reason.cck.org.uk

It is sadly true that people from different religions have sometimes, naively or otherwise, falsified the truth claims in other religions in order to make a mockery of them. This type of crude propaganda is unloving, unreal, and divisive. In order to be able to assess the validity of each religion, one must be willing to investigate with humility, not only for the sake of learning, but also out of respect for those of other faiths.

The question presupposes, however, that in order for one to judge the truth claims of a religion one must experience that religion. But what is meant by ‘experiencing’ a religion? There are two main categories of experience that I think are being referred to; knowledge of the doctrines of that religion, and a supernatural experience of God.

Knowledge of doctrine

There is much in the knowledge or understanding of different religions that can be tested. Some primary questions might be: Do they cohere with history and human experience? Does the belief system explain human origins? How does it deal with the problem of evil? And so on. These questions are helpful in ascertaining the validity of a world-view.

The three seats

Additionally, such knowledge will provide you with a basic understanding of the three main seats of religion (which will be discussed in further detail below). All religions fall roughly (not exclusively) into three camps in regard to what it means to be either a Muslim, Hindu, Christian and so forth. Firstly, what you do, secondly, what you think, and thirdly what you feel. For example, to be a Muslim you need to believe that Allah is one and has no partners among other things (The Qur’an: Surah 112), and you need to do good, and live in such a way that Allah will grant you paradise in the afterlife.

You can’t argue with experience

There are groups from different religions who claim that they have had a supernatural experience of God, or a transcendental experience of reality. If these religions claim to be exclusive, how can this be correct? Either, all ‘experience’ is physiological; or all are experiencing some aspect of God, an interpretation that might be proposed by a Hindu or a member of the Baha’i faith.
It is important to recognise that the term ‘religious experience’ can mean vastly different things. For some faiths, experiencing God in a personal way contradicts the fundamental teaching of that faith. For example, to say that a Buddhist experiences God in his/her meditations would be shocking since Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) taught that an understanding and compliance with the Four Noble Truths, would lead one to nirvana (total oneness with Brahman: the impersonal Ultimate Reality). Therefore, saying that a Buddhist experiences God contradicts the concept of nirvana.

Islam

There is not enough time to examine the Islamic concept of ‘religious experience’ in detail here, however, we can briefly look at the concept of ‘Tauhid’, the oneness and otherness of A’llah. It has been proposed on numerous occasions that the God of the Bible, and the God of the Qur’an are the same. However, the differences between the two must not be underestimated. Indeed, most Muslims believe that the Bible has been changed by Christians and Jews to suit our divergent beliefs about God (People of the Book (Jews and Christians), why do you deny God’s revelations when you can see that they are true? People of the book, why do you mix truth with falsehood? Why do you hide the truth when you recognise it? The Qur’an: The Family of ‘Imran: 70-71. Also see: The Mystery of Jesus by Ruqaiyyah Waris Maqsood, and is the Bible Gods Word? By Ahmed Deedat). In contrast then, the God of the Bible is fundamentally relational, existing in community within the Trinity, an idea that is repugnant in Islam (The Qur’an: Surah 112). This is because the concept of Tauhid reveals A’llah to be great, absolutely transcendent, unknowable, and beyond us. Therefore, the idea that God can be personally known is out of place and does not appear in orthodox Islam.

There is, however, a branch of Islam that does interact with the supernatural: the Sufis. Still, ‘experiencing a personal relationship’ with A’llah in our human bodies and minds does not strictly cohere with the doctrine of Tauhid. It is a perplexing but well-established fact that much of Sufi teaching directly contradicts some of the most fundamental doctrines of orthodox Islam (Geisler, L., Norman. Saleeb, Abdul., Answering Islam: The Crescent in the light of the Cross, 1993, Baker Books.)
As one Muslim author observes: Beyond their speculations concerning God, the necessity of his existence, and his properties, Muslim theologians and philosophers have apparently felt no need to question the possibility and reality of a human experience of God . . . It is difficult to find an appropriate Arabic or Persian expression for ‘experience of God’ without running the risk of encroaching on the absolute transcendence of the God of Islam, of anthropomorphising him’  (Annemarie Schimmel and Adboldjavad Falaturi, We Believe in one God, New York: Seabury Press: 1979)

Christianity

To have a personal understanding and experience of God is not only coherent within Christian orthodoxy, but a necessary component of being a Christian. Often Christians have a dramatic revelation, or experience of God at the time of conversion or soon after. The Bible makes many references to these events especially in Acts 2: 1 –12; these encounters are still happening today. The foundation of ‘being a Christian’ lies in a relationship with God, not exclusively in any of the three seats (mentioned above). Rather, when one meets God in a personal way the result is a dramatic change in what one thinks, feels and does.

In conclusion, to assess the reliability of truth one can do so intellectually to a certain degree. If a religion is claiming to have supernatural referent, then it is worth assessing what this really means. Is the idea coherent within the doctrine of that religion? If it is, then is it a central tenant of that religion? If a religion claims supernatural or transcendental experience, it does not necessarily validate the claims of that religion.

The evidence for the reliability of the Christian faith lies not only in its historic foundation, and understanding of human nature and needs, but in the profound reality that God himself meets with those who accept Jesus. Christianity is, therefore, an experiential religion, not only in doctrine but also in practise.

