Religion
Truth [A Quick and Dirty Guide]
What is truth? And does anybody have a lock on it?
The preacher? The scientist? The scholar? The engineer? The psychologist? The shaman?
Furthermore, can you trust them?
Not easy questions to answer.
There are so many competing claims and different approaches.
Can we REALLY know the truth? I think we can. And to help me answer that question, a while back I asked my friend Rob Powell to help.
He agreed and knocked out three posts on truth: Absolutism, Pluralism and Scientism. [See below.]
I then pulled together seven more posts dealing with the question “what is truth?”
Perhaps you’ve seen them before. If so, skim through each for a little refresher course on truth.
If you haven’t seen these posts before, walk through them slowly and then let me know what you think.
In the end, we might disagree. My hope is that I at least get you to think. And I promise to do the same for you. Enjoy the list!
Absolutism [What You Need to Know--and Why] Is truth absolute? Or is it relative and merely based on personal preferences? There has to be a right answer, right? There is.
Pluralism [What You Need to Know--and Why] On the surface pluralism seems like a reasonable explanation for the diversity of faiths we see. Look below the surface and it’s not.
Scientism [When You Shouldn't Trust a Scientist] Science is awesome. It provides us with great party tricks and is the most predictable way to study the world. But what is it? And can it ever go wrong?
The Blind Men and a Queer Animal In an ancient parable, dozens of hermits and scholars are making conflicting claims about reality. Who was right? D. None of the above.
How to Deal with Religious Conflict What beliefs create peaceful behavior and deal with the discord of religion? Here’s the answer.
Is the Gospel What the World Desperately Needs? Only Christian salvation can lead to a humble, enemy-embracing love that the world desperately needs. Sound counter intuitive? Let me explain why it’s not.
The Blissfully Plastic Moral Base of Humanism What does the meaningless, value-absent creed of humanism have to offer? It might surprise you.
Hard Questions: How to Make Sense of the World Answer these seven questions and you’ll discover what’s at the bottom of all your thoughts about God, yourself and the world.
What Camus and Frankl Can Teach You about the Meaning of Life Is it possible to find meaning in life without God? Albert Camus and Victor Frankl think so.
Is Jesus the Only Way to God? [Guest post at Sorting Beans] Great question. It’s one I’ve often struggled with and felt very awkward at times defending. Here’s what I’ve found.
Pluralism [What You Need to Know--and Why]
**Guest post by Rob Powell. Part of a series on truth.**
In continuing our discussion about truth and absolutism let’s move to how that idea intersects with the wide diversity of faiths represented in our world, specifically in the concept called “pluralism.”
We’ve all heard the allegory of the blind men feeling different parts of an elephant.
Each man describes a completely different animal based on what part they are feeling.
The moral of the story is that each is relating just a small but true part of a larger truth.
This parable is a feel good way to reconcile the differences between the thousands of different religions in society.
In fact, somebody should make a song out of it so they can add a verse to It’s a Small World.
Pluralism: The Good and the Bad
On the surface pluralism seems like a reasonable explanation for the diversity of faiths we see.
Nobody gets their feelings hurt by being told they are wrong and everybody gets to do what they think is true.
A little deeper inspection though shows that just like relativism this view falls apart under it’s own weight.
To allow all these discordant faiths to agree the pluralist has to do a few things, but first let’s take a look where faiths disagree.
Do All Religions [Basically] Agree? Eh, No.
To make that less than a 2 year doctoral thesis we’ll limit our discussion to the most populous religions.
Not that numbers equals truth but even the most PC pluralist isn’t going to say that the Heaven’s Gate Cult or the Branch Davidians has a truth claim equally as valid as Buddhism or Islam.
Bottom line: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism all have a diagnosis for what is wrong with humanity and a cure to fix it.
It’s past the scope of this article to delve into all the differences but they are not insignificant. Here are a few:
The number of gods. Some religions believe there is no God while others believe in only one and still others embracing many.
The problem of sin. All religions describe a very different program to curing sin.
The body and mortality. Each religion seeks to explain the purpose behind our bodies and solve the riddle of death.
In all these examples, the cures range from faith in Christ, to an esoteric experience where we see we are immaterial self aware beings with all knowledge or to realizing that all we are is fleeting conscious states.
The pattern here is clear.
There are a diversity of perceived spiritual problems–and a myriad of just as diverse solutions.
What We Must Avoid
To try and boil all this down and just say that people are broken and need a cure would be as silly as saying a person has “sick” and needs “better”.
If your appendix has ruptured you will not find a doctor that recommends in vitro fertilization.
