Universalism and Religious Pluralism: Their Appeal and Problem

I must confess that I find universalism (“everyone gets saved”) appealing. My Jewish parents passed away without giving any indication that they believed in Jesus. I want to see them again and to be with them forever. While I can always hope, the Bible gives me no explicit basis for such a hope.

However, our Lord does keep certain things hidden (Deut. 29:29; 1 Cor. 13:12; 1 John 3:2). I therefore hope that He will be gracious in ways that He hasn’t explicitly revealed through Scripture. In fact, I tend to think that the stillborn and perhaps also some of the mentally challenged will receive His mercy (Luke 12:47-48). However, He hasn’t given me the liberty to preach or teach these uncertainties as if they were verities. Instead, where He is clear about the nature of His mercy, hope, and inheritance, I too must be clear and unequivocal. However, where His revelation remains shrouded in mystery and uncertainly, I too must reflect the same in my speech. This is part of what it means to be faithful.

We do not have the liberty to tamper with His revelations or go beyond them. He explained this to the Prophets of Israel:

• When someone tells you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living? Consult God’s instruction and the testimony of warning. If anyone does not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn. (Isaiah 8:19-20)

In so many ways, Scripture teaches that if we abide in His Word, we will thrive (Psalm 1; Josh. 1:8; John 15:7-14); if we refuse, we will suffer (Deut. 28-29). He warned Isaiah that to go beyond His Word demonstrated willful ignorance and incurred grave consequences:

• “Do not listen to what the prophets are prophesying to you; they fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. They keep saying to those who despise me, ‘The Lord says: You will have peace.’ And to all who follow the stubbornness of their hearts they say, ‘No harm will come to you.’ But which of them has stood in the council of the Lord to see or to hear his word? Who has listened and heard his word? See, the storm of the Lord will burst out in wrath, a whirlwind swirling down on the heads of the wicked. The anger of the Lord will not turn back… I did not send these prophets, yet they have run with their message; I did not speak to them, yet they have prophesied.” (Jer. 23:16-21)

The false prophets inevitably prophesied a popular message – one that could be successfully marketed. However, they confidently spoke, even though God “did not send these prophets.” They therefore stood guilty before God, along with those who, in “the stubbornness of their hearts,” embraced their comforting message.

I think that we need to take a course in astronomy or simply meditate on what our eyes reveal. Time and space are unfathomable. The galaxies are uncountable, along with the stars in each galaxy! In comparison, our minds are small. And yet we are confident that we can get our minds around the spiritual mysteries of God. We are so confident that we have little hesitation to invent things beyond what Scripture has revealed. It is like an astronomer throwing away his telescope, saying, “I don’t need this. I can learn more about the heavens by just sitting in my armchair.”

This is arrogant presumption and not truth. However, we require truth more than self-absorbed comfort, more than the self-satisfaction we might find by conjuring up in our own minds the nature of the universe. Therefore, God continued to Jeremiah:

• “But if they [the false prophets] had stood in my council [My Word], they would have proclaimed my words to my people and would have turned them from their evil ways and from their evil deeds.” (Jer. 23:22)

Surgery can be painful, but it is sometimes necessary. The truth can also be painful, but it can bring healing and reconciliation, while the comforting message can enable us to repress the real problem – the turning away from God.

If we play fast-and-loose with what God has revealed, we stand guilty before Him. However, the Apostle Paul claimed that he had been faithful to God’s Word and, therefore, bore no guilt:

• “Therefore, I declare to you today that I am innocent of the blood of any of you. For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God.” (Acts 20:26-27)

Even the unpopular teachings of Scripture! Paul also warned the church to not go beyond what the Bible states:

• Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other. For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not? (1 Cor. 4:6-7)

The Corinthian church had gone far “beyond what is written!” Therefore, they committed a costly error by boasting of the spiritual superiority of their particular faction. Consequently, Paul had to remind them that, if they had any good thing, they had to regard it as a gift from God and not a reason for boasting.

I’d rather preach a popular and all-inclusive message – “Everyone is saved” or “Everyone has her own path” (Religious Pluralism). I would then be invited on all of the talk-shows and to the exclusive parties.

