Toward An Orthodox Biblical Perennialism
One
of the common objections to the exclusive claims of the Christian
Faith is that truth exists in all the world's religions, therefore no
single religion can claim to possess all truth. The proponent of this
essentially Relativist point of view is rarely engaged in any serious
pursuit of spiritual truth themselves, having absolved themselves
from the responsibility that truth claims bring by appealing to a
commonality in religion. In response to this Relativist claim, and by
way of removing this excuse to avoid the responsibility to carefully
consider and respond to the claims of the gospel, I will endeavor to
explore the question of commonality of truth, and of the veracity of
the Absolute nature of Christian truth claims. In addressing the
existence of elements of truth found in non-Christian religion, the
serious theologian will be led to admit to a certain perennial wisdom
found therein. Perennialism, also known as Philosophia Perennis,
is the position that the world's religious traditions all share a
common origin at some time in human history, and thus elements of
what was originally a shared religion have been preserved in the
various orthodox religions, each being an equally valid means of
salvation. Even those religions that emerged rather late in human
history possess one or more of these elements by default, borrowing
from established orthodox religious traditions. There are various
philosophical approaches that branch off from this rather basic
statement of Perennialism, and this author does not subscribe to any
of them. However, it is helpful to briefly look at these schools of
thought, as they have influenced those who make the claims of
commonality as excuse to avoid responding to the gospel, whether they
are aware of their influence or not. We will look at each to
establish our point. First is the Traditionalist School.
Proponents of this school of thought define the perennial wisdom
as “absolute Truth and infinite Presence.”1
Absolute Truth is considered to be found in the common elements of
all orthodox religions, including Christianity, Judaism, Islam,
Buddhism, and Hinduism. While this school rejects outright
syncretism, it does accept the equal validity of each of these
religious expressions, and considers each to be a reliable vehicle
for the salvation of Man, allowing for each to define that salvation
differently. It only states that one should not borrow, or pick and
choose from each, but commit fully to one. Universalism,
too, is a school of Perrenialism, containing within itself
Transcendentalism, and finds its roots in the work of Johann
Gottfried Herder2and
Friedrich Schleiermacher.3
Transcendentalists emphasized experience and inner states above what
they viewed as mere blind faith or cold scholarship. Experience leads
to knowledge for the Universalist, which places them squarely in the
historic lineage of the ancient Gnostic heresy. The Unitarian
Universalist Church grew out of this particular school.
The
New Age Movement is by far the most well known
manifestation of Perennialism today. Heavily influenced by
Transcendentalism and Theosophy4,
the New Age Movement developed in the 20th century, fueled
mainly be disenchanted former counter-cultural youth of the 1960s,
and taking much of its philosophy from Eastern religious expressions,
paganism, and pantheism, with a strong dose of Jungian psychology,
quantum physics, consciousness research, and Leftist social activism.
It is the very essence of syncretism, recognizing no one religion as
expressly orthodox, while encouraging adherents to borrow freely from
traditions in creating a personal religion or mythos. In essence,
this particular expression of Perennialism is wholly Relativist and
supportive of the fallacious “my truth-your truth” approach to
epistemology. These schools do not at all represent what I have
termed “Biblical Perennialism”. Allow me to define what I mean.