References/Further reading

• Orr-Ewing, Amy., But is it Real?, Chapter 1, Inter Varsity Press, 2008.
• Geisler, Norman. And Saleeb, Addul., Answering Islam: The Crescent in the light of the Cross, Baker Books, 1997.
• The Qur’an., A New Translation by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem.
• In Defence of Miracles, Ed. Geivett, Douglas., Habermas, Gary., Inter Varsity Press, 1997.
• Annemarie Schimmel and Adboldjavad Falaturi, We Believe in one God, New York: Seabury Press: 1979

What does the question presuppose?

On the most simplistic level the question queries the validity of belief if it is accompanied by emotional needs, and presupposes that those who believe in God do so, not because God exists, but only because they want to believe that he does. However, emotional bias is going to affect every human being in answering questions that are infinitely defining for his/her life, in this case, the existence of God. Therefore, what is important to consider when dealing with these questions, both those who believe in God and those who don’t, is: ‘What is true, regardless of how I feel?’, rather than just: ‘How do I feel about this?’

Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-72) and Sigmund Freud (1856-1939)

Feuerbach and Freud were two thinkers who made significant contributions to the question of psychological projection. They rightly questioned the truth and accessibility of a faith that was based on subjective experience. They argued that man had desires that were not fulfilled, and an understanding of the idea of perfection, and therefore projected them into an idea, namely, God. Therefore, Feuerbach argued that experiences of God were really people’s experience of themselves. His arguments may have been valid if Christian faith truly were only based on internal experiences. However, God has revealed himself not only to individuals by experience, but also in the Bible. Christian faith has never been entirely subjective; faith has to be based on something solid. It arises from an encounter with God, through Christ, mediated by scripture.

The main objection to projection theory is just that, it is a theory, and it cannot be proved or tested, verified or falsified. It is based on a simple idea, that if someone wants something to be true, they will believe that it is, for their own comfort. However, is this really the case universally? Do all Christians come to faith because they want it to be true? There are many who do not. For example C. S. Lewis describes that he was ‘surprised by joy’  after coming to believe in Jesus. Also, by the same merits of Feuerbach and Freud’s arguments, it would be equally valid to say that those who do not believe in God do so because they do not want God to exist. They project the idea of the non-existence of God from their emotional needs. However, this method of reasoning is highly simplistic, and does not do justice to the thinking Atheist. Likewise, it does not do justice to the thinking Christian.

* For a more detailed critique of Feuerbach and Freud see: http://www.bethinking.org/truth-tolerance/god-as-wish-fulfilment.htm

‘God’ as wish-fulfilment

Although it is evident that not all of humanity ‘desires’ a God, it is true that a large amount of humanity do. This very fact, far from it proving the psychological projection theory, instead, fits perfectly with the Christian creation story: that we are made in God’s image for a relationship with him, and so we desire to relate to our creator, as we are made like him in certain finite ways. It certainly is rather incredible that humanity does have such a universal tendency, if we are just the product of our environment, and thus essentially only complex matter. Throughout history and up until today there is something in humanity that longs for that which is beyond us, bigger than us, something that can ultimately fulfil us. This is the essence of what drives every human. Are we happy merely to exist? Do we long for something that will give us significance and purpose to our existence? How is it that we feel we need to validate our existence? Instead of these feelings giving rise to a make-believe God, the presents of these longings strongly suggest something about our nature that goes beyond the material that we are made of. That we are made in God’s image, to relate to him.

‘Crutch’?

When it is asked: is not ‘God’ a psychological crutch? It raises the question: what type of God? For a God that we have invented should comfort us from all our troubles, and fulfil all of our needs not yet satisfied. But do we find the God of the Bible to display only these attributes? In both the Old and New Testaments God is very angry at ‘sin’ (humanities tendency to turn away from him and do what ‘is right in his own eyes’, i.e. to put himself at the centre of the universe, and do what is not right in God’s estimation). In the Old Testament, Israel was known as God’s people. If he is a projection, would he not be continually validating and justifying all Israel’s endeavours? Cheering from the side-lines, in perfect accord with the dominant politics of the day? But we find the very opposite, Israel’s prophets were consistently warning them of God’s anger at their idols, injustice, cruelty, and unfair treatment of the poor. This is true of the books of, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Micah, Zephaniah, and Malachi, a large percentage of the Bible.

Jesus

Finally, but most critically, Jesus Christ was God (the second person of the Trinity) who entered human history as a man who lived on Earth as we do. His identity is not a matter of projection, but historical analysis. Christianity is unique in teaching that God, in his hatred of sin but his love for us, came to earth as a man, lived the perfect life and suffered the death that we deserved for our turning away from God. As such God made it possible for us to be forgiven, without neglecting to be just in punishing sin, but putting our punishment on Christ. Is Christ God as well as man? This is not a question of subjective projection, since there are records of what he did and how he lived in the Bible, in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Christ’s divinity is proved by his resurrection, an event that can be researched and validated historically. Belief in God, for Christians, is not just emotional and philosophical, but also a matter of history.

** For more sources on the resurrection:

1. http://www.bethinking.org/resurrection-miracles/
2. http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/2007/2390_Historical_Evidence_for_the_Resurrection/

3. For an understanding of what we believe about Christ: http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/2003/1960_What_We_Believe_About_Jesus_Christ/

4. For another essay on: ‘Isn’t God a psychological crutch?’ read: But isn’t it Real?, Amy Orr-Ewing, Intervarsity Press, 2008, chapter 3.