeared before my doubting eyes.’

In Barby, Schleiermacher formed a reading club with close friends, and he would spend his time reading the books of Kant and Goethe⁠—books that had been forbidden by those supervising him. This literature impacted him greatly, and in January 1787, Schleiermacher wrote the following to his father:

‘Faith is the regalia of the Godhead, you say. Alas! Dearest father, if you believe that without this faith no one can attain to salvation in the next world, nor to tranquillity in this – and such, I know, is your belief – oh! Then pray to God to grant it to me, for to me it is now lost. I cannot believe that he who called himself the Son of Man was the true, eternal God; I cannot believe that his death was a vicarious atonement.’

Upon this, Schleiermacher’s father disowned him, but they did eventually reconcile. The seminary at which Schleiermacher was studying had also asked him to leave, after which he studied for a short while at the University of Halle.[4]

Halle was the centre of the German Enlightenment and German Pietism. In Halle, rather than attending lectures, Schleiermacher spent more time reading on his own. At this point, we see a common trend amongst deformers: they are amazed by their own ideas, choosing them over all others; and they desire to break away from tradition. This results in them forming their own deformed ideology and theology. Despite this, they outwardly claim to be traditional and do not attack the tradition directly. Rather, they cunningly chip away at it from from every angle, endeavoring to deconstruct the religion and subsequently reconstruct it as they please.

In 1790, Schleiermacher passed the first round of his examinations and was eligible for employment. A friend of his uncle arranged for a job for Schleiermacher, where he would serve as a tutor to the family of Count Friedrich Dohna. Schleiermacher lived with the Dohnas for three years. He preached and taught there, and he also fell in love with one of the Dohna daughters.[5]

In 1794, Schleiermacher served as an assistant pastor to Schumann, and a year later, he was appointed as a preacher at the Charitѐ Hospital in Berlin. While in Berlin, Schleiermacher became an active participant in the early Romantic Circle,[6] an association which had a significant impact on his thought and expression from that point onwards.[7]

The Protestant Reformation

After the fight surrounding who would control the Catholic Church, during the period following the Black Death, doubts about the authority of Catholicism increased greatly. There was widespread doubt and questioning of the Church. Martin Luther[8] then arose to question the authority of the Church, even placing his life at risk. He wrote a work called The Ninety-Five Theses, wherein he questioned the practices of the Church. He set out to reform Catholicism, but he provided a rational idea of rebelling against Rome, which resulted in Protestantism.[9] The Lutheran Church was thus formed.[10]

RELATED: American Christians: Are They Actually Christian?

On the other side, rather than protest, the Catholics who were disillusioned with the Church set out to instead reform the Church. Schleiermacher had argued that the separation of the Lutheran and Reformed confessions was not fruitful. He felt that most people had forgotten the basis for the separation, and he desired to bring both confessions together.[11]

Of course, he would require a basis upon which to bring the two confessions together. Schleiermacher lectured at Churches where congregants were a mixed bunch, comprising of both Lutheran and Reformed Christians. What he adopted was a line of interpretation, called Hermeneutics, which he applied to the scripture. This is essentially the toolkit of Liberal Protestantism.

Schleiermacher’s Key Contributions to Liberalism

As soon as it is left as a matter of religious taste I have nothing against it; but we owe a dreadful amount of evil in our theology to the dogmatic use of the Old Testament. And if Marcion had been properly understood and not hereticized, our doctrine of God would have remained far purer. I consider this necessary to say with the utmost strength, and for me it is a matter of conscience […]

– Friedrich Schleiermacher to Ludwig Gottfried Blanc (April 23, 1830), in Schleiermacher, Aus Schleiermachers Leben: In Briefen, ed. Ludwig Jonas and Wilhelm Dilthey (Berlin: Reimer, 1858-1863), 4:496.[12]

To fully grasp and comprehend the liberal reformation of Christianity at the hands of Schleiermacher, it is essential to understand Marcion and the connection between Schleiermacher and Marcion.

In following and admiring Marcion, Schleiermacher went about liberalising Christianity, especially through his lectures. His contributions to modernising and liberalising Christianity are more predominantly found in his ideas and the mental gymnastics that he proliferated among his students. Here and there, we can find clear heretical statements of modernisation and liberalisation from him. This method is employed to this very day by contemporary Modernists. They occasionally try and slip in the odd liberal idea now and then, within their lectures and writings.

