Worldview Class #2 – Part 10 – New Age Biology

While teaching a Sunday morning class on the topic of various worldviews, I plan to share some of the more significant findings which our class is learning. The main text for the study is The Battle for Truth by David Noebel. A good deal of this class is also based on personal research.

*********************

Cosmic Humanists wants nothing more than for man to fulfill his ultimate purpose of ushering in the New Age (their words, not mine). Consequently, they require a theory of science and the origin of man which allows for a constant self-improvement plan – a spiraling upward of man’s abilities and “consciousness”. The problem that faces this theory is that each individual clearly progresses at a different rate. How do they overcome the possibility that some will progress toward their desired end state more quickly than others?

Their answer lies in the concept of individualism vs. collectivism. Marilyn Ferguson has said, “The proven plasticity of the human brain and human awareness offers the possibility that individual evolution may lead to collective evolution. When one person has unlocked a new capacity its existence is suddenly evident to others, who may then develop the same capacity.” Thus, the “growth” of one person may be enough to drag all others along to the higher state. In all seriousness, I see very little difference between such a society and that of the Borg from Star Trek. The aim of both movements (I know, I know, one is fictional!) is to achieve perfection by adding biological and technological improvements to the species.

So, evolution is fundamental to the New Age movement. But how does the Cosmic Humanist see such a change occurring – as gradual steps over time, or as something else? Like Marxism, the New Ager believes that such collective changes will likely happen in surges. When one individual breaks through with an evolutionary change, society will quickly copy it and bring everyone else along, one step closer to enlightenment. David Spangler describes this - “In this [evolutionary] context, civilizations, like individuals, go through profound changes from time to time which represent discontinuities; that is, a jump or shift is made from one evolutionary condition to another. The New Age is such a shift.”

Once again, the mechanism to achieve this state is the theory of punctuated equilibrium. A surge of biological improvement will quickly be created and adopted within the species. And while this theory is supported by few observations (as well as entirely violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics), the convenience it provides is too tempting to be ignored. As we pointed out in the section on Marxist biology, bad science backed by insubstantial proof is completely trumped by a theory - if that theory allows one to believe whatever they want.

Why is this theory so popular, even though science sees little proof of such a mechanism? For the New Ager, it solves two problems.

1) It promises a shared future divinity

2) It solves the worry of sin – by denying any original fall of Man

The promise of one day becoming gods ourselves is very tempting for some. Indeed, the New Age philosophy says that we are gods today – just imperfect ones. Like Marxism, this worldview is rooted in the desire to deny the existence of a single Creator of everything. Instead, a magical “force” drives the New Age movement along, gaining continual improvement and harmony (perhaps I’ve now moved from Star Trek to Star Wars?).

So, I ask a question. If we are constantly marching toward enlightenment and peace, then why is there still war and disease and starvation and cruelty? Have these things become better over time? I would make the case that they have not. In fact, the world seems to have become a much worse place in which to live than the 1950’s, when the Leave It To Beaver family lifestyle was popular. Cosmic humanists see this world as Paradise, which is slowly being unveiled. Joseph Campbell explained the disconnect between theory and observation of this world by saying, “That is the way it feels, but this is it. This is Eden.” Humans need to “see not the world of solid things, but a world of radiance.”

My advice – be very careful. The pull of New Age thinking is everywhere around us, and the danger in it is that it often lies very close to the truth. To see an example of this, reference Dan Brown’s latest book The Lost Symbol. This book progresses along a fascinating path of science and in some places, Biblical teaching, nearly ending in absolute Christian truth, only to take a final diversion away. It is so close to God’s truth at times – but close is not correct. That is why real truth must be absolute.

**********************
Next: Worldview #2 - Part 11 – Biblical Christian Biology
-- or –
Back to the start of this series
-- or --
Back to Worldview Series #1

Worldview Class #2 – Part 6 – Cosmic Humanist (New Age) Philosophy

While teaching a Sunday morning class at church on the topic of various worldviews, I plan to share some of the more significant findings which our class is learning. The main text for the study is The Battle for Truth by David Noebel. A good deal of this class is also based on personal research.

*********************
We have defined philosophy as the “rational investigation of the principles of knowledge.” Put more clearly – How do we know what we know?