Biblical Perennialism
My
definition is similar, but makes a very clear distinction between
elements of truth, and the fullness of truth itself. It
also makes a distinction between shared principles and equivalency. Biblical Perennialism is the recognition that elements
of divine truth exist in all religions, and do indeed share a common
origin, but that the fullness of Truth exists
only in the Christian faith. Elements of truth are simply pieces of
divine revelation or of the history of God's intervention in human
history preserved in various forms in non-Christian religions, in a
corrupt, incomplete, incoherent, or otherwise unclear form. An
example would be the biblical history of the Flood, which is found in
distorted form in many of the world's religions, including the Epic
of Gilgamesh. Tablet XI of the Babylonian Flood story tells of five
gods (Anu, Enlil, Ninurta, Ennugi, and Ea) who decided to flood the
earth, swearing to keep it a secret. Ea decides instead to warn a man
named Utnapishtim to build a boat. He does so, taking all the animals
he has, as well as his family, craftsmen, and gold. After the waters
subside, he lands on Mt. Nimush.5
The distortion is obvious to the student of
Sacred Scripture. The very basic framework of the Flood of Noah is
present, but in a much distorted form. Such elements of truth are not
limited to sacred history, but also to theological concepts,
including the Triune deity, monotheism, efficacious blood sacrifice,
divinely appointed teachers, divinely given laws, etc. The
mere presence of these elements of truth in no way places
Christianity on the same level as these other religions, as
commonalities do not equate with sameness. For example, Islam
is a monotheistic religion, yet the character and nature of Allah is
strikingly different from that of the God of Sacred Scripture. While
Muslims are correct in asserting that God has the right to take any
life, as He is the author of all life, He did so in biblical history
only as a matter of justice, and does not operate this way in the New
Covenant. As John Piper writes:
“The
difference now is that, with the coming of Jesus Christ, God does not
relate to people like that anymore. Back then the people of God were
a theocratic, ethnic, and political entity. Today they are not.”6
Allah
is a monadic oneness. Daniel Janosik7writes:
“...his
attributes extend from his powerful will which, because it provides
no basis for relationship, often promotes capriciousness. Also, since
his power is more important than his other attributes, there is an
unequal emphasis on power over his other attributes.”8
Yahweh,
on the other hand, is personal, and seeks relationships. Yahweh is
Triune, revealed as three Persons, of one power, eternity, and
substance. Yahweh provided a savior for humanity, while Allah
provides nothing by way of salvation except submission to his will,
and even then there is no guarantee. These points from just one of
the world's religions demonstrate that commonality in elements of
truth, does not equal sameness nor equivalency. Christian
Perennialism recognizes the reality of the existence of only one,
absolute, objective truth. There can not be many truths. When we
examine world religion, despite the many shared elements of truth,
each of these religions contradicts the other, and quite
significantly. The Law of Non-Contradiction is a guiding principle of
Christian Perennialism, as it preserves the integrity of truth,
rather than eroding its integrity by placing it on the same level as
error. The Law of Non-Contradiction simply states that two opposing
statements can not both be true; either one is false and the other
correct, or both are false. A simple example would be the afterlife.
Hinduism generally teaches that after the soul leaves the body it is
either absorbed in the Brahman effulgence, or has a continuing
existence in a place called Vaikuntha, or is reincarnated in any one
of the forms of life on our planet. Christianity, on the other hand,
teaches that to be absent from the body is to be present with the
Lord. (2 Corinthians 5:6-8) Sacred Scripture also teaches only two
eternal destinies for Man; either heaven or hell. (2 Corinthians 5:8;
Phil. 1:21,23; Luke 16:19-26; 1 Thess. 4:15-17; Rev. 6:4-6; 20:12-15)
These are clearly two very opposing views of the afterlife. Either
Hinduism is correct in its assertions, or Christianity in its
assertions. There is no way to reconcile these without damaging the
integrity of either. Another example is the Person of Jesus Christ.
Islam teaches that Jesus is a mere human prophet, who did not truly
die on the cross. The Quran states:
“And
they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but another was made
to resemble him to them.”-Quran 4:157
Christianity
asserts that Christ is God, the 2nd Person of the Trinity,
who truly suffered on the cross and died for the salvation of all
men. (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2; 1 Cor. 15:3) Again we have two very
opposing statements that are not reconcilable in any sense. One of
them must be true, or both are lies. Christian Perennialism does
something the Syncretist schools do not. That is, it recognizes that
since the common elements of truth found in the various world
religions share a common origin, this strongly indicates that the
spiritual errors contained therein also share a common origin. When
we examine closely the similarities in these shared spiritual lies,
we find remarkable consistency that could not exist simply as a
matter of chance. For example, emphasis on ancestor worship, worship
of nature, a pantheon of gods who descend to mountains to initiate
contact with Man, half human, half divine beings sired by these same
gods, idol worship, the use of mind altering substances to induce
trance states, and many others.
Common
Origins
It
is important then to identify the common origin of both the elements
of truth, and the spiritual deceptions, as both are of vast
importance on the soteriological level. This means we have to have a
reliable starting point- a reliable history. For the Christian
Perennialist this starting point is the canon of Sacred Scripture,
both the Old and New Testaments.
