The Death of Truth III: Why Postmodernists Scorn Christianity

The Problem Specific to Christianity

The reason that Postmodernism becomes problematic for non-pluralistic religions like Christianity is because of its illogical proposition that there can be no valid absolute truth claims. Any person, religion or belief system that would be so bold as to make an absolute truth claim like Christianity is therefore deemed or condemned by postmodernism as an invalid view because of its exclusivist truth claim(s).  Monotheistic religions tend to do this by their nature because they call people to believe in one God therefore making a truth claim to a single deity or Godhead. Judaism, Islam and Christianity are by their very nature exclusivist.

Christianity is exceptionally exclusivist because in its main underlying premises and doctrines, it makes exacting demands on humanity and explains the reality of the universe and man’s place in it in explicit rock-solid and unwavering terms. These are the enemy of the postmodernist. Christianity shows that humanity is naturally sinful and fallen in their natural condition due to Original Sin. It even shows that salvation is not by works only through faith in God (even Islam and Judaism don’t believe this). Although Postmodernism will acknowledge evil, the truth is they have no suitable explanation of its origins, nor do they have a way to deal with it. This is probably because it is hard for them to define and pin down in an absence of absolute or objective truth(s) (Webber 40-41).  Christianity believes that humanity is incapable of any good without the involvement of the Holy Spirit or God as described in the Bible. The Bible further ratchets-up the demands and makes further absolute truth claims when it states that there is absolutely no way to the Father or eternal life except through Jesus Christ and acceptance of the Gospel which is the very essence of Christianity (Webber 31, 39-40, 43, 50). Christianity is extremely exclusivist in its worldview and its means/path to salvation. There is no pluralism here in terms of gods, paths to salvation or means of redemption. There is only one way to salvation and it is explicitly spelled out and literally demanded as entry to Heaven. As such Christianity is the virtual antithesis of the postmodernist worldview and it is viewed negatively because of this.

The Inclusivism of the Non-Christianity Crowd

Interestingly, those religions that are not monotheistic, inclusivist, not dedicated to absolute truth claims but rather have a plurality or pantheon of gods or focus on the individual “self’s/selves/ or no self” as paths to enlightenment tend to be more tolerated by a postmodernist worldview (Newport 68-69, 84). We see the same in worldviews like the Neo-Paganism or Ancient Nature Religions such as Druidism and Wicca due to the wide variety of paths and variety of beliefs (pluralism). This appears to be because of their “live and let live attitude” and complete lack of exacting demands on the adherents other than the nebulous and nearly meaningless mantra: “Do no harm”. This is because all of these religions allow for a plurality or diversity of more than one possible truth. Because of this we tend to see pluralistic religions (Bahai), religions focusing on many individual paths to salvation/enlightenment (Buddhism) or religions that give off the appearance of plurality and tolerance (Hinduism) thrive in Postmodern culture/society (Newport 68-69, 83-85). This is not to say that the religions have to be pluralistic in the purest sense, they just need to appear to be. Although religions like Bahai and Hinduism will claim to be monotheistic, this needs to be viewed as a probable misuse of the term. Hinduism says God can take many forms but is manifestations of one God. If anything Hinduism and Baha’ism appear to be henotheistic which means that they believe in one supreme or a specially venerated god who is not the only god or deity possible (“Henotheism” Merriam-Webster 2012). Baha’ism on the other hand is pluralistic in its acceptance of many religion’s prophets as all being manifestations or the One True God. Therefore, to call these two religions monotheistic is a dubious assertion

The Real Hidden Danger of Postmodernism

The reason the aforementioned antithetical relationship is so dangerous to Christianity is because postmodernism appears to have run amok in the United States which is one of the most influential entities in the world. It has also crossed over geo-political boundaries to other countries but is appears to have jump over what amounts to theological/philosophical boundaries also or the imaginary boundary between Church and State. It has breached into not only our government but also our churches. If churches are to be the last bastion of truth and even they are becoming polluted with this pluralistic mindset of truth, where are people to turn? Where will truth be found?

With no obvious anchor for truth, therefore no anchor for morality to be based on, morality and truth are cut loose and left adrift on an indefinable sea of uncertainty for both church and the culture. It is because the real hidden danger of postmodernism to Christianity is that it seems to deny the ability to know things for sure. It can even undermine the construction or deconstruct language by stating that words can be interpreted differently (Webber 23, Westphal 128). Because of this, the textually extensive Bible becomes this ever shifting morass of ancient languages that would need to be open to everyone’s subjective interpretations that are subject to the reader’s presuppositions. This is exactly what we have begun to see in the culture. Socialists come to the text with a “Social Gospel” style approach where man needs to make the changes to usher in the Kingdom of God. Homosexuality comes to the text with a favorable hermeneutic towards homosexuality and so on. Due to these factors, the underpinnings of both moral and spiritual truth become subject to question and opened perpetually to re-evaluation. This means that the absolute truths or objective truths contain within the Bible (Groothuis 67) then become forever suspect to a Postmodernist (Slick, paragraph 4).

For a Christian, this is an untenable premise. It completely undermines the Christian at its core: The Scriptures and what Scripture say about Jesus Christ. In a modern human civilization mostly founded on the pursuit of truth through Scholasticism’s clear absolute propositions about nature, time, space, God, predictability (i.e.: Christian-like belief) there was structure and cogency. Now, as humanity drifts away from this there is mounting confusion, disorder and therefore moral debasement resulting (German 983, Slick, paragraph 14).

These two beliefs / religions: Christianity and Postmodernism, contradict one another and are therefore irreconcilable and nor should they be reconciled on moral and spiritual grounds (Moreland 86). If they are homogenized what will result is a modern from of syncretism (or moral syncretism). Both cannot make claims to absolute truth at the same time. Postmodernism may make most of its claims about subjective truth but by saying Christianity itself cannot make its claims, it is trying to override another faith that lives by absolute truth statements. It thereby oversteps its supposed “subjective” bounds. Therefore, according to the Law of Non-Contradiction and other logic arguments, one must abandoned the Postmodernist religion as untenable. 

The Death of Truth II: The Illogical Untruth of Postmoderism

Quod Est Veritas?

Christ and Pilate

(1890)

Nikolay GayOil Painting on Canvas

John 18:37-38 ~ “You are a king, then!” said Pilate. Jesus answered, “You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.” “What is truth?” Pilate asked. 

What is Truth?

To be able to define a Postmodernist’s stance, truth must be described. The Postmodernist believes in a plurality or multiplicity of truth. To the Postmodernist truth has become relative (Groothuis 20). A multiplicity of truth is not truth at all, no more than a plurality of morality is by definition morality, its confusion and disorder. A plurality of truth is counterintuitive to the idea of truth which in its basic essence is an accord with reality or a conformity to a standard or ideal. Truth is a fundamental or spiritual reality. Augustine stated that if man's mind is incapable of grasping truth, particularly if man is incapable of grasping the truth about God, then theology and subsequently morality are impossible to ascertain (Clark 1113). This is because real truth or absolute truths have moral and spiritual implications because this truth exudes from the essence of what God is just as it is stated in the John 14:6’s, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” (Clark 1114). There is nothing standard or ideal about Postmodernism as it accepts all truth as true. If it accepts all truth claims to reality as equally valid, how can truth possibly be standard then? It would need to be non-standard or irregular/uncommon and therefore non-conforming. It also makes every truth claim, biblical or otherwise, equally valid with Scripture. For a Christian, this is an absurd proposition. This is especially if a truth claim contradicts another which is bound to happen if all are accepted. Truth in its purest sense is by its very nature-absolute, or it is not truth. The idea of relative truth is a misnomer or contradiction. Therefore anyone claiming truth is relative to the observer or subjective is in reality being duplicitous and misusing words. Therefore we immediately see the disingenuous nature of someone making claims that multiple truths are true.

