Showing posts with label Original Monotheism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Original Monotheism. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Treatment of Religions (Pt. 5 - final post)

In comparison the writers, both of Christian backgrounds, offered their specific flavor to interpretations of other world religions. Corduan’s, “So you meet a…” sections at the end of every chapter were of great value and often times taught much more than one can experience on one’s own. Additionally Corduan’s premise of Original Monotheism, again, helps to bolster the whole book and therein provides the reader a more substantial understanding of the historical nature and progression of all religion while still providing the facts of specific religions. Dickson’s chapter, “What’s Wrong With Jesus” furnishes the reader information that they would not normally consider especially if they were of a Christian upbringing or background. Herein lies the power of Dickson’s book, attempting to show each of the five religions regarded in their own specific light and therefore letting the reader get to know the unadulterated state of a religion as best as a Christian writer can do given his preconceptions.

            If asked to recommend one of these two books as a resource of another believer to learn about other religions, Corduan’s work would best suit the believer. While it offers many more religions to learn about this is not the primary case for choosing this book (but it does not hurt). The main reason Corduan’s book is more helpful than Dickson’s is completely based on the Original Monotheism motif, which runs the course of the book. In so doing it gives the read a deeper and richer understanding of the historical sense as well as equips them for the, now seemingly, inevitable conversation they will have with an Atheist about their faith.

            What remains after this? That Christ is the Savior of his Church and the Church is the herald of that glorious news. As Christians it is part of their purpose to know, to the best of their abilities, how to speak the gospel into other people’s lives. Therefore Christians are the bearer of wonderful news with cunning minds, able to see the myths of other belief systems (and unbelief systems) for what they are and, by the grace of God for the glory of God, proclaim,

“O come, Thou Rod of Jesse, free Thine own from Satan's tyranny; from depths of Hell Thy people save, and give them victory o'er the grave… O come, Thou Day-Spring, come and cheer; our spirits by Thine advent here; Disperse the gloomy clouds of night, and death's dark shadows put to flight. Rejoice! Rejoice! Emmanuel shall come to thee, O Israel.”[1]


[1] Emanuel Veni. translated by John M Neale. O Come, O Come Emmanuel. Mediaevel Hymns, 1851

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

Friday, January 17, 2014

Treatment of Religion (Pt. 3)


The former part of contrasting and comparing the two assigned books of Winfried Corduan’s Neighboring Faiths A Christian Introduction to World Religions and John Dickson’s A Spectators’ Guide to World Religions An Introduction to the Big Five and their treatments of religions is to be accomplished in two main ways. First, that of the how a Christian in a Post-Christian society might be able to best use these resources and the information they contain; and second the Christian approach of both books in presenting other world religions.

The Post-Christian world is a steadily increasing mindset in America. A recent study by the Barna Group shows some ninety-six cities are listed as having higher than 10% post-Christian tendencies with the highest being 63% Post-Christian having been rated on a scale of fifteen factors of unbelief (from atheism to lack of local church attendance) . Therefore it is an ever-growing necessity to learn how to be an effective disciple of Christ in a land that is becoming increasingly ignorant and intolerant to the views of Christianity. Part of doing this is aiming at understanding the arguments, which stand as fundamental to the atheistic mindset. 

Corduan explains well the mindset, which demands our understanding, “The Evolutionary Approach,” which, “many scholars assume… rests on two assumptions. The first… is a general commitment to an evolutionary view of life and culture… The second assumption has to do with the anthropological method.” That culture and subsequently religion has moved from, “mana and magic,” to, “animism, polytheism, henotheism, and finally monotheism,” begging the question that atheism is the next move in mankind’s religious and cultural evolution.

Within this same chapter Corduan explains the merits of Original Monotheism over and above the Evolutionary Approach. In it’s most basic form, “Original monotheism locates the beginnings of religion in God.”  The first form of religion would looks something like: a God of personhood referred to in masculine terms; living in heaven; great in power and knowledge; creator; author of the standards for good and evil; causing mankind’s purpose as his creatures to be obedience to his laws; an alienation of mankind because of their disobedience; and the provider of a way of overcoming said alienation.  This is the idea of Original Monotheism Corduan sets forth at the beginning of his book. 

[1] Barna Group. The Most Post-Christian Cities. http://cities.barna.org/the-most-post-christian-cities-in-america/.
[2] Winfried Corduan. Neighboring Faiths A Christian Introduction to World Religions. P 24-32. InterVarsity Press IL, 1998.
[3] Ibid
[4] Ibid