What is the Christian view of yoga?

For many Christians in the West who don't understand the history behind it, yoga is simply a means of physical exercise and strengthening and improving flexibility of the muscles. However, the philosophy behind yoga is much more than physically improving oneself. It is an ancient practice derived from India, believed to be the path to spiritual growth and enlightenment.

The word yoga means "union," and the goal is to unite one's transitory (temporary) self with the infinite Brahman, the Hindu concept of "God." This god is not a literal being, but is an impersonal spiritual substance that is one with nature and the cosmos. This view is called "pantheism," the belief that everything is God and that reality consists only of the universe and nature. Because everything is God, the yoga philosophy makes no distinction between man and God.

Hatha yoga is the aspect of yoga that focuses on the physical body through special postures, breathing exercises, and concentration or meditation. It is a means to prepare the body for the spiritual exercises, with fewer obstacles, in order to achieve enlightenment. The practice of yoga is based on the belief that man and God are one. It is little more than self-worship disguised as high-level spirituality.

The question becomes, is it possible for a Christian to isolate the physical aspects of yoga as simply a method of exercise, without incorporating the spirituality or philosophy behind it? Yoga originated with a blatantly anti-Christian philosophy, and that philosophy has not changed. It teaches one to focus on oneself instead of on the one true God. It encourages its participants to seek the answers to life's difficult questions within their own consciousness instead of in the Word of God. It also leaves one open to deception from God's enemy, who searches for victims whom he can turn away from God (1 Peter 5:8).

1 Peter 5:8 (NIV)

8 Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.

Whatever we do should be done for God's glory (1 Corinthians 10:31), and we would be wise to heed the words of the apostle Paul: "Fix your thoughts on what is true and honorable and right. Think about things that are pure and lovely and admirable. Think about things that are excellent and worthy of praise" (Philippians 4:8, NLT). A Christian should exercise caution and pray for discernment regarding involvement in yoga.

The Christian Claim about yoga:

It teaches one to focus on oneself instead of on the one true God. It encourages its participants to seek the answers to life's difficult questions within their own consciousness instead of in the Word of God. It also leaves one open to deception from God's enemy, who searches for victims whom he can turn away from God.

Response: Yoga which has its roots in the Vedas is all about union with God. In fact the word yoga denotes union.

Yoga stems from the Vedas - the Indian holy texts that were composed from around 1900 BC. The "eight limbs" of yoga are practiced as posture, breathing, meditation and correct living.

It becomes apparent, that Christianity is ever so ready to export its teachings throughout the world, but refuses to give the same acceptance to other religions. In fact because many of these teachings pre-date Christianity, Christians label them pagan teachings.

The great difference between Hinduism and the Abrahamic religions are: Monotheism in Abrahamic religions represents the denial of gods in God, while the monotheism of Hinduism represents the affirmation of gods in God. Failure to recognize this tempts the followers of Abrahamic religions into branding Hinduism as pagan.

What is Vedanta?

The Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center of New York bases its teachings on the system of Vedanta, especially as explained by Sri Ramakrishna (1836-1886) and his disciple Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) and demonstrated in their lives. Vedanta is the philosophy that has evolved from the teachings of the Vedas, which are a collection of ancient Indian scriptures -- the world's oldest religious writings.

    According to the Vedas, ultimate reality is all-pervading, uncreated, self-luminous eternal spirit, the final cause of the universe, the power behind all tangible forces, the consciousness that animates all conscious beings. This is the central philosophy of the Vedantist, and his religion consists of meditation on this spirit and prayer for the guidance of his intellect along the path of virtue and righteousness.

    From the philosophical standpoint, Vedanta is non-dualistic, and from the religious standpoint, monotheistic. The Vedanta philosophy asserts the essential non-duality of God, soul and universe, the apparent distinctions being created by names and forms which, from the standpoint of ultimate reality, do not exist. Vedanta accepts all religions as true and regards the various deities of the different faiths as diverse manifestations of the one God.

    According to Vedanta, religion is experience and not mere acceptance of certain time-honored dogmas or creeds. To know God is to become like God. We may quote scripture, engage in rituals, perform social service, or pray with regularity, but unless we realize the Divine spirit in our hearts, we are still phenomenal beings, victims of the reparative existence. One can experience God as tangibly 'as a fruit lying on the palm of one's hand,' which means that in this very life we can suppress our lower nature, manifest our higher nature, and become perfect. Through the experience of God, one's doubts disappear and the 'knots of the heart are cut asunder.' By ridding himself of the desires clinging to his heart, a mortal becomes immortal in this very body. That the attainment of immortality is not the prerogative of a chosen few but the birthright of all is the conviction of every follower of Vedanta.

    Vedanta asserts that Truth is universal and all humankind and all existence are one. It teaches the unity of Godhead, or ultimate Reality, and accepts every faith as a valid means for its own followers to realize the Truth. The four cardinal principles of Vedanta may be summed up as follows: the non-duality of the Godhead, the divinity of the soul, the unity of existence and the harmony of religions. On these four principles the faith of the Vedantist is based.

    The essential teachings of Vedanta, as stated by Swami Vivekananda are: "Each soul is potentially divine, the goal is to manifest this divinity within by controlling nature: external and internal. Do this either by work, or worship, or psychic control, or philosophy -- by one, or more, or all these -- and be free. This is the whole of religion. Doctrines, or dogmas, or rituals, or books, or temples, or forms, are but secondary details."

Yoga an Overview

The purpose of this overview is to give the reader an opportunity to decide whether to embrace the Christian view on yoga or the actual teachings of yoga.

When making this comparison, please keep in mind that:

Christianity teaches that the only way to God is to repent of one’s imperfections (sins) and accepting Jesus Christ who died for our sins as one’s Lord and Savior.                                       

Jesus Christ provides a relationship with the Father and eternal life through His death on the cross and resurrection (Rom. 5:10).

Yoga claims that moksha or liberation can be obtained through self effort by performs the necessary steps that lead to Self or Soul realization. Paramahansa Yogananda’s  definition of Self realization: “Self-realization is the knowing in all parts of body, mind, and soul that you are now in possession of the kingdom of God; that you do not have to pray that it come to you: that God's omnipresence is your omnipresence; and that all that you need to do is improve your knowing.”

What is the real meaning of Yoga?

Yoga is a discipline to improve or develop one’s inherent power in a balanced manner. It offers the means to attain complete Self-Realization. The literal meaning of the Sanskrit word Yoga is ’Yoke’. Yoga can therefore be defined as a means of uniting the individual spirit with the universal spirit of God.

According to Patanjali, Yoga is the suppression of modifications of the mind.

Who was Patanjali?

Wikipedia - Patanjali was a sage in Hinduism, thought to be the author of a number of Sanskrit works. The greatest of these are the Yoga Sutras, a classical yoga text. There is doubt as to whether the sage Patanjali is the author of all the works attributed to him as there are a number of known historical authors of the same name. A great deal of scholarship has been devoted over the last century to the issue of the historicity or identity of this author or these authors.

Patanjali’s definition of yoga:

Yogas chitta vritti nirodha, it means that yoga is for the purpose of removing the fluctuations which normally occur in the mind.

Yoga is of four primary types:

Karma Yoga, Yoga of Action,

Bhakti Yoga, the path of devotion and love for God and for the whole of creation - animals, as well as humans, and all of nature.

Jnana Yoga, the science of God Realization, a step by step means of reuniting the soul with Spirit, man with his Creator.

Rajas Yoga or eightfold path, the path of prayer and meditation, as described by the sage, Patanjali, in the Yoga Sutras as the eightfold path, or the eight limbs of yoga:

1.     Yama - Non-violence, truthfulness, chastity, non-stealing and detachment to worldly pleasures

2.     Niyama - Purity, contentment, austerity, self-study

3.     Asana - Yoga postures

4.     Pranayama - Breathing techniques, control of prana

5.     Pratyahara - Withdrawal of senses

6.     Dharana - Concentration

7.     Dhyana - Meditation

8.     Samadhi - Super conscious state, enlightenment.

History of Kriya Yoga

Wikipedia - Kriya Yoga is described by its practitioners as the ancient Yoga system revived in modern times by Mahavatar Babaji through his disciple Lahiri Mahasaya, c. 1861. Kriya Yoga was brought to international awareness by Paramahansa Yogananda's book Autobiography of a Yogi and through Yogananda's introductions of the practice to the west from 1920. Kriya Yoga is the "Yoga of Action".

