...............................................................................................................................................
Christians, Beware Of
DEEPAK CHOPRA
.
by Matt Ayars
Deepak Chopra is becoming one of the most
widely read teachers on spirituality in the Western world.
Over the past
two decades Chopra has produced more than 20 publications, whose teaching
focuses primarily on holistic healing (physical, emotional and spiritual),
historical religious figures (Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha) and even leadership.
Chopra’s
influence, however, does not stop at Barnes and Noble, he also frequents
day-time TV (including the Ellen DeGeneres Show and Oprah) and hosts traveling seminars offering
healing and renewal to participants.
All this being
the case, Deepak Chopra and his teaching is growing more and more influential
in the Western world.
As Christians,
how can we understand and respond to the popular wave of “Choprism” offering
holistic human regeneration?
Is Chopra’s
teaching at odds with Christian doctrines (after all, he has written positively
about Jesus), or is Chopra to be embraced as a valid “counselor” trained in
medicine and spirituality?
While Chopra
could very well have good intentions of helping humanity, good intentions are not
enough.
When weighing
Chopra’s teachings against scripture, it is not only found wanting, but
fundamentally erroneous.
Chopra’s
teaching is rooted in a pantheistic worldview that is very much at odds with
Christian doctrine.
The
fundamentally pantheistic nothings on which Chopra bases his teaching the Bible
rejects. Chopra’s understanding of the world (physical and metaphysical),
humanity and most importantly God, are diametrically opposed to the Christian
worldview.
If the teaching
is erroneous in its core, and Chopra’s teaching is, then as Christians, we must
be aware.
So, in what
specific way or ways does Chopra’s worldview diverge from the Judeo-Christian
worldview?
Foremost,
Chopra rejects the Christian doctrine of transcendence which is a foundational
pillar to the Christian worldview.
The Christian
doctrine of transcendence “refers to God being beyond anything that is other
than God. In Christian theology what’s other than God is, by definition, the
creation” (Dembski, 2003).
Essentially,
Christians believe that there is a distinguishable difference between God and
His creation.
God is other
than his creation. The creation, including human beings, is not divine
and they do not have the divine substance.
With the
rejection of transcendence there comes the abandonment of a whole slew of other
critical Christian doctrines founded on transcendence and creation doctrines.
This in
contrast with Chopra’s teaching.
Chopra’s
teaching is a variation of Hindu pantheism.
He goes on to
argue that humans have an inherent “divinity” that must be cultivated by
connecting with the life giving force that orders the universe.
In his
book, The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success (1994),
Chopra makes the following statements:
In reality, we
are divinity in disguise, and the gods and goddesses in embryo that are
contained within us seek to be fully materialized. True success is
therefore the experience of the miraculous. It is the unfolding of
divinity within us (p. 68-69).
He says again
in the same book, “We must find out for ourselves that inside us is a god or
goddess in embryo that wants to be born so that we can express our
divinity” (Chopra, 1994, p. 98 – emphasis mine).
In response to
this statement, Ravi Zacharias appropriately responds, “This is the heart of
Hinduism ― self-deification” (Zacharias, 2000, Kindle version).
Isaiah’s
prophecy in 44:6 combats the notion of human
deification/polytheism/pantheism with the following, “I am the first and I
am the last; besides me there is no god” (emphasis
added).
Also, Isaiah 44:8b “Is
there a God besides me? There is no Rock, I know not any”.
Also,
Isaiah, 45:21b, which reads, “And
there is no god besides me, a righteous God and Savior; there is none except
Me”.
So, why is the
doctrine of transcendence important?
This doctrine
is important because it is necessary to maintain that God is a free
personal being, not bound by the governing principles of the creation or the cosmos.
If God is
continuous with the universe, or identified with the cosmos, then
he is no longer truly free to act nor truly omnipotent.
Thus, it is
extremely problematic for Chopra to imply that God is not transcendent, but
rather a bound to the cosmos.
Chopra writes
the following:
“Your body is
not separate from the body of the universe because at quantum levels there are
no well-defined edges. You are like a wiggle, a wave, a fluctuation, a
convolution, a whirlpool, a localized disturbance in the larger quantum field. The
larger quantum field ― the universe ― is your extended body” (Chopra, 1994,
p. 68-69).