While secular humanism philosophy glories in naturalism (nothing is spiritual), and the Marxism worldview believes in a variant of that called dialectical materialism, the Cosmic Humanist (or New Age) philosophy goes completely in the opposite direction. For a New Age follower, everything is considered to be spiritual rather than material – people, rocks, light, methane gas – you name it. This philosophical belief is called non-naturalism.

This belief system admits to a God – and we are it. All things, living or otherwise, are considered to be part of a larger “God-force”. David Spangler, a principal proponent of New Age writing, says, “From a very early age, I was aware of an extra dimension or presence to the world around me, which as I grew older I came to identify as a sacred or transcendental dimension.” Such thinking pervades our society at every level today – in public schools, colleges, and community activities.

A popular bumper sticker seen around town proclaims that “The Earth is your mother” (something I’m pretty sure my mother, who endured a great deal of pain to bring me into this world, might find offensive). This New Age thinking comes from the Gaia Hypothesis (pronounced “guy-uh”) – a belief system that considers the earth to be alive. In fact, Gaia enthusiasts believe that the earth behaves like a living organism, able to regulate its own conditions and adapt for its own survival.

Consider the Gaia thinking around something as common as the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the air. From a Cosmic Humanist standpoint, here are some “known” facts:

· At one time, the earth had no atmosphere – it was a big, cold ball of rock circling the sun
· To create an atmosphere, the evolution of photosynthetic life forms was required
· Molecular oxygen is a waste product of plant photosynthesis – plants use carbon dioxide and water to create oxygen, while gathering sunlight during photosynthesis
· Atmospheric oxygen is now at a very convenient 21% level, and appears to have remained stable for “millions” or even “billions” of years
· If this concentration were to edge up to as little as 25%, forest fires would be raging across the globe (oxygen is a great catalyst for fires)
· Carbon dioxide is created by combustion, exhalation, volcanoes and plants at night (when there is no sunlight for photosynthesis)
· The oxygen/carbon dioxide balance seems to maintain itself very well, and has done so for a very long time

The conclusion that a New Age proponent reaches is that the earth is “alive” and takes charge of regulating this gaseous mixture – because that is what is good for its own survival. It all sounds very neat and tidy. But I have a couple of questions. Looking back to the second bullet point, how did the earth “know” that it needed an atmosphere? Why wasn’t it “happy” just being a cold rock? Does the earth “regret” its move now that evil man is trying to destroy the environment?

New Age philosophy often gets very close to the truth, but then veers off down an unfortunate path. They see the beauty of balance in the way things work – in this case, the regulation of our atmosphere, even when changes are introduced into the system. But instead of seeing this as a great and grand design by an all-powerful God, they attribute the wonder of such things to “smart” matter and material. In short, New Age thinking talks about us being God, but never about God being God.

Romans 1:20-23 bears repeating:

“For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.”

When a person sees the handiwork of God, but fails to attribute the grandeur to God, they become fools. Join with me in prayer, that these people’s eyes can be opened once again to the wonder of God’s creation – and that they will proceed down the path of giving God the glory.

**********************
Next: Worldview #2 - Part 7 – Biblical Christian Philosophy
-- or –
Back to the start of this series
-- or --
Back to Worldview Series #1

Worldview Class #2 - Part 2 - Cat Murder and Ethics

While teaching a Sunday morning class at church on the topic of various worldviews, I plan to share some of the more significant findings which our class is learning. The main text for the study is The Battle for Truth by David Noebel. A good deal of this class is also based on personal research.

*********************

In the last installment, I mentioned how critical it is that we recognize this fact – there is only one truth. To further emphasize the point, let’s consider a premise given by the New Age community – that truth is different for everyone. In this case, the New Agers will contend that each individual has the ability to “define their own truth”. So for one person, truth might be that cats are inherently ugly. Another person will contend that cats are preferable to any other living being, including humans. The New Age worldview will say that both are right, and that there are two truths in play (I recognize that this may be a tough example for some, considering how opinionated people tend to be about cats!).

Moving up the spectrum a bit, let’s leave the topic of feline physical beauty, and put into play whether it is ethical to kill a cat. This example may elicit a different answer from people, as many in our society are invested in the rights of animals. Others have no qualms about drowning cats. Again, New Age says that both viewpoints can be correct, as truth is different for each individual.

