Evolution and Evangelical Christianity, Part 1

For the record, I am an evangelical Christian, and I affirm the Apostle’s Creed. I am a fundamentalist in the sense that I believe in the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith as handed down by the Apostles and attested to in the Bible. However, I often find that what the various denominations define as fundamental doctrines are not always so, but are additions to the fundamental doctrines. You will see shortly why it was necessary to say these things.

I am not a scientist, so I am not qualified to enter the conversation about evolution on that basis. What I seek to contribute here comes from the perspective of a student of religion and its history. The situation that the Church faces has happened before: there is a scientific theory that is a threat to the existing paradigm–which some see as a threat to the very foundations of Christianity itself–but it has the consensus of the overwhelming majority of scientists. I will say a brief word about Creation science momentarily. What I propose is that, from the standpoint of Church history, it is reasonable to assume that the Church will ultimately capitulate to that theory and absorb it into its theology.

As for Creation science, the vast majority of the world’s scientists have rejected its evidence on the grounds that it does not meet the rigorous standards of the methods of scientific investigation. One of the claims against scientists who accept evolution theory is that they are all part of a worldwide humanistic conspiracy. No doubt science has its politics like everything else, but I find the conspiracy theory to be highly unlikely.

In its history, the Church has reacted vehemently and even brutally against science. Because his discoveries about planetary motion supported the heliocentric theory of Copernicus, Galileo was told by the Church in 1616 to refrain from publically stating his views. Finally, in 1633, because Galileo continued to publish his findings, the Church Inquisition tried and convicted him for heresy, for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment. In spite of the Church’s battle against the heliocentric theory, the Church ultimately had to acknowledge it.

As I look into the future of the evangelical church, I see a church that will ultimately have to acquiesce to evolution theory. When this will happen, I do not know, certainly not in my lifetime. Those who have invested so much time and energy into fighting evolution will not capitulate. It will fall to succeeding generations to absorb evolution theory of some form into evangelical Christian theology. They will have to because the time will come when the denials have exhausted their credibility. It will be comparable to a church today claiming that a flat earth is part of their essential doctrine.

In absorbing evolution theory into Christian theology, the evangelical church will have to find a new way to interpret the Genesis creation account. I will propose a new interpretation later in this article, but I must first explain the mechanism by which the evangelical church will come to this revolutionary change.

It is virtually impossible for the evangelical church to change its view on evolution any time soon. None of the existing evangelical leaders will be able to change their view. Even if they could, it would only ruin their careers in the church. The change will happen generationally, and so slowly that the process will remain undetected for a long period of time. Individually, one by one, educated young people of succeeding generations will quietly acquiesce to the theory, but those who remain evangelical Christians will work out the theology for themselves. One day it will be realized that the change is an established fact and pastors will begin to say, “If there were evolution–which there is not–but if there were, God is still the Creator of the universe.” And so on. This is, of course, scandalous today. The future is always scandalous in terms of the past.

In Part 2 I will address the theological implications of evolution and move towards that seemingly impossible task: describing how evolutionary theory will be absorbed into a living evangelical Christian theology.

God bless.

Why Evangelize?

I am a Christian. I believe in the Christian doctrine and profess the Apostle’s Creed. Yet after studying religion over a span of thirty years, I have reached the inescapable conclusion that God expresses himself or reveals his nature in various ways and at various times in every religion. If anyone has spent the time that I have investigating religion, I would be honestly amazed if they did not reach the same conclusion.

But how does one account for the different doctrines in the world religions, each within its own culture? One answer is that human beings will filter their revelations or the movings of the Spirit in terms which they can understand. A culture which does not believe in the killing of animals, for example, is not going to be able to understand a system of blood sacrifice as payment for sin. The Koran says in so many words that God reveals himself in an intelligible way to every culture.

But how do you account for the claim of Christianity that Jesus is the only way to the Father? Well, he is, and it is the same Spirit that is flowing through the world religions, the same grace, in different forms. The Upanishads say that God is the source of all the religions, all scriptures, and all the creeds. The Golden Rule occurs in one way or another in each religion.

Jesus makes this statement about the Spirit in John 3:8:

The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit. (NIV)

The Spirit comes from wherever it wants to come from and its destination is wherever it chooses.

Here is a mystery that we do not understand, as it does not fit into the rules of logic constructed by the mind. We say that a thing has to be either A or B exclusively, not both A and B or, worse yet, not  sometimes A and sometimes B. If our doctrine is true, the others must be false. If our doctrine is true for us, our doctrine is therefore true for all people everywhere and everywhen.