In his
book, Reinventing the Body, Resurrecting the Soul: How to Create a New You (2009), Chopra
claims that the divine substances is inseparable from the universe:
“It [the soul]
is the source of life, the spark that animates dead matter. It creates the
mind and emotions. In other words, the soul is the very foundation of
experience. It serves as the channel for creation as it unfolds in every
second” (Kindle version).
Between these
two quotes, Chopra’s dismantling of transcendence unfolds.
In the first
quote, he points out that the living body is an inseparable part of the
universe.
In quote two,
he states that that the soul (that which gives the body life), “is the
source of life,” and “the very foundation of experience”.
In other words,
the human soul is divine which is in turn inseparable from the universe.
Christianity
says, “NO!”.
Again, the
forfeiture of the transcendence of God means he is bounded by and limited to
the cosmos.
If God is
continuous with the universe, not truly free to act nor omnipotent, then as a
divine being, bound to the rules of the universe, he is unable to
deliver humanity from the human situation.
A god who is
bound by the universe who claims to be able to deliver humanity is analogous to
one pulling oneself up by the bootstraps.
Such a god has
no true alternative reality to offer to humanity.
From Chopra’s
angle, the God of Exodus 3:14 is the “I AM”, but in much the same way,
so “AM I,” and “ARE You,” and “ARE They,” etc.
The message of
scripture, however, makes great effort to communicate the transcendence of God
as a necessary attribute for human salvation (especially emphasized in Isaiah
40-66).
By making God
continuous with the created universe, Chopra irrevocably diverges from
Christian doctrine by eliminating the freedom and omnipotence of God via his
teaching on the deification of humanity.
By elevating
humanity to the divine, Chopra reduces divinity to the human level, which the
Bible most ardently prohibits (also see Deuteronomy 6:4).
While
Christians maintain that the Person of the Holy Spirit, being of divine
substance can cohabit with humans and be in intimate
relationship with humans (created beings), there is a distinct difference
between deification in the sense that people become like God
in moral character (Christianity) and actually are god but
do not realize it (Chopra).
To conclude,
Christians must be attentive to the reality that Chopra often points to Jesus
and his teachings to support his own doctrine.
It is tempting
to think that because Chopra presents Jesus in a positive light, that his
teaching is harmonious with the Christian worldview.
This is not
true. For example, Chopra writes:
Connecting your
soul is actually easier than whatever you are doing right now. It takes
effort to keep your soul at a distance. When you stop struggling, the path to
the soul is automatic. Everything you want to achieve will naturally unfold.
This is what Jesus meant when he said, “Ask and you shall receive. Knock
and the door will be opened”.
To start, it is
important to identify exactly how Chopra is defining his terms, specifically, “soul”.
Chopra
maintains that “connecting with the soul” is the key to a better life.
For Chopra,
connecting with the soul means connecting with the divine substance
inside of every human being that can redirect the human life away from
demise and towards success.
As mentioned above,
the “soul”, according to Chopra, is the “spark that gives life,”
and the basis for all reality and existence (Chopra, 2009).
This definition
of soul is extremely different than the Biblical understanding of soul.
With all
certainty, neither the Bible, nor Jesus, understood the human soul to be
divine, the creative force of the universe, or the basis for all reality.
Nevertheless,
for Chopra to claim that, “This is what Jesus meant when he said…” is
erroneous.
Because Jesus
maintained a Biblical worldview, in the above quote he most certainly did not mean,
“If you just ask, the divine substance will be born in you and you will be
in connection with the divine universe which means for a better life.”
Chopra’s
scripture quote comes either from Matthew 7:7 or Luke 11:9.
Both contexts
underline essentially the same issue: God’s readiness to respond to our
needs.
While Chopra’s
positive presentation of Jesus is in some sense relieving for Christians living
in a world who’s hostility towards Jesus continually increases, his
presentation is much more of a danger than the hostile presentation of Jesus
because we can be enticed to lend authority to that which is relieving.
We must be
aware of the major divergence away from Christian doctrine in Chopra’s teaching
and be prepared to respond properly.
Matt
Ayars
is the President of Wesley Biblical Seminary. Matt has a PhD in Old Testament.
Matt’s research interests include biblical theology, Wesleyan soteriology, the
Psalms, and linguistics.
No comments:
Post a Comment