So, it’s time to take the example to the extreme. Consider the topic of premeditated human murder and where people might classify it – as an acceptable practice, or an act that must be punished by law? With very few exceptions, people will say it is the latter. The New Age movement will, in general, say that premeditated murder is inherently wrong and against societal norms. We can draw the following spectrum diagram:

There are two questions that beg to be asked here. Number one – where does an issue go from becoming one of personal preference (cat beauty) to one of ethics? And, number two – along the ethical point of the spectrum, where is the concept of multiple truths supplanted by one single truth for all? That is, can I definitively locate the gray arrows in an absolute place – for all people?

But, to do so requires the admission that somewhere there is an absolute truth. And the next question must be, “Where does that absolute truth come from?” The answer from the Christian worldview is obviously, “It comes from God”. But what is the answer offered by other worldviews?

This clearly causes a dilemma for other worldviews, who must struggle under the weight of a changing or arbitrary definition of right and wrong. It is much easier to believe that God set right and wrong in the hearts of men and that, for matters relating to ethics and not personal preference, there is a defined line of good and evil that pertains to all men. “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” (Romans 1:18-20)

**********************

Next: Worldview #2 - Part 3 - Sacred and Secular
-- or --

Back to the start of this series

-- or --
Back to Worldview Series #1

Songs I Can’t Sing Anymore – Part 2

I grew up listening to rock and roll from the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. I have always maintained that there is no era of music that I prefer to listen to more, and I listened to a lot of it in college and during the years before my wife and I had children. I amassed over two-hundred albums on vinyl over the years, before compact discs took over. I have spent a great deal of time over the last couple of years transferring this music to my iPod. As I’ve recently begun listening to this music again, I have been struck by the lyrics of many of the songs – seen anew from a refreshed Christian perspective. I believe that I listened only to the music back in my younger days, but today I actually pay attention to the lyrics. This is the second in a series of articles discussing the possible hidden (or overt) meaning in many songs I used to sing out loud -- without actually listening to what the words were saying.

*****************************

As a guitar player, I have always admired the music of Dan Fogelberg. He was a multi-talented musician, reportedly able to pick up almost any new instrument and immediately begin playing it as if he had invested years of practice. His voice was unique, and he often recorded all of the vocal and instrumental tracks on his records by himself (though he usually liked to turn over the drums to someone more accomplished). His words had an appeal to many, because they often had a searching and philosophical overtone that satisfied people’s need for more than just pop lyrics. I’ve sung many of his songs, either at talent shows or while wooing my wife-to-be during my college years. Those songs include the one I mention here – a fact which I now find almost unbelievable, given that I’ve been a Christian since the age of twelve.

Part of the Plan was released by Fogelberg in 1975, as the opening song on the Souvenirs album. It’s catchy, singable, and pretty easy to play on the guitar. The lyrics start out in a searching fashion, making you wonder if there’s more to life than what we’re experiencing:

I have these moments
All steady and strong
I'm feeling so holy and humble
The next thing I know
I'm all worried and weak
And I feel myself starting to crumble.

The meanings get lost
And the teachings get tossed
And you don't know what you're
Going to do next.
You wait for the sun
But it never quite comes
Some kind of message comes
Through to you.
Some kind of message comes through.

This is a good start, seen from a Christian perspective. There is certainly a longing in life for more than what this world has to offer, if we choose to grasp only the things of this world. So what is the message that “came through” to Fogelberg? The chorus of the song tells us:

And it says to you...
Love when you can
Cry when you have to...
Be who you must
That's a part of the plan
Await your arrival
With simple survival
And one day we'll all understand...

Oops…problem. From a biblical perspective, “being who I must” is a recipe for disaster. The New Age worldview tells us to do this very thing – by following what our heart tells us. Even Christians make this slip quite often, saying “I followed my heart’s leading…” about some matter or another. But Jeremiah 17:9 tells us that “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” We are called to follow God’s example, left to us in the Holy Scriptures and the example of His Son, Jesus Christ. That is not necessarily “what I am” – in fact, it rarely is. Being like Christ takes a determination and perseverance that is not easy for me. The very thing that requires the least effort for me is to lapse into what I believe to be my true nature.

If this was not enough to ruin the song for me, the third verse clinches it:

There is no Eden or Heavenly gates
That you're gonna make it to one day
But all of the answers you seek can be found
In the dreams that you dream
On the way.

