Jarl Waggoner's Articles

Existentialism: Philosophy of the Masses

by Jarl K. Waggoner

If we are to communicate the gospel of Jesus Christ to modern-day people, we must know how they think and why they think as they do.

Everyone has a life philosophy--a set of beliefs or principles by which he makes decisions and determines the course of his life. Most people, however, cannot even articulate what it is. They have not carefully thought out their philosophy of life; rather they have absorbed it from the culture around them.

If it is true that most people absorb their life philosophy rather than painstakingly and thoughtfully construct it, we can be sure that most people in Western culture have been influenced to one degree or another by the philosophy known as existentialism.

R. C. Sproul wrote, "The rapid spread and enormous impact of existential philosophy upon our culture has been uncanny. I doubt if there has been any philosophical system that has had as much influence on American culture in thetwentieth century as this school of thought. We encounter the influence of existentialism virtually every day of our lives and in virtually every sphere of our culture" (Lifeviews, Revell).

What is Existentialism?

Exitentialism is a difficult philosophy to define. Indeed, even the philosophers most often identified as existentialists often disdain the title.

A typical dictionary definition of existentialism, however, sums up the basic tenets upon which most existentialists agree. It is a "philosophical movement embracing diverse doctrines centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual who must assume ultimate responsibility for his acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad" (Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Merriam Webster).

Existentialism is often identified with such philosophers as Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Karl Jaspers, Albert Camus, and Soren Kierkegaard, who developed a form of existential theology.

These philosophers concerned themselves with the happiness and contentment of the individual. They saw man as completely free to make choices in a world that offers no meaning and no sure path to peace and fulfillment. So it is that one of the major themes in existentialism is that of despair.

According to Christian philosopher and theologian Francis Schaeffer (Escape from Reason, InterVarsity), the development of existentialism followed a well-defined course. It began with a deficient view of the fall and depravity of man. Man saw his own reason as adequate for understanding all things. Seeing no need for divine revelation, man embraced rationalism. Rationalism, however, leaves no room for God; thus the rationalist ultimately finds life itself meaningless.

Seeing nothing but despair in the rational and having no way to determine right and wrong, the existentialist sees himself as responsible for defining himself and giving meaning and fulfillment to his life. Without any reference to moral absolutes, however, everything becomes subjective. Each person must seek to find fulfillment and meaning for himself. Ultimately, feelings or passions become his sole guide. The only meaning one finds in life is the meaning one chooses to give it, and that choice is made on the basis of feeling alone.

Sproul noted that Friedrich Nietzsche, the father of existentialism, "took the philosophy of secularism to its logical conclusion. He understood that if this time is the only time, and this world is the only world, then there is no God. If there is no God, then life is meaningless. If all of human existence is shut up in the here and now, then all human values are arbitrary. If there is no exit to the eternal, then values and truth and ethics are a matter of pure decision. Right and wrong are simply what we have the courage to decide they are for ourselves."

The best the existentalist can do is to carve out his own, often irrational, values in the face of a meaningless universe. He "does his own thing."

The Impact of Existentialism

One might be wondering what this philosophical mumbo jumbo has to do with modern life. Do people really buy into this? The answer is yes. It is true that most people have not even heard of the term "existentialism" outside a college classroom, but the masses have unconsciously absorbed its basic tenets and live by them.

Schaeffer wrote, "The mass of people have received the new way of thinking through the mass media without analysing it. It is worse for them because they have been smashed in the face by it, because the cinema, television, the books they read, the press, magazines, have been infiltrated by the new thought-forms in an unanalysed way."

One can see its influence in modern motion pictures in general, which so often have no traditional heroes. The "heroes" of today are not those who stand for what is right; they are those who stand for something, anything--even the immoral and the irrational. They are those who succeed without any reference to truth or goodness.

Many forms of modern art are the direct and intentional expression of existential thought. They are nothing more than chaos on canvas, "artistic" statements that life is meaningless.

We also see the influence of existential thought in the despair that engulfs much of Western society. Suicide rates continue to rise, and the psychoanalysts never seem to lack for patients. Many people have followed the existentialist prescription for escaping a meaningless existence by abandoning reason and seeking fulfillment in what Schaeffer called a "leap of faith"--a desperate attempt to find meaning in such far-ranging experiences as the use of mind-altering drugs, religious mysticism, and sexual indulgence.