According to Yogananda the ancient Yogic text the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, contains a description of Kriya Yoga in the second chapter II.49: "Liberation can be attained by that pranayama (breathing technique) which is accomplished by disjoining the course of inspiration and expiration."

The Kriya yoga system consists of a number of levels of pranayama, mantra, and mudra based on techniques intended to rapidly accelerate spiritual development and engender a profound state of tranquility and God-communion. Yogananda attributes his description of Kriya Yoga to his lineage of gurus, Sri Yukteswar Giri, Lahiri Mahasaya, and Mahavatar Babaji. The latter is reported to have introduced the concept as essentially identical to the Raja Yoga of Patanjali and the concept of Yoga as described in the Bhagavad Gita.

Kriya Yoga was introduced to the West by Paramahansa Yogananda. However it is claimed that, long before Yogananda was born, a saint named Babaji lived in the Himalayas. One day, Jesus appeared to him, and told him that although Jesus' followers still do good works, they have forgotten how to commune with him inwardly in meditation. Jesus told Babaji to send someone to the West to remind his people that the goal of life is to become one with God through inner communion. That person was to be Yogananda.

Kriya Yoga is a meditation technique that quickly accelerates one’s spiritual growth. It teaches “Self-realization “a knowing - in body, mind, and soul – that we are one with omnipresence of God. All we have to do is improve our knowing.

“Kriya,” he wrote, “is the easiest, most effective, and most scientific avenue of approach to the Infinite. In contrast to the slow, uncertain theological path to God,

Kriya can still be learned from Ananda Sangha   530-478-7560, Ananda Sangha
14618 Tyler Foote Rd. Nevada City, CA 95959 and other groups. Kriya Yoga and represents an entire way of life.

Yoga is the stilling of the mind until it rests in a state of total and utter tranquility, so that one experiences life as it is: as Reality.

Through the practice of Yoga, one experiences life through the clearest of lenses, lenses not colored by thoughts of good or bad, or mine or yours. When the fluctuations of the mind are totally removed, we are at one with everything and all that is.

St. Paul knew Kriya Yoga, or a technique very similar to it, by which he could switch life currents to and from the senses. He was therefore able to say: “Verily, I protest by our rejoicing which I have in Christ, I die daily.” 1 Corinthians 15:31,

By daily withdrawing his bodily life force, he united it by yoga union with the rejoicing (eternal bliss) of the Christ consciousness. In that felicitous state, he was consciously aware of being dead to the delusive sensory world of maya (the world is not what it appears to be, it is illusive).

“All the greatest and most important problems are fundamentally unsolvable. They can never be solved, but only outgrown. This out growing proves on further investigation to be a new level of consciousness. Some higher or wider interest appears on the horizon, and the unsolvable problem loses its urgency, fades out when confronted with a new and stronger life urge.” Carl Jung.

Yogananda's gospel, however, originated not in the Bible, but in Vedanta. Although he used the English word Bliss instead of the Sanskrit word ananda, he argued that Bliss was the goal of life (which, for him, was identical to the experience of God), that the search for Bliss could be achieved only by destroying desire and attachment, and that behavior is shaped by innate tendencies known as samskaras (fluctuations that ordinarily occur of the mind). Although he avoided use of the word prāna or pranayama, he prescribed specific techniques for “the control, regulation and turning back of the life-force to transcend the body and mind and know the ‘Self’ in its native State.

His use of Christian language reflected his effort to present a faith through which all other religions found their true meaning. He explicated the “one truth” underlying all religions, explaining “that unless we know our self as spirit, as the fountain-head of Bliss, separate from Body and mind, our existence is devoid of meaning; our life is akin to that of a brute. We can know God only by knowing ourselves, for our natures is similar to His. Man has been created after the image of God. If the methods suggested are correctly practiced, we will know ourselves to be Blissful spirit and in it one will feel God.

Did early Christians change Christ’s message?

The Jewish people, at the time of Christ, had arrived at a crossroads. In their decision to live by high principles, the Jews, as a people, were far ahead of most peoples of their time. They had taken the next step, also, of recognizing that living for God is the highest principle. They had chosen God, and for this reason, as the Bible states, God chose them.

The most important step on the spiritual path, however, is to make oneself receptive to divine guidance. The next step for the Jewish people would have been to welcome practical spiritual guidance ,  not only through written laws, but through enlightened masters like Jesus Christ who themselves were in tune with God’s will.

Jesus came to teach the Jewish people the true meaning of freedom: not liberation from outer slavery such as they’d endured in Egypt and in Babylon, and were enduring to a lesser degree under Roman rule, but freedom from the tyranny of delusion: from material desires and attachments, from the demands of an arrogant and self-affirming ego. He came to help them understand that their original “contract” with God was primarily inward. Inner communion with God was the essence of Jesus Christ’s message and was recognized as such by spiritually-minded Jews.

The challenge the Jewish people faced was to awaken to God’s love by accepting the guidance of Jesus Christ, an enlightened master, and through that love, to enter into communion with God. But for this next step the Jews, as a people, were not ready.

The early Christians and the Greco-Roman world

Jesus, not surprisingly, was opposed by the narrowly orthodox Jews of his day – the pedants and the prelates who, enclosed in high walls of dogmatism, condemned his fresh perception of truth, inspired as it was from within. The orthodox Jews’ rejection of Jesus had the effect of pushing his followers out into the Greco-Roman world, where the overall approach to life was radically different from the more-or-less unsystematic teachings of Jesus Christ.

In the Greco-Roman world, institutionalism had already been developed to a fine art. As Christianity entered into that world, the early church leaders thought it necessary to adapt Christ’s message to that culture,  for most of them, the only culture they knew. They therefore perceived a need to get organized, and to encase Christ’s teachings in a formal structure, under strict administrative control.

As Christianity became absorbed by the Greco-Roman world, it adopted the rigid disciplines of Greek reasoning to bolster the teachings it was formulating, and shunned the more fluid perceptions that come with soul-intuition. Slowly there emerged an authoritarian Church, centralized and all-powerful. As soon as the Church was in a position to do so, it declared a need for fixed definitions, that is to say, dogmas to protect Christ’s teachings from numerous ideological assaults. Dogmatic definitions offered a safe and easy way of “refuting” error.

Is there value in studying comparative religions?

“Comparative Religions 101: Study the world’s major faiths and religions side by side and learn their similarities and differences.” This simple course description is included in thousands of college and university catalogs advertising a class that is often required for graduation. Books and websites are devoted to the subject of comparative religions, many times with the goal of validating and presenting each as a respectable option for mankind’s spiritual needs. Education is always beneficial when it is pursued from a foundation of truth; however, if we study comparative religions with the goal of changing our thinking about God and His Word, such an undertaking can be dangerous. Christians who are grounded in their faith should have no problem studying the world’s man-made religions. Even so, there are a few things to keep in mind.

1. Who/what is facilitating the study of comparative religions? In Luke 6:39–40, Jesus gave this warning: “Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not both fall into a pit? The student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher.” The way the subject of comparative religions is presented makes a huge difference in whether it is helpful or harmful. A book on comparative religions that is written with bias toward Islam or atheism can create doubt or fear in a reader. A teacher who treats Christianity with contempt and expresses personal disdain for the things of God can disturb the faith of many, especially in young or immature believers. Psalm 1:1–3 applied to this question warns Christians to avoid the “counsel of the ungodly” and those who “sit in the seat of scoffers.” So, before reading a book or taking a class on comparative religions, first learn the qualifications and philosophical slant of the author or the teacher.