This verse saddens me. I’ve written before about Dan’s life, death, and his belief in between. His philosophy that “dreams” can take the place of a loving Father waiting for us in eternity leaves me cold and empty. While it sounds pretty to follow your dreams or to dream of a better world, the simple truth is that God offers an eternal, precious existence in His kingdom of heaven. But we must embrace and accept His offering as the free gift of grace that it is. Only He can save us, and this can be achieved only through His wondrous plan. This is more than the “simple survival” offered up by Fogelberg. It’s a lasting gift of eternity, as we live humbly before Him.

*******************

Next in the series... or

Go back to the beginning of this series…

Songs I Can’t Sing Anymore – Part 1

I grew up listening to rock and roll from the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. I have always maintained that there is no era of music that I prefer to listen to more, and I listened to a lot of it in college and during the years before my wife and I had children. I amassed over two-hundred albums on vinyl over the years, before compact discs took over. I have spent a great deal of time over the last couple of years transferring this music to my iPod. As I’ve recently begun listening to this music again, I have been struck by the lyrics of many of the songs – seen anew from a refreshed Christian perspective. I believe that I listened only to the music back in my younger days, but today I actually pay attention to the lyrics. This is the first in a series of articles discussing the possible hidden (or overt) meaning in many songs I used to sing out loud -- without actually listening to what the words were saying.

**************************

The 1960’s were dominated by bands with an underlying New Age philosophy. Peace, free love, and rock and roll were all blended together in words that welcomed the dawning of the “the age of Aquarius”. One of my very favorite bands from this time frame is Crosby, Stills and Nash (and sometimes Young). I enjoy their music, if a bit rough and unpolished, and am mostly attracted to their incredible harmonies. I still try to mirror some of the high notes sung by Graham Nash in my own backup singing. Some of their vocal blending still gives me chills.

Recently, I was playing the So Far album from 1974, and came across the song Woodstock. Written by Joni Mitchell in 1969, it details elements of the famed Woodstock concert in a farmer’s field in Bethel, New York. While I used to mouth the words to the opening lines, it struck me for the very first time what the lyrics were actually saying. Give a listen:

Well, I came upon a child of God

He was walking along the road

And I asked him, Tell me, where are you going?

This he told me

Said, I'm going down to Yasgur's Farm,

Gonna join in a rock and roll band.

Got to get back to the land and set my soul free.

We are stardust, we are golden,

We are billion year old carbon,

And we got to get ourselves back to the garden.

Huh? Did I really used to sing “We are billion year old carbon” without blinking an eye? Sadly, the answer is “Yes”. Did I think about what I was singing at the time? Sadly, the answer is “No”.

These lyrics display a clear New Age influence. The 1969 idea of setting your soul free and getting back to the land sounds a lot like bumper stickers that we see on cars forty years later (“The Earth Is Your Mother”). These are not new New Age ideas. The desire for a return to something more than we are may be an inherent feeling in all of us. What it is, and how it got there is the topic for debate.

Carl Sagan is famous for his Cosmos television series, where he stated the words, “We are all star stuff”. This also is not a new concept, as Joni Mitchell penned similar words many years before Sagan reintroduced the idea. I have always found Sagan’s words somewhat ridiculous. Is it a scientific statement? What hard evidence does he have? Does anyone really believe that “star-stuff” or stardust can somehow “evolve” into a sentient race of people? It is not a factual conclusion, but rather a philosophical musing, rooted in nothing more than flawed humanist thinking. I don’t want to think of myself, or my lovely wife, or my precious children as “billion-year-old carbon”. The idea takes away from the wonder and miracle of life, which is far better explained by God’s hand.

I am beginning to see many examples such as these lyrics which attempt to combine the humanist way of thinking with religious expressions. Given that the author assumes we are simply a collection of carbon molecules, what place do the phrases “child of God” and “back to the garden” have in their argument? They don’t – they are merely an attempt to add to the mysticism of their lyrics in order to appear “artsy” or “enlightened”. This song -- one I used to sing out loud -- now takes on an anti-God aspect that I never saw before. It’s ruined for me.

One final point – has anyone taken note that the “billion-year-old carbon” line was replaced with a different line in the last chorus – a line that is much more true? Write me back with a comment if you discover what it is.

*******************

Next in the series...

Worldview Class – Part 11 –Cosmic Humanist (New Age) Ethics

This is a continuation of highlighted topics discussed in a worldview class I am teaching on Sunday morning. The main text for the study is The Battle for Truth by David Noebel. A good deal of this class is also based on personal research.