What is Postmodernism?

The first thing we must do to understand why the Postmodernist view of a plurality of truth is a detriment to Christianity (and subsequently society), is to figure out what the postmodern mindset really is. First it must be understood that the main underlying principle or mantra of the postmodernist is that everyone’s subjective truth claims are all equally valid as stated earlier. This means the notion of absolutes has been forsaken (Moreland 80; Webber 23; Westphal 128). According to J.P. Moreland in Kingdom Triangle, in Postmodernism, “…there is no such thing as objective reality, truth, value, reason, and so forth” (Moreland 77-78). Because of these underlying philosophies there is a general distrust of any claims to authority and Postmodernism generally operates under a modus operandi of skepticism or doubt whenever someone is bold enough to make an absolute or objective truth claim. This is not necessarily because any individual postmodernist is particularly hostile towards theistic worldview but rather that they are a product of the postmodern culture around them (Orr-Ewing 5).

Violator of the Laws of Non-Contradiction & The Excluded Middle

The first problem with the Postmodernist mindset is its approach to truth is not logical. It is logically incoherent (Orr-Ewing 3) and violates at least two primary axioms of logic. The first violation is of the Law of the Excluded Middle which states that for any proposition, it is either true or its opposite negation is (Slick, Law of Excluded Middle). Postmodernism says that it is possible for all truths to be true. The next problem is when we compound this idea with the axiom or the idea of the Law of Non-Contradiction. The law of non-contradiction basically states that something can’t be both true and not true at the same time when dealing or working within the same context. The reason this becomes a problem for Postmodernism is because in any given context, a postmodernist states that all truths must be true and this just cannot be possible in any given context. By making this very statement, a Postmodernist violates a main underlying tenet of their belief system, thereby nullifying the logical consistency and viability of their belief. This amounts to an internally inconsistent worldview and therefore it is flawed. Christianity on the other hand is “intra-textual” in terms of the Bible being a source of truth. It is consistent and makes sense from an internal point of view for describing reality. It does this without outside factors coming in to support it (Webber 185). Only one can have an absolute truth claim in any given context. Everyone cannot be right at the same time (Law of the Excluded middle). In this way, a Postmodernist has made a statement that is both true and untrue at the same time when they say, “all truths are true –or- there are no absolutes”. If “all truths are true” they’ve violated both the Law of the Excluded Middle and the Non-contradiction. They have also ironically made an absolute truth statement by claiming there are not absolute or objective truths. They are therefore perpetrators of the very thing they abhor…making them hypocrites.

Postmodernism Flies in The Face of Aristotelian Logic and Reason

The rampant pluralism created by Postmodernism does not allow for only one truth in a given situation or context (Groothuis 53). Aristotle had specifically stated that, “without the principle of non-contradiction we could not know anything that we do know,” and this is because we wouldn’t be able to distinguish what something really is. nor could we establish the definitive truth about something (Aristotle on Non-Contradiction, Stanford Encyclopedia). A person is a person or a rock is rock. However ludicrous it seems, a postmodernist says that a person could say a person is a rock and his statement would need to be taken as valid. It is here we see the severe damaging effects of the Postmodernist’s philosophy. If someone could say a person is a rock then someone else can also say that there is one God (Christianity) or there is a plurality of gods (or manifestations of God) (Newport 68, 83) and still view both statements a correct. They can also say that there are multiple paths to salvation through individual enlightenment or multiple manifestations of god/God (Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) or there is a single path to salvation (Christianity). Both cannot be true. It is at this particular point where we see that Christianity begins to become undesirable to a Postmodernist. It is because, unlike many other religions, Christianity is exclusivist and makes absolute exclusivist truth claims.

Intellectual Honesty & Something More

From an intellectually honest academic standpoint, the aforementioned violations of the basic premises of logic and postmodernisms should effectively shoot postmodernism down in flames. For any logical and intellectually honest person it will. What is so unsettling is that this is not the case. The fact is that this philosophy, worldview/religion is rampant in society. This tells me at least three possible things. People are either (1) not thinking through their logic properly (2) willfully being duped by false premises or (3) There is a prejudice or intolerance against exclusivist religions, especially Christianity due to its extremely narrow demands on adherents for a path to a single being God through Jesus Christ. It is my belief that this discrimination is against Christianity in particular and may or may not be demonic or supernatural in origin.

Postmodernism's Justifications

It will be posited by adherents of postmodernism that they are just being “tolerant” and inclusive of everyone’s beliefs and they will state that this is the proper thing to do in a tolerant and civilized society. They have thereby deconstructed the meaning of the word “tolerance” and redefined it to mean that they are accepting of everything…except things that they don’t like. A Postmodernists view of tolerant means being inclusivist to other’s beliefs but only when it suits or backs their worldview. What they fail to consider or understand is that by accepting all points of view they are literally creating an anarchical grouping of people with no absolute truth claims only subjective truth claims. By allowing everyone to live by their own rules and moral guidelines they have made themselves (humanity) their own highest authority. This is of course strangely reminiscent of the time of the Judges in the Bible where “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (MacArthur ESV, Judges 17:6, 21:25). We eventually see this reflected in society’s failure to formulate cogent laws and some of the laws even negate one another. To base a standard of morality off of a known capricious entity like a human is like basing a massive edifice (humanity) on a flawed foundational base (a relativistic postmodern base). In doing this a postmodern society is placing its fundamental basis for truth on ever-shifting sands of human impulse. To the Postmodernist, truth has indeed become relative to the observer (Groothuis 20). They have therefore become moral relativists (Groothuis 38). They have settled on a definition of truth that is not true (Groothuis 24).

Postmodernism's Antithetical Nature to Christianity

The Christian worldview is opposite this and its statements about the truth of humanity and their condition is clear: Humanity is totally depraved and hardly the correct basis of formulation of moral guidelines to base civilization on. This depraved nature compounded with the idea of no absolutes or even objective truths only leads to chaos and further debasing or society since there will be no absolute or objective standard of morality if there are not absolute/objective truths to base morality on.

A Shape-Shifting Parasite

Having stated all this I could conceivably state that I have shown postmodernism to be in direct violation of a fundamental law of logic thereby rendering it internally inconsistent from a logic standpoint which was the original premise of this paper but there is more that needs to be extracted from this topic. There is something much more sinister and subtle going on with Postmodernism that usually flies under radar. It is the idea that Postmodernism is a shape-shifting syncretistic parasite. It’s extremely pluralistic nature and the beliefs of its adherents that all subjective truth statements are valid make it friendly to like-minded pluralistic religions or at least religions that allow for multiple perceptions of manifestations of a god (Hinduism, Buddhism, Nature Religions, etc. (Newport 65, 68) . It can then blend or morph into said religions until it becomes nearly indistinguishable from the host religion. In this way Postmodernism is either parasitic or at least symbiotic to other beliefs (Webber 23). Anyone that attempts to isolate Postmodernism and call it out for its inconsistencies is often met with resistance and labeled “intolerant”, "ignorant" or "hater".