2. What is the purpose of the study of comparative religions? If our purpose in studying comparative religions is so that we can be more fruitful witnesses, then doing so can be helpful. Missionaries headed to the foreign field need to be educated about the religions of the culture to which they are sent. Educating ourselves about the religions of our region can help us craft a more successful approach in presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ. However, if the study is motivated by our own spiritual unrest or questions about whether the Bible is true, such a study will most likely only increase confusion. Young adults may see the study of comparative religions as a wise endeavor, now that they are free from parentally imposed church attendance. They often dive into the study of other religions, believing they will uncover truth for themselves. The results are often disastrous, leaving the student disillusioned and determined to believe nothing. When biblical truth is studied on par with man-made idolatry, Christianity is easily discarded as “one more religion.”

3. From what perspective is the comparative religions course being taught? Christians should always study comparative religions from a Christian perspective. Excellent resources abound that showcase the fundamental beliefs of other religions and demonstrate how they differ from biblical truth. When approached from a solid foundation, the study of comparative religions only reaffirms the incomparable truths of Christianity. Proverbs 13:20 says, “He who walks with wise men will be wise, But the companion of fools will suffer harm.” It is our responsibility to be selective about who or what we allow to teach us or our children. We should approach every field of study from a solid foundation with convictions based on the unchanging Word of God (1 Peter 1:24–25).

Putting Christianity on par with other religions is similar to cleaning a huge mess of fish while wearing a diamond ring. If the ring slips off and gets lost in the slime, it can be tossed out with the garbage. Only much later is its absence missed, but by then there’s no way to know where to begin looking for it. The ring may be a lost cause because it is so easily hidden in the mass of fish entrails. Some people can lose their faith like that, when they fill their minds with the world’s confusing nonsense in the name of a comparative study of religion. When they go to retrieve their faith, they realize it is no longer there. Many never recover it and simply walk away into atheism and emptiness. Christians should only study comparative religions when the purpose is evangelism and the teacher or textbook subjects itself to God’s truth.

What is postmodernism?

We live in a postmodern world. Or, so we’re told. But what does this mean? On one level, postmodern is a word used to describe major changes in the underlying ways people think — especially the way people view truth and reality. Postmodern is a term of contrast which implies modern. But before modern, there was pre-modern. To understand postmodern, it helps to consider the main differences in the way each of the three “moderns” relate to truth and reality.

Pre-modern era was one in which religion was the source of truth and reality. God’s existence and revelation were givens in the culture. In the modern era, science became the source for truth and reality. During this period, religion and morality were arbitrarily demoted to the subjective realm. In the present, postmodern era, there is no single defining source for truth and reality beyond the individual. Postmodernism simply radicalized relativism and individualism and then applied them to all spheres of knowledge, even science.

In a postmodern world, truth and reality are understood to be individually shaped by personal history, social class, gender, culture, and religion. These factors, we are told, combine to shape the narratives and meanings of our lives. In this sense they are culturally embedded, localized social constructions without any universal application. Post moderns are suspicious of people who make universal truth claims. Such claims of universal meaning are viewed as imperialistic efforts to marginalize and oppress the rights of others. The most important value of post modernity is the inadmissibility of all totalizing ways of viewing any dimension of life. Post modernity, as a worldview, refuses to allow any single defining source for truth and reality. The new emphasis is on difference, plurality and selective forms of tolerance.

Postmodern thinking is full of absurdities and inconsistencies. It is, for example, the worldview that says no worldview exists. It is an anti-theory that uses theoretical tools to neutralize all theories. It demands an imposed uniformity in an effort to resist uniformity. It employs propositional statements to negate truth based on propositional statements.

Dominate postmodern concerns for plurality, diversity and tolerance have not led to a more stable and secure society. Instead, the postmodern era exchanged one misguided mood for another. Post modernity was fueled by a shift from the human optimism of modernity (based on scientific certainty and technological progress), to a pessimistic mood of skepticism and uncertainty. One observer noted that, “Modernity was confident; post modernity is anxious. Modernity had all the answers; post modernity is full of questions. Modernity reveled in reason, science and human ability; post modernity wallows (with apparent contentment or nihilistic angst) in mysticism, relativism, and the incapacity to know anything with certainty.”

This mood change was fueled by the devastation and disappointments of two world wars. Philosophies of despair and nihilistic existentialism became popular fare throughout Europe. These philosophies would later provide the ideological framework for the rejection of authority and institutionalism in America.

During the 1960s and 70s, the prevailing attitudes against authority, institution and establishment produced overwhelmingly negative effects on the nation. It was during this same period that we experienced a massive societal shift away from the institution of marriage and family. This involved alarming increases in divorce rates and the widespread acceptance of co-habitation. Anyone who denies these devastating consequences is not living in reality.

As a result of these changes, pastors, counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists and therapists are stretched to the limit as they try to help overwhelming numbers of people pick up the broken pieces of their lives and become whole again. Yet many of these helpers are equally lost because they accept the postmodern lie. What is the lie? It is the wholesale rejection of universal reason and absolute truth. It is the delusional mindset that there is no objective goodness and rightness. These prevailing opinions have led to the dismissal of an absolute deity.

Let’s not misunderstand; God is warmly welcomed in the postmodern world as long as he doesn’t try to play God. Post modernity returns value to faith and affirms the nurturing of our spiritual being as vital to humankind. Unfortunately, with the loss of truth, people will now seek faith without boundaries, categories, or definition. The old parameters of belief do not exist. As a result, people will be increasingly open to knowing God, but on their own terms.

Yet the true and living God will not be defined by finite creatures. While postmodern philosophers have tried to write the obituary of the “God’s eye view of the world,” the Creator of the universe still determines the standard of truth, goodness and beauty. Scripture warns, “Remember that you can’t ignore God and get away with it. You will always reap what you sow!” (Galatians 6:7). If you are lost in the postmodern world, the God who revealed himself through Jesus Christ is your only way out (see John 14:6). He is the savior who can forgive our sins and the shepherd who can lead us out of the confusion and despair of post modernity.

What is Transhumanism?

Transhumanism is an international philosophical movement that advocates for the transformation of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies to greatly enhance human intellect and physiology.

Transhumanism is a philosophical and cultural position that encourages human advancement through technology. More specifically, transhumanism encourages the use of artificial enhancements to push mankind towards something “more than” human. Fundamentally, it is a form of Utopianism, the belief that human beings can change themselves and create a heaven on earth. The basic idea of improving the human condition is perfectly compatible with the Bible. In fact, it’s one of the purposes of a Christian lifestyle (John 10:10). But transhumanism contradicts the Bible when it assumes that humanity is completely sovereign and capable of self-directed change without the need for God (Jeremiah 17:9).

Like any other cultural movement, there are subsets and sub-genres of thought under the transhumanist tent. There are some admirable motivations behind transhumanism. For some, the intent is to reduce suffering or improve quality of life (Luke 12:33). Taken to an extreme, though, it can become a pursuit of immortality, an escape from moral boundaries, or a form of religion in and of itself. The ultimate redemption of mankind is something that will be accomplished by God alone (Revelation 21:1), not by technology.

Since God gave mankind dominion over the earth, there are spiritually acceptable means of improving the human condition through technology. That doesn’t mean that humans are fully capable, or even fully free, to change ourselves in any way we choose. Ultimately, God is sovereign over us; we are not sovereign over ourselves. Once a person takes the view that they can re-create themselves, they place themselves in an unrealistic spiritual position and usurp the prerogatives of God. Our knowledge, power and ability simply cannot compare to that of the Creator (Job 38:2-5).

Modern man has technology unimaginable to generations of a thousand years ago, but we’re still human, still flawed, and still in need of a Savior (1 John 1:8). Experience has taught us that human beings tend to be just as immoral with technology as without it. Aldous Huxley noted that “what science has actually done is to introduce us to improved means in order to obtain hitherto unimproved or rather deteriorated ends.” In other words, science doesn’t make humanity less sinful, or more moral; it just makes our sin more sophisticated. Human experience demonstrates that the utopian side of transhumanism is just as fictional as its spiritual side.