Perhaps an even more obvious evidence of existentialist influence is the common failure of people to see any unified answer for knowledge and life. Most people see no universal truth. All that matters is what makes them feel good, what works for them. Existentialists do not seek truth--for them there is no ultimate truth. Rather, they seek an experience that will somehow satisfy for them their questions about purpose, meaning, and existence.

Sadly, we find existentialist thinking even in the church of today. Liberal theologies have embraced the basic precepts of existentialism and clothed them with Christian terminology. But even in Bible believing and Bible teaching churches, one finds that the "feeling ethic" has been adopted by many Christians. What feels good to them often takes precedence over what is true. The emphasis is on one's experience with Jesus rather than on the truth of Jesus as taught in the Bible. How often we hear people speak of "feeling the Lord's leading" when that leading contradicts the clear teaching of the Bible.

A Christian Response

Clearly, existentialism is at odds with biblical Christianity. "While existentialism stresses subjective inner experience, Christianity links subjective inner experience with objective and testable supernatural events in history . . . and with God-given and God-developed reason" (McDowell and Stewart, Handbook of Today's Religions, Here's Life).

The existentialist belief that man is absolutely free contradicts the biblical teaching that human beings are enslaved to their own sin natures (cf. John 8:34). The moral standards of Scripture are not merely the subjective values of human beings, no better than those values any individual might select for himself. They have an objective basis in the character of God.

It is not enough, however, to simply critique existentialism from a biblical point of view. We must lovingly confront those who hold these views. In view of the pervasive influence of existentialist thought, Christians need to keep several things in mind when dealing with people today. First, we cannot stress our personal Christian experience. There is a place for personal testimony, of course, but existentialists see all experiences as equally valid. Everyone chooses his own way, and one's experience is as valid as another's.

Second, we must challenge people's presuppositions. Most people assume that human beings are autonomous--free to determine for themselves what is true and right. They have no objective standard for what is right and wrong, only their own subjective feelings. Of course to declare that there are no universal, absolute truths is inherently self-contradictory (an absolute declaration that there are no absolutes!), but this is the tension modern people live with.

The Bible is the objective, absolute standard for truth and morality, and it must be presented as such. It is the only satisfactory alternative to the pessimistic, subjective, and always uncertain "faith" of existentialism. The Bible is God's perfect revelation to man and, as such, gives the answers to the individual's greatest concerns. It points people to Jesus Christ, the only One who can give meaning, purpose, and fulfillment to one's life.

Third, we must confront existentialist thinkers with the Bible. It speaks to all the concerns of the existentialist--individuality, inner peace, and ultimate meaning--and provides a unified, cohesive view of life and the universe in which we live.

We cannot argue someone into the faith on the basis of rational arguments. Indeed, modern man has by and large abandoned the rational. However, the Bible is a supernatural Book. It alone, through the work of the Holy Spirit, is sufficient to alter the warped thinking of confused, hopeless people and bring conviction and conversion.

Finally, we must be careful that we do not absorb the very existential values our Christian faith rejects. We must not allow our faith to degenerate into an experience-oriented Christianity, for when this happens, personal experience eventually and inevitably becomes the very basis of our faith, subtly displacing the great doctrines of Scripture.

True Christianity does not deny experience, but neither does it elevate it above Scripture. Every experience must be subjected to the scrutiny and interpretation of the objective standard of the Bible. Otherwise, experience reigns supreme, and our faith has more in common with existentialism than with biblical Christianity.

As the late Francis Schaeffer warned, "If we do this, the generation which follows will certainly be undercut as far as historic Christianity is concerned. But also, if we ourselves bear the central mark of our generation, we cannot at this moment in history be the voice we should be to our poor and fractured generation; we cannot be the restorative salt which Christians are supposed to be to their generation and their culture . . . If we are so marked, we then have no real absolute by which to help, or by which to judge, the culture, state, and society" (How Should We Then Live? Crossway).

This article was originally published in The Gospel Herald and the Sunday School Times, Summer Quarter 2000 issue. It is reprinted here by permission of the Incorporated Trustees of the Gospel Worker Society, Union Gospel Press, P. O. Box 6059, Cleveland, Ohio 44101.