Ethics are defined as “the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc." Specifically, the study of ethics attempts to answer the question “Who makes the rules – God or man?”

In previous posts, we have seen that some supporters of Secular Humanist ethics have defined a set of absolute truths, to exclude acts such as murder and rape from accepted morality. Marxist ethics are well-defined, and are pointed at a specific goal of class elimination. In contrast, New Age ethics are the very definition of personal free-for-all. True New Agers are held to no standard, but live under whatever truth they define for themselves at any given point in time. Added to this is the fact that they are free to change their own ethics at any time, to suit their changing needs. This lifestyle is a form of boundless ethical relativism, and is the foundation of the New Age ethical premise.

While truth cannot be pinpointed in this worldview, even more disturbing is the fact that no individual is ever allowed to judge another’s ethics. Judgment of another person’s beliefs and values would imply that there is an absolute truth to be applied to all individuals. Paradoxically, this belief opens the door for one case in which this rule does not apply: tolerance of all viewpoints is allowed except for the one that insists on an absolute truth. Put another way, anyone who judges the ethics of another person is immediately judged as being intolerant and wrong. This is the only instance where a New Age follower is allowed to judge another individual. The circular logic is a bit mind-boggling. It’s enough to make your head spin.

According to New Age proponents, setting limitations on ethical beliefs is equivalent to denying a person their quest for godhood. The moral implications are limitless under this lack of authority. How does the New Age movement view the Ten Commmandments? They see them as a list of boundaries which hinder the “evolutionary growth” of the individual. Each person’s growth is dependent on the ability to change and adapt in an ever-changing system of design-your-own ethics. For this reason, there are no New Age books which tell a person how to live a moral life – only books which encourage you to break free and follow your heart.

Marianne Williamson says, “Adam and Eve were happy until she ‘ate of the knowledge of good and evil.’ What that means is that everything was perfect until they began to judge – to keep their hearts open sometimes, but closed at others….Closing our hearts destroys our peace. It’s alien to our real nature.” Indeed, she may be right in saying that our nature is to open our hearts to everything. But the Bible tells us that “the heart is deceitful above all things…” (Jeremiah 17:9). It is precisely this realization that separates New Age from Christian ethics. One relies on and actually encourages the reference to a misleading source (the heart); the other denies that fallible internal source and points to a perfect, supernatural source outside of the individual.

Of all New Age positions, the concept of unity of good and evil may be the most disturbing. Because right and wrong are defined differently for each individual, it becomes impossible to distinguish between good and evil. David Spangler takes this premise to the extreme when he says, “Christ is the same force as Lucifer…..Lucifer prepares man for the experience of Christhood…..Lucifer works within each of us to bring us to wholeness as we move into the New Age.” This idea is the acute result of the progression of a philosophy that starts with desirable and simple ideas such as “unity”, “harmony”, and “world peace”. When held forth as a final goal, these ideas appear to be virtuous and are embraced by impressionable people seeking a higher purpose in life. But they get twisted when seen through the New Age lens, and end up in ridiculous statements such as Spangler’s.

One of the best ways to approach a New Age believer is to appeal to the innate sense of right and wrong that God instilled in each of us (Romans 1:18-20). Ask them, “Do you believe that murder of a child is wrong?” When they hesitate or even agree, follow up by asking them “Where does this internal sense of wrong come from?” While they may get creative in their answer, the fact is that God placed the idea in the hearts of men. If the New Ager does not recognize the act of murder as having absolute moral implications, it could be that they are too far removed from truth to be brought back easily, if at all. God promised that men would be misled and would “exchange the truth of God for a lie”. It is not an easy thing for a person to admit this possibility in their own life. The Christian should continue to boldly point it out, in the hopes of making the New Age believer meditate on it the next time they have a flash of internal moral truth. God may be speaking to them in that moment.

To Worldview - Part 12 - Christian Ethics

Or go back to the main index for all twelve Parts.

***
If you are interested in portions, or all of this twelve part series taught in an engaging, educational fashion, please contact Alan at Banyan Concepts.
***

Worldview Class – Part 7 – New Age (Cosmic Humanist) Theology

This is a continuation of highlighted topics discussed in a worldview class I am teaching on Sunday morning. The main text for the study is The Battle for Truth by David Noebel. A good deal of this class is also based on personal research.