What are the dangers of postmodernism?

Simply put, postmodernism is a philosophy that affirms no objective or absolute truth, especially in matters of religion and spirituality. When confronted with a truth claim regarding the reality of God and religious practice, postmodernism’s viewpoint is exemplified in the statement “that may be true for you, but not for me.” While such a response may be completely appropriate when discussing favorite foods or preferences toward art, such a mindset is dangerous when it is applied to reality because it confuses matters of opinion with matters of truth.

The term “postmodernism” literally means “after modernism” and is used to philosophically describe the current era which came after the age of modernism. Postmodernism is a reaction (or perhaps more appropriately, a disillusioned response) to modernism’s failed promise of using human reason alone to better mankind and make the world a better place. Because one of modernism’s beliefs was that absolutes did indeed exist, postmodernism seeks to “correct” things by first eliminating absolute truth and making everything (including the empirical sciences and religion) relative to an individual’s beliefs and desires.

The dangers of postmodernism can be viewed as a downward spiral that begins with the rejection of absolute truth, which then leads to a loss of distinctions in matters of religion and faith, and culminates in a philosophy of religious pluralism that says no faith or religion is objectively true and therefore no one can claim his or her religion is true and another is false.

Dangers of Postmodernism - #1 – Relative Truth

Postmodernism’s stance of relative truth is the outworking of many generations of philosophical thought. From Augustine to the Reformation, the intellectual aspects of Western civilization and the concept of truth were dominated by theologians. But, beginning with the Renaissance the 14th – 17th centuries, thinkers began to elevate humankind to the center of reality. If one were to look at periods of history like a family tree, the Renaissance would be modernism’s grandmother and the Enlightenment would be its mother. Renee Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am” personified the beginning of this era. God was not the center of truth any longer – man was.

The Enlightenment was, in a way, the complete imposition of the scientific model of rationality upon all aspects of truth. It claimed that only scientific data could be objectively understood, defined, and defended. Truth as it pertained to religion was discarded. The philosopher who contributed to the idea of relative truth was the Prussian Immanuel Kant and his work The Critique of Pure Reason, which appeared in 1781. Kant argued that true knowledge about God was impossible, so he created a divide of knowledge between “facts” and “faith.” According to Kant, “Facts have nothing to do with religion.” The result was that spiritual matters were assigned to the realm of opinion, and only the empirical sciences were allowed to speak of truth. While modernism believed in absolutes in science, God’s special revelation (the Bible) was evicted from the realm of truth and certainty.

From modernism came postmodernism and the ideas of Frederick Nietzsche. As the patron saint of postmodernist philosophy, Nietzsche held to “perspectivism,” which says that all knowledge (including science) is a matter of perspective and interpretation. Many other philosophers have built upon Nietzsche’s work (for example, Foucault, Rorty, and Lyotard) and have shared his rejection of God and religion in general. They also rejected any hint of absolute truth, or as Lyotard put it, a rejection of a metanarrative (a truth that transcends all peoples and cultures).

This philosophical war against objective truth has resulted in postmodernism being completely averse to any claim to absolutes. Such a mindset naturally rejects anything that declares to be inerrant truth, such as the Bible.

Dangers of Postmodernism - #2 – Loss of Discernment

The great theologian Thomas Aquinas said, “It is the task of the philosopher to make distinctions.” What Aquinas meant is that truth is dependent upon the ability to discern – the capability to distinguish “this” from “that” in the realm of knowledge. However, if objective and absolute truth does not exist, then everything becomes a matter of personal interpretation. To the postmodern thinker, the author of a book does not possess the correct interpretation of his work; it is the reader who actually determines what the book means – a process called deconstruction. And given that there are multiple readers (vs. one author), there are naturally multiple valid interpretations.

Such a chaotic situation makes it impossible to make meaningful or lasting distinctions between interpretations because there is no standard that can be used. This especially applies to matters of faith and religion. Attempting to make proper and meaningful distinctions in the area of religion is no more meaningful than arguing that chocolate tastes better than vanilla. Postmodernism says that it is impossible to objectively adjudicate between competing truth claims.

Dangers of Postmodernism - #3 – Pluralism

If absolute truth does not exist, and if there is no way to make meaningful, right/wrong distinctions between different faiths and religions, then the natural conclusion is that all beliefs must be considered equally valid. The proper term for this practical outworking in postmodernism is “philosophical pluralism.” With pluralism, no religion has the right to pronounce itself true and the other competing faiths false, or even inferior. For those who espouse philosophical religious pluralism, there is no longer any heresy, except perhaps the view that there are heresies. D. A. Carson underscores conservative evangelicalism’s concerns about what it sees as the danger of pluralism: “In my most somber moods I sometimes wonder if the ugly face of what I refer to as philosophical pluralism is the most dangerous threat to the gospel since the rise of the Gnostic heresy in the second century.”

These progressive dangers of postmodernism – relative truth, a loss of discernment, and philosophical pluralism – represent imposing threats to Christianity because they collectively dismiss God’s Word as something that has no real authority over mankind and no ability to show itself as true in a world of competing religions. What is Christianity’s response to these challenges?

Response to the Dangers of Postmodernism

Christianity claims to be absolutely true, that meaningful distinctions in matters of right/wrong (as well as spiritual truth and falsehood) exist, and that to be correct in its claims about God any contrary claims from competing religions must be incorrect. Such a stance provokes cries of “arrogance” and “intolerance” from postmodernism. However, truth is not a matter of attitude or preference, and when closely examined, the foundations of postmodernism quickly crumble, revealing Christianity’s claims to be both plausible and compelling.

First, Christianity claims that absolute truth exists. In fact, Jesus specifically says that He was sent to do one thing: “To testify to the truth” (John 18:37). Postmodernism says that no truth should be affirmed, yet its position is self-defeating – it affirms at least one absolute truth: that no truth should be affirmed. This means that postmodernism does believe in absolute truth. Its philosophers write books stating things they expect their readers to embrace as truth. Putting it simply, one professor has said, “When someone says there is no such thing as truth, they are asking you not to believe them. So don’t.”

Second, Christianity claims that meaningful distinctions exist between the Christian faith and all other beliefs. It should be understood that those who claim meaningful distinctions do not exist are actually making a distinction. They are attempting to showcase a difference in what they believe to be true and the Christian’s truth claims. Postmodernist authors expect their readers to come to the right conclusions about what they have written and will correct those who interpret their work differently from what they have intended. Again, their position and philosophy proves itself to be self-defeating because they eagerly make distinctions between what they believe to be correct and what they see as being false.

Finally, Christianity claims to be universally true in what it says regarding man’s lost condition before God, the sacrifice of Christ on behalf of fallen mankind, and the separation between God and anyone who chooses not to accept what God says about sin and the need for repentance. When Paul addressed the Stoic and Epicurean philosophers on Mars Hill, he said, “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent” (Acts 17:30). Paul’s declaration was not “this is true for me, but may not be true for you”; rather; it was an exclusive and universal command (that is, a meta-narrative) from God to everyone. Any postmodernist who says Paul is wrong is committing an error against his own pluralistic philosophy, which says no faith or religion is incorrect. Once again, the postmodernist violates his own view that every religion is equally true.

Just as it is not arrogant for a math teacher to insist that 2+2=4 or for a locksmith to insist that only one key will fit a locked door, it is not arrogant for the Christian to stand against postmodernist thinking and insist that Christianity is true and anything opposed to it is false. Absolute truth does exist, and consequences do exist for being wrong. While pluralism may be desirable in matters of food preferences, it is not helpful in matters of truth. The Christian should present God’s truth in love and simply ask any postmodernist who is angered by the exclusive claims of Christianity, “So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?” (Galatians 4:16).

How can I find joy in the midst of trials?