The mystery is that, while my Christian doctrine is true in every way, it is also true that the Spirit may operate independently of doctrine, because doctrine is made for man, not for God.

The church fathers discovered truth outside the Christian religion very early, even calling Aristotle and Plato Christians before Christianity, and adopting many of their ideas into Christian theology. St. Paul borrowed from pagan religion the verse, “For in him we live and move and have our being.” (Acts 17:28) St. Ambrose said that all truth comes from the Holy Spirit regardless of what religion or philosophy it comes from. The famous early American preacher Jonathan Edwards, who served as a missionary to American Indians, concluded that God reveals himself in every culture, and salvation is not restricted to the Christian religion. To paraphrase Hans Kung, “Why don’t we just admit it?”

The inevitable question is: Then why evangelize?

Part of the answer is that I don’t think we should try to convert those people who are devout Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc. if they are at peace in their faith. Mahatma Gandhi used to tell Christian missionaries, “Instead of trying to make us into Christians, help us to become better Hindus.”

The other part of the answer is that there is a need–and it is urgent–to bring the message of the Gospel to those people who don’t have any faith at all, who are caught up in the word and searching in all the wrong places for peace of mind.

God bless.

Aldous Huxley: The Perennial Philosophy

For myself as a Christian, Jesus Christ is my only way to the Father. He is the only way by which I may be saved. My profession of the Apostles’ Creed is an expression of my faith and belief in my own redemption through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ,

A Muslim’s profession of faith is: “There is no God but God; and Mohammad is his Prophet.”

A Hindu’s way may be the practice of complete devotion and worship of Krishna as an incarnation of God, among other possible paths.

A Taoist might say that the Tao is the way of God’s working in the universe that existed before God had a name and before there was any religion.

An adherent to the Jewish faith believes in Jehovah as the Creator and Lord of all things, and who revealed his Law through Moses.

A Buddhist takes refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma (the spiritual law of the universe), and the Sangha (the spiritual community).

As Aldous Huxley stated in his famous introduction to Swami Prabhavananda’s and Christopher Isherwood’s translation of the Bhagavad-Gita that was first published in 1944:

But happily there is the Highest Common Factor of all religions, the Perennial Philosophy which has always and everywhere been the metaphysical system of the prophets, saints, and sages. It is perfectly possible for people to remain good Christians, Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims and yet to be united in full agreement on the basic doctrines of the Perennial Philosophy.

In Huxley’s opinion, “The Bhagavad-Gita is perhaps the most systematic scriptural statement of the Perennial Philosophy.” Father Bede Griffiths noted in his book, River of Compassion: A Christian Commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita:

A Christian who is open to the message of the Gita will find that it throws new light on many aspects of the Gospel.

Aldous Huxley identified four main characteristics, and later added a fifth, of the Perennial Philosophy that he sees as not only the common ground, but the highest common ground, of all religions:

First: the phenomenal world of matter and individualized consciousness…is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be nonexistent.

Second: human beings are capable of not only knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.

Third: man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.

Fourth: man’s life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to unitive knowledge of the Divine Ground.

The above principles of the Perennial Philosophy are stated in philosophical rather than doctrinal terms so that they may be compatible with the various religions.

An example of its application is that, just as Eckhart and Ruysbroeck describe a Christian Godhead underlying the Trinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the Bhagavad-Gita states that Brahman is the Godhead which underlies the Hindu trinity of Brahma (creator), Vishnu (preserver), and Shiva (dissolver).

Another parallel can be found in that the Atman, the spark of divinity residing in the heart and which is directly related to Brahman (uncreated God in his unmanifest state) can be compared, not doctrinally but philosophically, to the indwelling Christ (“I no longer live, but Christ lives in me.” Galations 2:20).

Yet the language about the Divine Ground, and indeed all four characteristics of the Perennial Philosophy, are of a decidedly impersonal nature. It is indeed a valid spiritual practice to meditate on the impersonal aspect of the divinity; that is, divinity without what might be called anthropomorphic attributes such as love, goodness, compassion, and mercy.

But rare is the individual who can continuously maintain an impersonal approach to the divine. Even Buddhism developed bodhisattvas, beings who have achieved nirvana but have voluntarily postponed their entry into it until all beings are saved, and so are at the service of humanity.