Marcion: The ‘Arch-Heretic of Early Christianity’

Marcion of Sinope[13] is considered to be the ‘arch-heretic of early Christianity.’ He had taught that Jesus was the revelation of an unknown God that had nothing to do with creation. He said that the work of creation was the work of the God of the Jewish people. He went on to say that the Jewish God was a God of justice and wrath, while the God of Jesus was a God of pure grace who had come to deliver humanity from the world.[14]

By making this separation, Marcion was basically saying that Christianity had nothing whatsoever to do with Judaism. Consequently, he removed all of the Jewish scriptures from the Christian Bible, along with everything in the New Testament which seemed to be a tad too Jewish.[15]

The thought of Marcion was revived during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and his thought became closely associated with thinkers in German theology.[16]

The reason why Marcion is important is because his thought lies at the foundation of Protestant Liberalism. An important point of note is that the form of Christianity taught by Marcion is explicitly anti-Judaic.[17] Schleiermacher is very strongly connected to Marcion in his thought, and this connection seems to be missed or ignored by scholars and theologians.

Heresies of Marcion

  • Marcion regarded Paul to be the only genuine apostle.
  • Marcion interprets the descent into hell as saving all those prior to his coming, with the exception of the Jewish leaders.
  • According to Tertullian, the foundational work of Marcion was the separation of the law and the gospel. By doing this, Marcion implied that people were redeemed from the law and thus also redeemed from the world and its God.
  • Marcion insisted that the Jewish messiah was a political figure and he was still to come.
  • Marcion separated the Old Testament from the New Testamant. The thought of Marcion asserts that the Old Testamant was a source of valuable information and that it is a Testament of the evil God of creation and his people. It has nothing to do with the redeemer, the unknown God or the alien God.[18]

Marcionism of Schleiermacher

Schleiermacher is recognised as a great Christian theologian, but at the same time, he accepts the position of Marcion in rejecting the Old Testament as being part of Christian Scripture. We can glean from this that, although Marcion was excommunicated from the church, his ideas lingered on and bloomed later on in history.

Schleiermacher also accepts the Marcion position that Judaism is eliminated as a constitutive part of Christianity.[19]

Schleiermacher holds onto the conception of two Gods, the God of Israel and the God of Jesus, based on the differentiation of the scriptures and their sources, i.e., the Old Testament being from one God and the New Testament being from another.[20]

RELATED: The Christians Who Believe in Two Separate Gods

By Schleiermacher adopting Marcion positions, he essentially disavows a number of Christian theological doctrines. He disavows Christianity in favour of Liberalism, which is in harmony with the concept of being redeemed from the law.

What was the reason for Schleiermacher disavowing himself from Christian beliefs?

The Enlightenment period in which Schleiermacher lived was known for advancement in science. Schleiermacher held onto his ‘feeling’ concept in place of adopting an actual creedal system. The reason for this is that he did not want to clash with the scientific claims that were being made around him.

What Is Hermeneutics?

Hermeneutics is a methodology for the interpretation of all texts. Hermeneutics, the art of interpretation, was firstly used for the definition of Scripture and other texts by ancient Greek philosophers. In this sense, hermeneutics has a long history, tracing back at least as far as ancient Greece. According to ancient Greek mythology, Hermes was the messenger of God who interpreted messages from the Gods to humans and explained the wishes of the Gods to them. Thus the word for interpreter in Greece was hermeneus, which is where we get ‘‘hermeneutics’’ from, the concept of interpreting hidden meanings.[21]

Schleiermacher developed Hermeneutics and brought it out of its earlier intended practical purpose.

Schleiermacher presented differences between the author and the reader or interpreter with respect to their personal histories, the use of language, culture, worldview, and stressed misunderstanding, rather than an understanding based in textual interpretation.[22]

Hermeneutics is basically the toolkit for liberalism. When a person adopts Hermeneutics, they simply reinterpret and practice whatever they want from the scripture. This dangerous trend is common among liberal Muslims today. What the Hermeneutics of Schleiermacher does is that it divorces traditional understanding from its sphere of application and pushes the liberal minded person towards embracing concepts that are Islāmic in name but un-Islāmic in both reality and practice.

Schleiermacher gave new interpretations using Hermeneutics to a number of key issues and topics within Christianity. By doing this, he turned the minds and hearts of people away from their faith, rendering them heretics, just as Marcion was.

