| Religion, humanity and Christian
testimony
Common citation of a Supreme Being, even in polytheism, is often assumed to indicate a shared spirituality toward which, humans are evolving. Yet religions represent extraordinary differences in their portrayals of human life and society. One religion can speak of enlightenment, without reference to God, through reduction of the self to nothingness in order to still human passions as a source of moral static. The attempt to do this by meditation requires a lifetime of commitment in isolation from society. Another religion conflates specific human life and its endless reincarnations with the divinity of all life in its endless recurrence. Yet another religion invokes the will of God within unequivocal human capacity for moral obedience. Further variations pursue a vision of the supreme good through highly individualised mysticism as a necessary spiritual ascent beyond common experiences of life. There are radical differences between religious traditions concerning the nature of humans, human compromise, how compromise is overcome (salvation), what each person’s essential obligations are and how these are expressed within community. v A religious perspective on salvation is related to a certain value of human life. This is often a denial of human dignity in the quest to rise above either entanglement in matter or the labyrinth of human passions. In one, the body is a problem to be removed (dualism); in the other, unique personality is a problem to be transcended as individual consciousness is dissolved in cosmic oneness (monism). Eliminating suffering is often equated with salvation as a primary concern in religious perspectives of the human person, with suffering located in either the body or the passions of personality. By eliminating either source, suffering is supposedly eliminated. In dualism, human entanglement in matter is a mistake within a botched creation or the manifestation of a cosmic flaw. Redemption from matter and reconciliation with the principle of spiritual enlightenment is therefore sought. Dualism gives priority to the mind, mysticism and idealism as sources of enlightenment. In monism, humans exist on a continuum with all other life in its oneness or divinity. Humans emerge as a conscious dimension of nature, finally to merge into a cosmic soul without differentiation from the natural energies of life, gentle and violent. By seasonal rituals, religious monism elevates phenomena as inviolable rhythms that give tangible expression to the divinity of all things. For both dualism and monism, suffering is overcome by diminishing some aspect of human dignity. Dualism, as a basis for religious perspective, diminishes the integrity of creation and human bodies. Monism, as a basis for religious perspective, diminishes the uniqueness of human personality. A third religious possibility affirms the goodness of creation but endorses the dualism of humanity, which is divided morally according to codes of righteousness given by God (theism or unitarianism). Creation as a source of suffering is morally neutral, while beyond nature, suffering is a consequence of individual transgressions, social ungodliness or both. Redemption is wrought through obedience to God and ultimately, legislation of social morality; it is wholly these in a religious state (theocracy). Diverse views of salvation imply diverse views of human life, how individuals are changed and society is influenced. People may speak of global harmony, yet this possibility is countered by conflicting religious views of human life and its enhancement. Are humans intrinsically good or evil? From what is a person saved and how is this salvation given tangible expression within the world? Religious views on fostering human wholeness range from eliminating passions to legislating love (there are significant differences between tolerance, contractual justice and love for enemies). Should society be governed by a singular authority, mediating authorities or some form of pluralistic governance? Religions express a wide range of opinions on social order and authority, which in turn, have diverse tangible effects in human life. Primary ideals, how the divine is involved and what part humans play in giving specific values tangible expression, are vastly different and often in conflict among religions. There is neither religious development toward one view of humans nor congruence in their diverse approaches to human life. v In Christian testimony, by contrast to religious visions of humanity, Israel’s prophets cite the righteous law and human responsibility, exposing prevarication and compromise (sinfulness) and the necessity of God’s creativity in writing righteousness on the heart. This is expounded in the New Testament. Human self-compromise through anxiety in living before a horizon of death, necessitates personal transformation in the future of God becoming present in Jesus Christ as life in the Holy Spirit. The compromised self is recreated as loved by God, affirming the particularity of each in unprecedented intimacy as adopted children of God and intimate siblings of Christ through the Spirit. This cannot be correlated with reduction of the self to silent nothingness, dissolution of identity in a cosmic soul, acceptance of a tawdry destiny in one of many reincarnations as divinely cast or stiffening moral self-fortitude in obedience to God as unitarian. Christian faith cites God’s initiative in grace not religion as the source of renewed life and the unique possibility of love for enemies that exceeds both tolerance and justice. Christian faith does not locate the quality of individual life or human community with the quality or accuracy of any religious view of humanity forged from specific traditions, laws, cultural values or natural phenomena. People are rightly inclined to see wholeness as fulfilling righteous responsibilities, yet they quibble endlessly over how and to what degree these responsibilities are fulfilled. The pursuit of righteousness could also be infinite, as indeed God is infinite. Who will determine the limit of such commitment? This is troubling for the monotheist believer; God might be assumed to command any degree of obedience, even to the detriment or destruction of others who, presumably or patently, are not obedient to God—as if this could be adjudicated! In Christian testimony, infinite debt as to righteousness is absorbed by God as the true shape of humanity is given as a gift. Grace and truth for human dignity are disclosed as defined in God’s initiative expressed by self-giving love in Jesus Christ. This source of human possibility is triune, which is distinguished by indelible nail-prints in experience of human suffering. Christian faith affirms the uniqueness of persons and the goodness of creation. If evil exists, it is a consequence of human hubris in God-given freedom. Christians make two significant affirmations with the following effects for humans. In testimony to incarnation, suffering bodies matter, therefore tangible compassion is a central imperative. In affirming the unique value of each person, the gift of life is affirmed through freedom for decisions and responsibility within their source of life as intimate love. Grace and truth in Jesus Christ invoke volitional responsibility involving unique bodies within creation, in relationships of love involving unique persons before God. This exceeds any perceived possibility generated within human cultures and societies, whether these possibilities happen to be religious or not. |