Each specific diagnosis needs a specific remedy.
Maybe the pluralist believes that God will save those not of a certain tradition based on how they responded to what knowledge they had accessible to them. For example, the Christian God might save Buddhists because they were sincere in their belief.
Unfortunately this is not what ANY of these individual faiths teach. Also, past just the general diagnosis, religions disagree on what makes up a human.
What the Pluralist Must Do to Make Religions “Agree”
Do we have an enduring soul or are we merely a collection of momentary states? Either people come in two (or more) distinct flavors or you have to believe these both of these self contradicting things to be true at the same time.
So how does the pluralist make all of this work for them?
For example, there is no mechanism in the Christian worldview where the Buddhist’s sin problem is resolved outside of faith in Christ. Nor is there is no mechanism in the Buddhist tradition whereby the Christian becomes enlightened.
So the pluralist must create their own system whereby the two are compatible and neither can hold the other as incorrect.
This involves either treating all religious exclusive claims as either being non-literal (mythical) or having limited importance.
This would include any claims to miracle which would seem to add credence to one faith over another. What really matters to the pluralist is harmony, love, justice and unity.
In other words, how you live your faith (orthopraxy) is more important than what how your faith says you should live (orthodoxy).
The Pluralist’s Sleight of Hand
But did you see what just happened there? The pluralist in attempting to negate all the exclusive claims of different religions created an exclusive claim of their own.
The pluralist denies the Muslim a chance to define his or her own religion with exclusive claims but is completely free to do so themselves.
Pluralism fails pluralistically. Which brings us back to the elephant.
A pluralist takes each person describing their religious truth and enlightenment and says “Yes but what you don’t know is that you are blind and only see in part.”
That’s perfectly laughable because the implication is that the pluralist can see just fine and in whole–and you can’t.
In the end, he’s more than happy to make a claim to exceptional knowledge that he won’t let any single faith make own their own.
The Pluralist Is Just as Blind
As you can see, pluralism isn’t an overarching view that combines all faiths in one big bubble bath of goodness. It’s just one more view claiming special enlightenment and truth–which isn’t very pluralistic, don’t you think?
So when someone says “What matters is that it makes sense to me and enables me to grow spiritually,” it’s easy to see the benefit to this claim even taken at face value and not applying it to itself.
It allows everyone to do what they want how they want to do it.
But if there is no objective truth to be found outside of one’s belief then you can never be wrong in what you believe.
In essence you’ve created a Stepford God that is made in your own image–he’s a robotic butler who will never contradict you but always please you.
Unfortunately this approach destroys the distinction between the terms “truth” and “belief” and implies that something is true because “I believe it.”
Where Pluralism Threatens the Christian Church
So where does pluralism affect the Christ follower and it’s church. Here’s a quote from JP Moreland’s book Love Your God with All Your Mind that I think says it well.
[Such] a church . . . will become . . . impotent to stand against the powerful forces of secularism that threaten to bury Christian ideas under a veneer of soulless pluralism and misguided scientism. In such a context, the church will be tempted to measure her success largely in terms of numbers—numbers achieved by cultural accommodation to empty selves. In this way, . . . the church will become her own grave digger; her means of short-term “success” will turn out to be the very thing that marginalizes her in the long run.
The call is clear to preach the obnoxious and offensive gospel to a world and church that most of the time doesn’t want to hear it.
Religious Divisions [A Quick-and-Dirty Guide]
There’s certainly no shortage of divisions when it comes to Christianity–or religions in general.
So what’s the difference between Christianity and Islam?
Where does Mormonism fit into our faith?
What about the Amish?
And what makes a Presbyterian different than a Methodist?
All good questions. This little guide will help you hash the answers out.
Denominations
Movements that differ on doctrinal issues but hold to a common core of beliefs about God, Christ and the Bible.
A multiplicity of denominations doesn’t imply a problem. It simply suggests agreement on the essentials and disagreements on non-essentials.
Sects
Movements that agree with denominations on these matters but often place emphasis on certain topics that move them to the fringe of Christianity. Think the Amish’s radical separatism.
Sects only become a problem if the emphasis conflicts with core tenets.
Cults
Movements connected to Christianity in that they use Christian Scripture and appeal to Jesus but they also differ from the traditional faith in core areas–denial of the Trinity, rejection of part or all of the Bible or novel views about Christ.
Cults typically reveal a perversion of the core of a religion due to self-indulgent embellishments. Think Mormons or World Wide Church of God.
World Religions
Historic traditions that include Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism and share very little in common, especially when it comes to core tenets of the faith.