Hermeneutics Continued

Schleiermacher’s goal was to use the language of the tradition, but to use it in ways that please and make sense to the Modern public. Before we delve into Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutics, we feel compelled to draw a comparison with modern scholars and Compassionate Imāms. They are experts at exceeding the bounds in interpreting the verses of the Noble Qur’ān and the Blessed Aḥādīth. They express them in novel ways, so as to subvert the divine word completely. The minds of the thrilled audiences are drawn away from the faithful classical interpretations of the verses.

Schleiermacher classifies Hermeneutics as an art because, though it follows rules, there are no rules to guide the interpreter in the application of those rules.[23] In other words, the theory of Schleiermacher opens up the door to interpreting the scripture according to the feelings or personality of the interpreter. This is pure liberalism. Period.

The Noble Qur’ān and the Blessed Aḥādīth have not been left to the feelings and deformed interpretations of liberals and modernists. Thus we have faithful and principled scholars, true scholars, who stand firm in guarding the words, the meanings and the interpretations of the texts.

One of the reasons why the Jewish and Christian scriptures have been mutilated is that they do not exist in their original forms, in the original language they were revealed in. This is not the case with the Noble Qur’ān. One may argue that deviated groups and sects have published their own interpretations of the Noble Qur’ān. However, we must remember that all deviated interpretations were not classified as Islāmic, rather they were labelled with the name of the group or sect which made that particular interpretation. For example, if a Qādiyānī made a flawed interpretation, then that interpretation will be classified as a Qādiyānī deviance, but it will not be accepted or classified as Islāmic. Similarly, today you have The Study Qur’an, which pushes a deviant perennialist interpretation.

The Old Testament is written in Hebrew and the New Testament is written in Greek. Both of these languages were foreign to Schleiermacher, who was German. These texts were subsequently translated into various languages, but the world received multiple versions of the text and not the original text.

Schleiermacher treats the Old Testament differently than the New Testament. According to him, the Old Testament is dismissed as a relic of a primitive age and has been retained for historical reasons.[24] If he did this with the Old Testament, what guarantee do we have that he did not also do this with the New Testament or, for practical purposes, every other Christian text?

RELATED: Jewish Scripture: Preserved or Corrupted? An Introduction

The Handiwork of Schleiermacher: The Thrust of His Reform

Schleiermacher made the following modifications to the Christian faith:

  • Modernists claimed that Christianity disagrees with science and liberal morality. Schleiermacher countered the first point, i.e., science, by saying that religion does not make scientific claims. In his magnum opus, he states that science can never disprove religion because religion is just emotion or feeling (see: Absolute Dependence or Feeling, below). According to Schleiermacher, ‘God created the universe’ simply means that ‘there is some higher power that has power over me.’ This is the essence of religion according to him. When science, according to Schleiermacher, cannot disprove religion, this essentially implies that science is supreme, above religion. In this way, liberalism has triumphed. We seek refuge with Allāh Ta’ālā from such heresy and deviance.
  • In order to deal with liberal morality, Schleiermacher restructured the Trinity. He strived to get rid of the Old Testament, which contains illiberal teachings.
  • Furthermore, he desired to get rid of the Canon Law[25] and Papal decrees.[26] These are associated with the Holy Spirit. The reason for this is that the Catholic Church held that the Holy Spirit is what guided the Papal Decrees and the Church Councils.[27] However, these too clashed with liberalism. Hence, Schleiermacher desired to get rid of the Holy Spirit too. He did this by turning his focus on Jesus, because the teachings of Jesus could be most easily conceived to be moral instructions which would be least offensive to liberalism. The teachings of Jesus were made to resemble the liberal teaching of peace and love. By preaching the above line of thought, he did away with the traditional trinitarian conception of God in Christianity.
  • Schleiermacher believed that “fragments of divine truth could be found scattered throughout the pagan world.”[28]
  • Schleiermacher dangerously refuted and rejected several traditional maxims of the faith, he wrote, “I cannot believe that He, who called Himself the Son of Man, was the true eternal God: I cannot believe that His death was a vicarious atonement, because He never expressly said so Himself; and I cannot believe it to have been necessary, because God, who evidently did not create men for perfection, but for the pursuit of it, cannot possibly tend to punish them eternally, because they have not attained it.[29]
  • Schleiermacher also presented a novel explanation of ‘original sin’, by saying that it is best represented ‘as the collective act and collective fault of the human race.’[30]

‘Father of Deformed Theology’, i.e., Mediating Theology

Schleiermacher become known as the ‘Father of Modern Theology’, but for our understanding and purposes, we know him to be and refer to him as the ‘Father of Deformed Theology.’