Instead, we are called to walk a costly road with a toll-booth at every intersection. Jesus had to pay the price and warned that we also will:

• “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. Remember what I told you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also.” (John 15:18-20)

If, instead, you find that the world is readily accepting your message, it is very possible that you are on the wrong road.

God doesn’t do Things My Way; Therefore, He must be Wrong!

A Letter to an Atheist:

I can appreciate your skepticism about God and His ways. In fact, if I were God, I certainly would have done things differently. However, over the years, I've had many occasions to reconsider assuming this weighty vocation.

For instance, we tend to think we know what’s ultimately good for us. Many think that hitting-the-Lotto equates with happiness. However, surveys have shown that, more often than not, it destroys the lives it touches.

I can also think of many examples from my own life. For decades, I had experienced the horror of severe depression and panic attacks. However, I now thankfully look back on what I endured and recognize that I needed these trainers.

Also, this lesson pertains to how many of us have regarded God’s way of salvation. You too write:

• Reward lies solely with repentance and not at all whether you led a good and decent life. I just cannot accept this idea on faith.

Nevertheless, I think that there is wisdom in this, which we can only perceive as we progress further down the road. What if none of us are really good? Instead, we merely like to think that we are good, and this causes us to arrogantly look down on others and live in denial about our true nature. Would you disagree with me that if life enabled us to continue in our arrogance and denial that these would ruin any hope of real relationships?

You don’t have to be a Christian to recognize that denial, self-delusion, and self-righteousness are the real status of humanity. A multitude of experiments and surveys have revealed this very thing, although there have been some psychologists who have tried to justify our delusions by claiming that we need them in order to be able to function proactively.

Instead, if self-delusion is our reality, then counseling should be more confrontational than indulgent. It should attempt to break through the denial. However, such psychotherapists wouldn’t last long in their practice. They would loose all of their clients, who would seek other psychotherapists - those who would make them feel better about themselves.

However, life – God’s life – will not allow us to escape with ease. Life is painful. While we can escape the confrontational therapist, we can’t escape life, and life has a way of contradicting our illusions.

I’ve come to understand that a relationship with God is like having a relationship with life and with others. If someone spreads around malicious stories about me, it will not matter how many nice things they might say to my face or even how many times they might shower me with gifts.

Instead, in order to repair the relationship, the problem must be addressed at its core. The offender would have to humble himself to confess and repent of his wrongdoing. (I would even insist that he also attempt to make reparations by openly confessing his lies about me.) Nothing can be more healing for a relationship! If the offender refuses to repent, then there is no hope for restoration.

The Pharisees had been good and righteous people, at least, that’s the way they had been perceived. They were zealous to perform the good deeds of the law, and everyone held them in high esteem. Even the Jewish people of today regard them as worthy of God. However, these same people were in denial about their true spiritual status (Luke 16:15). They were self-righteous (Matthew 23) and looked down on others (Luke 18:9). These were the very same people who hated the light of God (John 3:19-20) and sought to put to death the Source of that light.

A relationship with God requires that we address our problem at its root – our sins and rebellion against the truth. Anything else is superficial. Meaningful relationship must start with renewal of our attitudes and heart’s desires. If I found out that my wife loved me because I reminded her of her first flame, this would seriously undermine whatever we had enjoyed together.

There are many other areas – areas that you have mentioned – where it seems that God has taken a wrong path. We think of the problems of suffering, of hell, and of the exclusivity of Christ, among others. While for some, these represents knock-out punches, for those who know and love Him, these are no more than areas that give birth to questions, albeit uncomfortable ones.

In short, I have come to find the wisdom of God in areas where, previously, I could find little rationale. However, if He is truly the Creator, then we shouldn’t be surprised by our perplexity.

Christianity and Child Abuse

Living by myths and irrational beliefs usually gets us in trouble. We need an accurate road-map (or GPS) to get us where we want to go. If it’s inaccurate, we’ll end up in Timbuktu, costing us valuable resources.

The same principle applies to our beliefs. If they don’t accord with reality, they will lead us to make costly decisions. Decision-making requires accurate data. When we see clearly, we can drive our car through traffic without a fender-bender.