Isaiah 5:20 ~ "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter."

Revealing Christ In The Old Testament XI: Build It And They Will Come

Nehemiah

About one decade passes between the reforms of Ezra and the time Nehemiah is granted leave from Artaxerxes. He had been motivated to return by the news of the desolate condition of the city with its broken walls. Nehemiah found it even as he had heard, and together with elders decided, "...let us rise up and build. So they strengthened their hands for this good work." (Nehemiah 2:18)

This restoration was laid on people by the Spirit and began at the heart/core of things and spread outwards. When the heart is right with God, and established as His dwelling-place, the outward work of His service in the world can go forward.

The entire book of Nehemiah is thick with the idea of the “servant of Christ”. It begins with

with Nehemiah's confession to God, in which he humbles himself on account of the condition of his people. He shows himself to be a servant of people for God and a servant of God for the people. He familiarizes himself with the details of the needs of Temple and the people. He is portrayed as a holy man of prayer. But he is not only that, he is a born statesman, and as such brings his God given gifts and powers into God's service. We could literally be describing Jesus here.

He utilizes the power of co-operation and unity in a body working together, and he inspires a those that at first seem unable…to accomplish a great works in his stead. He manages to get people that normally wouldn’t even associate with one another to work together: priests, rulers and merchants, worked side by side as brothers brothers-in-arms with a common defining purpose-to rebuild the glory of the Temple to God. In a literal respect Jesus does the same with His church. He brings those of disparate and differing backgrounds into a unified body called the Church to glorify of God. We are told of explicit detail as Nehemiah is literally working to a plan both in rebuilding the Temple and God building His kingdom in History. Nehemiah manages to accomplish both simultaneously. By rebuilding the Temple he pushes the march of God’s history forward to an unavoidable and inexorable pinnacle in Jesus Christ. Nothing is overlooked any more than God would overlook the exact details of history unfolding from His throne. The irony or perhaps the plan of it is beautiful in the fact that God picks the humblest of servants to perform the service for Him.

Adversarial Relationships

Interestingly, Nehemiah was mocked mercilessly by the Samaritans. In particular it came from Sanballat the Horonite. In front of the rich of Samarians we hear, “What are these feeble Jews doing? Are they going to restore it for themselves? Can they offer sacrifices? Can they finish in a day? Can they revive the stones from the dusty rubble even the burned ones?” Tobiah the Ammonite was near him and he said, “Even what they are building—if a fox should jump on it, he would break their stone wall down!” We here the same sort of disbelief and incredulity when Jesus said, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days." Of course Jesus was referring to Himself. Furthermore, just like Jesus, Nehemiah’s ridicule from others turns to anger as he gains success and gets closer to reaching his goal. The more the will of God is fulfilled by or through God’s chosen, the more like it is that those of the world system will mount dogged resistance whether it be im mockery or violence. So it is not surprising what we read in Nehemiah 4:8, “All of them conspired together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause a disturbance in it.”

Nehemiah armed the builders, and gave orders that in what place they heard the sound of the trumpet they were come to defend the city. Then the enemy tried four times to evil devising

to draw Nehemiah off task, asking him to meet them in the plain of Ono. Four times he sent the same retort, " I am doing a great work, why should the work stop, so I can leave it, and

come down to you?" Although the retorts are not nearly as good as Jesus’, the same type of stratagem is used by the Devil to tempt Christ in the wilderness to get Jesus to forfeit His ministry and draw Him off task. Even today our enemies still use similar threats and plots, to hinder or discourage believers from doing God's work (like we need any help on this front).

Genealogies & A Great High Priest.

Another interesting thing often overlooked in Nehemiah is the register of those who first came from Babylon under Zerubbabel is again repeated here. It looks like just another list of names but the end of the register is what should draw our attention. Within this register are some of the priests who sought their register in the genealogy but it “could not be found, so therefore were

They were excluded from the priesthood as unclean.

Nehemiah 7:63-65~”And from among the priests: The descendants of Hobaiah, Hakkoz and Barzillai (a man who had married a daughter of Barzillai the Gileadite and was called by that name). These searched for their family records, but they could not find them and so were excluded from the priesthood as unclean. The governor, therefore, ordered them not to eat any of the most sacred food until there should be a priest ministering with the Urim and Thummim.”

Here is another illustration of Christ from the Old Testament. To miss it is to be blind to Scripture. If one is looking for Christ in the Hebrew Scripture, this is a neon sign. It is as bold as it is unexpected. Right after a redundant list of names we see Jesus. Jesus is the capstone of both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies in the New Testament, so too here we see an auspicious nod to Jesus at the end of a register/genealogy. In particular a register of a few priests who could not find their place in it. They were to be people that were holy people. But apparently because of God’s plans, they were not to be holy of their own accord but by a priest that would minister in their stead just as Jesus our Great High Priest does for us. We too are unclean, unworthy until our High Priest Jesus acts on our behalf. Christ is a great High Priest—not by genealogy of Aaron, but "after the order of Melchizedek," who was "without genealogy” as stated in Hebrews 7:3. Melchizedek's genealogy was, no doubt, omitted to fit him all the more to be a type of Jesus not because he didn’t have a genealogy but it was just unknown. God has called all believers in Christ to be Priests. Our right of priesthood being totally dependent on whether we’re born again and have our names written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

Ezra's Preaching with Authority

The immediate result of the work of restoration was a great hunger for God's Word. When people are restored into a proper relationship with God through justification in Christ…this also ends up being one of the signs of a true believer. They intently study and crave the World of God. They desire to learn it…so they can better obey it. The people gathered themselves together as one man around Ezra before the Water Gate, and begged him to bring the Book of the Law of Moses (the Pentateuch). It is here that we see both bastions of restoration united in Ezra and Nehemiah to do God’s work. Ezra's preaching is profound. He opened the book, and having prayed, read the Law clearly and people understood it…and the people did not weary of it. Just as we see in the true believer. The Word…that is simple enough for a child to understand but deep enough for an elephant to wade in. Day after day they listened. Any that "could understand" Ezra stayed on. As a person learns more of God as they grow in God they become more convicted. Why? Because as man becomes more aware of God and understands Him better, they begin to understand and sense just how far they fall short of Him or even His demands of them. We are never as obedient as we think we are. None are righteous...no, not one. The people of Ezra and Nehemiah's time then weep. Weep of their shortcoming in sadness. Then the weep in joy that God would still remember them and desire to have a relationship with them. All pointing to Jesus Christ. The joy is also caused by turning themselves over to God's will. What does Nehemiah 8:12 say?:

"Then all the people went away to eat and drink, to send portions of food and to celebrate with great joy, because they now understood the words that had been made known to them."

Another decade unfolds and what do we suppose happens? Backsliding once more. Nehemiah, who had gone back at the Court of Shushan for a time then returns to Jerusalem only to find all the terms of the covenant broken and the Law disregarded. Again Nehemiah is forced to contended with the rulers because he found that the service of the House of the Lord was neglected and they had actually given over a chamber in the Temple to this enemy of the Lord. They had forsaken the Sabbath.