Theology is defined as “the study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions”. Every worldview takes a stand on God, whether it is to believe in one Creator of all, or to say that no God exists. A critical understanding of each worldview pivots around the position taken regarding the existence of God.

The New Age worldview is often stated in ethereal words of transcendental gobbledy-gook. I must confess that the majority of statements made by many New Agers escape logic – at least, my logic. For example, Marilyn Ferguson attempts to describe God in this way - “In the emergent spiritual tradition God is not the personage of our Sunday school mentality….God is experienced as flow, wholeness….the ground of being….God is the consciousness that manifests as Lila, the play of the universe. God is the organizing matrix we can experience but not tell, that which enlivens matter.”

I just read this quote to my fourteen-year-old daughter Molly and she called it “a load of waffle”. I don’t think I could describe it any better.

There are many problems with Cosmic Humanism (New Age thought), but one of the most disturbing is the absence of a clear truth or an absolute right and wrong. In fact, New Age theology teaches that one must look within oneself in order to search for truth. And what is true for one person may not be true for another. By searching individually for truth, the New Age follower strives to achieve godhood. That is their individual goal, and the collective aim of all New Agers is for all people to achieve godhood together. By doing this, they achieve what they call “consciousness”. In the final state, God is everyone and everyone is God. Beverly Galyean said, “Once we begin to see that we are all God, that we have all the attributes of God, then I think the whole purpose of human life is to re-own the Godlikeness within us; the perfect love, the perfect wisdom, the perfect understanding, the perfect intelligence, and when we do that, we create back to that old, that essential oneness which is consciousness.”

Another disturbing belief that is prevalent in New Age thought is that of reincarnation. They believe that souls are in a constant state of movement from one form to another as a part of the quest for godhood. And they also maintain that it is important for a person to discover “who” they were in past lives in order to gain some understanding of why they are the way they are, and what must be done to achieve godhood in the future. There are even some who claim to make “soul contracts” with other individuals in one life, with the agreement that these individuals will “help” each other in future lives. Claims are made that you can tell when you have a soul contract with another individual because of an unusually strong feeling of familiarity when you look in that person’s eyes. A lot of money is made in the psychic world to help people “discover” their soul agreements. So I’ll ask this question – is it possible that people who believe they were Emperor Nero or Abraham Lincoln in a past life are being deceived by an evil spirit? What may seem to them like fact and truth may simply be the deception mentioned by Paul in Romans 1:21 – “For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.” The quest to know who they were in a past life begs the act of inquiring information of the spirit world – an extremely dangerous enterprise.

Finally, an added danger to the New Age belief system is their treatment of Jesus Christ and his role in history. Rather than deny Jesus’ existence, as other worldviews tend to do, New Age followers believe Jesus existed, and was a perfect man. By living such a life, he demonstrates that godhood can be achieved. Jesus is used as an example of what New Agers want to become, and he gives them hope for the possibility. From the New Age publication Science of Mind, we read “The significance of incarnation and resurrection is not that Jesus was a human like us but rather that we are gods like him – or at least have the potential to be.”

The sum of these dangers makes Cosmic Humanism much more difficult to combat from a Christian worldview. Unlike other worldviews like Marxism and Secular Humanism, the Cosmic Humanist offers a form of afterlife, even if it is a false one. They promise a happier ending than Marxism does, and they hold to the belief that things can work out in another life if we don’t do so well in the current one. The belief in reincarnation gives the New Ager something to live for and something to look forward to beyond this life.

The key to winning over a New Age follower is to impress upon them that the Christian worldview preaches a personal God – one who cares deeply and intimately about the individual. At some point, a New Age person is certain to cry out for more, when things in this world are falling apart around them. Can they say that someone died for them long ago in order that God’s plan could be fulfilled and we could live forever in heaven with the Creator of the universe? In talking with former New Age believers, I found this to be the thing that was missing in their former life – the promise of a personal, caring God who already has the answers and who doesn’t require us to achieve godhood at His level. This is the God that I believe. I am content to let Him be God, while I remain His servant.

To Worldview - Part 8 - Christian Theology

Or go back to the main index for all twelve Parts.

***
If you are interested in portions, or all of this twelve part series taught in an engaging, educational fashion, please contact Alan at Banyan Concepts.
***