We should therefore expect that those who are most deluded will experience the most problems – physically, mentally, emotionally and relationally. Generally speaking, people who think that they literally are Julius Caesar don’t get far on the job or with their friends.

If Christians are following a set of myths, we should also expect that our lives will also show more wear-and-tear for it. However, this is not what we find. Instead, a multitude of surveys have shown that practicing Christians experience many and varied benefits. This also includes children of “religious parents”:

• Andrew Whitehouse, of the University of Western Australia, recently summarized a 2008 study that looked into “whether growing up in a religious household conveys advantages or disadvantages in the behavioral and emotional development of children.” Whitehouse wrote that it “turned out to be a bit of a landslide in favor of more religious parents. Children of religious parents were rated by both parents and teachers as having a greater self-control, better interpersonal skills, and less likely to have depression or impulsivity problems. (Salvo, Issue 22, 18)

Instead of discounting the ways of Christianity, investigators should be examining them more closely to determine what it is that accounts for these favorable outcomes.

These findings are contrary to the expectations of atheists, who call the Christian upbringing “child abuse” and even worse. Weep your eyes out Dawkins, Harris and Dennett!

Denial, Delusion or Depression

One young lady candidly informed me, “I’m a selfish bitch-on-wheels.” She wasn’t trying to flaunt her stuff or self-hood. Instead, she was humbly confessing that there were things about her she didn’t like – things she was trying to change.

I told her that I was very impressed with her candor. Most people are in denial and refuse to acknowledge their faults, even when they are so apparent to others. However, honest self-scrutiny can be very disheartening. I therefore asked her – I’ll call her “Marge” – how she was able to deal with the guilt and shame, seeing her faults as she did.

She shook her head, apparently acknowledging that there weren’t any easy answers. “Everyone has their faults. That’s what being a human is all about. I’ll just keep on challenging my faults.”

I couldn’t fault her response. It’s true that we are all beset by deep flaws, and some of their roots penetrate straight to the core of our soul. I also esteemed her willingness to continue the good fight against her flaws.

However, I began to wonder how she would feel about herself if, after some years, she had failed to curb her bitchiness and other negative traits that she’d surely encounter. Also, what happens to our sense of well-being or self-acceptance if they depend upon our performance – in this case, positive self-change? It seemed as if this could be a roadmap to despair. Our faults are so deep seated that our expectations for positive change might be unrealistic.

What if she remained a “bitch-on-wheels” despite her best efforts? And how would she deal with the ever-present sense of guilt and shame? The vast majority of people resort to denial to keep these unwanted feelings at a good distance. Consequently, The Book of Proverbs writes, “All a man's ways seem right to him” (21:2).

This is a truth that has repeatedly been empirically established. Psychologist Shelley Taylor writes,

• As we have seen, people are positively biased in their assessments of themselves and of their ability to control what goes on around them, as well as in their views of the future. The widespread existence of these biases and the ease with which they can be documented suggests that they are normal. (Positive Illusions)

Perhaps to some extent, we are all “normal.” We are all in denial to some extent – an expression of our persistent need to see ourselves in a positive way and to convince others of our worthiness. However, Marge is less in denial than most. What then will this mean as her life takes her into collision course with her highly-resistant-to-change traits?

Taylor argues that we only have two choices – delusion or depression. Although she repeatedly admits that “the mildly depressed appear to have more accurate views of themselves, the world and the future” (213), she believes that delusion is the better alternative:

• The research on depressive realism suggests that the goal of therapy might better be to help people develop cognitive illusions so that they can think more positively about themselves…employing the mildly inflated biases that normal people characteristically use. (220)

Are depression and delusion/denial the only alternatives? Not according to Jesus:

• "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:31-32)

How can truth set us free? Is it possible for us to live in the light of truth without despairing? Psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled, wrote 15 years later about his journey from Zen Buddhism to Christianity. He had repeatedly observed that his Christian clients would improve, no matter how serious their psychiatric condition. He concluded,

• The quickest way to change your attitude toward pain is to accept the fact that everything that happens to us has been designed for our spiritual growth…We cannot lose once we realize that everything that happens to us has been designed to teach us holiness…We are guaranteed winners!

