Christianity and Existentialism: Meaning, Freedom, Faith, and Human Responsibility

Christianity and existentialism offer sharply different answers to the question of meaning. Existentialism generally begins with the individual’s experience of freedom, anxiety, guilt, despair, choice, and responsibility, while biblical Christianity locates meaning in God, creation, the image of God in humanity, sin, redemption, and a restored relationship with Jesus Christ.

The central contrast is this: atheistic existentialism argues that human beings must create meaning in a world without objective purpose, whereas Christianity teaches that meaning is given by the Creator and fulfilled through everlasting relationship with Him. Theistic existentialism accepts belief in God but often treats faith as a personal, subjective, and passionate response rather than as knowledge grounded in divine revelation.

The problem of meaning

Nihilism says matter exists, but God doesn't. This universe is a closed system. Everything is determined. Human beings don't have real choices, we're just cogs in a wheel, and the system is going and we're part of it, and our choices don't matter, and what we think doesn't matter. Nothing matters.

Nihilism goes on to say that humans are just complex machines; that's what we are. And we're part of a bigger and more complex machine. So the idea of true knowledge-it's meaningless. Ethics are impossible. There is no meaning in life.

Every secular philosophy since this worldview of Nihilism came into the world in the third quarter of the nineteenth century, every secular philosophy that has risen in the Western world since, has tried to give an answer to Nihilism; that is, has tried to find meaning in an otherwise meaningless existence.

Albert Camus, the great twentieth-century existentialist said this: “In the darkest depths of our nihilism, I have sought only for the means to transcend nihilism.” In other words, he's saying ‘my goal in all my philosophizing and living has been to try to find an answer to the meaninglessness which has been predicated by Nihilism.

The Christian worldview and the image of God

The Christian response to the apparent smallness of human beings in the vast universe is not meaninglessness, hopelessness, or unimportance. The Christian worldview begins with God as Creator and with humanity as made in His image.

When I consider the heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained; what is man, that Thou dost take thought of him? And the son of man, that Thou dost care for him?

Yet Thou hast made him a little lower than God, and dost crown him with glory and majesty! Thou dost make him to rule over the works of Thy hands; Thou has put all things under his feet, all sheep and oxen, and also the beasts of the field, the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea, whatever passes through the paths of the seas.

O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth!

The doctrine of the image of God in man explains the difference between the Nihilist looking at this big world and finding that it's absurd, and declaring that everything's meaningless, and the psalmist looking at this big world and seeing little man compared to this big world, and yet praising God.

He's taking you right back to Genesis 1 and 2, where God tells us in His word that man was created in His image. The Creator suffused meaning into man's existence in the very way that He created us.

It's one of His blessings that the Creator has given to His creation. And the psalmist celebrates that reality in Psalm 8, and it's such a different view of reality than the view of Nihilism.

From Theism to Nihilism and existentialism

Remember, we said that Deism replaced Theism as a worldview in the time of The Enlightenment because it was thought that Theism, on the one hand, was responsible for the internecine wars in Europe, and perhaps a more refined and rational view of God in the world could produce peace and tranquility in human life.

And then, along behind Deism came Naturalism that says, look, Deism predicates a first cause, a divine maker who made this world like a clock and set it running and then let it go to go and do whatever he was interested in doing, and he no longer interacts in this world.

The laws he set in motion are still in motion, so Naturalism says, look, we can take everything that Deism gives and remove the idea of this God who created things, this first cause, and the philosophy works just fine.

And then came a view which said, well, why do you have to assume that this world is rational, and can be made sense of? So Nihilism came along behind Naturalism.

In other words, Nihilism saw all of the presuppositions of Naturalism and said Naturalism's assumption that we are in a rational world that can be understood and that meaning can be constructed out of is wrong.

And then behind Nihilism comes Existentialism, saying, no, we can make meaning in this world, but that meaning doesn't come from the objective reality. There's no objective meaning out there. The only meaning that can be had in life is produced by us.

So we see a slide down in these progressive worldviews, as they continue to take one another to their logical conclusions and expose their weaknesses.

