I. The Five Magnetic Points
Johan identifies the “Five Magnetic Points” as fundamental expressions of the inherent tensions and existential longings within human experience. These points form an essential set of interconnected ideas that drive the lives of all individuals.6 Each element is deeply interconnected with the others, collectively influencing and shaping human religious reality.
The first question is What is my relationship to the cosmos?7 or what Johan describes as “experience of totality.”8 9 People often sense that they belong to a larger whole, even as they feel fragile before the eternal.10 Yet, at the same time, they also experience greatness, as if the entire cosmos meets within them.11 This tension between humility and significance shapes human life and reflects a key part of religious consciousness.12
The second question is What is my relationship to my own desires?13 which Johan calls “the relationship with the Norm.”14 He explains that people have an inner sense of a moral and religious standard that they did not create, yet it shapes their thoughts and actions. This inner dialogue points to a spiritual reality and a connection to the divine that gives life meaning and direction.15 16 17 18
The third question is What is my relationship with the Supreme Power?19 or what Johan calls “The Great Unknown.”20 Here, he explores the deep struggle people face in understanding the source of their existence.21 Throughout history, humans have sensed a connection to a higher power, whether seen as a distant god, many gods, or a force behind the universe. This power is often linked to moral awareness, shaping how people view life and right and wrong.22 23
Johan’s fourth question is How do I find salvation?24—the human “need for deliverance”25 or “thirst for redemption.”26 He explains that in every age, people sense that something is wrong inside them and in the world.27 This inner trouble keeps them from becoming what they could be and creates a strong longing to be set free. They picture freedom as social change or personal release, yet they disagree on what really chains them—death, ignorance, constant change, or selfishness.28 The endless search for how to be saved—by our own effort, by changing society, or by God’s action—shows humanity’s urgent, timeless quest for redemption.29
The fifth question is How do I understand my relationship to my mysterious existence?30 It is a question that concerns destiny,31 or what Johan calls “the tension between action and fate.”32 This tension reflects the human struggle to balance taking control (activity) of life and accepting what is beyond control (passivity).33 It raises the question of whether people shape their own fate or must trust in God or the gods. Johan explains that this struggle—between acting and submitting—runs deep in human experience and has shaped religious and philosophical thought throughout history.34 At the heart of this struggle, humans sense a connection to a Supreme Power that rules their destiny.35
Together, the Five Elements form the core of religious consciousness and confront people in every culture.36 Johan writes, “We cannot deny that these five dimensions influence one another and are tied to each other.”37 The sense of cosmic totality points to a higher power and to the pull between action and fate. 38 Norm and the need for deliverance show that a person is not just a speck in the universe but a free, responsible being who feels moral law and seeks redemption.39 These themes colour every faith and touch even those who identify as nonreligious.40
II. Religious Consciousness and the Paradox of Romans 1
Theologically, Johan grounds the five key life questions in a biblical framework that explains how religious consciousness works. His approach shows a deep integration of theology and anthropology, or a theological anthropology, offering a Reformed understanding of human religious experience.