And so Aldous Huxley identifies a fifth characteristic of the Perennial Philosophy, which is the belief in, and worship of, the divine incarnation. The Bhagavad-Gita describes the sacrificial worship of the divine incarnation–God taking birth as a human being for the sake of humanity–in great detail, and is known in Hinduism as bhakti yoga. The concept of sacrificial worship is mentioned by St. Paul in his letter to the Romans:

Therefore, I urge you, brothers (and sisters), in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God–this is your spiritual act of worship. (Romans 12:1, NIV)

In “Appendix 1″ of Prabhavananda’s and Isherwood’s translation of the Bhagavad-Gita, it says, “Hinduism accepts the belief in many divine incarnations, including Krishna, Buddha, and Jesus, and foresees that there will be many more:”

In every age I come back

To deliver the holy,

To destroy the sin of the sinner,

To establish righteousness.

This is problematic for Christians, who believe that Jesus is God’s only begotten son, and also for Muslim’s, who do not accept the concept of incarnation. It might even seem problematic for Hindu’s as well in terms of the number of gurus in the modern age who have claimed to be divine incarnations.

Father Bede Griffiths, in his book, Return to the Center, does not oppose the possibility of more than one divine incarnation. But he does argue that, among the major claimants–he names three: Krishna, Buddha, and Jesus–Jesus Christ, through his life, death, and resurrection, represents the most perfect incarnation of God. His view is that Christ expresses what is most perfect in every religion.

All things considered, Aldous Huxley, in discussing the Perennial Philosophy–in his book by that name and in his wartime introduction to one of the best ever translations of the Bhagavad-Gita–makes an important contribution to interspirituality and to the peaceful coexistence of religions by seeking to define the Highest Common Factor that represents a metaphysical basis by which all religions can enter into the conversation.

God bless.

The Unity of Religion in the Interspiritual Age

One goal for this interspiritual Christian weblog is to make the case that one can be wholly Christian without having to be exclusive. It is my hope that there are interspiritual Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, etc. who are making the same case for their own faiths.

We now live in a time when the influences of exclusive religion on milatarist thinking poses an actual threat to the survivability of the human race. This is because religion needs to be leading the way towards peace instead of apocalypse.

For example, whatever case I hear being made for an exclusivist Christian faith or an exclusivist Islamic faith, I am absolutely certain that neither case is within the will of God, whether I address Him as Allah or Jehovah. Whatever name I use, He is still the All-Merciful, All-Compassionate One who seeks to save.

The Interspiritual Age we live in necessitates that every religion must re-examine itself and its Scriptures in the light of the present state of human affairs. See “On The Nature of Scripture” as an example.

I pray for prophets of peace within all religions–such as were found in Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.–to replace the prophets of apocalypse. No doubt such prophets will be persecuted, first and foremost by the religionists in their own faith. It is to be recalled that Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindu terrorist for seeking Hindu-Muslim unity.

There are serious obstacles to the interspiritual movement, and they must be faced with the overwhelming power of love. The unity of all religion is to be found in love. The tribalism of the past must be absorbed into love; tribalism always takes the relative view whereas love is universal.

God bless.

About Interspiritual and Ecumenical Religion

One of the main premises of this blog is that religions must show the nations how to live in peace by their own peaceful coexistence with each other. Every religion needs to re-examine itself in this light. Also, as part of a global community, members and especially leaders of every religion need to become conversant in multiple religions. As a Christian, learning about world religions has contributed a great deal to my relationship with Jesus Christ.

For those who are traveling along the path of interspirituality, I believe it is important to remain grounded in one religion. Although, in this interspiritual age, it is not uncommon for some people to observe a “second religion” in addition to the one that they are grounded to. Examples of this are Ruben Habito, a Catholic Christian who is also a Zen master, and Bede Griffiths, the Catholic priest and monk who also lived the life of a Hindu sanyassin in India. Unless a person feels especially called to a second religion, I believe it is best to have one religion to be grounded in.

My calling is to be a follower of Jesus Christ, but in the same sense that Gandhi intended, I am also a Sufi, a Jew, a Hindu, a Buddhist, and a Muslim. This is to say that I recognize one common humanity which has one God, by whatever name he or she may be called.