Christ guarantees that we are winners, as the Apostle Paul wrote:

• God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Cor. 5:21)

This radical truth means that we no longer need be defined by our power, purse, popularity or our accomplishments. Since we have been brought into a saving relationship with Jesus, we are now defined by the Source of all truth, power and virtue. Consequently, no other source of definition is now necessary. Our Lord forgives us, and this relegates every other concern or opinion to a tertiary status. Consequently,

• If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all--how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? (Romans 8:31-32)

I had been married once before, when I didn’t have Christ. Whenever we fought, there was never any resolution. Denial builds a wall against reality and resolution. She was convinced that she was right, and I was convinced that I was right. What is not resolved is buried and merely resurfaces at the next disagreement.

Convinced that Christ accepts me, I can now accept myself, however unpleasant this may be. Yes, I still fight with my present wife, but now – by the mercy of God – we can face the truth about our misdeeds, kiss and make-up. We can forgive one another, seeing how much Christ has forgiven us.

I wonder which way Marge will turn – denial or depression. I pray that she opts for Jesus.

   

   

Ken Wilbur, Albert Einstein, and World-Centrism

What is ethical? - Compassion that stops at our own household or a compassion that embraces the entirety of nature? Albert Einstein associates a self-centered and myopic compassion with an “optical illusion of …consciousness,” ethical “delusion” and “prison”:

• A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated form the rest, a kind of optical illusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

Why should we widen “our circle of compassion?” Einstein insists that ethics restricted to “personal desires” is “delusion,” a failure to see reality as it truly is. Indeed, the concept of “delusion” suggests that there is a condition of “non-delusion,” a higher truth that trumps and transcends a narrow preoccupation with our needs and comforts. However, if this is the case, what is the basis of this higher moral reality, and how do we know that we are actually tapping into it? Perhaps instead, the highest truth is nothing more than the survival-of-the-fittest – me and my genes first! How can I be sure that this represents “delusion?”

New Age guru Ken Wilbur expresses Einstein’s ethics in terms of the stages of “moral development”:

• As we look at infants at birth, they have not yet been socialized into the culture’s ethics and conventions. This is called the pre-conventional stage. It is also called egocentric, in that the infant’s awareness is largely self absorbed. But as young children begin to learn their culture’s rules and norms, they grow into the conventional stage of morals. This stage is also called ethnocentric, in that it centers on the child’s particular group, tribe, clan, or nation, and it therefore tends to exclude care and concern for those not of one’s group. But at the next major stage of moral development, the post-conventional stage, the individual’s identity expands once again, this time to include a care and concern for all peoples, regardless of race, color, sex, or creed, which is why this stage is also called world-centric.

Even if Wilbur is correct about the stages, why should the final stage – world-centrism – represent an ethical improvement over the former stages? The later isn’t necessarily the best, no more than senility is an improvement over adolescence. Perhaps the first two stages might contribute more positively to the evolution of the human race? If there are no universal, immutable, and authoritative moral absolutes – fixed standards of judgment – who can say that self-fixation or the survival-of-the-fittest is morally wrong?

If world-centrism represents a positive step in “moral development,” is there a rationale for this judgment? Perhaps it’s better for our families to be centered upon their immediate needs? And perhaps our purported concerns about the world are simply the reflection of our own psychological need to demonstrate our moral superiority over those of the first two stages? I can’t help thinking of world-centric communism. While expressing flowery idealistic concerns about the world did more to decimate the world than had any other philosophy.

Usually, world-centrism is erroneously defended by pragmatic appeals to its possible benefits for the entire world. Appeals are made to protecting the environment and limiting warfare, starvation and disease worldwide.

However, this argumentation secretly assumes the very thing that it is trying to prove – that “warfare, starvation and disease” are evils, which need to be eradicated or at least reduced. The argumentation fails to answer what makes these things or anything “evil.” Consequently, pragmatic argumentation is deceptive. It rejects the need for transcendent moral absolutes, while it secretly appeals to them and their condemnation of certain “evils.”