The
Old Testament gives us a very concise and clear history of the
beginnings of Man, and of the corruption of Man's original state. In
this beginning point Adam apparently had daily interaction directly
with God, as Genesis 3:8 tells us that God walked in the garden. This
indicates a level of intimacy between the first man and his Creator.
This intimacy must have included some elements of what we understand
as spiritual instruction, since after the fall we do see elements of
formal religion, such as that recorded in Genesis 4:3-4. It can be
reasonably surmised that Abel know to offer sacrifice to God because
he had been taught to do so. Abel had a concept of not only
sacrifice, but what was an acceptable sacrifice, and what its purpose
was. (Heb.11:4). On the other hand, Cain's sacrifice was not
acceptable, as it violated the religious conditions and principles
established for sacrifice. From this we can deduce that there were
principles of religion passed on from Adam to Cain, Abel, and Seth,
and from their descendants (with the exception of Abel), down to
Enoch. Enoch was Seth's great-great-grandson. Enoch, in addition to
having received religious instruction from his father Jared, is said
by Sacred Scripture to have “walked with God”. (Gen.5:21)
Interestingly, Enoch is the first person since Adam Sacred Scripture
tells us had such an intimate relationship with God. In the New
Testament epistle of Jude, Enoch is specifically said to have
prophesied and not to have tasted death. (Jude 1:14-15; Heb.11:5) In
other words, Enoch was a highly esteemed prophet. Undoubtedly Enoch's
deeply meaningful relationship with God came with certain revelations
regarding the character and nature of God and His desire for His
people, which Enoch would have passed on to his son Methuselah, who
in turn would have passed it on to Lamech (Gen. 5:12-25), the father
of Noah. From Noah these principles would have been passed on to his
sons Ham, Shem, Japheth, and Yam, who then repopulated the earth
after the Flood. Thus we have a direct and unbroken line of religious
truth through which these principles could be spread throughout the
then known world accounting for commonalities. The common origin of
error can likewise be traced back to the beginning of human history.
Accepting as history the account of the Garden of Eden, and of the
serpent deceiving Eve (Gen. 3:13; 2 Cor. 11:3), and Adam's subsequent
willful disregard for God's instruction (Gen. 3:6-7), we find the
seeds of all future spiritual deception. In fact, Christ Himself
refers to the Adversary as “the father of lies”. (John 8:44)
Sacred Scripture explains how the Adversary puts on masks in order to
deceive man (2 Cor. 11:14), that he is a “deceiver” (Rev.12:9),
and that the Adversary is “wicked”. (2 Cor. 6:15) Because the
origin of lies is a spiritual being, those lies can be renewed
without a line of human agency, but by direct interaction with fallen
and sinful man.
The
Fullness of Truth
Biblical Perennialism recognizes the necessity of a restoration of all truth
in order for man to properly engage in a relationship with his
Creator, and render Him due worship. While man can pass on elements
of truth, as we have demonstrated, he cannot restore the fullness of
truth, as he is susceptible to the corruption that comes from
inherited depravity. Anything man attempts to establish on his own,
without specific divine assistance, is doomed to corruption,
confusion, and misunderstanding. Thus the one to restore the fullness
of truth must be the Origin of all truth. As the first man, Adam,
fell, introducing spiritual deception and sin into the human
equation, and sin holds infinite punishment, again, only an infinite
being could make an efficacious sacrifice for such punishment,
restoring man to a right relationship with God. Christian theology
informs us that Jesus is both God and Man, and in this incarnation of
the Origin of all truth, that very truth is restored in its fullness.
Christ Himself tells us, “I am the way, the truth, and the
life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:16)
It is important to note that Jesus did not simply say He is “a
truth”, or “one of a number of truths”, but the
truth. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines
truth as “that which is in accordance with reality”. In this one
statement recorded in the Gospel of John Jesus is claiming to be the
reality of spiritual life; the Absolute Reality. He does not leave
room for any religion simply because it might have elements of truth
contained within it. In Christ is the restoration of all truth to
man. He is further described as “the Word”. (John 1:1) Sacred
Scripture records Jesus as having prayed, “Sanctify them by the
truth; Your word is truth.” (John 17:17) Our expected
response to this fullness of truth is also explained in Sacred
Scripture. We are to walk in truth (3 John 1:3), love and believe the
truth (2 Thess. 2:10-12), and speak the truth (Ephesians 4:32).