James 1:2-4 says, “Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.” This is the very first thing James writes in his letter after his salutation. Why? Because of its import. Many Christians think once they’ve made that decision for Christ that everything will fall into place and life will be that proverbial bowl of cherries. And when trials and tough times come upon them or continue, they begin to question, “why?” Wondering how they could possibly endure horrible circumstances and consider it joy.

Peter also tackles this subject of joy through trials. “In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire—may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls” (1 Peter 1:6-9).

In both of these passages, we see the instruction of what we should do. ‘Consider it pure joy…’ ‘In this you greatly rejoice…’ Why? Because trials make us stronger. The James passage clearly states that the testing of our faith produces perseverance. And the Peter passage states that our faith, which is priceless, will be proved genuine and result in praise to God. But how? How can we find joy in the midst of all the junk, hardships, and painful circumstances?

First, we need to understand that the joy the world gives is not the same as the joy the Spirit gives. Worldly joy or happiness comes and goes as often as waves hitting the shore. It isn’t something you can cling to when you’ve lost a loved one or are facing bankruptcy. The Spirit’s joy or happiness, on the other hand, can stay with you for the long haul. For the believer, the fruit of the Spirit, including joy, is like a bottomless well of water—there’s always an abundant supply. Even in the darkest days, when sadness, grief, and loss may threaten to overwhelm you, God’s joy is there.

Second, we need to understand that God’s joy cannot be taken away. Oh, you might think that it’s gone—that the hands of misfortune have snatched it from you—but it’s not. As believers, we are promised the constant presence of the Holy Spirit. We are promised His joy. Just as our salvation is assured through Jesus’ one-time sacrifice for all. Jesus’ words in John 15:11, “I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete.” Other examples, Acts 13:52, “And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.” Acts 16:34, “The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God—he and his whole family.”

Third, we need to stop wallowing, whining, and complaining and grab onto God’s joy. Just like salvation, joy is a free and perfect gift from Him, and we must reach out and accept that gift. Grab onto it. Like a lifeline. Choose joy. Over bitterness, anger, and sorrow. Make a decision to choose joy every day. No matter what. Look at these great examples in Scripture: “Out of the most severe trial, their overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity. For I testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability” (2 Corinthians 8:2-3). “You became imitators of us and of the Lord; in spite of severe suffering, you welcomed the message with the joy given by the Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 1:6). “Be joyful always” (1 Thessalonians 5:16). “You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions” (Hebrews 10:34). And the best illustration of all, “Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Hebrews 12:2).

All through Scripture we see the persecution of the church, the trials and hardships that believers have faced. The challenge then is to truly learn how to consider each trial joy.

Grab onto God’s joy.

What is true religion?

Religion can be defined as “belief in God or gods to be worshipped, usually expressed in conduct and ritual” or “any specific system of belief, worship, etc., often involving a code of ethics.” Well over 90% of the world’s population adheres to some form of religion. The problem is that there are so many different religions. What is the right religion? What is true religion?

The two most common ingredients in religions are rules and rituals. Some religions are essentially nothing more than a list of rules, do’s and don’t's, that a person must observe in order to be considered a faithful adherent of that religion, and thereby, right with the God of that religion. Two examples of rules-based religions are Islam and Judaism. Islam has its five pillars that must be observed. Judaism has hundreds of commands and traditions that are to be observed. Both religions, to a certain degree, claim that by obeying the rules of the religion, a person will be considered right with God.

Other religions focus more on observing rituals instead of obeying a list of rules. By offering this sacrifice, performing this task, participating in this service, consuming this meal, etc., a person is made right with God. The most prominent example of a ritual-based religion is Roman Catholicism. Roman Catholicism holds that by being water baptized as an infant, by partaking in the Mass, by confessing sin to a priest, by offering prayers to saints in Heaven, by being anointed by a priest before death, etc., etc., God will accept such a person into Heaven after death. Buddhism and Hinduism are also primarily ritual-based religions, but can also to a lesser degree be considered rules-based.

True religion is neither rules-based nor ritual-based. True religion is a relationship with God. Two things that all religions hold are that humanity is somehow separated from God and needs to be reconciled to Him. False religion seeks to solve this problem by observing rules and rituals. True religion solves the problem by recognizing that only God could rectify the separation, and that He has done so. True religion recognizes the following:

1. We have all sinned and are therefore separated from God (Romans 3:23).

2. If not rectified, the just penalty for sin is death and eternal separation from God after death (Romans 6:23).

3. God came to us in the Person of Jesus Christ and died in our place, taking the punishment that we deserve, and rose from the dead to demonstrate that His death was a sufficient sacrifice (Romans 5:8; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4; 2 Corinthians 5:21).

4. If we receive Jesus as the Savior, trusting His death as the full payment for our sins, we are forgiven, saved, redeemed, reconciled, and justified with God (John 3:16; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-9).

True religion does have rules and rituals, but there is a crucial difference. In true religion, the rules and rituals are observed out of gratitude for the salvation God has provided – NOT in an effort to obtain that salvation. True religion, which is Biblical Christianity, has rules to obey (do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not lie, etc.) and rituals to observe (water baptism by immersion and the Lord’s Supper / Communion). Observance of these rules and rituals is not what makes a person right with God. Rather, these rules and rituals are the RESULT of the relationship with God, by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone as the Savior. False religion is doing things (rules and rituals) in order to try to earn God’s favor. True religion is receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and thereby having a right relationship with God – and then doing things (rules and rituals) out of love for God and desire to grow closer to Him.

What is transcendentalism?

Transcendentalism is a philosophy that says that our knowledge of reality comes from an analysis of our own thought processes, rather than from scientific evidence. According to the transcendentalist, if God exists, He can be found through human intuition. Transcendentalism is most commonly associated with a philosophical/religious view developed in the mid-1800s by a group of mainly Unitarian and agnostic intellectuals in New England, including Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau.

Much of transcendental thinking comes from German idealism and the writings of Immanuel Kant, the philosopher generally seen as laying the foundation of all modern philosophy. Kant used the term transcendental to describe those a priori (non-analytic) elements involved in empirical experience. Kant did not believe these elements to be “spiritual” in any sense, but he held that they did not originate with empiric observation and so were, in some sense, intuitive.

The transcendentalism of 1830–60s New England essentially hijacked Kant’s philosophy and applied his “transcendentals” to ideas as well as to the phenomenological realm. Thus, intuition was valued as a necessary guide in the understanding of all reality, including science, philosophy, and religion. This idea came from Samuel Taylor Coleridge as interpreted by Unitarian Minister Frederic Henry Hedge.

Hedge started a group that became the Transcendental Club, originally a discussion group for disenchanted Unitarian ministers and some others. Important transcendentalists include Emerson, Thoreau, Theodore Parker—who ultimately rejected even a Unitarian understanding of the supernatural—James Marsh, Caleb Henry, and Hedge himself. Margaret Fuller was also influential in the movement through her writing, editing, and organizing efforts.

Defining transcendentalism has been troublesome from its beginning. Emerson himself had great difficulty putting it succinctly, complaining in letters to his mother that people always asked him to define it because he was identified as a transcendentalist. It does not help that the only truly consistent belief among the original transcendentalists was Hedge’s adaptation of Coleridge’s interpretation of Kant—an already confusing chain of ideas! A conglomeration of many different definitions could be boiled down to “a philosophy of intuition as a guide for spirituality.”

Transcendentalists believe that society and its institutions—particularly organized religion and political parties—corrupt the purity of the individual. They have faith that people are at their best when truly "self-reliant" and independent. It is only from such real individuals that true community can form.

Some transcendentalists have claimed to be Christian; however, the idea that a human, intuitive understanding of “the transcendental” can bring us to the truth is misguided. Transcendentalism directly conflicts with the biblical command to “lean not on your own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5). But the transcendentalists did more than trust their feelings. They also received guidance from Romantic poets like William Wordsworth and from the sacred texts of Hinduism. Thoreau, in Walden, spoke of how “in the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita.”

The Bible is truth (John 17:17). The heart of man is deceitful (Jeremiah 17:9). Those who rely on their own intuition and “good sense” to lead them to spiritual truth will find themselves being led astray (Isaiah 53:6).

