Why the Christian should study other religions and philosophies, especially those in his or her area
For my religion class I've been reading a book outlining how to study religion. After finishing one of the chapters in it just now, I have some thoughts.
A Christian should study other religions, philosophies, worldviews, etc. in order to understand the world that he or she lives in and how to communicate the gospel with lost people. This is especially important in the area which they reside. If I was born and raised in Thailand and was a Christian as well, it would be imperative for me to study Buddhism in order to communicate what the Bible is really saying to those people who, if they only had a plain reading, would greatly misunderstand what the text is actually saying. If you tell a person who was raised in the world of Buddhism, "Jesus died on the cross for your sins," two problems immediately arise. The first is that they would think that Jesus had done something wrong in one of his past lives and that his death on the cross was because of bad karma. The second is that they do not have the sin concept that we as Christians do. Good karma and bad karma is more of an impersonal process rather than having to face a personal, holy God on judgment day.
For Christians all over the world, it is imperative that we understand our own religion and explore at least its basics. Too often people are confident with, "This is what I believe. That's how I was raised," etc. ad naseum. The problem is not that many Christians do not know what they believe, the problem is that many Christians do not know why they believe it. Too many Bible studies explore that whats but not the whys. We leave the foundation of people's faith unstable when we do not explain why we believe in Christianity and certain teachings of Christianity. People like this are open prey to those who would try and draw them out of Christianity altogether. When they are shown why Christianity is true, they become rock solid against those who would try to shatter their faith.
In the academic world which I reside, work, and study, secular humanism has taken a stronghold and gained tremendous influence. Even the book I am reading for my religion class was written by a man who takes the humanist position in the study of religion. The problem with humanism is the theory that man is the measure of all things. At first it seems good in this area of study. After all, it is humans who are willingly and actively participating in religion, not animals or inanimate objects (though they are used in religion). Where this theory self-destructs is the fact that man is finite. A finite thing (or many finite things) cannot be the measure of all things. This theory naturally turns morality into relativism and religion into mere human practice (whether religion is essential to our being or not). Although humanism tries to study religion empirically, which is a good thing, if taken to its logical conclusions it ultimately cannot declare anything truly significant or find any absolute standard to things like religion or morality. C.S. Lewis recognized this problem in his own day when he wrote The Abolition of Man. In that book, he showed why denying absolute truth will ultimately lead to man's destruction, not his liberation. He said that cutting oneself off from the Tao (his way of saying absolute truth here) is akin to a branch cutting itself off from the tree.
A Christian should study other religions, philosophies, worldviews, etc. in order to understand the world that he or she lives in and how to communicate the gospel with lost people. This is especially important in the area which they reside. If I was born and raised in Thailand and was a Christian as well, it would be imperative for me to study Buddhism in order to communicate what the Bible is really saying to those people who, if they only had a plain reading, would greatly misunderstand what the text is actually saying. If you tell a person who was raised in the world of Buddhism, "Jesus died on the cross for your sins," two problems immediately arise. The first is that they would think that Jesus had done something wrong in one of his past lives and that his death on the cross was because of bad karma. The second is that they do not have the sin concept that we as Christians do. Good karma and bad karma is more of an impersonal process rather than having to face a personal, holy God on judgment day.
For Christians all over the world, it is imperative that we understand our own religion and explore at least its basics. Too often people are confident with, "This is what I believe. That's how I was raised," etc. ad naseum. The problem is not that many Christians do not know what they believe, the problem is that many Christians do not know why they believe it. Too many Bible studies explore that whats but not the whys. We leave the foundation of people's faith unstable when we do not explain why we believe in Christianity and certain teachings of Christianity. People like this are open prey to those who would try and draw them out of Christianity altogether. When they are shown why Christianity is true, they become rock solid against those who would try to shatter their faith.
In the academic world which I reside, work, and study, secular humanism has taken a stronghold and gained tremendous influence. Even the book I am reading for my religion class was written by a man who takes the humanist position in the study of religion. The problem with humanism is the theory that man is the measure of all things. At first it seems good in this area of study. After all, it is humans who are willingly and actively participating in religion, not animals or inanimate objects (though they are used in religion). Where this theory self-destructs is the fact that man is finite. A finite thing (or many finite things) cannot be the measure of all things. This theory naturally turns morality into relativism and religion into mere human practice (whether religion is essential to our being or not). Although humanism tries to study religion empirically, which is a good thing, if taken to its logical conclusions it ultimately cannot declare anything truly significant or find any absolute standard to things like religion or morality. C.S. Lewis recognized this problem in his own day when he wrote The Abolition of Man. In that book, he showed why denying absolute truth will ultimately lead to man's destruction, not his liberation. He said that cutting oneself off from the Tao (his way of saying absolute truth here) is akin to a branch cutting itself off from the tree.