He marked a clear and distinct line between religion and theology. According to him, religion is an experience of redemption that is found in community, and theology is a reflection upon and articulation of that experience. According to academics and observers, Schleiermacher passed through the Enlightenment with his religion intact but with a new way of doing theology. In his work, he embraced the Enlightenment and its challenges. He did this by placing modern theology on the foundation of experience, and this experience was not challenged by the enlightenment epistemology. However, the religious scriptures and reasoning at the time were challenged by enlightenment epistemologies. He resorted to articulating his experience in a way that smuggled in enlightenment ideas. This is what made him the ‘Father of Modern Theology.’[31]

We understand from the above that those who desire to make Islām compatible with modernity will end up like Schleiermacher, a wanderer in his own thoughts and feelings, completely devoid of genuine faith and spirituality.

RELATED: Moses Mendelssohn: The Father of Jewish Modernity


Schleiermacher divides theology into a threefold structure⁠—philosophical, historical and practical.

  1. Philosophical Theology presents the essence of Christianity. For this, one must define religion, and then go on to express what distinguishes Christianity from other religions.
  2. Historical Theology is divided by Schleiermacher into:
    • Exegetical theology (the study of primitive Christianity’s documents);
    • Church history; and
    • The Church in its contemporary historical moment
  3. Practical Theology is the crown of the theological disciplines. It is intended to teach people techniques for how to do something. Theology in general is for the sake of training church leaders, and practical theology gives them the techniques to take whatever they learn in all the theological disciplines and use this to further the objectives of the church.[32]

Ideas of Schleiermacher

As we already know, one of the major debated issues amongst Christians is Christology. When it came to the time of Schleiermacher, the people were divided into two major camps. On one side there were the traditionalists, those who emphasized adherence to correct doctrine. They felt that Jesus effects the salvation of man supernaturally. Schleiermacher referred to this as ‘magical.’ According to him, this view was weak because it required man to deny the fruits of human intellectual and cultural efforts, such as science. Christians faced the questions being raised by Newton and the scientific world, but the traditionalists responded by saying that scripture required man to believe in the unbelievable.[33]

The second group were the rationalists. They said that man could follow the teachings of Jesus and follow his example, but Jesus is dead, i.e., no longer present. This was referred to as ‘empirical’ by Schleiermacher. This view was theologically weak because it nullified Jesus: there is no ongoing presence or role for Jesus, i.e., he was simply crucified and is now gone.

Schleiermacher formulated a third way, which included the strengths of the arguments postulated above and avoided their weaknesses. He said that Jesus founded a community, and people flocked to him. Jesus expressed himself and his experiences to others, and they began to take on his ways. In reality, Schleiermacher was offering an idealistic approach which he expressed in front of the people, and in the process, he did away with the concept of a religion, substituting it with Hermeneutics, and people found this comforting. The crux of this argument is that it is simply a play of words, devoid of spirituality and faith.

Schleiermacher thought that if Christians search their experience of the Redeemer, his activity will be seen to resemble the attractive power of a strong personality. Now, the community founded by Jesus continues to embody his ways. So, when people enter the community later on, they enter by the redemptive personality of Jesus. This was the method of thought adopted by Schleiermacher as an alternative, and it convinced people of the ongoing presence of Jesus and the redeeming effects of that presence.

This is the essence of religion according to Schleiermacher, i.e., an experience or feeling. Because he redefined religion, according to him Christianity is not a religion per se. According to him, religion is not thinking or doing. It has no metaphysics or morality. It is only a feeling. This feeling in Christianity is the feeling and experience of redemption that is linked to the personality of Jesus.[34]

If religion is just about feelings, as Schleiermacher avers, then there can be no true contradiction between Christian theology and scientific facts or liberal moral positions. And the Christian believer can understand himself as no less Christian despite adopting scientific and liberal positions that, on their face, contradict the Bible and Christian theology.

This third approach does not require Christians to abandon science and liberalism, but, under the guise of Hermeneutics, it robs them of their entire religion.