What is Christian humanism?

The term Christian humanism has been used to refer to a wide range of views, some of which are more biblical than others. In general, humanism is a system of thought that centers on human values, potential, and worth; humanism is concerned with the needs and welfare of humanity, emphasizes the intrinsic worth of the individual, and sees human beings as autonomous, rational, and moral agents. The extent to which this broad viewpoint is integrated with Christian beliefs determines exactly how biblical Christian humanism is.

There are various types of humanism, and it is good to know the differences among them. Classical humanism, which is associated with the Renaissance, emphasized aesthetics, liberty, and the study of the “humanities” (literature, art, philosophy, and classical languages of Greek and Latin). Secular humanism emphasizes human potential and self-fulfillment to the point of excluding all need for God; it is a naturalistic philosophy based on reason, science, and end-justifies-the-means thinking. Christian humanism teaches that liberty, individual conscience, and intellectual freedom are compatible with Christian principles and that the Bible itself promotes human fulfillment—based on God’s salvation in Christ and subject to God’s sovereign control of the universe.

Christian humanism represents the philosophical union of Christianity and classical humanist principles. While classical humanists studied Greek and Latin writings, Christian humanists turned to Hebrew and biblical Greek, along with the writings of the early church fathers. Christian humanism, like classical humanism, pursues reason, free inquiry, the separation of church and state, and the ideal of freedom. Christian humanists are committed to scholasticism and the development and use of science and technology. Christian humanism says that all advances in knowledge, science, and individual freedom should be used to serve humanity for the glory of God. Unlike their secular counterparts, Christian humanists stress the need to apply Christian principles to every area of life, public and private.

Christian humanism maintains that humans have dignity and value due to the fact that mankind was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). The extent to which human beings are autonomous, rational, and moral agents is itself a reflection of their having been created with the imago dei. Human worth is assumed in many places in Scripture: in Jesus’ incarnation (John 1:14), His compassion for people (Matthew 9:36), His command to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31), and His parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30–37). Paul’s allusions to secular writings (Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12) show the value of a classical education in presenting truth. The second-century writings of Justin Martyr also demonstrate the usefulness of classical learning in bringing the gospel to a pagan audience.

Christian humanists understand that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Christ (Colossians 2:3) and seek to grow into the full knowledge of every good thing for Christ’s service (Philippians 1:9; 4:6; cf. Colossians 1:9). Unlike secular humanists who reject the notion of revealed truth, Christian humanists adhere to the Word of God as the standard against which they test the quality of all things. The Christian humanist values human culture but acknowledges the noetic (i.e., intellectual) effects of man’s fallen nature (1 Corinthians 1:18–25) and the presence of the sin nature in every human heart (Jeremiah 17:9). Christian humanism says that man reaches his full potential only as he comes into a right relationship with Christ. At salvation, he becomes a new creation and can experience growth in every area of life (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Christian humanism says that every human endeavor and achievement should be Christ-centered. Everything should be done to God’s glory and not in pride or self-promotion (1 Corinthians 10:31). We should strive to do our best physically, mentally, and spiritually in all that God desires us to do and be. Christian humanists believe this includes intellectual life, artistic life, domestic life, economic life, politics, race relations, and environmental work.

Christian humanism believes the church should be actively involved in the culture and that Christians should be a voice affirming the worth and dignity of humanity while denouncing, protesting, and defending against all dehumanizing influences in the world.

Christian scholars such as Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, and Calvin were advocates of Christian humanism, although they did not call it that. Today, the term Christian humanism is used to describe the viewpoints of writers as varied as Fyodor Dostoevsky, G. K. Chesterton, C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, and Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Christian humanism is biblical insofar as it holds to the biblical view of man—a responsible moral agent created in God’s image but fallen into sin. Christian humanism becomes less Christian the more it compromises with secular humanism, which promotes humanity to godlike status.

How can we prevent our young people from losing faith?

This question highlights an unfortunate trend. As numerous recent books and studies have revealed, a large number of today’s youth are becoming disenchanted with the church. As a result, they are either leaving the church altogether or exploring other avenues to satisfy their spiritual appetites. And, contrary to what some may believe, more young people leave the church during their middle and high school years than will leave during their college years. Over 60 percent of young adults who attended church in their teens will ultimately become spiritually disengaged at some point during their twenties (The Barna Group).

Although the reasons behind this youthful exodus are many and varied, the answer to this epidemic is really quite simple. Our children need to fully understand that Scripture alone can give life and bring sanctification to a sinful soul, and only Scripture can equip us to discern truth from error. Yet, as the apostle Paul aptly pointed out, how can they believe when they’ve not heard? (Romans 10:14). In a world in which there is a growing tide of hostility towards Christianity, we need to teach our children the Word of God and how to defend it (1 Peter 3:15). There are three places our children ultimately learn and develop their worldview and belief system: school, church, and home.

Beginning around age five, kids will spend the better part of two decades becoming educated. And public school systems, along with the colleges and universities, continue to indoctrinate kids with the religious beliefs of humanists. Half a century ago, the United States Supreme Court recognized humanism as a religion. So, when the Bible and prayer were tossed out of public schools, they did not throw out religion. They simply replaced the Christian worldview with an atheistic one. As a result, practically everything a child learns in school about science and history has nothing to do with God. Everything is explained without any reference to our Creator. On the other hand, while kids are in school they are taught and expected to tolerate all beliefs, points of view, and different behavioral preferences. A sign at one college epitomizes this expected tolerance: “It is OK for you to think you are right. It is NOT OK for you to think someone else is wrong.” It should come as no surprise, then, that over 70 percent of young adults under the age 25 think all beliefs are equally valid.

Let’s look at the church, as this is certainly a place where the truth of God’s Word should be vigorously defended. Unfortunately, however, more and more churches are deviating from scriptural truth. The apostle Paul warned us this would happen (2 Timothy 4:3). Discussing the church’s diminishing adherence to the hard truths of God’s Word, Charles Spurgeon had this to say: “There will come another generation, and another, and all these generations will be tainted and injured if we are not faithful to God and to His truth today. …How is the world to be saved if the church is false to her Lord?” One theologian aptly commented in response: “We who love the Lord and His church must not sit by while the church gains momentum on the down-grade of worldliness and compromise. Men and women before us have paid with their blood to deliver the faith intact to us. Now, it is our turn to guard the truth. It is a task that calls for courage, not compromise. And it is a responsibility that demands unwavering devotion to a very narrow purpose.”

The development of a Christian foundation, then, must begin at home with the parents. Yet the truth is that, by the time the average child leaves for college at age 18, he or she will have never read the entire Bible (which can be read cover to cover in about 80 hours), and many will never have opened a Bible. Yet they will have watched roughly 21,000 – 30,000 hours of television, which will most definitely have played a significant role in developing their worldview.

The Bible tells us that children are a gift from God (Psalm 127:3). Even though we are their stewards for a relatively short time, our parental influence in their lives is significant, to say the least, and it is our responsibility to pass along our faith and values to them. In the Old Testament, Moses stressed to his people the importance of teaching children about the LORD and His commands, decrees, and laws: “Teach them to your children, talking about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates” (Deuteronomy 11:19-20). And in the New Testament, parents are taught to raise their children in the “training and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4), as all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, training, and correcting (2 Timothy 3:16). Parents need to instill in their children a thoroughly Christian worldview so they understand that the only way to God is through Jesus Christ (John 14:6). This requires studying the Bible and a lot of hard work. For our children to be able to defend the Word of God (1 Peter 3:15), they need to know it well. The importance of teaching our children the truth of Scripture at an early age is put into perspective by this sobering statistic from Barna: only about 6 percent of people who are not Christians by age 18 will become Christians later in life. That frightening thought should reverberate deeply in the hearts of parents who aspire to have their children attain the eternal life that Jesus Christ died to give us.