The utter disregard of God's Day (Sunday) is one of the evidences of the backslidden condition of the Church in our own time. It has spread upon our land like disease and is a sign of the perilous times of these last days. It is the image of a remnant that will be saved by belief in Christ. The path is narrow to salvation but wide is the path to destruction.

The Death of Truth I: Postmodernism Is A Killer

It has become clear to many people, especially Christians, that society and the moral core of society in general has become rather debased. Sexual immorality is rampant and has been so for decades. Violence like sexual immorality is also glorified in society. We need only see the senseless tragedy unfolding today in Colorado due to a mindless evil shooting rampage in a midnight showing of the latest Batman movie. A movie which, played trailers attached to other movies that were chock full of what? More violence. This tripe is propagated by faceless unethical conglomerates driven by the bottom-line. Bad decisions by people that hold the controls of media empires through which tens of millions are exposed to godlessness and immorality. But as the mind-numbing mantra from the free-thinkers of our generation repeats in a senseless refrain: "It's a free country and everyone is entitled to their opinions." We live now in a society where everyone's statements and opinions are equally valid in the court of public opinion. We cannot be "haters" and tell people they're wrong for allowing this violence to be paraded before us daily. We then wonder why we have a generation of youth growing up that solve everything by making choices with a bullet. Yet I am told that I am mean-spirited and hurtful to tell them they are wrong...never mind the families of those poor murdered people in Colorado. The truth is, what was done to those poor people was horribly wrong. The claims that this spineless coward was a Christian is nonsense and nothing more that political propaganda. It is spun by people with agendas and ideologies to spread even if it means piggybacking them into tragedy. As any true Christian will understand anyone indwelt with the Holy Spirit would not have gone on a killing spree. But a society desensitized to God and Scripture would never be able to recognize this fact anyway. This man was no more Christian than Jim Jones of David Koresh. They say he recently went to church. This possibility of him going to Church no more made him a Christian than going to a train station makes him a train. False assumption...


Meanwhile we are left to pray for these victim's families to be comforted by the God of all comfort.


This clearly deranged shooter's behavior is the end result of moral depravity and sin run amok not the fruits of a Christian life. Horrid violence and rampant immoral sexuality are a degenerate and reprobate mind left to its own devices and a life absent of God. Regardless of how much this person used to attend church...people can clearly fall away from the faith never having been part of it to begin with. When we begin to dig we will find flawed sinful thought patterns and actions in the closets of people like this (so as a man thinks, so is he). A mind that commits these atrocities has been unmoored from the ethical restraints instituted by a moral God. A person untied from moral absolutes and set adrift on a sea of moral ambivalence, will spiral endlessly into the blackest of the black in a void of evil. Wrong is wrong, sin is still sin and evil is still evil. Call it whatever you'd like...it still needs to be identified as wrong and corrected. If we do not determine wrongs we will then continue to spiral away from truth and moral rectitude because there is no measuring stick or benchmark of morality other than the capriciousness of sinful men. The world adheres to a broken moral compass. I am fairly certain we are seeing a nation and world under judgment (or soon to be under judgment) as we saw in Isaiah's time. The depravity of man cannot go on unchecked and unabated forever. People should not confuse God's forbearance and mercy for His final response.

Isaiah 5:20 ~ Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

We were warned there would be days like these...they are now here. Below and over the course of the next few posts, I will suggest how we may have gotten here.

2 Timothy 3:1-5 ~ But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God—having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This type of debasement is now infiltrating the Christian Church. In this short series of posts I intended to show through reasoned and logical argumentation that a main if not primary contributor to this debasing is tightly wound and tied to the amorphous idea of Postmodernism. I will show that a failure to allow for an absolute or objective truth claim undermines and subverts Christianity, morality and therefore society. I will also show that it is the relativism that ensues from Postmodernism that breeds pluralism or vice versa (Groothuis 53, Webber 23). I will also attempt to show how this has been to the detriment of Christianity and therefore society at-large because postmodernism removes a basis for objective truth (therefore morality) because in a society where no single basis for absolute or objective truth can be valid, all truths will be. Because these truths will then be subjective as they will come from a multitude of individual sources, confusion, chaos and anarchy ensues in a society “regulated” by these principles.

Many within society including some in the church have fallen victim to postmodernist philosophy. Many of these very people will argue vehemently that this is not the case and tell me this is not true and nor should I state this because is it not tolerant, exclusivist and unloving statement. They will further posit that I am being intolerant and close-minded by saying such a thing. The sad fact is that they will never once look to themselves and realize that the very statement they have made about me is the hypocritical inverse of the very thing that they have accused me of doing. This is the curious essence of the postmodern mindset. It posits that all people should be tolerant of all other people’s claims on truth or statements about their perceived truth. That tolerance or acceptance should be practice except towards the very person that shows theirs opinion (truth claim) as being in error and contradictory. Enter Christianity…the Christian faith is a faith based in absolute and objective truth claims. It is often Christianity (or non-pluralistic religions like it) that are demonized by the postmodern thinkers/theologians. Therefore a Christian cannot make an absolute truth claim to a postmodernist because it goes direct up against the main tenant/doctrine of the postmodern “faith” which is that all subjective truth claims are equally valid. Therefore Postmodernism has enmity towards Christianity.

It is at the point where now a postmodernist will draw lines and make duplicitous distinctions against someone with a worldview akin to Christianity that believes in absolute truths and is willing to make an absolute truth statement. It is here where the postmodernist becomes intolerant and non-pluralistic of someone else’s truth claim. They are tolerant to a point but will draw the line with anyone attempting to make an absolute truth claim that they are wrong, thereby they themselves make an absolute truth claim about a person making a claim contrary to theirs. Therefore they become self-contradictory. We will see that the postmodernist worldview is therefore self-defeating and does not have a leg to stand on.

I will conclude my short series by offering a few observations and what Christianity can do to countermand or cancel out the ever growing religion of Postmodernism that seems to have a death grip on the minds of the modern culture. Part of the battle of defeating postmodernism is often just recognizing it for what it is and isolating, then showing it for the contradictory and often hypocritical worldview/religion that it is.

[Please see last in series of post for Bibliographical information]

Counterfeit Religions IX: Secularism / Secular Humanism

As with Ancient Nature Religions, this is a broadly defined and nebulous category that may be hard to pin down. I’ll do the best I can. I can hear it already. "Secularism isn't a religion! You idiotic Christian zealous nuts are all the same!  That's like saying atheism and agnosticism is a religion too. What, are you stupid?"

Eh...I guess I must be.

A belief in the anthropocentric (human centered) view is a belief in man-centered reliance. To me, this belief in something other than the God of Christianity is idolatry. Secularism and Atheism are indeed religions based on a belief...it just happens to be disbelief. “Atheism is the position that affirms the non-existence of God. It proposes positive disbelief rather than mere suspension of belief.” (Rowe). Secularism follows in this mindset in that it refuses to acknowledge God in a holistic manner. Picking and choosing what to believe is still a belief or failure to believe in something. Sadly, secularism like atheism often claim that their belief is not a religion. This allows them to propagate their beliefs in settings where other religions are banned, but this should not be so. This is exactly what they've managed to do in Government and the public arena. Their attitude is that you can have your religion...you just need to keep it under wraps in you own home...but  don't you dare bring it out in public. The belief in atheism and a desire to remove God from Government has now gotten and unfair advantage over all other religions in our state houses because it is the only religion allowed in the state houses and government buildings. From a logic standpoint this religion is being singled out and given preferential treatment over all other belief systems and this seems to be not only hypocritical but also unconstitutional and against the civil law of many sovereign nations including the United States.