What existentialism is

That first attempt at answering Nihilism has been called Existentialism. Tonight we're going to look at the search for meaning in Existentialism.

Existentialists have many differences, but there are some common concerns that guide their philosophical thinking.

First, existentialists believe that freedom is the distinct trait of human beings. The existentialist wants to enable people to experience and practice their freedom as they choose what to value and how to live.

Second, existentialists also seek to convert their readers. They want the reader to see that she has been deluded in some way, and to take a radically new perspective.

This is similar to a religious conversion, and in fact for Kierkegaard it includes such a conversion. For other existentialists, the new perspective may not include God at all, but a purely human point of view.

Existentialists argue that if we accept the fact of our freedom and the responsibility that goes along with it, we will be changed.

Another key component of existentialism is the belief that emotions can be a means of understanding.

Existentialists believe that human beings can come to know things through certain moods or feelings.

For example, if a person feels a sense of fidelity to a friend who has died, this points him to the existence of God, who is the source of fidelity.

The emotions of despair and guilt have important roles in Kierkegaard’s philosophy and the human quest for meaning and satisfaction in life.

Atheistic existentialism

There are two forms of Existentialism that are on the market. There is one form of Existentialism that is atheistic. It doesn't believe in God. But there's another form of Existentialism that is theistic. It does believe in God.

Some of you have read the material of atheistic existentialism. Some of you have read John Paul Sartre, or Albert Camus, or Martin Heidegger.

Atheistic Existentialism begins by agreeing with Nihilism. Atheistic Existentialism says, “Yes, matter exists eternally, and matter is all there is. God does not exist. The cosmos exists as a uniformity of natural causes in a closed system.”

This world is a big machine. History is a string of linear events linked by cause and effect, but you can't discern any overarching purpose in it.

Ethics. That's just something that human beings invent. It's not rooted in objective reality.

And so, Atheistic Existentialism starts off by saying “Yep, the Nihilists have described the world correctly. It's just a big blob that you can't make any sense of out there. It's absurd, and the more you think about it, the more absurd it is.”

Existence precedes essence

But, then the Atheistic Existentialist says, “Here's how we're going to respond to this. We’re going to respond by saying that existence precedes essence.”

Existence precedes essence. In other words, we exist, and then we supply the meaning of life. We exist, and then we supply the answer to the essence of life.

In other words, mankind makes itself. We invent ourselves. We invent meaning.

We come into a world which has no meaning, and the job of the Existentialist in this meaningless world is to do what? To create meaning. To create what we are as human beings.

The idea of the Existentialist is that people make themselves who they are.

The Existentialist, over against the Nihilist who said people are robots, the Existentialist says, “No. This world is a big machine, but I am not a cog in this wheel. I have a free will. I determine myself. My decisions make who I am.”

The Existentialist says each person is totally free as regards to their nature and destiny, and the job of the Existentialist over against this world is to revolt against the object of this world, and create meaning out of meaninglessness, and to create value out of valueless-ness.

It's a very heroic sort of worldview.

This is the task, the Atheistic Existentialist says, of humanity: to revolt against this world, this meaningless world, and to create value. People make themselves who they are.

Theistic existentialism

Theistic Existentialism is a little bit different. It has existed, actually, longer than Atheistic Existentialism.

You know, the great Atheistic Existentialist writers that perhaps you read in high school or in college were writing, by and large, in the middle of the twentieth century.

But Theistic Existentialism actually began in the nineteenth century with a Danish theologian named Soren Kierkegaard reacting against dead orthodoxy in the Lutheran churches in which he had grown up.

And following Kierkegaard had been a series of modern theologians. Maybe the two names that you know best would be the names of Rudolph Bultmann and Karl Barth. Both of these were influenced by existentialism.

And sometimes it even calls itself “Christian Existentialism”-if ever there was a contradiction in terms, that's one of them.

Søren Kierkegaard and Christian existentialism

Søren Kierkegaard’s two heroes were Socrates and Jesus Christ.

When explaining what he took his purpose as a philosopher to be, Kierkegaard said, “My task is a Socratic task-to rectify the concept of what it means to be a Christian.”