World religions suggest the existence of a native sense of the holy in man. And then we move to explain it. Christianity is the story of the source of that holiness redeeming, adopting and glorifying man.
So, how do you decide whether a religion is compatible with Christianity? Whether it’s a cult, sect or denomination?
Simple: It needs to pass two tests–doctrinal and experiential.
Doctrinal: Is it orthodox on the key issues? Experiential: Does it see a faith encounter with Christ alone as the pathway to being right with God?
How a religion answers these questions will determine whether it falls inside or outside orthodox Christianity.
Let me know what you think.
The Enemy [It's Not Who You Think]
Books supporting evolution are not in short supply.
Stand just inside my local Barnes and Noble and you’ll see what I mean.
Lining a shelf of the new and notable science publications and you’ll see books like The Universe: Order Without Design.
Nothing unusual.
But it’s that last one–by none other than Richard Dawkins–that did it…
That got the gears going.
An Abundance of Books Easily Amuses Me
What surprised me most about this book was not that he wrote a book on the evidence of evolution…
But that he keeps on doing it. Systematically. Deliberately.
Naturally, his other books are just variations on the theme. The Blind Watchmaker. The God Delusion. The Selfish Gene.
Then there’s the hundreds more published by other authors. It’s a veritable cottage industry breaking into the big time.
But it’s also indicative of a sense of alarm about the future of evolution and the threat of superstition.
So, in the face of this sleepless opposition, what are Christians to do? Enter the Christian apologists.
Soon We Will Resort to Cage Matches
To be fair, neither is there a shortage of books AGAINST evolution.
For example, a month or two down the road Alistair McGrath, Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, David Aikman–someone in the camp–will write a book called Evidence Against Evolution.
Or The REAL Greatest Show on the Earth: Evidence for Design.
No?
Well, I’m banking on history here, because this is nothing more than the thrust, counter-thrust, counter-counter-thrust, counter-counter-counter thrust of our current scientific-spiritual climate.
A climate brewing for the last forty years.
My observation boils down to this: We get our underwear in a wad, convinced our privileged nation is going to hell in a hand basket, and so we’ve got to roll up our sleeves and single handedly stop the steamroller called evolution.
Or atheism. Or pagan spirituality. Whatever you want to call it.
I’m Guilty, Too
Believe me, I hear that same voice every time a new book opposing Christianity is published.
Whether it’s by Ehrman, Dawkins, Young or Tolle.
I want to write the book that saws off the branch that evolution sits on. That pulls out the rug from under higher criticism. That drowns false prophets.
Vicious, I know.
And don’t get me wrong: This competition is healthy.
Yet in view of this growing, hostile reaction to Christianity, you need to keep these three things in mind as you hash out your plan of attack–or retreat.
Three Reasons Why You Should Chill
One, this shouldn’t surprise one thoughtful Christian at all. Jesus promised both joy AND opposition.
Second, evolution, like all scientific views, has a shelf life.
In fact, it may surprise many to learn that most biologists at the start of the 20th Century rejected Darwin’s theory of evolution.
Darwinism revived when a handful of scientists merged his theory with Mendelian genetics.
This is not an isolated event. The history of science is full of such turnabouts.
Whatever Happened to These Scientific Theories?
Ever heard of the geosynclinal theory? Of course not. It was buried alive by plate tetonics.
Geocentric view of the universe? Shoved aside by Copernicus and his trusty heliocentric view.
That phlogiston caused heat? Well, oxidation burned this one at the stake.
Yes, Darwinism remains the consensus. [As do the others.] How long? A lot longer, I believe, than most because it is truly a great idea.
But that’s where it remains. As an idea.
Didn’t See This Coming
My final and third point is this: the global south–the region that covers South America, Africa and China.
What’s so special about it? It’s a region of the world that’s experiencing unprecedented growth in Christianity.
And here’s the kicker: This is occurring in the face of rigid anti-religious cultures.
It’s really quite astonishing if you think about what’s going on in China, for example.
Millions of converts in a nation very unkind to Christianity.
And while not the poverty and persecution of the extremely repressive Cultural Revolution in 3 decades China’s gone from 3 million Christians to anywhere from 54 million to 130 million.
Conservately, that’s 18-fold jump in Christians. Go with the liberal number and we’re talking a 43-fold leap.
And get this.
This wave of Christianity is not led by foreign missionaries: Christianity in China spreads from person to person.
Government crackdowns and public scrutiny. Christians beaten, arrested and church leaders jailed. Converts remaining anonymous for fear of persecution.
As much as changed in China, much has remained the same. But Christianity spreads.
