The typical negative redemptive religion is that of Buddhism.  Buddhism teaches us that the world is a sham and an evil; and the duty of man is to appreciate this fact, and to deny the world, but here the matter ends—­it ends with world-renunciation and self-renunciation.  There is only a negative element in such a religion, no inspiration to live and fight for gaining a higher world.  This, of course, cannot provide a satisfactory solution to the problem, for no new life with new values is presented to us.  It is a religion devoid of hope, for it does not point to a higher life.  “A wisdom of world-denial, a calm composure of the nature, an entire serenity in the midst of the changing scenes of life, constitute the summit of life.”

Christianity teaches us that the world is full of misery and suffering, but the world in itself is really a perfect work of Divine wisdom and goodness.  “The root of evil is not in the nature of the world, but in moral wrong—­in a desertion from God.”  Sin and wickedness arise from the misuse and perversion of things which are not in themselves evil.  Christianity calls for a break from the wickedness of the world.  It calls upon man to give up his sin, to deny, or break with, the evil of which he is guilty.  But it does not expect man to do this in his own strength alone—­God Himself comes to his rescue.  Unlike Buddhism, it does not stay at the denial of the world, but calls upon man to become a citizen of a higher world.  This gives a new impetus to the higher life; man finds a great task—­he has to build a kingdom of God upon the earth.  This demands the highest efforts—­he must fight to gain the new world, and must keep up the struggle to retain what he has gained.  The inferiority of Buddhism as contrasted with Christianity is well described by Eucken in the following words:  “In the former an emancipation from semblance becomes necessary; in the latter an overcoming of evil is the one thing needful.  In the former the very basis of the world seems evil; in the latter it is the perversion of this basis which seems evil.  In the former, the impulses of life are to be entirely eradicated; in the latter, on the contrary, they are to be ennobled, or rather to be transformed.  In the former, no higher world of a positive kind dawns on man, so that life finally reaches a seemingly valid point of rest, whilst upon Christian ground life ever anew ascends beyond itself.”

From such considerations as these, Eucken comes to the conclusion that of the redemptive religions, which are themselves the highest type, Christianity is the highest and noblest form, hence his main criticism is concerned with the Christian religion.  This does not mean that he finds neither value nor truth in any other form of religion.  His general conclusion with regard to the historical religions is that they “contain too much that is merely human to be valued as a pure work of God, and yet too much that is spiritual and divine to be considered as a mere product of man.”  He finds in them all some kernel of truth, or at least a pathway to some part of truth, but contends that no religion contains the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  “As certainly,” he says, “as there is only one sole truth, there can be only one absolute religion, and this religion coincides entirely in no way with any one of the historical religions.”