This nineteenth-century Danish philosopher (1813-1855) is perhaps best known as the father of existentialism, a school of philosophical thought most often associated with atheist thinkers like Jean Paul Sartre.

Kierkegaard, however, had a passionate faith in God.

He was a staunch critic of the Danish church as well as a voice urging others to consider their need for God and His place in a truly fulfilled human existence.

Much of what he wrote is strikingly relevant to contemporary life.

Kierkegaard’s authorship and pseudonyms

Kierkegaard is often misunderstood, in part because of the complexity of his approach as an author.

Many of his works are written under particular pseudonyms. That is, Kierkegaard takes on a persona as an author and writes from a perspective different from his own.

For example, in Fear and Trembling, a book that explores God’s testing of Abraham through His command that he sacrifice Isaac, Kierkegaard writes as Johannes de Silentio (“John of silence”).

In the preface, John of silence states that he is not a philosopher.

Instead, he is an outsider looking in at the faith of Abraham. He is trying to understand a faith that he does not have.

Kierkegaard wanted to help people discover and ultimately live the truth for themselves, which may be one of his motivations for writing from the perspective of different characters.

Because Kierkegaard employs pseudonyms in this way, he is often misinterpreted.

To understand his views, it is best to look to the works published under Kierkegaard’s own name, such as his series of edifying discourses and Works of Love.

Kierkegaard’s life and existential concerns

Kierkegaard is said to have inherited his propensities for guilt and melancholy from his father, Michael, who was a strictly religious man.

Michael believed that all of his seven children would die by the age of 33, the age of Jesus at His crucifixion.

The reason may have been that he cursed God as a young boy, or that he impregnated his second wife Anne, Søren’s mother, before they were married.

Interestingly, only Søren and one of his older brothers lived past the age of 33.

In 1840 Kierkegaard became engaged to Regine Olson.

His inheritance from his father, who died in 1838, was large enough that he would not need to work, but it was not enough to support a wife and children.

Ultimately, Kierkegaard broke off the engagement, which he justified as necessary to fulfill his divine calling as a writer.

It is clear that his relationship with Regine had a lasting impact on him, and its ending was felt by him to be a painful sacrifice.

But he apparently believed that it was a sacrifice with a divine purpose.

The stages on life’s way

Kierkegaard believed that philosophy should focus on life’s deep questions related to God, humanity, ethics, and meaning.

He approaches these issues not merely in an abstract sense, but in a way that is both practical and prophetic.

In keeping with his belief that philosophy should be relevant to our daily lives and speak to our deepest concerns, Kierkegaard discusses a process by which human beings can acquire deep satisfaction and become authentic persons.

In order to understand this process, he often discusses the stages on life’s way.

The aesthetic stage

The first stage on life’s way is the aesthetic stage.

The main goal of a person in this stage is to satisfy her desires.

These desires could be for many different things. The hedonist in pursuit of sensual pleasures is the perfect example of life in this stage.

Because she is driven by her desires, she is not truly free and fails to have a consistent character.

But a problem arises, even if she gets what she wants.

Given their nature, humans are not satisfied with mere pleasures, whether from food, drink, sex, or television.

We need something more; this type of life is empty.

Because of this, a person living in this stage will at some point experience despair.

This emotion of despair, then, is a means by which she can come to know that she must change, that life as she is living it is not now and cannot ever be truly satisfying.

In response, she may seek out more or different pleasures in her quest for satisfaction, or she may move to the next stage on life’s way.

If she does, she can make progress towards living out her freedom rather than being captive to her desires.

The ethical stage

The second stage is the ethical stage, in which the primary goal is to live according to ethical truth.

In this stage, there are moral limits on what one can and cannot do.

The individual takes responsibility for herself and her choices, and seeks to become what she ought to be.

She seeks to fulfill her duties related to her work and her relationships.

The ethical life introduces sacrifice; the self is no longer at the center of everything as it was in the previous stage.

However, a new problem arises that prevents her from being truly fulfilled.