This reminds me of the liberal Muslims and Compassionate Imāms who feed a message of deviation to the unwary masses; who feel that they are believing in and practicing upon the Noble Qur’ān and Blessed Sunnah. In reality, they relegate their message to simply that⁠—a feeling. They do not subscribe to or practice Islām as it was practiced and understood during the first three generations, nor do they adhere to the ways of the pious, though they delude themselves into thinking that they are!

The method adopted by liberals and Compassionate Imāms is to provide the Muslim public with their own approach, one that is seemingly peaceful, uncontroversial, perfectly in line with liberalism and unites people on a path that is in tune with the modern era. This path is the supposed ideal, but in essence, it robs the Muslim of their original perception and understanding of Islām, as well as its actual role in their life and the world around them. An example of this is everything we saw with their approach to LGBTQ issues. The Compassionate Imāms offered an approach to live in harmony with, tolerate and accept sodomy, with this impotent supposed Ijtihād of theirs being based on their own alarming incompetence. However, this idea makes the Muslim feel as though they are adopting and practicing a stance that is grounded in the Noble Qur’ān and Blessed Sunnah due to the deceptive brainwashing employed by the Compassionate Imām. Whereas, in reality, it is a stance that could potentially rob a person of his entire religion altogether and deprive them of everything that Islām actually stands for.

Theory of Religion

According to Schleiermacher, religion is summarized as follows:

  1. Religious consciousness is independent of concepts and beliefs.
  2. The moment of religious consciousness can be described as a sense of the infinite or consciousness of absolute dependence.
  3. Religious language is best understood not as propositional assertions but as spontaneous expressions of this basic moment of religious consciousness.[35]

RELATED: How the Idea of “Progress” Began as a Christian Heresy

Absolute Dependence or Feeling

As human beings, we act on the world and are acted upon by the world. We have freedom when we act and a feeling of dependence when we are acted upon. Schleiermacher claims that human beings do not have a feeling of absolute freedom, but we have a sense of absolute dependence.[36] The reason for absolute dependence is that we realise the sense and feeling that all of our activity is ultimately based on a source outside of ourselves. This source is God, and the feeling is the feeling of absolute dependence.[37]

He says:

‘The feeling of absolute dependence can be referred to as “God-consciousness”.’[38]

According to him, this feeling should accompany every thought and every act, so as to make a person ‘pious.’

Let us examine this more carefully. Piety, according to Schleiermacher, is not the good deeds and acts of worship that a person does, but it is a feeling that accompanies every thought and every act. Once again, this idea of ‘feeling’ is being pushed. This great emphasis upon ‘feelings’ among liberals and modernists carries is so immense that, if it were to be personified, it would have the capacity to cause Mount Everest to quake and shatter into pieces. More often than not, we are bombarded with absurd comments such as:

‘Why doesn’t Islām take our feelings into consideration?!’

Allāh Ta’ālā did not make feelings the basis of a person being judged. Alḥamdulillāh.

If you wish to gain a deeper understanding of Schleiermacher’s ‘feeling,’ you may study this article.

Position on the Bible

Schleiermacher was greatly affected by the concept of reason and rationality. This affected his understanding of the Bible, and he was unable to affirm the Bible as revelation because of it.[39] Schleiermacher’s general position on the Bible was that it was to be regarded as a human production rather than an emanation from God, i.e., it is a manmade book rather than the divine speech of God. The authors of the Bible were simply men who wrote under the influence of the Holy Spirit.[40]

It must also be borne in mind that Schleiermacher had his own definition of the ‘Holy Spirit.’ He said that the Holy Spirit is ‘the common spirit of the new corporate life founded by Christ.’[41]

Schleiermacher was also affected by Semler, a critical scholar who taught at Halle. One of his leading principles was that the Old Testament and the New Testament did not hold equal value. This was his rationalistic attack on the concept of revelation. Semler advocated a distinction between scripture and the word of God.[42]

An interesting observation: In our study and research on Schleiermacher, we found hardly any references to the actual scripture. Isn’t this quite odd? And aren’t the Compassionate Imāms and liberal scholars the same in this regard? Their references points are scarcely the classical works on Islām. Instead they look towards recent and contemporary Modernists who aimed to overturn the teachings of Islām.

RELATED: Muhammad ‘Abduh: Leading 19th Century Modernist Reformer

Works & Publications

The University of Berlin opened in 1810. Schleiermacher was the dean of the Theological Faculty. He served as its rector in 1815/1816.

Schleiermacher also served at the Berlin Academy of Sciences as secretary of the philosophical section.

