In the last two blog posts, I used four criteria to analyze common worldviews as systematically as possible. The four criteria are best applied once a seeker realizes that nature is consistent with the existence of a supreme and necessary being. These were, first, the deity revealed in any particular faith should be consistent with nature’s revelation.
Second, the worldview should be able to diagnose and provide an effective remedy for the brokenness of the human condition. Third, the evidence of supernatural activity should be observed. Finally, one can evaluate the experiential aspect of a worldview or religion by engaging in a devotional experiment.
But someone might trip on asking whether these criteria are valid and reliable ways of assessing a religious worldview. It is like asking how I know that the ruler I am using is a valid and reliable tool to measure the length of an object.
Well, let’s briefly discuss them individually.
The First Criterion: Comparing the Two sources of Revelation.
For the first criterion, it flows quite naturally that the works of God should reflect his personality. Therefore, if the teachings of religion X contradict nature's revelation, we can eliminate religion X.
The Second Criterion: Diagnosing the Human condition
For the second criterion, it does not take much to realize that even though we are living in the most technologically, medically, and scientifically advanced age in human history, and level of education, we have been witnessing the most devastating moral evil of all times. Think of ISIS, the Nazis, war news, mass shootings, and Stalin's atrocities. Also, consider the rising confusion in ethics, the understanding of the most basic units of society, namely family and identity as in issues surrounding sexual orientation, transgenderism, and divorce. Moreover, the rise in depression and suicide rates in the richest and the most educated countries to the point of it being an epidemic is noteworthy (Horwitz & Wakefield, 2008). Although we are obviously capable of doing good deeds, most of us would agree that our hearts are wicked. Finally, we fail to transform ourselves despite our luxury, advancements and knowledge. In summary, the current human condition resembles a leper who is trying to heal himself by covering himself with fancier outfits, more makeup, and by doing more aesthetic surgeries, yet he wonders why his leprosy is getting worse.
How about evidence for the hunger for meaning and the afterlife? Here we are, discussing religious quests, while we could have been doing something else. What does our spiritual hunger imply? According to Geivett (1995), religious quests are motivated by a "natural desire to make sense of human existence within a larger framework of reality. This desire expresses itself in a variety of ways. At times, we are curious about life's larger meaning" (pp. 189). Sometimes, these quests are driven by our confusion on issues like evil and pain (Geivett, 1995). So, in the end, the hunger for meaning is the underlying agitator that motivates us to bear the intellectual burdens of religious quests. Also, considering ancient Egyptians, it seems that most of their lives revolved around their afterlife. Their arts, engineering, and even medicine flourished because they were all fueled by their belief in the afterlife and hunger for eternity.
The Third Criterion: Supernatural Evidence
How about the third criterion or the evidence for the supernatural? Some typical objections come to mind; miracles cannot possibly happen. Why do we assume that God would intervene miraculously anyway? In regard to the first objection, if the objection is raised because of naturalistic assumptions, then we have to go back to our first step in our religious quest. If we decide that the evidence points to God's existence, then there is no barrier to believing that the same God who was capable of the biggest miracle of all (i.e., creating the universe out of literal nothing) is also capable of doing other miracles. C.S. Lewis puts it this way, “But if we admit God, must we admit miracles? Indeed, indeed, you have no security against it. That is the bargain" (as cited in Geisler & Brooks, 2013, pp.72). In fact, one should expect that God would continue to intervene in supernatural ways. Since God is good and powerful enough to create this universe to allow physical flourishing, He would care for our spiritual flourishing (Giesler et al., 2013). However, we are broken spiritually and in need of remedy. Miracles are one way that a caring God would utilize to capture our attention and direct us to his prepared remedy (Geivett, n.d.).
The Fourth Criterion: Devotional Experimentation
The last criterion becomes valid when you have a good lead in your quest but still have some doubts, especially emotional doubts, Geivett (1995) recommends doing a "devotional experiment". In this "experiment", you would imagine how you would manage life if you had accepted the view you are considering and see if it works in your life.