She reflects on her life and realizes that she does not always do what she ought to do.

No one does.

This leads to a new problem, the problem of guilt and the despair that it produces.

These emotions show her that a further change is needed if she is to be fulfilled.

In response to this, she may simply try harder to do the right thing, to be the kind of person she wants to be, or she may move to the third and final stage.

The religious stage

The religious stage is where the individual finds true fulfillment, and becomes truly authentic.

Here, one realizes that she cannot always do the right thing.

This is a fact of human nature that she accepts.

She also receives forgiveness from God, which resolves her guilt and eradicates her despair.

She is now becoming an authentic individual because she is rightly related to God by a passionate faith in Him.

She has been converted; she sees her life from a new perspective.

For Kierkegaard, the religious person is no sour ascetic.

Instead, she realizes the goodness of creation, and takes the sensual pleasures of food, drink, and sex to be gifts from God to be enjoyed in the right way.

By grace she is rightly related to the physical world, other people, and God.

Her physical and spiritual aspects are integrated in a way that brings wholeness and integrity to her character and to her life.

For Kierkegaard, this is what it means to be a Christian.

Institutional Christianity, or “Christendom,” as he often referred to it, was beset by hypocrisy and consisted of empty ritual.

By contrast, an authentic Christianity is a personal, passionate, inner faith that leads one to act in the world.

Faith, reason, and the absurd

The first thing is to say this: We humans live in an alien universe, and the matter of the existence of God is not something which is a matter of knowledge and reason; it's a matter of faith.

And a hard divide is made between faith and reason, so that, for instance, beginning with Kierkegaard the idea was [that] in order to transcend and arrive at an understanding of who God is, you had to take a leap of faith.

That's a very un-Christian idea, you understand. God in the Scriptures never asks you to take a “leap of faith.”

Kierkegaard is commonly thought to hold the view that faith and reason are opposed to one another.

Many readers of his works come away thinking that for him faith is irrational.

This confusion is sometimes due to the way Kierkegaard uses the terms “objectivity,” “subjectivity,” and “absurd.”

Kierkegaard seems to be critical of objective truth and a believer in the subjectivity of truth.

But he is no relativist.

In fact, his aim is to preserve objectivity but to keep it deeply connected with a passionate subjectivity, or a deeply held inward commitment that moves one to obey God through acting in the world.

He believes that one ought to give careful thought to one’s goals and perspective on the world.

He believes that there are objectively true moral principles, and that humans have moral obligations connected to the various roles they inhabit, such as parent, ruler, or employee.

He also believes that there is an objective reality that can be known and engaged, including divine reality.

What Kierkegaard is critical of, and rejects, is the form of objectivity that undermines a person’s self-understanding as an individual responsible for his actions, convictions, and concern for truth.

For example, he would reject the notion that we are merely complex biological machines at the mercy of the laws of nature, because this view undermines individual responsibility.

He would also be critical of the person who claims to know the truths of Christianity, but does not live them.

These truths must be grasped subjectively and lived out in daily life, if they are to be truly known.

The meaning of the absurd

Another reason that Kierkegaard is thought to believe that faith is irrational has to do with the concept of the absurd in his writings.

Many interpret Kierkegaard as holding the view that individuals should take a blind leap of faith and believe in something that is contradictory.

Contemporary Christian philosopher Robert Adams thinks this interpretation is misguided, however, based on his reading of Fear and Trembling.

When a person of faith embraces the absurd, it is not that he believes something that is contradictory.

Rather, the absurd refers to a believer giving up his claim but not his care for someone or something that he loves.

Abraham illustrates this when he binds Isaac and is prepared to offer him to God as a sacrifice.

Abraham loves Isaac with all that he is.

He gives up any claim to Isaac as he intends to offer him as a sacrifice, but never renounces his love for Isaac.

By faith he receives Isaac back again as the angel of the Lord tells him to relent.

To receive back that which one has given up is the movement of faith.

This same faith is important for others as well.

Humans are to renounce their claim on the finite goods of the world, but in the same moment receive them back from God by faith.

