Monday, January 20, 2014

Treatment of Religions (Pt. 4)

These two ideas, Evolutionary Approach and Original Monotheism are at odds and will be continually at odds in a Post-Christian society. For a fundamental assumption on the part of atheism is that of the evolutionary model for not simply biological creatures but also for culture. In so assuming the Atheist logically follows the outcome of what should happen in an ideal circumstance, namely that of progressively tighter organization, belief systems and reason. This would continue until there is no more need for religious institutions and doctrine, as reason would dictate. But against this idea stands Original Monotheism, which assumes that religion began as monotheistic and spiraled out of control in to polytheism, henotheism, animism and fetishism while a segment of that original monotheism was preserved by that original deity (the Christian God).[1]

The evidence for Monotheism is, it would seem, weightier than that of the Evolutionary Approach. For the Evolutionary Approach assumes that all culture and society are gradually evolving into more and more unity, but in many ways society and culture do not seem to be evolving in that direction at all. Therefore Original Monotheism’s approach of an almost devolution of religion and society makes a good case.

It is this portion of Corduan’s book and the way in which he interprets all religions discussed therein through the lens of Original Monotheism that makes his book unique and, presumably, more helpful to those aiming at living in, or already living in, an ever increasing Post-Christian culture. But John Dickson provides helpful insight into what is now being faced in American Culture at large, namely the issue of pluralism.

While quoting Chris McGillion from The Sydney Morning Herald Dickson writes of what sophisticated pluralism is,

“The very diversity of religions… speaks to a truth – that all people in every time and place have felt the need to respond to the infinite… The various religious traditions are the ‘how’ of that response… All religions are truthful in far more important ways than some of their propositions are false.”[2]

In reading this description of pluralism C.S. Lewis comes to mind, “We cannot tell it because it is a desire for something that has never actually appeared in our experience. We cannot hide it because our experience is constantly suggesting it, and we betray ourselves like lovers at the mention of a name…”[3] that there is indeed something more mankind is aiming for, reaching for, or grasping at attaining because within all humanity is a hardwired desire for, as McGillion would say it, “the infinite.” But Lewis does not leave off with the same conclusion McGillion’s does, nor does he assume, as so many pluralists do, all religions are the same but rather he continues with,

“These things – the beauty, the memory, of our own past – are good images of what we really desire; but if they are mistaken for the thing itself, they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshippers. For they are not the thing itself; they are only the scent of a flower we have not found, the echo of tune we have not heard, news from a country we have never yet visited.”[4]

So it is that pluralism, while seeking to describe the paths of religions almost grasp hold of Blaise Pascal’s God shaped vacuum inside of us all.

            Thus in contrast Corduan’s book helps those of a Post-Christian culture become more aware of the arguments of those around them while Dickson would be of more help to one in a Post-Modern culture. Corduan writes of more about the basis behind religions and, from this position, discusses the belief systems of various religious systems. Dickson attempts to present a fair treatment of each religion based on their fundamental doctrinal beliefs.


[1] However Original Monotheism assumes that God is real and God is at the center of all. This is the idea that Atheists will indeed argue against. But the question at hand is not to argue for or against the existence of God but rather to pose the question, “If Original Monotheism is true, then…”
[2] John Dickson in A Spectators’ Guide to World Religions An Introduction to the Big Five. P 218 Lion Hudson, 2008
[3] C.S. Lewis. The Weight of Glory p 30-31. Harper Collins, NY 1949
[4] Ibid

No comments:

Post a Comment