Jesus Christ said, “Everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall as it had its foundation on the rock” (Matthew 7:24-25). It is clear that the forces of our increasingly secular world will bring torrents of “rain” and “wind” into our children’s lives so as to turn their ears away from the truth. Christians are not surprised by this, as the Bible tells us this is going to happen to a greater degree as we draw closer to Christ’s return. The wise Solomon taught us to train our children in the way they should go and when they are old they will not turn from it (Proverbs 22:6). Quite simply, it is imperative that we construct a Christian paradigm in our children’s hearts at a tender age.

What is secular humanism?

The ideal of secular humanism is mankind itself as a part of uncreated, eternal nature; its goal is man’s self-remediation without reference to or help from God. Secular humanism grew out of the 18th century Enlightenment and 19th century freethinking. Some Christians might be surprised to learn that they actually share some commitments with secular humanists. Many Christians and proponents of secular humanism share a commitment to reason, free inquiry, the separation of church and state, the ideal of freedom, and moral education; however, they differ in many areas. Secular humanists base their morality and ideas about justice on critical intelligence unaided by Scripture, which Christians rely on for knowledge concerning right and wrong, good and evil. And although secular humanists and Christians develop and use science and technology, for Christians these tools are to be used in the service of man to the glory of God, whereas secular humanists view these things as instruments meant to serve human ends without reference to God. In their inquiries concerning the origins of life, secular humanists do not admit that God created man from the dust of the earth, having first created the earth and all living creatures on it from nothing. For secular humanists, nature is an eternal, self-perpetuating force.

Secular humanists may be surprised to learn that many Christians share with them an attitude of religious skepticism and are committed to the use of critical reason in education. Following the pattern of the noble Bereans, Christian humanists read and listen to instruction, but we examine all things in the light of the Scriptures (Acts 17:11). We do not simply accept every declaration or mental perception that enters our minds, but test all ideas and “knowledge” against the absolute standard of the word of God in order to obey Christ our Lord (see 2 Corinthians 10:5; 1 Timothy 6:20). Christian humanists understand that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Christ (Col. 2:3) and seek to grow in full knowledge of every good thing for Christ’s service (Phil. 1:9; 4:6; cf. Col. 1:9). Unlike secular humanists who reject the notion of revealed truth, we adhere to the word of God, which is the standard against which we measure or test the quality of all things. These brief comments do not fully elucidate Christian humanism, but they add life and relevance to the clinical definition given in lexicons (e.g., Webster's Third New International Dictionary, which defines Christian Humanism as "a philosophy advocating the self-fulfillment of man within the framework of Christian principles").

Before we consider a Christian response to secular humanism, we must study the term humanism itself. Humanism generally calls to mind the rebirth or revival of ancient learning and culture that took place during the Renaissance. During this time, “humanists” developed rigorous modes of scholarship based on Greek and Roman models and attempted to build a new Latin style (in literary and plastic arts) and political institutions based on them. However, long before the Renaissance “Christian humanism” thrived in the works and thought of Augustine, Aquinas, Erasmus, and others. Some even see in Plato, a pagan philosopher, a type of thinking that is compatible with Christian teaching. While Plato offers much that is profitable, his assumptions and conclusions were certainly not biblical. Plato, like Nietzsche, believed in “eternal recurrence” (reincarnation); he (and the Greeks generally) paid lip service to their gods, but for them man was the measure of all things. Contemporary expressions of secular humanism reject both the nominal Christian elements of its precursors and essential biblical truths, such as the fact that human beings bear the image of their Creator, the God revealed in the Bible and in the earthly life and ministry of the Lord Jesus, the Christ.

During the scientific revolution, the investigations and discoveries of broadly trained scientists who can be considered humanists (men like Copernicus and Galileo) challenged Roman Catholic dogma. Rome rejected the findings of the new empirical sciences and issued contradictory pronouncements on matters lying outside the domain of faith. The Vatican held that since God created the heavenly bodies, these must reflect the “perfection” of their Creator; therefore, it rejected the astronomers’ discoveries that the orbits of the planets are elliptical and not spherical, as previously held, and that the sun has “spots” or colder, darker areas. These empirically verifiable facts and the men and women who discovered them did not contradict biblical teachings; the real turn away from biblically revealed truth and toward naturalistic humanism—characterized by rejection of authority and biblical truth, and leading toward an avowedly secular form of humanism—occurred during the Enlightenment, which spanned the 18th and 19th centuries and took root throughout Europe, blossoming especially in Germany.

Numerous pantheists, atheists, agnostics, rationalists, and skeptics pursued various intellectual projects not beholden to revealed truth. In their separate and distinct ways, men like Rousseau and Hobbes sought amoral and rational solutions to the human dilemma; moreover, works like Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, and Fichte’s The Science of Knowledge laid the theoretical foundation for later secular humanists. Whether consciously or unconsciously, contemporary academics and secular humanists build on the ground laid before when they promote exclusively “rational” approaches to social and ethical issues and antinomian forms of self-determination in such areas as individual autonomy and freedom of choice in sexual relationships, reproduction, and voluntary euthanasia. In the cultural domain, secular humanists rely on critical methods when interpreting the Bible and reject the possibility of divine intervention in human history; at best, they view the Bible as “holy history.”

Going by the name of “higher criticism,” secular humanism spread like gangrene in schools of theology and promoted its rationalized or anthropocentric approach to biblical studies. Starting in Germany, the late 19th century “higher criticism” sought to “go behind the documents” and de-emphasized the authoritative message of the biblical text. As Darrell L. Bock has noted, the speculative nature of higher criticism treated the Bible “as a foggy mirror back to the past” and not as the inerrant historical record of the life and teachings of Christ and His apostles (“Introduction” in Roy B. Zuck and D. L. Bock, A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, 1994, p. 16). For example, in his Theology of the New Testament, Rudolf Bultmann, a leading exponent of higher criticism, relies heavily on critical assumptions. As Bock points out, the author is “so skeptical about the New Testament portrait of Jesus that he barely discusses a theology of Jesus" (ibid).

While higher criticism undermined the faith of some, others, like B. B. Warfield at Princeton Seminary, William Erdman, and others, persuasively defended the Bible as the Word of God. For example, in responding to skeptics who questioned the early date and Johannine authorship of the fourth gospel, Erdman and other faithful servants of the Lord have defended these essentials on critical grounds and with equal scholarship.

Likewise, in philosophy, politics, and social theory, Christian academics, jurists, writers, policy-makers, and artists have wielded similar weapons when defending the faith and persuading hearts and minds for the Gospel. However, in many areas of intellectual life the battle is far from over. For example, in American English departments and literary circles beyond the academic world, the siren call of Ralph Waldo Emerson continues to hold sway. Emerson’s pantheism amounts to a denial of Christ; it is subtle and can beguile the unwary to turn away from the Gospel. Emerson held that the “Over Soul” within individuals makes each person the source of his or her own salvation and truth. In reading writers like Emerson and Hegel, Christians (especially those who would defend the faith once and for all delivered to the saints [Jude 3]) must exercise caution and keep the Word of God central in their thoughts, and humbly remain obedient to it in their lives.

Christian and secular humanists have sometimes engaged in honest dialogue about the basis or source of order in the universe. Whether they call this reason or Aristotle’s prime mover, some secular rationalists correctly deduce that moral Truth is a prerequisite for moral order. Although many secular humanists are atheists, they generally have a high view of reason; therefore, Christian apologists may dialog with them rationally about the Gospel, as Paul did in Acts 17:15-34 when addressing the Athenians.

How should a Christian respond to secular humanism? For followers of the Way (Acts 9:2; 19:19, 23), any legitimate form of humanism must view the full realization of human potential in the submission of the human mind and will to the mind and will of God. God’s desire is that none should perish, but that all should repent and inherit eternal life as His children (John 3:16; 1:12). Secular humanism aims to do both much less and much more. It aims to heal this world and glorify man as the author of his own, progressive salvation. In this respect, “secular” humanism is quite at ease with certain religious substitutes for God’s true Gospel—for example, the teachings of Yogananda, the founder of the Self-Realization Fellowship. By contrast, Christian humanists follow the Lord Jesus in understanding that our kingdom is not of this world and cannot be fully realized here (John 18:36; 8:23). We set our minds on God’s eternal kingdom, not on earthly things, for we have died and our lives are hidden with Christ in God. When Christ—who is our life—returns, we will appear with him in glory (Colossians 3:1-4). This is truly a high view of our destiny as human beings, for we are His offspring, as even secular poets have said (see Aratus’s poem “Phainomena”; cf. Acts 17:28).