Even in confirming that I am a Christian, it could be asked what kind of Christian am I, as there is a wide variety of Christian traditions. Again, my answer would have to be that I am both a Catholic and a Protestant; and within Protestantism, I am an Episcopalian, Evangelical, Baptist, Charismatic, and etc. The best term to use, perhaps, is ecumenical. The term interspiritual was coined by Bede Griffiths to apply to the crossing of religious boundaries. The term ecumenical is commonly applied to the crossing of denominational boundaries within one religion.

I used to believe that I had to make a distinct choice to the exclusion of all the other choices. This is the main reason why I ended up studying so many different creeds and traditions. After many years, I finally discovered Bede Griffiths, the great interspiritual pioneer after Gandhi, and Brian McLaren, the Christian elder and pioneer in the emerging church movement. One of my intentions for this blog is to offer ideas and information that took me so many years to discover, in the hopes of saving a lot of time for younger people.

God bless.

Interspirituality: Seeing With God’s Eyes

There is a Sufi saying that declares, “When I see with the eyes of God, I see God everywhere.” Christian mystic Meister Eckhart proclaims, “The same eye wherein I see God is the same eye wherein God sees me.” In the religion of Vedanta, God says, “Whoever sees me in all beings hates no one.” Jesus teaches us that seeing with God’s eyes is to see every being, high or low, rich or poor, as a child of a loving Father, wherein we are all brothers and sisters. Like the Buddha, Jesus looks upon all beings with compassion. Compassion is his response to the human condition. When Mohamed first went to Medina, he desired to unite Jews, Christians, and Arabs under a religion of the God of Abraham.

As an interspiritual Christian, it is my mission to recognize truth in whatsoever religion it occurs; and all the while to see with the eyes of Jesus. When I see with the eyes of Jesus, I see Him in every being and in every religion, even those that do not recognize Him in the same manner which I see Him.

This process has taken me more years than I care to say. It is my fervent prayer that younger Christians–and young people of every religion–will take a much shorter time than I did to become interspiritual. For us Christians, this does not mean that we “compromise” on our own faith, as some fundamentalists claim. Nothing could be further from the truth. Studying other religions–looking beneath the surface waters of dogma and deep into the eternal waters of the Spirit–has given me a greater love for Jesus Christ than ever before.

I have discovered that, underneath the differences, every religion–in its highest expression–teaches us to die to self in order to be reborn into the Divine will. The Sufis speak of a drop of rain finding its path to the river and making its way into the ocean. Zen Buddhist master Shunryu Suzuki speaks of an individual drop of water going down a surging waterfall until at last it joins the vastness of the river below.

We Christians can speak of dying into Christ, being resurrected through Him, and ascending with Him into Heaven. While still on this earth and in this very body, we can pray, “May I no longer live so that Christ lives in me and through me.”

The prophet Isaiah spoke of a time when the lion will lie down with the lamb. He prophesied that God’s people will take their intruments of war, forge them into plowshares, and cultivate the earth in peace with all the nations. Every thoughtful person knows that this is what the nations of our globe must learn to do if we are to survive as a race.

As Hans Kung has pointed out in books, speeches to the United Nations, and talks to religious groups around the globe, “There will be no peace between nations until there is peace between religions.” Every religion must refuse to be used as a tool to facilitate war.

All religions must be examples of how nations can coexist peacefully by peacefully coexisting with each other in love and mutual respect. This is, after all, what every religion teaches in its highest expression, and I believe that this vision is to see with the eyes of God.

God bless.

A New Paradigm On World Religions

Now that the paradigm of modern and post-modern society has shifted dramatically to the global community, because wars that invoke God are still happening today, and nations cannot agree on saving our planet to preserve our common humanity, it is necessary for Christianity and every other religion to do away with exclusive thinking. At its best, it is the result of too scant a knowledge of world religions; at its worst, it is arrogance or tribal thinking that has now become obsolete. Even more, it is dangerous, as we have seen that making war is still sanctioned by some organized religion.

As abhorrent as the bloody crusades were and doubtless offensive to a Savior who taught peace, tolerance, and love of neighbor and enemy alike, the very survival of the human race was not at stake, as it is now. We seem to be living in a religious emergency that too precious few are responding to, and time is fast running out. To those who would quote Scripture in favor of exclusivity, I would say that Jesus Christ the Word of God reveals himself to different cultures in different ways just as a diamond reflects the light at different angles. I propose that Jesus welcomes everyone who tries to live according to the Sermon on the Mount and who lives a life of faith, whether they are Jew, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or other. The One we worship is the Prince of Peace.