It is this concurrent resignation and reception that is the absurd, for Kierkegaard.

But it is also the right thing to do.

Christian existentialism and its theological problems

Atheistic Existentialism says, “Yes, matter exists eternally, and matter is all there is. God does not exist.”

Christian Existentialism begins from a very different set of affirmations.

Atheistic Existentialism says, “Yes, God exists; He's infinite, He's personal, He's triune. He's transcendent, He's emanent, He's everything-He's sovereign, He's good.

He creates the cosmos out of nothing to operate in accordance with natural causes, and human beings are created in the image of God.

And God can and does communicate with us.

And we were created good, but we're now fallen and need to be restored by God through Christ.

For human beings death is either the gate to life with God and His people forever, or a life separated from God.”

And you say, well, that sounds pretty good. And of course, Existentialism in Christian garb can sound pretty good.

But he so-called Christian Existentialist goes on to say four other things that are not so good.

Faith separated from knowledge and reason

The first thing is to say this: We humans live in an alien universe, and the matter of the existence of God is not something which is a matter of knowledge and reason; it's a matter of faith.

And a hard divide is made between faith and reason, so that, for instance, beginning with Kierkegaard the idea was [that] in order to transcend and arrive at an understanding of who God is, you had to take a leap of faith.

God in the Scriptures never asks you to take a “leap of faith.”

Subjective Christianity

The second concern is that existentialist approaches can move the center of Christianity from God’s objective revelation to the individual’s inner experience.

These truths must be grasped subjectively and lived out in daily life, if they are to be truly known.

But a Christian faith reduced to inward experience can undermine the doctrine of Scripture and of Christ and the foundations of The Apostles’ Creed, the biblical Christian faith.

Authenticity without biblical authority

Existentialists seek to convert their readers.

They want the reader to see that she has been deluded in some way, and to take a radically new perspective.

For Kierkegaard, the religious person is no sour ascetic.

By contrast, an authentic Christianity is a personal, passionate, inner faith that leads one to act in the world.

Christianity, however, cannot be defined only by personal intensity, inward passion, or existential authenticity.

The Christian faith is also defined by God’s revelation, the person and work of Christ, the truth of Scripture, and the content of the biblical Christian faith.

Confusing the human problem

According to the Scripture our big problem is not meaning.

If we are created in the image of God, the problem in the world is not that there is a lack of meaning.

There's plenty of meaning to go around.

The problem which is upon us is sin; our sin, and our alienation from the God who made us to be fulfilled in everlasting relationship with Him.

And therefore, if you’re talking to someone who's on a quest for meaning, your job isn't just to do something like this: “Jesus can give you meaning.”

That is true, Jesus can.

But if they are conceiving the problem of man and the problem of this world in terms of the Nihilist view of meaninglessness, they need to understand that that's not their biggest problem.

Their biggest problem is idolatry and sin.

And they need to be saved from that idolatry and sin.

Christianity, existential questions, and the right problem

It is important to understand that people shaped by other worldviews may not simply lack the right answers to the right questions.

Sometimes they lack the right questions.

And so if you’re dealing with people who are on a search for meaning, it is not only your job to give them the right answer, it is your job to make sure they’re asking the right question in the first place.

That's so important for us to remember.

It's not just the answers, it's the right question.

And when you’re working with people that are coming from other worldviews, sometimes their whole lives have been spent in the pursuit of finding the answer to the wrong question.

The biblical question is not merely, “How can I manufacture meaning in an indifferent universe?”

The biblical question concerns the nature of God, the identity of humanity, the reality of sin, the need for forgiveness, and the restoration of fellowship with the Creator through Christ.

The doctrine of the image of God means that human life is meaningful before any individual creates a personal project or chooses a value.

Human beings do not create the fundamental meaning of their existence; they receive it as creatures made by God.

At the same time, Christianity does not treat human beings as passive machines.

Human beings are responsible moral agents who make real choices, are accountable for their actions, and are called to obey God.

Freedom and responsibility

Existentialists believe that freedom is the distinct trait of human beings.

The existentialist wants to enable people to experience and practice their freedom as they choose what to value and how to live.