Belief is the acceptance of the truth or actuality of anything without certain proof. Belief is a mental conviction. To believe is to accept something as true or real (or not). It is to accept the truth, existence, value, worth of something: i.e. to believe in freedom. One of the primary meanings of "to believe" is to have religious faith. Because an atheist cannot prove God does not exist they are relying on faith without proof that this is true. A faith that there is no God, therefore their belief system or worldview should be constituted as a religion. Secularism again fits this mold. As they cannot prove or disprove and are attempting to control others behavior through force (law, legal mandates)...constitutes a belief that others do not have the right to bring their Christian, Buddhist, etc belief into the government or public arena...yet not only have they done so...their belief dictates how the laws get passed against other religions. That sounds an awful lot like violation of the freedom of religion which is not only in the US but also a basic human right according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) in the UN (as if they'd enforce it anyway...lol).

Dates:  Varies, modern times, around the time of the European Enlightenment

Major Text(s): Because I view secularism and humanism inseparably link I see things like the Humanist Manifesto as a major supporting text. Science/science books and philosophy and philosophical books also fulfill this function. Generally, any anthropocentric source text that is mostly devoid of, or totally devoid of religion or religious trappings.

Major Variations:  There seems to be two main divisions of Secularism but determining exactly where they divide is quite difficult. There is what seems to be pure secularism that is more of a socio-political structure and then there is a Secular humanism that is more akin to religion. Secularism (proper) believes that laws and public institutions such as the government and the education system should be neutral as between alternative religions and beliefs or the proverbial separation of Church and State. Almost all humanists are secularists, but some religious believers may also take a secularist position when it comes to freedom of belief, including the right to change belief and not to believe. Secularists seek to ensure that persons are neither privileged nor disadvantaged by virtue of their religion or lack of it. They believe secular (man-made) laws – those that apply to all citizens – should be the product of a democratic process, and should not be determined, or unduly influenced, by religious leaders or religious texts. "Secularism" was once used to describe a non-religious worldview generally but this meaning is now becoming archaic.

The other variation that should be noted is Secular humanism believes that moral values follow on from human nature and experience in some way. Humanists base their moral principles on reason (which leads them to reject the idea of anything supernatural but rather  on shared human values and respect for others. They believe that people should work together to improve the quality of life for all and make it more equitable. Humanism is a full philosophy, "life stance" or worldview, rather than being about one aspect of religion, knowledge, or politics. As such this version of secularism seems more akin to religion and ironically more agnostic or atheistic in its approach. This then leads one to ask the question. How can it be so akin to a religion and atheism unless…atheism itself needs to be viewed as a religion…of no God or a belief system the is absent a deity

Current number of Adherents: Varies in levels of intensity of secularism. Difficult to determine because it is not generally consider a religion per se that can be tallied or tracked easily.

Beliefs about Major Holidays and Practices: As a rule (although there may be exceptions and variations, most secularists appear to embraces human reason, ethics, and social justice while conversely abandoning religion or religious dogma, supernaturalism, or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making.  Secularism tends to be pluralistic and tolerant except when it comes to religious views. By its very nature the core tenant or doctrine of Secularism is a belief that rejects religion and/or religious considerations either on social, political or theological grounds. As for holidays, officially it looks as if they have none but in reality many actually do celebrate culturally normative holidays when it suits them like Thanksgiving even though it appears to hold no religious significance to them (what?)

I have combined Beliefs about God and Humanity below as they are often times synonymous or the same.

Beliefs about God and Humanity: Many will say that Secularists or Secular Humanists are outright agnostic or atheistic, the truth is I can find no outright denials of God or impossibility of the supernatural. Secularism is not just simply a case of no God or no religion. It almost appears as if secularism ignores its existence or denies it in a form of ontological denial. It seems as if they leave the ability for God to exist they just refuse to take a divine or supernatural being into account in their pursuit of what they view as reality. Supernaturalism is precluded on purpose or by a deliberate choice. Secularists believe humans can be ethical and moral without religion or the precept of a god or God, It appears to view humans as inherently neutral morally/ethically. They are neither evil nor good. Progress and the inevitable improvement of man is solely dependent on the advance of man, science, reason and technology. As a matter-of-fact, secularists seem to cling to people like Francis Bacon and Robert Boyle that argued that the supernatural spiritual realm of God was separate and distinct from the natural material world of lifeless, inert matter (Oxford University Press). This distinction between supernatural and natural worlds created two distinct divisions of reality. One is secular space and naturalistic (a posteriori) and the other one is a religious space that is spiritual (a priori).

As this is a predominately human or anthropocentric religion we see it manifest in things human-centered. Frankly I view Secularism as irreligion/unreligion or a lack of it. I run the risk of having a secular professor disagree with some of my assessments on this religion but its very nature makes it a chameleon and hard to define and see in society. Some forms of secularism manifest in the humanists and humanistic movement that has arisen since the Enlightenment. It appears to be a kickback due to the abuse and deaths involved in inter-religion wars or religion to religion. Secularism seems to be more of a socio-political doctrine developed as a response to specific religious, political, and economic developments in early modern Europe (mostly their abuse). Because religion seemed to produce nothing but war and death, many abandoned religion in search of reason, logic or rationalism. The idea behind this is that ideologies whether they be religious or political/anthropocentric need to be examined not solely on faith but also to some extent through science and philosophy. Many secularists will deem themselves non-religious when in reality they are. They have a belief system, it usually just absent of God or gods.

Beliefs about the Supernatural (Angels, Messages from God, etc):  What a secularist believes is not easy to determine. What is important to them is how they arrive at a reasoned or rationalized conclusion. Frankly I cannot even tell if there is any Fideism (faith) involved here as the concepts of secularism are so nebulous and hard to pin down. I suppose they allow for some form of fideism but they rely and lean heavily towards things like empiricism, naturalism, reason and rationalism.

Beliefs about the Afterlife:   I suspect this depends on just how secular a secularist is. Some would say none. Others would acknowledge it might exist.

Rowe, WL. ”Atheism”, in Craig. E Routledge, Ed., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, New York, 1998

Counterfeit Religions VIII: Ancient Nature Religions

When stating Ancient Nature Religions this is referring to the Primal Religions. I suppose under this heading we can include neo-paganism and even animism which is beliefs that revolve around the existence of non-human "spiritual beings" or similar kinds of embodied principles. In saying the aforementioned and considering some of these belief systems to be religions, we are really dancing around the edge of the definition of what a “religion” is. This is a broad category and at times may be hard to define.

Dates:  Unknown, antiquity, pre-history

Founder(s):  Unknown, multiple. Not an organized religion per se but rather a communal or community based set of beliefs, value systems, morality, ethics (or lack thereof) usually driven geographically and culturally: Geo-Cultural or location based religions.