The
Relativist claim that truth exists in all the world's religions, and
that these truths share a common origin is one the Christian
Perennialist can accept. Where we must part ways with the Relativist
is in their erroneous conclusion that, as this is the case, no single
religion can claim to possess all truth and that all religions are
equally valid. By examining logically the contradictions in these
religions, applying the Law of Non-Contradiction, and through
deductive reasoning finding a common origin for both elements of
truth and falsehood, the Christian Perennialist can remove this
excuse to avoid the responsibility of carefully considering and
responding to the claims of the gospel.
1Lings,
Martin, Minnaar, Clinton (2007), The
Underlying Religion: An Introduction to the Perennial Philosophy,
World
Wisdom
2
(1744-1803)
German philosopher, theologian, poet, and literary critic
influential in the Enlightenment.
3
(1768-1834)
German theologian, philosopher, and biblical scholar best known for
his work in trying to reconcile the Enlightenment with Protestant
Christianity.
4
An
occult organization founded in the Nineteenth
century
by Helena P. Blavatsky.
5
Kovacs, The
Epic of Gilgamesh,
Tablet XI, pp. 95-103
6
John Piper, How
Are Yahweh and Allah Different?,
Article,
December 8, 2008, Desiring God
7
Adjunct Faculty (Apologetics), Columbia International University
8
Daniel Janosik, Is Allah of Islam the Same as Yahweh of
Christianity?
Thank you for sharing this excerpt. Thought-provoking indeed! Some questions and comments:
ReplyDelete1) On Perennialism:
“… elements of what was originally a shared religion have been preserved in the various orthodox religions, each being an equally valid means of salvation.”
In your view is the “common origin” God Himself or a specific man-made religion lost to antiquity?
“… since the common elements of truth… share a common origin, this strongly indicates that the spiritual errors contained therein also share a common origin.”
By “spiritual errors” are you referring to the distortion of sin? And is this “common origin” human nature itself, the outside influence of the anthropomorphized negative being known as Satan, or something else like “collective karma”?
After decades of seeking an answer to this intractable question I’ve drawn some (rather unorthodox) conclusions. No tangible proof, just logical deductions based on multi-disciplinary research and personal experience. And faith!
2) On the nature of the afterlife:
“… two very opposing views of the afterlife. Either Hinduism is correct in its assertions, or Christianity in its assertions. There is no way to reconcile these without damaging the integrity of either.”
Thousands of years separate the origins of Hinduism and Christianity.
When cultural context is considered, varying interpretations of the afterlife naturally reflect the technological perspective of a people and their collective experience.
What if these are not just opposing views but rather a reflection of humanity’s spiritual evolution over the ages?
3) On the fullness of truth:
“… Jesus is both God and Man... ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’… In Christ is the restoration of all truth to man.”
This is a provable metaphysical fact, but one that must be experienced on a personal, individual basis and not blithely accepted as external dogma.
Lord Jesus Christ, the Son, is the epitome of God the Father’s creative expression. His execution opened the gateway to direct union with the Divine, the very essence of Salvation. The born-again/self-realization phenomena are testaments to a very real, permanent shift in spiritual consciousness.
4) On Relativism:
“… no single religion can claim to possess all truth and that all religions are [not] equally valid.”
At some point in each culture’s past their dominant religion was indeed valid, reinforced by continuity of enculturation. After all it is human nature to adhere to collective conditionings and reject that which does not fit the comfortable, commonly accepted narrative.
Case in point: Christianity is but apocalyptic Judaism wherein God’s covenant to His people was fulfilled. And yet, those who self-identify as Jewish are still awaiting the Messiah. Does this mean Judaism is invalid, oppositional to Christianity?
Of course not! It is foundational to Christianity. One could say that contemporary Jews have simply missed the boat (for now).
In this sense it is more constructive to understand the universality of man’s desire to be in relationship with God than to judge particular religious expressions outside of cultural and historical context.
It is not “either/or” (which separates and confines) but “this and then that” which expands and evolves until finally God’s Kingdom on Earth arrives for all.