His main publications include: On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers, Brief Outline of the Study of Theology, The Christian Faith, On the Glaubenslehre: Two Letters to Dr Lȕcke.


In the January of 1834, Schleiermacher was afflicted with a severe cold. This developed into pneumonia, and he died on 12 February 1834.[43]

Islām Will Endure Until the Very End, Overpowering All Else

In this study of Schleiermacher, we have come to understand very well and are convinced that Christianity has been modernised, liberalised, changed and deformed. In addition to this, from a theological standpoint, Christianity has been abrogated by Islām. Hence, when the idea of a unified religion inclusive of Christianity is tabled, it is rightfully seen with utter consternation and scorn.

RELATED: Ibrāhīm ‘alayhi as-salām Refutes the Abrahamic Religion: The Clear Verses of the Qur’ān 

With the current rise of liberalism within Muslim circles, liberals and modernists must open their eyes to the reality of what they are submerging themselves into. They are leaping into a pool of dirt and faeces, a pool that others before them have drowned in. It is absolutely moronic for a rabbit to knowingly enter the jackal’s den.

As Muslims, we already have our perfect abode and tradition. It is in the pure and pristine Qur’ān, the authentic Sunnah, and the ways of our pious predecessors. Muslims must cling onto tradition at all costs if they desire success and wish to be saved. Islām will most certainly be guarded and protected from the pathetic attacks of every deformist. Muslims must support the defenders and genuine scholars of the Ummah in this field of work. May Allāh Ta’ālā guide us and support us in this venture. Āmīn.


  1. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, Theodore Vial, Bloomsbury, 2013
  2. Friedrich Schleiermacher: Between Enlightenment and Romanticism, Richard Crouter, Cambridge University Press, 2005
  3. Schleiermacher’s Interpretation of the Bible: The Doctrine and Use of the Scriptures in the Light of Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutical Principles, Ian S Wishart, 2019
  4. Christianity’s Shadow Founder: Marcion, Anti-Judaism, and the Birth of Protestant Liberalism, Samuel J. Loncar, PhD


  1. Sūrah Al-Furqān: 44
  3. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, pp.4-6
  4. Ibid p.7
  5. Ibid p.10
  6. The Romantic circle in this context refers to imaginative literature and not the modern genre of romance literature
  7. Ibid p.11
  10. Lutheranism – Pietism | Britannica
  11. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, p.16
  12. Christianity’s Shadow Founder: Marcion, Anti-Judaism, and the Birth of Protestant Liberalism, Samuel J. Loncar, PhD
  14. Christianity’s Shadow Founder: Marcion, Anti-Judaism, and the Birth of Protestant Liberalism, Samuel J. Loncar, PhD p.2
  15. Ibid
  16. Ibid
  17. Ibid, p.3
  18. Ibid, pp.7-11
  19. Ibid, p.4
  20. Ibid, p.20
  21. Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutics, Masum Keserci, p.1
  22. Ibid p.2
  23. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, p.49
  24. Schleiermacher’s Interpretation of the Bible: The Doctrine and Use of the Scriptures in the Light of Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutical Principles, p.11
  29. Ibid
  31. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, p.8
  32. Ibid, p.87
  33. Ibid, p.88
  34. Ibid, p.88-90
  35. Ibid, p.64
  36. Ibid, p.91
  37. Schleiermacher’s Interpretation of the Bible: The Doctrine and Use of the Scriptures in the Light of Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutical Principles, p.28
  38. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, p.92
  39. Ibid, p.16
  40. Ibid, p.17
  41. Schleiermacher’s Interpretation of the Bible: The Doctrine and Use of the Scriptures in the Light of Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutical Principles, p.119
  42. Schleiermacher: A Guide for the Perplexed, p.18
  43. Ibid, p.23

Follow Mufti Abdullah on Twitter: @MuftiAMoolla

MuslimSkeptic Needs Your Support!
Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

True guidance is simple but so hard.
We just need to stick to the Sunnah and Quran and block everything that contradicts it, even if we use our intellect and reason and start to doubt the deen, it’s just the Sheitan trying to divert us.
Simple in concept but so hard to do, and getting increasingly harder.
Even for some of us who have a rebellious nature and don’t usually follow everything we are told, it’s very hard to not get carried away by the huge wave of liberalism given it’s everywhere.


They use feelings and vagueness to alter religions, Islam shall remain unchanged and steadfast, inshaallah.