The Existentialist says each person is totally free as regards to their nature and destiny.

For Kierkegaard, however, freedom cannot be separated from moral responsibility, guilt, dependence on God, and the need for grace.

The individual takes responsibility for herself and her choices, and seeks to become what she ought to be.

She seeks to fulfill her duties related to her work and her relationships.

Finally, if Kierkegaard were alive today, he would exhort people to take responsibility for themselves and their choices.

He would have little patience for shifting responsibility to genetics, environment, or upbringing.

Ultimately, each person is responsible for who they are and how they live, and can only achieve their full potential through a passionate and living faith in God.

Despair, guilt, and the search for fulfillment

The existentialist analysis of despair and guilt can illuminate important aspects of human experience.

Given their nature, humans are not satisfied with mere pleasures, whether from food, drink, sex, or television.

We need something more; this type of life is empty.

Because of this, a person living in this stage will at some point experience despair.

This emotion of despair, then, is a means by which she can come to know that she must change, that life as she is living it is not now and cannot ever be truly satisfying.

The ethical life also exposes a deeper difficulty.

She reflects on her life and realizes that she does not always do what she ought to do.

No one does.

This leads to a new problem, the problem of guilt and the despair that it produces.

These emotions show her that a further change is needed if she is to be fulfilled.

Christianity interprets despair and guilt not merely as psychological conditions or signals that a person should invent a new identity.

She also receives forgiveness from God, which resolves her guilt and eradicates her despair.

She is now becoming an authentic individual because she is rightly related to God by a passionate faith in Him.

Creation, pleasure, and dependence on God

For Kierkegaard, the religious person is no sour ascetic.

Instead, she realizes the goodness of creation, and takes the sensual pleasures of food, drink, and sex to be gifts from God to be enjoyed in the right way.

By grace she is rightly related to the physical world, other people, and God.

Her physical and spiritual aspects are integrated in a way that brings wholeness and integrity to her character and to her life.

Christians are to renounce the world but then receive it back from God by faith to be enjoyed and experienced in the ways He intends.

Believers are to renounce their claim on, but not their care for, what and whom they love.

We can enjoy the finite goods of earthly life, but we must depend on God for our ultimate happiness.

Authentic faith and Christian life

First, a central truth in the works of Søren Kierkegaard is that we must obey God, even when this looks preposterous to others.

Abraham, Noah, and the apostles are biblical examples of such obedience.

Authentic faith is different from dead religion because it produces genuine obedience and love of both God and others.

For Kierkegaard, a living faith is one that expresses itself in works of love for God and others.

This is what it means to truly know God in Christ.

Institutional Christianity, or “Christendom,” as he often referred to it, was beset by hypocrisy and consisted of empty ritual.

By contrast, an authentic Christianity is a personal, passionate, inner faith that leads one to act in the world.

Christian faith therefore includes both inward commitment and outward obedience.

It is not enough to claim to know Christian truths while refusing to live them.

These truths must be grasped subjectively and lived out in daily life, if they are to be truly known.

Christianity and the existentialist search for meaning

Existentialism asks serious questions about freedom, identity, responsibility, anxiety, guilt, despair, authenticity, and the possibility of meaning.

These questions are not insignificant, and some existentialist descriptions of human experience can expose the emptiness of pleasure, the burden of moral failure, and the danger of evading responsibility.

Christianity, however, rejects the premise that meaning must be created by human beings in an otherwise meaningless world.

The Creator suffused meaning into man's existence in the very way that He created us.

The difference between Christianity and atheistic existentialism is therefore not simply that Christianity adds God to an existentialist framework.

Christianity changes the framework itself.

Human beings are not autonomous creators of meaning but creatures whose identity and purpose are received from God.

They are not merely cogs in a machine, but neither are they self-defining beings whose nature and destiny are determined exclusively by personal choice.

They are made in God’s image, fallen into sin, responsible for their choices, and in need of restoration by God through Christ.

For human beings death is either the gate to life with God and His people forever, or a life separated from God.

O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth!

tags: #christianity #and #existentialism