One does not have to be a Christian to appreciate that humanism powered by pure reason alone cannot succeed. Even Immanuel Kant, writing his Critique of Pure Reason during the height of the German Enlightenment, understood this. Neither should followers of Christ fall prey to the deceitfulness of philosophy and human tradition, or be taken captive by forms humanism based on romantic faith in the possibility of human self-realization (Colossians 2:8). Hegel based human progress on the ideal of reason as spirit “instantiating” itself through progressive dialectical stages in history; but had Hegel lived to see the world wars of the 20th century, it is doubtful that he would have persisted in detecting human progress in this debacle of history. Christians understand that any form of humanism set apart from divinely authored redemption is doomed to failure and false to the faith. We ground a high view of man in a high view of God, since mankind is made in the image of God, and we agree with Scripture concerning man’s desperate situation and God’s plan of salvation.

As Alexander Solzhenitsyn observed, humanism offers no solution at all to mankind’s desperate condition. He puts it this way: "If humanism were right in declaring that man is born to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to die, his task on earth evidently must be of a more spiritual nature.” Indeed. Mankind’s task is to seek and find God (Acts 17:26-27; cf. 15:17), our true redeemer who offers us a better than earthly inheritance (Hebrews 6:9; 7:17). Anyone who opens the door to Christ (Revelation 3:20) will inherit that better country, which God has prepared for those who love Him and are called according to His purposes (Ephesians 1:11; Romans 8:28; Hebrew 11:16; cf. Matthew 25:34; John 14:2). How much more excellent is this than all the proud and lofty goals contained in secular humanist manifestos?

What is the meaning of life?

What is the meaning of life? How can purpose, fulfillment, and satisfaction in life be found? How can something of lasting significance be achieved? Many people have never stopped to consider these important questions. They look back years later and wonder why their relationships have fallen apart and why they feel so empty, even though they may have achieved what they set out to accomplish. An athlete who had reached the pinnacle of his sport was once asked what he wished someone would have told him when he first started playing his sport. He replied, “I wish that someone would have told me that when you reach the top, there’s nothing there.” Many goals reveal their emptiness only after years have been wasted in their pursuit.

In our humanistic culture, people lose sight of the meaning of life. They pursue many things, thinking that in them they will find meaning and purpose. Some of these pursuits include business success, wealth, good relationships, sex, entertainment, and doing good to others. People have testified that, while they achieved their goals of wealth, relationships, and pleasure, there was still a deep void inside, a feeling of emptiness that nothing seemed to fill.

The author of the book of Ecclesiastes looked for the meaning of life in many vain pursuits. He describes the feeling of emptiness he felt: “Meaningless! Meaningless! . . . Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless” (Ecclesiastes 1:2). King Solomon, the writer of Ecclesiastes, had wealth beyond measure, wisdom beyond any man of his time or ours, hundreds of women, palaces and gardens that were the envy of kingdoms, the best food and wine, and every form of entertainment available. He said at one point that anything his heart wanted, he pursued (Ecclesiastes 2:10). And yet he summed up life “under the sun”—life lived as though all there is to life is what we can see with our eyes and experience with our senses—is meaningless. What explains this void? God created us for something beyond what we can experience in the here-and-now. Solomon said of God, “He has also set eternity in the hearts of men” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). In our hearts we are aware that the “here-and-now” is not all that there is.

In the book of Genesis, we find a clue to the meaning of life in the fact that God created mankind in His image (Genesis 1:26). This means that we are more like God than we are like anything else. We also find that, before mankind fell and the curse of sin came upon the earth, the following things were true: 1) God made man a social creature (Genesis 2:18–25); 2) God gave man work (Genesis 2:15); 3) God had fellowship with man (Genesis 3:8); and 4) God gave man dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:26). These facts have significance related to the meaning of life. God intended mankind to have fulfillment in life, but our condition (especially touching our fellowship with God) was adversely affected by the fall into sin and the resulting curse upon the earth (Genesis 3).

The book of Revelation shows that God is concerned with restoring the meaning of life to us. God reveals that He will destroy this present creation and create a new heaven and a new earth. At that time, He will restore full fellowship with redeemed mankind, while the unredeemed will have been judged unworthy and cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11–15). The curse of sin will be done away with; there will be no more sin, sorrow, sickness, death, or pain (Revelation 21:4). God will dwell with mankind, and they shall be His children (Revelation 21:7). Thus, we come full circle: God created us to have fellowship with Him; man sinned, breaking that fellowship; God restores that fellowship fully in the eternal state.

To go through life achieving everything we set out to achieve only to die separated from God for eternity would be worse than futile! But God has made a way to not only make eternal bliss possible (Luke 23:43) but also life on earth satisfying and meaningful. How is this eternal bliss and “heaven on earth” obtained?

The meaning of life restored through Jesus Christ

The real meaning of life, both now and in eternity, is found in the restoration of our relationship with God. This restoration is only possible through God’s Son, Jesus Christ, who reconciles us to God (Romans 5:10; Acts 4:12; John 1:12; 14:6). Salvation and eternal life are gained when we trust in Jesus Christ as Savior. Once that salvation is received by grace through faith, Christ makes us new creations, and we begin the progressive journey of growing closer to Him and learning to rely on Him.

God wants us to know the meaning of life. Jesus said, “I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10). A “full” life is logically one that is meaningful and devoid of aimless wandering.

The meaning of life is wrapped up in the glory of God. In calling His elect, God says, “Bring all who claim me as their God, for I have made them for my glory. It was I who created them” (Isaiah 43:7, ESV). The reason we were made is for God’s glory. Any time we substitute our own glory for God’s; we miss the meaning of life. “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it” (Matthew 16:24–25). “Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart” (Psalm 37:4).

What evidence is there of a spiritual realm?

The Bible teaches the existence of an immaterial, spiritual reality, unseen by human eyes. The physical reality is evident for all to see—although some doubt the existence of a material universe, too! The Bible says that the spiritual realm consists of both good—God and the holy angels—and evil—the devil and his demons. Demons are most likely fallen angels who rebelled against God and were thrown out of heaven (see Ezekiel 28:11–17; Isaiah 14:12–15; Revelation 12:7–9). The Bible also teaches that humans were created by God in His image, which means we have a spiritual component (Genesis 1:27). We are more than physical entities; we possess a soul/spirit destined for eternity. Even though the spiritual realm is invisible to the physical eye, we are connected to it, and what goes on in the spiritual realm directly affects our physical world.

In our culture, the most commonly accepted form of evidence for proving the existence of something is empirical evidence, which involves using the scientific method of observation and experimentation. Is there empirical evidence for a spiritual realm? It doesn’t take much research before one realizes there is “evidence” both for and against the existence of a spiritual realm. It comes down to which studies one wants to believe.

The best, and most prevalent, evidence available proving that there is a spiritual realm is testimonial evidence. We can look at the sheer number of religions around the world and the billions of people who focus their lives on the spiritual realm. Is it likely that so many people would report encounters with the spiritual and it not be real?

The best testimonial evidence for a spiritual realm is the Bible itself. Historians, both Christian and non-Christian, agree that the historical authenticity of the Bible is strong. Jesus claimed to be God’s Son, the One who came down from heaven. He made this fact quite clear: “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world” (John 8:23). The Bible recounts numerous encounters that people had with the spiritual realm. Jesus cast demons out of people regularly, healed the sick by speaking to them, miraculously fed thousands of people, and spoke with people who should be dead: Moses and Elijah (Matthew 17:1–3). These are all indicators that the spiritual realm is real.