So, while we fight for legislation to protect our freedom of speech or prayer or our right to insist marriage should remain between a man and woman, our Christian culture weakens.
What Gives?
Quite frankly, we could use a little persecution. And not only of the academic sort.
In the West, we have lots of bandwidth to do much with. No surprise that Christianity comes in 356 colors.
And then some.
And neither is it a surprise that most Christians affirm the view that as long as people leave them alone they’ll leave them alone.
We are comfortable and want to stay that way.
Perhaps it would do us well be stripped of our freedoms. To be limited in our movement.
Perhaps creating laws that decreed publishing a book opposing evolution could lead to death. To make a stand against abortion punishable by torture.
I predict that much of what we know as the church today would run for the woods if this ever occurred…
Or commit outright treason against Christ. [I'm sounding rather alarmist myself, aren't I?]
A Conclusion
In a nutshell, rather than wring our hands over the fear that the sky is falling in, our time would be better spent if we simply rejoiced and made discipleship of the nations a singular and solitary pursuit.
If we first sharpened our sense of sound doctrine and gospel truth.
And that we started with our own people.
Once we get back on that horse, then we can get on with the business of trampling evolution. Whacha think?
Is the Gospel What the World Desperately Needs?
Love.
In the face of doctrine, creeds and faith systems…isn’t the important thing that we just love?
Isn’t love the superior truth we should be after?
Depends.
Depends on what motivates that love. What content is behind that love.
Faith systems like legalism and philistinism, moralism and secularism, lead to arrogance and superiority. Fist fights. Military coups.
Not love.
Only salvation via the Christian gospel can lead to a deep, humble, enemy-embracing love…a love the world desperately needs.
Let me explain.
Why the World Needs a Better Method of Salvation
If your method of salvation is performance based, then you are saved by your performance.
This, not surprisingly, leads to self-righteous arrogant behavior towards others who don’t measure up to your standard.
Think of legalism. Which leads to oppression. Tyranny.
Secularism isn’t any better.
A view that you’re the enlightened intellectual leads to smug feelings toward the dimwitted religious zealot.
Each group snubs the other.
What Christianity does differently is grinds out self-righteous thinking in a believer as he discovers and admits that he is a helpless sinner in need of grace.
It makes him humble before the people who are different from him.
Why the World Needs a Better Purpose Behind Salvation
And if the ultimate purpose of salvation is the restoration of the earth–the elimination of poverty, disease and death–then that should also be our mandate.
Our mandate should be the renewal of our cities. Our neighborhoods. Our homes.
That means we seek to bring peace where we live. We seek to make it a prosperous place…
A region non-believers want to live.
See, this idea that salvation’s ultimate goal is the renewal of heaven and earth humbles us: If God’s goal is the resurrection of ALL creation, why should we prefer anything different?
We should seek to serve our government. Corporations. Schools. Museums. No matter who runs them…
…which brings me to my next point.
Why the World Needs a Better Origin of Salvation
The Bible teaches that Jesus is not just a prophet or a teacher. It teaches he is God. It teaches he is Lord over all–
“Now wait a minute,” you say. “Doesn’t that view lead to a sense of superiority? Arrogance?”
No.
What it does is lead to inclusion. [I know that sounds counterintuitive, but hear me out. ]
One of the most dramatic shifts in society occurred when Christianity introduced the idea that all people–under a just and holy God–were equal.
Jew and Gentile. Greek and non-Greek. Husband and wife. Child and adult. Master and slave. Rich and poor.
All were alike.
Unlike the Greco-Roman separation of classes and races, Christianity compressed all people into one class: sinner.
And when early Christians recognized their position in this new class, it led to patient, humble and compassionate behavior.
Why would this happen?
Think.
In Jesus, ultimate reality appeared as a man.
God entered a world hostile to him. He poured himself out for a people who rejected him. And he died on a cross for those who didn’t deserve their crimes to be forgiven.
All for their salvation in the shadow of a wrathful God.
With that in mind, how can Christians trample and double-cross and snub others? With the truths of the gospel embraced deep in the Christian’s heart, it’s near impossible.
Conclusion
In the last couple days we’ve learned that we all have exclusive beliefs. Christianity included.
The question remains: which one is right? I submit Christianity.
I submit Christianity because of the power embedded in the gospel truths that can radically transform human beings into passionate agents of reconciliation–something the world desperately needs.
That is true love.
And if you are a Christian, take this truth deeper into your being. If you’re not, embrace it now…
The world needs you.
Search
Recent Posts
Get Updates | Subscribe
Somewhat Essential
Categories
Archives