Like other Neo-Calvinists such as Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck, he bases much of his thinking on Romans 1:18–32, using it to explore the different aspects of religious consciousness in a way that fits both his time and context. Johan’s interpretation of Romans 1 addresses the paradox of humanity’s innate knowledge of God, acquired through general revelation, and their simultaneous suppression of this knowledge, which ultimately results in idolatry.41 Johan resolves this tension by explaining the dual process of suppression and substitution that characterizes humanity’s response to divine revelation. He explains:
It seems to me that Paul touches upon these things; Man has repressed the truth of the everlasting power and the divinity of God. It has been exiled to his unconscious, to the crypts of his existence. That does not mean, however, that it has vanished forever. Still active, it reveals itself again and again. But it cannot become openly conscious; it appears in disguise, and it is exchanged for something different. Thus, all kinds of ideas of God are formed; the human mind makes its own ideas of God and its own myths. This is not intentional deceit, it happens without man’s knowing it. He cannot get rid of them. So he has religion; he is busy with a god; he serves his god, but he does not see that the god he serves is not God himself. An exchange has taken place, a perilous exchange. An essential quality of God has been blurred because it did not fit in with the human pattern of life, and the image man has of God is no longer true. Divine revelation indeed lies at the root of it, but man’s thoughts and aspirations cannot receive it and adapt themselves to it. In the image man has of God we can recognize the image of man himself.42
Therefore, although humans exert considerable effort to resist divine revelation within their inner consciousness, they cannot push away this revelation.43 44 The universal act of divine self-disclosure is not eradicated by human suppression but instead becomes unconscious repression, leading to existential unrest and misdirected worship.45 Johan explains:
All this can be interpreted as meaning that the faculty (‘pistis’) by which man could see through the works of God has fallen into the magnetic field of sinful forces and inclinations, so that it has become completely counterproductive. It still captures the image of the works of God, it still penetrates the invisible backgrounds, but it can only see these unseen backgrounds in caricature form. There is a continuous process of ‘suppressing’ and ‘exchanging’ of God’s revelation taking place in the depths of the human heart.46
He argues, “We do well to regard this revelation as very alive and powerful. It is so strong that, while a person may be capable of suppressing the truth or exchanging it for a lie, they are never fully able to escape the power of that truth.”47 Thus, despite the human suppression of divine inner revelation, God’s truth remains an ever-present force within the human soul, demanding recognition and response.
Despite the clarity of this revelation, Johan emphasizes the persistent paradox of human response. He discusses that although people inherently know God, they suppress this knowledge and engage in what Johan describes as a “perilous exchange,” replacing divine truth with idolatrous alternatives.48 This suppression occurs, at the same time, with the perception of God’s revelation, reflecting a deep-seated moral opposition to God. As a result, humanity is left without excuse,49 since they are now accountable before God as knowers50 and recipients of general revelation.
Johan concludes his discussion on Romans 1 by affirming the significance of this teaching for the church’s mission. He affirms that Christians are engaging with individuals who have already received the general divine revelation in their inner lives. Therefore, every human being experiences what Johan describes as the “two fatal reactions” of suppression and substitution.51 Consequently, the task of Christians is not to prove the existence of God to non-Christians but to clarify the truths that God has already revealed about himself. So, when a Christian, for instance, preaches the gospel, it marks a new and intensified phase in the individual’s encounter with God. In other words, Christ is already present in the spiritual seeking of the gospel’s hearers, even before they recognize him.52 Through proclaiming the gospel, Christ becomes more tangible and audible.53
III. Sensus Divinitatis to Sensus Numinis
The analysis of Johan’s perception of religious consciousness underscores the reconciliation he achieves between theology and anthropology in his theology of religions. In other words, religious consciousness, on one hand, stems from a vague, precognitive dimension, an internal impact of general divine revelation on the human inner being that gives rise to the sensus divinitatis.54 On the other hand, it also encompasses the five fundamental elements of life questions, articulated within a worldview framework with psychological implications.55 However, based on Romans 1, there is a cognitive aspect within the effect of divine revelation.56 Johan identifies this aspect, developing a theological articulation of what he describes as sensus numinis, which is derived from the repression of the sensus divinitatis.57 By sensus numinis, Johan refers to a suppressed product of the sensus divinitatis, formed as a consequence of human sinfulness, which resists the divine sense imprinted in human inner life through general revelation.58 Therefore, although humans still possess a sensus divinitatis, an innate sense or awareness of God, a continuous process of suppression and substitution takes place within their inner being. As a result, this sense of the divine has become distorted by sin. While glimpses of God’s eternal power may still be perceived, they are often misinterpreted as magical forces residing in visible objects.59 Johan further rearticulates this meaning, stating,
There is truly a sensus numinis in man, which makes him not stand before the mighty phanerosis (manifestations) of God in his creatures as one who can no longer pick up a single sound. There is also a continuous effect of God on human life, an effect that is so strong and striking that it still exerts influence on fallen humanity.60
Thus, despite humans’ tendency to repress or distort the divine revelation, God continues to reveal himself within the inner being of every person. As a result, all people possess knowledge of God, albeit a non-saving knowledge, characterized by an undeniable awareness of his presence, akin to how demons acknowledge God with fear.61 For Johan, this explains how pseudo-religions, even in their most noble forms, reveal both God’s persistent, merciful influence and humanity’s continual, inherent drive to suppress divine truth.62 This understanding underscores the idea that people seek God due to God’s inner revelation.63 Therefore, paradoxically, people both know God and do not know him at the same time. Johan argues:
Even then, however, the dualistic nature of pseudo-religion remains; it is both knowing and at the same time unknowing, being addressed by God while at the same time repressing, distorting, and exchanging truth for lies. Man resists the Creator’s eternal power and divinity. It is obvious that even the pagan person cannot entirely escape the fact that he is “playing a game” with divine matters.64
Now, what is the significance of reading J. H. Bavinck today? How has he, as a Reformed theologian, missiologist, and missionary, contributed to theological anthropology?
