Click here to
|
Humanism in Scripture
and Culture
Recovering a Balance
Dennis Bratcher
In much of evangelical Christianity, the term "humanism" or "humanistic"
has come to mean nearly the opposite of "Christian," indicating a person or
an attitude that leaves God aside in favor of elevating human reason as the
measure of all truth. "Secular humanism" has been associated with the almost
totally rationalistic mentality associated with the ascendancy of scientific
methodology and naturalism in the first three decades of the twentieth
century, a
perspective that often did tend to leave God out of consideration.
The term
has more recently been popularized by Jerry Falwell in the latter part of
the twentieth century who used it to refer to
a whole segment of culture that he understood to be in direct opposition to
Christianity. However, totally apart from the existence of such a segment of
culture, this use of the term "humanism" is not only imprecise, it does not
do justice to a balanced understanding of both the Old Testament and the
historic Christian faith, as well as an important dimension of Wesleyan
theology.
To use the term humanism in this way
reveals a misunderstanding of the term and confuses it with secularism
or atheism. The term humanism is not
interchangeable with either secularism or atheism.
To avoid confusion, we need to nail down some basic meanings.
Secularism
is the "indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious
considerations" (Webster’s). This, by definition, is what would
stand opposed to Christianity. Atheism
takes this a step further is maintaining "the disbelief in the existence of
deity" (Webster’s). Secularism simply does not consider religion or God as a
factor in human affairs, while atheism actively denies the existence of God,
which would render religion irrelevant (this is slightly different from
agnosticism, which holds that we cannot know whether there is a
God or not). Although these two terms are of different degrees, in relation
to the Christian Faith they mean virtually the same thing: a perspective
that does not consider God to be of any concern for how people live their
lives.
Humanism, however, in its basic
meaning has nothing to say one way or the other about God or religion.
Humanism is simply a concern with things human, especially with literature,
the arts, and the humanities ("the branches of learning, as
philosophy and language, that investigate human constructs and concerns as
opposed to natural processes, as physics and chemistry," Webster’s). The
emphasis here is "human concerns," which would certainly include religion,
but also include a wide range of other endeavors that relate to human
existence. In this context, even the study of Scripture and theology are
humanistic endeavors, which is why Religion departments in universities
often come under a division of humanities.
Humanism arose as a concern and a discipline largely as a reaction
against the medieval period in which almost all the emphasis was on the
supernatural, mostly in the form of magic and the demonic. (I find it
interesting that many of the very people in modern Christianity who want to exclude
any humanism, also tend to want a great deal of emphasis on the demonic).
Humanism became a central principle of the Renaissance by the fourteenth century
and helped foster the Enlightenment in Europe. In fact, it helped lay the
foundation for the sixteenth century Reformation, as Luther began to see that
people could themselves read and understand Scripture and think
theologically apart from the divine authority of the church.
In this sense, a person can be a devoted Christian and be a humanist, as
was Erasmus of Rotterdam (late fifteenth century), credited with being one of the
first Christian humanists of the "modern" era. Among other things, Erasmus
wanted to study the Greek text of the New Testament on the basis of the
texts themselves apart from how the church said they ought to read. He was also a vocal opponent of tradition as truth. Erasmus represented a new
concern with history and language that focused on the human dimension rather
than trying to explain everything in terms of divine decree or by the
authority of the church or prevailing political powers.
But even though humanism was a new intellectual movement in the fifteenth
century, it was by no means a new perspective on how to view the world.
There is a great deal of humanism in Scripture, for example in the Wisdom
traditions of Proverbs, Song of Solomon, Job, and Ecclesiastes, as well as
in some sections of the torah that deal with social relationships.
We are so used to taking a prophetic perspective in thinking about
Scripture, in which a prophet simply speaks for God, or using the authority
of Jesus or Paul as the model for the authority of Scripture, that we forget
there are other voices and other perspectives in Scripture. The wisdom
traditions operate on a different level than a "God said" approach to life
(see The Character of Wisdom: An Introduction to Old
Testament Wisdom Literature). The basic perspective of Wisdom is that
God created the world as a place for human existence. As such, all of human
existence is lived under God, under a "sacred canopy." This is simply a
metaphor to describe the essence of the theological theme of wisdom: "The
reverence of God is the beginning of wisdom" (Prov 1:7). Since God is
Creator, there is nothing that falls outside of God’s domain.
Therefore, a concern with things human, such as literature and poetry,
the socialization of children, public manners, propriety and prudence in
conduct, the training of public leaders, even human sexuality and family
relationships, were important aspects of living in God’s world. Wisdom does
not address the human condition from the divine perspective but rather from
the perspective of human needs and concerns. It gives expression to the way
things are, not how they should be. It is descriptive not prescriptive.