Major text(s): As they are often ancient and stem from multiple sources, there are usually no official texts but it should be noted that they often rely heavily on oral tradition and passing down of stories of gods (an ancestors) through storytelling or aural/oral traditions, folklore and rituals. Generally there is no set doctrine but there are generalized commonalities of belief. Nature being divine or being imbued with the divine (Panentheism) is one such commonality of many of these belief systems. There are exceptions as is the case of Wiccans who have the Wiccan Rede which is a statement that provides the key moral system that says: “If it harms none, do as you will.” This can hardly be considered a sacred text though. In the case of Druidism Bards (storytellers in song) were often the keepers of tradition and the memory of the tribe/clan.

Major variations: Since I am broad stroking large swathes of belief this is hard to pin down. The ones that come to mind most are things like Druidism, Wicca, some can even be revitalizations of Egyptian, Greek, Norse, Roman and other ancient Pagan religions. Sometimes a combination of any of the above can result in a form of syncretistic hodge-podge. Due to indefinite or undefined set of beliefs or doctrines in these “religions”, endless variations can result. I will even take this slightly farther to include the likes of Native American religions, Australian aborigines, etc. although this may not be the strictest sense included in this catagory.

Current number of adherents: Nearly impossible to estimate. Some estimates say 1 million, some more, some less

Beliefs about major holidays and practices:  Since we are dealing with heavy variations in multiple (plural) belief systems there are a large variety of holidays and practices. I will note some generalizations that will define a majority of these “religions”. In general it should be noted that different deities are connected with different times of the year and worshipped in seasonal festivals, and practices like astrology and divination are rooted in the belief in nature's divinity. In this way they are Panentheistic (or appear to be). They revere the cycle of the seasons, which is regarded as an expression of the divine and a model for spiritual growth and renewal. The Earth itself is regarded as sacred, divine or a god/goddess: Gaia, Mother Earth, Green Man, etc. Because of these presuppositions there are deep ecological concerns that are characteristic of many of the adherents of these types of religions. The magical or mystic practices seem to revolve around the phases of the moon.

I will note some of the practices of Wicca and in so doing we will see interesting parallels with other beliefs. There is a belief in 4 or 5 Elements of Nature: Some acknowledge (4) air, fire, water, earth and others recognize (5) elements: earth, air, water, fire, and spirit or akasha. Some see the points of the pentagram symbol as representing the five elements. Elemental forms are commonly invoked at the beginning of rituals or used in their physical forms to symbolize purity. Each element has associated symbols, rituals and meanings. Like Native American beliefs, there is also a significance held in things like directions: North, south east, west, and center. Colors: Yellow, red, blue, green, violet, white or black. Talismans and/or Totems: Wand, chalices, pentacles, circle, animal totems, etc. Basic concepts of time: Mornings, noon, twilight, midnight and especially seasons (cycles of birth, death, re-birth): Spring, summer, autumn, winter. There is a huge dependency on symbols and symbolism relating to: The mind/intellect, reason, sciences, travel, youth strength, passion, energy, transformation, sex, emotional energies, intuition, wisdom, healing, fertility and transcendence and extremes such as everything and nothing.

Many of these “religions” are defined less by doctrines and dogmas and more by practices and behaviors (i.e.: rituals). Many cling to things related to the seasonal cycle or Wheel or cycle of the Year. The festivals generally fall along the lines of the following (or some variation thereof): Imbolc (midpoint of winter), Ostara (Spring Equinox), Beltane (beginning of Summer), Midsummer (Summer Solstice), Lughnasadh (beginning of harvest), Mabon (Autumn Equinox) , Samhain (end of harvest), Yule (Winter Solstice). It should be noted that many of these pagan festivals influenced the Catholic Church’s desire to covert the pagan masses, thereby they adopted and absorbed many of these practices and renamed them into Catholic celebrations, saints, etc. They did this sometimes to the detriment of the Christian church. Sadly, we are again beginning to see this in the more Liberal denominations willing to participate in ecumenical councils and interfaith gatherings that end up watering down Christian doctrines.

Beliefs about God: What appears to be normative to all these religions is recognition of the divine in nature. These ancient /primal religions generally (but not always) seem to have a polytheistic and often times Panentheistic view of God/gods and view deity often in the sense of a pantheon or multiple gods. One god is usually viewed as supreme or superior to others.

Beliefs about humanity:  There is an intrinsic belief the mankind or humanity is intimately tied to the earth.

Beliefs about the supernatural (angels, messages from God, etc):  Nearly all ancient nature religions usually honor ancestral (Cult of the Dead) and locational spirits. (This ties into the afterlife) Although there seemed to be no universal belief of reincarnation among the Celts, it is clear that it was believed that Spirits are often born into flesh for various reasons (Transmigration of Soul)

Beliefs about the afterlife:  These religions seem to follow a wide variety of paths and may have a variety of beliefs questions like the afterlife. The Celts expected their afterlife to be very similar to the life they left behind. They were buried either whole or after cremation, with chariots, jewelry, weapons, drinking equipment and food (similar to Egyptians). If not reincarnation there are many beliefs of afterlife. I’ll mention a few. Summerland is a Wiccan concept of paradise, where one experiences happiness and sensual pleasure. Summerland can function as a destination between reincarnations (a place of rest and renewal) or as the ultimate destination, when a soul eventually stops reincarnating…never mind that the final destination never seems to be alluded to. Then there is Tir na n'Og or "Land of Youth" is a blessed realm across the water where souls journey after death. It is also a land where the souls of heroic warriors engage in valorous battle. This then leads to Valhalla "Hall of the Slain" or Folkvangr "Field of the Host". These appear to be similar to the concept of the Elysium Fields which were destinations for the spirits of noble warriors and kings. The great warriors who journey to Valhalla and Fólkvangr upon their death will assist the gods in the battle at the end of the age. Then of course we have Hades which is the underworld in Greek myth. Descriptions of this place vary from gloomy to a realm similar to the Elysium.

Counterfeit Religions VII: Bahá'í

Bahá'í is a virtual potpourri of spirituality and religions. It is a religious sponge that absorbs everything around out like spiritual osmosis. Baha'i is extremely pluralistic, even more so than Hinduism. It seems to focus on many individual paths to salvation and gives off the appearance of plurality and tolerance (like Hinduism). Therefore it thrives in our current Postmodern culture/society.

Religions like Baha'i (and Hinduism) will claim to be monotheistic but Baha’ism appears more akin to henotheistic which means that they believe in one supreme or a specially venerated god who is not the only god or deity. Baha’ism is pluralistic in its acceptance of many religion’s prophets as all being manifestations or the One True God. Therefore it views god in a multiplicity or at least as modal or taking on different modes at different times. Either way, it becomes confusing when trying to pin down exactly what Baha'ism deems god at any one given time or place. It is similar to trying to tack sub-divine 
Jell-O®  to the wall. 

Dates:  1863 the year that marks Bahá'u'lláh's declaration of his mission.

Founder(s):  Sayyid `Alí Muhammad Shírází (1819-1850), The origins of the Bahá'í Faith go back to a religious movement founded in AD 1844 by an Iranian merchant. Like Christianity was birthed from Judaism, Bahia/Bahai had its origins in Shi'ite Islam. Some places where Bahai deviates from Shi’ite Islam though is that they allow for more prophets other than Muhammad. In its inclusivist nature women should play an active role in society. There is no holy war (jihad).