1) In your view is the “common origin” God Himself or a specific man-made religion lost to antiquity?
DeleteResponse: The common origin of Truth would of necessity be God, since Man could know nothing of God's will if it weren't divinely revealed or made available to our reasoning faculties. Outside such divine revelation, at best Man would be capable of understanding shadows of God's nature and character gleaned from the created world.
2.) By “spiritual errors” are you referring to the distortion of sin? And is this “common origin” human nature itself, the outside influence of the anthropomorphized negative being known as Satan, or something else like “collective karma”?
Response: No. The concepts you've described are, in my opinion, purely Naturalistic. My position is this: if we possess spiritual Truth, it is only as a result of divine revelation. This means direct contact between Man and God, which in turn means interaction between the realm of the spiritual and the realm of the material. The same is true of spiritual error. In this sense, the common origin is interaction with a spiritual source, either for Truth (God), or for error (rebellious spirit beings). Sacred Scripture is filled with examples of this interaction, both with God and the holy angels, and with at least two classes of unholy beings- rebellious angels and Nephilim. While I can agree on a certain level that these beings have frequently been anthropomorphized, they are very real beings possessed of will and intellect. As I'm firm in my belief in Sacred Scripture, I reject any notion of "karma", be it personal or collective.
2) On the nature of the afterlife: What if these are not just opposing views but rather a reflection of humanity’s spiritual evolution over the ages?
DeleteResponse: You'll note I've written several articles here addressing Cultural Relativism, though not from the perspective you mention here. Suffice it to say, I don't accept the propositions arising from a Relativist viewpoint, such as the one you mention. When it comes to divine revelation, the source is absolute and objective, regardless of the culture it is given to. I also reject the idea of “spiritual evolution”, as it relies on a spiritual Relativism that is incompatible with divine revelation as objective, timeless truth. As a result I stand by my statement that the Hindu and Christian views of the afterlife are very much at odds. This isn't to say I reject the idea of progressive revelation, since the history of God's interaction with Man, as explained in the O.T. and N.T. clearly demonstrate a progressive revelation, this is not the same as "spiritual evolution", which places the source of spiritual Truth wholly in Man's experience and not divine revelation.
3) On the fullness of truth: This is a provable metaphysical fact, but one that must be experienced on a personal, individual basis and not blithely accepted as external dogma. Lord Jesus Christ, the Son, is the epitome of God the Father’s creative expression. His execution opened the gateway to direct union with the Divine, the very essence of Salvation. The born-again/self-realization phenomena are testaments to a very real, permanent shift in spiritual consciousness.
Response: The beginning point of an acceptance of the fact of Christ's bringing the fullness of truth is both of these. It can start as intellectual assent (the objective) and then move to experience (the subjective), or one can experience this reality first, and be moved to intellectual assent as a result.
4) Case in point: Christianity is but apocalyptic Judaism wherein God’s covenant to His people was fulfilled. And yet, those who self-identify as Jewish are still awaiting the Messiah. Does this mean Judaism is invalid, oppositional to Christianity? Of course not! It is foundational to Christianity. One could say that contemporary Jews have simply missed the boat (for now).
Response: I disagree. First, Christianity isn't simply apocalyptic Judaism. The Essenes were apocalyptic Judaism. Christianity is the fullness of God's revelation to Man as it proceeds from God incarnate, who is Himself the revelation of God's character, will, and desire for Man. Judaism doesn't possess such revelation, and was simply a “shadow” of what was eventually to come in Christianity. As such Judaism isn't capable of providing a relationship with God any longer, but merely a continual series of fulfilled prophecies pointing to the Messiah who has already come. So as a vehicle of salvation, Judaism is indeed invalid. Christ said, “no one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) This doesn't leave room for any other way, not even the Old Covenant, which is superseded by the New. Opposition does indeed exist between the two faiths on a number of significant issues. Some examples are: the role of the Law, salvation, the afterlife, the Messiah, good and evil, access to God, the nature of God, ritual efficacy, and the superseding of the Old Covenant by the New, etc.
Sacred Scripture clearly leaves us with an “either/or” proposition. Our response must be thoughtful and careful not to wander into the mine field of Relativism.