Johan Bavinck offers a modern Reformed reading of the Christian doctrine of general revelation. He explains religious consciousness and other religions using key Augustinian-Calvinist ideas like imago dei, sensus divinitatis, and semen religionis, showing how these shape human awareness of God from a Neo-Calvinist perspective.
Second, unlike some Neo-Calvinists, such as Abraham Kuyper, who placed religions into a hierarchy and viewed Calvinism as the highest theological system, Johan opposes ranking Christianity above other religions. 65 Instead, he argues that all religious traditions offer answers to the five basic life questions. These answers are shaped by patterns of suppression and substitution, both personally and collectively.
Third, Johan’s interconnected concepts of sensus divinitatis and sensus numinis, worldview and world-vision, his psychological approach to religion, and the missiological implications form a framework for identifying points of contact between various faith traditions. It also fosters meaningful engagement with these religious traditions.
His idea of sensus numinis shows how his theology brings together insights from theology, anthropology, and culture. This allows Christians to dialogue with non-Christians not only across cultures but also in small groups and personal conversations. Such dialogue goes beyond discussing beliefs (“what”) to also consider the person involved (“who”), including psychological and human aspects—not just doctrines.
Additionally, in addressing the points of contact between Christianity and non-Christian religions, Johan affirms the presence of elements of truth within other faiths, grounding his perspective in the doctrines of general revelation and common grace.66 However, he cautions against viewing these truth elements in isolation from each other and from the whole religious system. Instead, he emphasizes that they must be understood within the framework of their totalizing religious systems, as their meaning and function are inseparable from the broader theological and cultural contexts in which they exist.67
In other words, it is wrong to assume that shared words or ideas mean the same thing in Christianity and other religions. These elements must be understood within their own religious systems, as their meaning depends on the beliefs that surround them. Johan Bavinck uses a kind of word-association theory, showing that terms gain meaning from the network of ideas they belong to. So, even if two religions use the same word, it may carry very different meanings. This helps create better interreligious dialogue by showing how each faith understands key ideas.68
Furthermore, Johan offers a Reformed theological perspective on the use of psychology within the religious realm, linking this approach to the doctrine of general revelation. Although Johan may be criticized for affirming the psychological interpretation of religion, he himself rejects the notion that psychology can replace theology in understanding religious experience.69 In other words, Johan asserts that anthropology and psychology must be employed from a theological foundation, forming a distinct Reformed anthropology and psychology.
Finally, Johan illustrates not only the uniqueness of the gospel message in non-Christian contexts,70 but also its transformative impact on individuals and societies.71 He acknowledges the work of the Holy Spirit in proclaiming the gospel to non-Christians. In his discussion on the content of preaching in the mission field, he explains,
This is the truth in the expression that our point of contact exists in an antithesis. In other words, if those whom we would convert have already been busy with God, in the sense that God has done something with them, and they have done something with God, then the missionary can only call such people to abandon the old and accept what has been made new in Christ Jesus.72
This process of presenting the gospel to non-Christians, as Daniel Strange observes in Johan Bavinck’s theology, does not stem from feelings of imperialism or self-righteous supremacy but from grateful individuals who are themselves sinners renewed by the grace of God.73 Johan describes this process as “meeting in love.”74 Thus, with love and humility, Christians must bear witness to the gospel, acknowledging that God’s grace has already been at work in the lives of all people.