Major text(s): The Kitab-i-Aqbas by Bahá'u'lláh. It is the book of laws in Bahá'í. Secondary texts are: collections from the writings of Bahá'u'lláh, prayers and meditations, Epistle to the Son of Wolf and the Seven Valleys and the Four Valleys

Major Variations:  There appear to be none at this point in time. Bahai in and of itself seems to be a religious sponge absorbing all religions and denominations by accepting other religion’s prophets as all being manifestations or the One True God. The very nature of the tenants to unite humanity and their beliefs make it pluralistic/syncretistic to the extreme. It seems as if it could be the Postmodernist’s religion of choice as it sees all beliefs as being equally valid. Because of it’s all inclusive nature there seems as if there can be no variation as it accepts all from Christianity to worship of one’s pet rock.

Current Number of Adherents: Although they only have 7 million adherents they have a rather impressive infrastructure worldwide for their spread of their beliefs. Since they are pluralistic in the approach to other key figures in other religions being messengers of God, they appeal to pluralistic viewpoints which appear to be rampant right now. This would advocate a quick spread.

Beliefs About Major Holidays and Practices: Bahai has a substantial list of holidays so I will only note them here: Nineteen Day Fast, Naw-Rúz - Bahá'í New Year, First Day of Ridván - Declaration of Bahá'u'lláh, Ninth Day of Ridván, Twelfth Day of Ridván, Declaration of the Báb , Ascension of Bahá'u'lláh, Martyrdom of the Báb, Birth of the Báb, Birth of Bahá'u'lláh, Day of the Covenant, Ascension of 'Abdu'l-Bahá. As noted below beliefs about the supernatural, there is a strong proclivity towards pluralism as noted in their acceptance of many other key figures in other religions such as Islam, Judaism and Christianity. There is an obligation to pray daily. Adherents are also encouraged to meditate daily, specifically on their deed and their deed’s worth. Bahá'í houses of worship are intended  gathering places to pray, meditate and to be the focus of community life humanitarian concern. Worship services if they can actually be called this have no sermon, rituals, or clergy. They appear to be a nebulous form of prayer, music, and reading of the Holy writings of all religions, especially the writings of Bahá'u'lláh In keeping with ? Bahai’s universalistic nature, houses of worship are open to people of all religions. Bahai seems to be the extreme version of Interfaith ecumenicalism. Bahais worship can also be at a member's home every 19 days, and through active service to their community.

Beliefs About God:  Bahai appears monotheistic, believing in one, all-powerful creator God. They believe that God is ultimately not knowable in his essence or being, but God can be had through God's Messengers or manifestations. We learn more about the Bahai God by the interactions of the adherents with society and other adherents (including those of other faiths).

Beliefs About Humanity:  Bahai doctrine stresses unity of mankind, the unity of the world's religions, and the progressive revelation of God to humanity. Baha’is believe in the oneness of humanity and devote themselves to the abolition of racial, class, and religious prejudices thereby making themselves pluralistic and universalist in nature if not outright syncretistic. Something that is very popular in the westernized nations of the world right now.

Service to humanity is a major tenant of Bahai. Of particular interest in the Bahai religion is how it interacts with the world and attempts to spread its faith. It has founded The Universal House of Justice (1963). It is the “Vatican” of the Bahai faith and serves as its highest authority. This shows that the faith has a centralized earthbound authority that gives guidance and coordinates activities. This has aided the spread and consolidation of Bahai communities around the world thereby increasing number of adherents. They also disseminate education and act in other humanitarian ways to improve the life of human society and in particular the pursuit of projects of social and economic development in well-established Bahai communities. The Universal House of Justice is based in Haifa, Israel

Beliefs About The Supernatural (Angels, Messages from God):  Clearly believe in God sending messengers as in the case of Baha’u’llah. Having been incarcerated for his belief he realized he was the prophet whose coming had been predicted by the Bab. A majority of Babis recognized this claim and afterward became known as Baha’is. Additionally, it is in places like the idea of the prophet in Bahai-ism that we begin to sense the universalist or pluralistic nature of Bahai. Baha’is believe that the founders of great religions such as Abraham, Jesus, the Buddha, and Muhammad were all sent by one God to reveal God's attributes and will in the terms that were appropriate for the time. In this manner Bahai is strongly universalist/pluralistic in its approach. This

Beliefs About The Afterlife:   In Bahai in the afterlife, the soul is separated from the body and begins a spiritual journey towards God through many planes of existence. Clearly a salvation by works, the believer progresses on a journey towards God. If the soul fails to develop in a form of sanctification, one will remain apart from God. This condition of being distant from God can in some sense be understood as "hell." As for Heaven or Hell being destinations it must be said that Bahai doesn’t believe they are literal places but as different states of being. Where Christianity sees the spiritual world as be distinctly “other”, Bahai views the spiritual world as a timeless and placeless extension of the universe. Other than this the nature of the afterlife is rather mysterious for Bahá'í and not well articulated nor elaborated on, at least in the sources I have referenced.

Counterfeit Religions VI: Buddhism

Buddhism as put forth by the Buddha typically teaches a religion bereft of authority and teaches a religion that scorns appeals to ineffectual gods/God. Here is the clincher: For me the failure of Buddhism is that fact that Buddha taught a religion of concentrated self-effort. Why do I deem this a failure in terms of a religion? We mustn't think that when we observe a Buddhist that he has achieved peace with his surroundings just because he is passive as a Christian would in an equivalent situation. It is not peacefulness as we understand it but rather an apathy or a torpor to the outside world. Christian's are called by Christ to do just the opposite. The Buddhist is told to turn inward to find peace-inner peace. Christians are called to turn outward and be communal in the worship and spiritual life (read Ephesians). You cannot be in harmony with your surroundings if you have completely ignored them to focus solely on the self - this is counter-intuitive. At its very core, Buddhism is a spiritual tradition that focuses in personal spiritual development and the attainment of deep personal insight into the true nature of one's life and self. It is not centered on the relationship between humanity and God. Man cannot save himself and if Buddhism tells you to turn to yourself for help and attainment of some form of salvation...you're doomed. 

Buddhism also preaches a religion absent of the supernatural. It is also a religion that supposedly can compete head-to-head with Christianity in the empirical department or observable validation. In every question of faith, personal experience is the test of truth. Buddhism asks adherents to turn inward for answers, not outward to God.

What’s more is that the adherents were to pursue nirvana which to me a nebulously defined “highest destiny of the human spirit”. Enlightenment is the only way to get off the “wheel of suffering” or “Samsara” the antithesis of nirvana. The book (and to some extent the adherents) seem to play a game of reality(ies) here.  It can be assumed this nirvana or (to blow out [a candle]) points towards annihilation (ism) but this may be a semantic overreach. It must be asked what is being “blown out” or extinguished. Apparently, the finite self. It follows that this doesn’t point to annihilationism directly. So an additional question then needs to be raised. If we are not annihilated if we reach nirvana and we have reached beyond the finite, where are we and what are we? Is nirvana God? Can it be assumed not? What’s worse is this nirvana, whether it is or is not God, was viewed by Buddha as an impersonal force. Defined in this way Buddhism is atheistic. When we begin account for all the minute variations of divisions and sects, it is as if we are trapped in an ever tightening spiral of ontological mazes that do not clearly answer the questions they just further exacerbate them.