Wisdom grapples with understanding the world, and is concerned with choosing
the proper course of action for well being in life ("the two ways," cf. Psa
1).
From this perspective, Wisdom is humanistic, but it a sacred or
sacral humanism in which every aspect of wisdom thought is
undergirded with the fundamental assumption that we live in God’s world,
under God’s order, and toward God’s purposes. A modern expression of this,
although in a little different direction, is the saying "all truth is God’s
truth."
So, while we can speak of a more rational approach of wisdom, even a
humanistic approach to truth (meaning "concerned with humanity"), it was
never secular. In wisdom thinking,
service of God comes by finding out how God has created the world to work,
and then living in harmony with that order of creation.
The wisdom writers did not necessarily perceive everything that happened
in the world as good. They approached the whole issue of human
existence from a different direction. They knew, for example, that a lot of
pain comes from interpersonal relationships, such as marriage. Something
needed to change to correct that. But their answer was not to impose law,
but carefully to instruct the young in what is involved in marriage, the
responsibilities it entails, and the consequences of not choosing wisely
(cf. Prov 1:8f). On one level, they did not need a "thus says Yahweh" for
this. What they needed was people who were sensitive to all those aspects of
life, who were willing to listen to the experience and wisdom of others, and
people who were willing to teach others. It is in this sense, with the
concern for human existence and for the things that affect human life, that
the biblical perspectives are humanistic.
Now, as far as the relation between humanism and secularism and atheism,
this is where the confusion occurs. Almost all
secularism is humanistic; if one assumes there is no God or that
he is irrelevant in the world, they are left with only humans as a focal
point. But not all humanism is secularism.
Humanism can be sacral as well as
secular. It is not that humanism itself is bad; only that it can
be perverted into a perspective that eliminates God. There is always a
danger in humanism that the human can overshadow the divine, that human
endeavor and achievement can be seen as the goal of human existence, and
therefore the criteria of truth.
But that does not come because it is
humanistic. It comes because a secularist or an atheist, or even a Christian
who does not really understand the heart of the Faith, eliminates God from
consideration and uses it that way. But when a Christian or a theist
who assumes God at work in human affairs from the beginning uses humanism,
then it becomes a sacral humanism that sees human life operating under the
sacred canopy of God as Creator.
I think it is a mistake and a misreading of culture to label most
everything that does not fit within certain definitions of "religion" or
"truth" as "humanism." "Humanism" is not in and of itself negative,
especially since a significant collection of biblical material takes that
approach (Walter Brueggemann, one of Christianity's most well known biblical
scholars, entitled a book on the theology of the Wisdom
traditions In Man We Trust: The Neglected Side of Biblical Faith).
We could even track here the humanistic perspectives of John Wesley that contrast
so readily with his opponents, especially in the dimension of human freedom
and the responsibility to live out a holiness of heart in life. It is that
very kind of humanism under the sacred canopy that directs our attention as
Christians to the needs of the world around us rather than being content
with introspection and personal salvation in isolation from the rest of
humanity.
So, to use the term humanistic to mean "not-Christian" reflects a
misunderstanding of some of the perspectives of Scripture itself. And
even to tag the label "secular" onto humanistic concerns in order to
discount them reflects as much ideology as does agnosticism or atheism, or
even the misplaced mysticism of modern New Age culture. It has the
effect of settling for labels rather than dealing with the more complicated
theological issues, and may even put some at risk of misunderstanding or not
being able to hear all of Scripture.
At this point rather than simply using the word humanism as a way to name
the "demons" that threaten to posses our children and our culture, we need
properly to distinguish whether we are speaking about secularism or atheism,
or whether we are referring neutrally to humanism as that which is of
concern to human beings. Perhaps our named demons are not as demonic as we
like to think. It’s easier to deal with a complex world if everything
outside of our own "safe" environment can be named as demonic with labels
like humanistic. Recall the notation on medieval maps at the edge of the
known world: "Here there be dragons." Now, we know that what lay in that
demonic realm was the New World of the Americas. The same may be true with
humanism. Understood and used properly, with a proper balance between human
effort and God’s work, it may provide us more opportunity than it does
threat.
-Dennis Bratcher, Copyright ©
2018, Dennis
Bratcher - All Rights Reserved
See Copyright and User Information Notice |
Related pages Biblical Realism as Faith:
The Wisdom and Psalms Traditions
Character of Wisdom
Bible in the Church
Issues in Ministry
The Triumph of Arminianism (and its dangers),
especially the section The Dangers of
Arminianism |