There is no way that pragmatic considerations (science, for example) by themselves can coherently call for a moral response. As the skeptic and philosopher David Hume observed, we cannot logically go from what “is” (pragmatism and science) to what “ought to be” (morality). They are separated by an impassable God-created gulf.

Einstein insists that because of “delusion,” the self-centered are missing a vital piece in the puzzle. However, how does Einstein know that they are deluded? We can’t make such a judgment unless we are certain about a fixed moral reality, transcendent moral absolutes – truths that transcend my myopic needs - and an embrace of the Creator, Sustainer and Enforcer of these absolutes. Without this Creator, there can be no basis for transcendent moral absolutes – the very thing needed to declare “world-centrism” superior to “self-centrism.” Without this Creator and His moral absolutes, no one can tell me that their morality is any bit superior to my own. We are left with nothing more than molecules-in-motion.

Without this higher standard, there is no basis to judge one action as better than another. It would be like a math teacher grading math exams without answers that are absolutely correct. Trying to do so without this absolute standard would be disingenuous.

Some might try to appeal to our common moral intuitions as a basis to make such judgments. However, this just passes the buck to another insubstantial source. The question still remains:

• Why should I trust my moral intuitions as an authoritative basis to judge, especially in view of the fact that my feelings change and are largely a reflection of my culture and upbringing? What makes them any more authoritative than the intuitions of the murderer?

Indeed, most of us feel that we are our neighbor’s keeper, but if this feeling is merely a chemical-electrical cerebral reaction, why then heed it? Is there any connection between feeling and moral truth? Not if a superior Being hasn’t designed this glorious connection!

Consequently, I am world-centric because God – the unchanging, all-wise and loving Source of all truth - is world-centric. Jesus taught that we should regard everyone as our “neighbor” and treat them accordingly. This is where the buck stops –absolutely!

Do You Know what’s Good for You?

I don’t. Yesterday, I was having a nightmarish time with my Google blog. I feel like it’s almost family – like my right arm. So when it’s not doing what I want it to do, I’m frustrated – even worse, I threw a bit of a tantrum.

What else can you do when you feel so helpless? There was no one to turn to – to make things right. Every screen was corrupted, unusable, and an affront to all of my sacred intentions. I was certain that the situation represented no less than a significant setback to all of my hopes and dreams.

I should know better. After all, I’m a Bible teacher who, for years, has told everyone else how to live their lives.

Upon returning home, my wife found a broken specimen of my former spiritual glory. Fortunately, Anita has more patience with the computer – even with my own program – than I have. So she started pushing a lot of buttons and found that Google’s screens had all changed because Google had installed a major update.

After a couple of hours and a lot of button-pushing, I saw once again what a fool I had been. The program was actually improved!

We too are improved by the most unlikely circumstances – even the things that feel like curses. The Apostle Paul wrote a lot about this apparent irony:

• We also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us. (Romans 5:3-5)

The Bible prepares us for this uncomfortable reality in so many ways. The ultimate example of this was the suffering of Jesus. Isaiah tells us:

• Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he [Jesus] will see his [spiritual] offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand. After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied. (Isaiah 53:10-11)

“Satisfied?” How can anyone be satisfied with suffering? It’s not the suffering that should satisfy us but instead what is accomplished by the suffering. The verse continues:

• By his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:11)

Jesus endured because He knew what His suffering would accomplish, and this principle - looking to the ultimate goal of the suffering – also pertains to us:

• Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:2)

My Google-directed tantrum hardly qualifies as suffering. However, even in the midst of this minor frustration, the same principle pertains – setting our focus on the bigger picture of what God is accomplishing, even in our worse circumstances.

This requires a certain humility of thought – a recognition that we don’t always know what’s best for us, but He does. Nevertheless, we’re convinced that if we hit the lotto - our material needs now satisfied – we’d then be happy and better able to serve our Lord. I was therefore surprised to read that the lotto winners turned out to be loosers. It wrecked their lives. They thought that they knew what was best for them, but they didn’t. In fact, we don’t even know what to pray for:

• The Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. (Romans 8:26)

I’m still learning this lesson, however slowly, perhaps several tantrums away.