Buddha’s view was scientific…lived empirical experience was the final test. Which is ironic because what the Buddhist is really looking for is supposedly spiritual. In Christianity it is faith. Buddhism is directed to individuals whereas Christianity is directed not necessarily towards individuals (except at salvation) but communally or corporate (Church).  These religions are epistemologically (knowledge-wise) opposed. Again, I'll state the Buddhist is told to turn inward to find peace-inner peace. Christians are called to turn outward and be communal in the worship and spiritual life. The Buddhist's eight-fold path is strictly works based as all eight things ask adherents to do things. Christianity on the other hand is based solely in the work of Christ on the Cross so that no man can boast in his own works.

What’s worse is Theradava Buddhist says humans are emancipated or liberated (saved) by self-effort. The Mahayana breakaway of Buddhism is such a close facsimile of a Pauline Christianity that to the uninitiated, it would be a little harder to distinguish between the two at first glance because of ideas of heaven, social harmony, etc. (of course you would need to be blind too as the rest of the tenants are in no way similar to Christianity). Either way, Buddhism once it is chosen would be a hard religion to switch from to go to Christianity. It is as if this Buddhism is the spiritual antithesis to Christianity. It calls adherents to turn inward away from god to self. If there are clear issues of black and white and incompatibility…it is here. The world will tell us that Buddhism is the way to go with its inclusive doctrine and focus on self...no surprise there. On the other hand, the culture will tell us that Christianity stinks because it is exclusive in its doctrine and makes certain demands of us that force is to recognize and account for our sin and depravity. It asks us to abstain from certain things and give selflessly. This is also not surprising since we live in a pluralistic/postmodern culture where "anything goes". For a person to admit they're wrong they first need to admit they are sinful. People left to their own devices will not do this. You have a choice. You can either chose the God that is outside of you who offers salvation and eternal life or you can chose the god within that does not exist and be condemned. The choice is yours.

Dates:  535BC-Buddha reached “Enlightement”

Founder(s):  Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) “The Enlightened One” 563-483BC

Major text(s): The Tripitaka or the Pali Canon is the earliest collection of Buddhist teachings and the only text recognized as canonical by Theravada Buddhists. Tripitka means three baskets. It is further broken down into the three baskets that form it: The Vinaya Pitaka (Discipline Basket), the Sutra Pitaka (Discourse Basket), the Abhidharma Pitaka (Higher Knowledge). Having said this it becomes rather difficult to ascertain accuracy of these writing and other secondary writings as Buddha himself wrote nothing and a gap of nearly a century or two (depending on source) between his spoken words and the first written records. Buddha taught for 45 years and there is a staggering corpus according to Huston Smith. The sheer quantity of material is “bewildering”. Although his teaching remained consistent through the years, it is impossible to say how many minds interpreted said teaching and this becomes difficult what zeroing in on specific texts. By the time texts began to appear, partisan schools and divisions within Buddhism had already sprung up. Some were specifically intended to minimalize Buddha’s break with Brahmanic Hinduism and others intended to sharpen his edge and division from it. To this day people are not sure how much of what they read is actually Buddha’s words (Smith 112-113).

Major variations: Theravada ("The School of the Elders") and Mahayana ("The Great Vehicle").

Current number of adherents: Approximately: 375-500 million (4^th Largest Religion Worldwide)

Beliefs about major holidays and practices:  They celebrate them. Buddhist New Year, Vesak or Visakah Puja ("Buddha Day"), Magha Puja Day (Fourfold Assembly or "Sangha Day"), Asalha Puja Day ("Dhamma Day"), Uposatha (Observance Day), Pavarana Day, Kathina Ceremony (Robe offering ceremony), Anapanasati Day, Abhidhamma Day, Loy Krathong (Festival of Floating Bowls), The Ploughing Festival, The Elephant Festival, The Festival of the Tooth, Ulambana (Ancestor Day), Avalokitesvara’s Birthday (Kuan Yin), Bodhi Day (Enlightenment Day)

According to meeting between monks of the two main factions of Buddhism (Theravada, Mahayna) called the The World Buddhist Sangha Council in 1966 there are 9 key essential points of agreement about Buddhism. (1) Buddha is their only master. (2) They take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma which appears to mean the path of discipline, and the Sangha which seems to refer to monastic community or just community/assembly. (3) We do not believe that this world is created and ruled by a God. (4) They follow or emulate the example of the Buddha and consider that the purpose of life is to develop compassion for all living beings without exception (pluralism?) and to work for their good and to develop wisdom leading to the realization of Ultimate Truth. [Andy’s thought: If they don’t have or know a God who would be omniscient, how would this be possible?]. (5) Buddhists in general accept the Four Noble Truths: Dukkha, Arising of Dukkha, Cessation of Dukkha, and the Path leading to the Cessation of Dukkha. All of these explain the nature of suffering in things such as birth, aging, illness, death, etc. (6) According to Buddha, that all conditioned things/things put together (samskaara) are impermanent the arise and pass away and suffer (dukkha), and that all conditioned and unconditioned things (dharma) are without self or possibly even illusion (anaatma).  (7) Buddhists accept the 37 qualities beneficial for Enlightenment (bodhipaksa-dharma) as different aspects of the Path taught by the Buddha leading to Enlightenment.  The bodhipaksa-dharma are found in the Bali Canon. (8) There are three ways of attaining Enlightenment, according to the individual: (8a) As a disciple (sraavaka), as a Pratyeka-Buddha which is a lone or rogue Buddha and finally as a Samyak-sam-Buddha or one who has become enlightened through his own efforts and insight. As a disclaimer the throw in the last point (9) They admit differences with regard to the life of monks, Buddhist beliefs and practices, rites and ceremonies, customs and habits. These external forms and expressions should not be confused with the essential teachings of the Buddha.

Beliefs about God:  As stated above in description # (3) They do not believe that this world is created and ruled by a God.

Beliefs about humanity:  Don’t believe humans need a personal savior, no need for personal prayer.

Beliefs about the supernatural (Angels, Messages from God):  Buddhism shares few concepts with Christianity. No God, at least not as a Christian would understand.

Beliefs about the afterlife:  They do not appear to believe in eternal life in a heaven or hell after death. They do believe in reincarnation. There are many cycles of rebirth, living and death. After many cycles as a person learns to release the finite self and attachments to things like desire (attain enlightenment like Buddha) they can escape the wheel of suffering (samsara) and attain nirvana.

"Basic Points of Buddhism - ReligionFacts." Religion, World Religions, Comparative Religion - Just the facts on the world's religions.. Blue Host, 4 June 2003. Web. 28 May 2012. <http://www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/beliefs/basic_points.htm>.

Bhikkhu, Buddhadasa. "Buddhism." Multidisciplinary View of the Religious, Spiritual and Esoteric Phenomena. MetaReligion, 6 Nov. 2011. Web. 28 May 2012. <http://meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Buddhism/budism.htm>.

Smith, Huston. The World's Religions. 50th anniversary ed. New York: HarperOne, 2009. Print.Top of Form