Worldview & Basic Beliefs Review

A prevalent worldview today is naturalism, which answers the three questions like this: 1) We are the product of random acts of nature with no real purpose. 2) We do not respect nature as we should. 3) We can save the world through ecology and conservation. A naturalistic worldview generates many related philosophies such as moral relativism, existentialism, pragmatism, and utopianism.

It sometimes seems as if there are more philosophical and religious views than any normal person could ever learn about. Indeed, there are more than six thousand distinct religions in the world today. However, some people are surprised to find that the world’s religions and philosophies tend to break down into a few major categories. These five worldviews include all the dominant outlooks in the world today. This chart is adapted from Christianity: The Faith That Makes Sense by Dennis McCallum (Tyndale).

WORLDVIEW	REALITY	MAN	TRUTH	VALUES
Naturalism  Atheism; Agnosticism; Existentialism	The material universe is all that exists. Reality is “one-dimensional.” There is no such thing as a soul or a spirit. Everything can be explained on the basis of natural law.	Man is the chance product of a biological process of evolution. Man is entirely material. The human species will one day pass out of existence.	Truth is usually understood as scientific proof. Only that which can be observed with the five senses is accepted as real or true.	No objective values or morals exist. Morals are individual preferences or socially useful behaviors. Even social morals are subject to evolution and change.
Pantheism  Hinduism; Taoism; Buddhism; New Age Consciousness	Only the spiritual dimension exists. All else is illusion, Maya. Spiritual reality, Brahman, is eternal, impersonal, and unknowable. It is possible to say that everything is a part of God, or that God is in everything and everyone.	Man is one with ultimate reality. Thus man is spiritual, eternal, and impersonal. Man’s belief that he is an individual is illusion.	Truth is an experience of unity with “the oneness” of the universe. Truth is beyond all rational description. Rational thought as it is understood in the West cannot show us reality.	Because ultimate reality is impersonal, many pantheistic thinkers believe that there is no real distinction between good and evil. Instead, “unenlightened” behavior is that which fails to understand essential unity.
Theism  Christianity; Islam; Judaism	An infinite, personal God exists. He created a finite, material world. Reality is both material and spiritual. The universe as we know it had a beginning and will have an end.	Humankind is the unique creation of God. People were created “in the image of God,” which means that we are personal, eternal, spiritual, and biological.	Truth about God is known through revelation. Truth about the material world is gained via revelation and the five senses in conjunction with rational thought.	Moral values are the objective expression of an absolute moral being.
Spiritism and Polytheism  Thousands of Religions	The world is populated by spirit beings who govern what goes on. Gods and demons are the real reason behind “natural” events. Material things are real, but they have spirits associated with them and, therefore, can be interpreted spiritually.	Man is a creation of the gods like the rest of the creatures on earth. Often, tribes or races have a special relationship with some gods who protect them and can punish them.	Truth about the natural world is discovered through the shaman figure who has visions telling him what the gods and demons are doing and how they feel.	Moral values take the form of taboos, which are things that irritate or anger various spirits. These taboos are different from the idea of “good and evil” because it is just as important to avoid irritating evil spirits as it is good ones.
Postmodernism	Reality must be interpreted through our language and cultural “paradigm.” Therefore, reality is “socially constructed.”	Humans are nodes in a cultural reality – they are a product of their social setting. The idea that people are autonomous and free is a myth.	Truths are mental constructs meaningful to individuals within a particular cultural paradigm. They do not apply to other paradigms. Truth is relative to one’s culture.	Values are part of our social paradigms as well. Tolerance, freedom of expression, inclusion, and refusal to claim to have the answers is the only universal values.

 

 

The Universe Next Door: A Basic World View Catalog

James W. Sire 1976/1988

Timeline:

• Theism: Middle Ages: 500-1500 (1000 yrs)
• Deism: Renaissance: 1500-1630 (130 yrs)
• Naturalism: Enlightenment 1630-1870 (240 yrs)
• Nihilism: 1870-1930 (60 yrs)
• Existentialism: 1920-1965 (45 yrs)
• Eastern Pantheistic Monism: 1950-1975 (25 yrs)
• New Age: 1965-1990 (25 yrs)

 

 

Preface to the 2^nd Edition

 

1.   A World of Difference What is a World View?  Seven Basic Questions and Some Common Answers

 

What is prime reality—the really real?

• God
• The gods
• The material cosmos

 

What is the nature of external reality, that is, the world around us?

• The world as created or autonomous;
• As chaotic or orderly;
• As matter or spirit;

Emphasizing subjective, personal relationship to the world, or its objectivity apart from us

What is a human being?

• A highly complex machine
• A sleeping god
• A person made in the image of God
• A “naked ape”
• Personal extinction
• Transformation to a higher state
• Departure to a shadowy existence on “the other side”

What happens to a person at death?

 

Why is it possible to know anything at all?

• Because we are made in the image of an all-knowing God
• Because consciousness and rationality developed under the contingencies of survival in a long process of evolution
  • We are made in the image of a God whose character is good
  • Right and wrong are determined by human choice alone
  • The notions simply developed under an impetus toward cultural or physical survival
    • To realize the purposes of God or the gods
    • To make a paradise on earth
    • To prepare a people for a life in community with a loving and holy God

How do we know what is right and wrong?

What is the meaning of human history?

 

Examples of Other Issues that Arise within a Worldview

Who is in charge of this world?

• God
• Humans
• No one

 

Are we as human beings determined or free?

Are we alone the maker of values?

Is God really good?

Is God personal or impersonal?

Does God exist at all?

 

2.   A Universe Charged with the Grandeur of God: Christian Theism

 

Basic Christian Theism

1.   God is infinite and personal (Triune), transcendent and immanent, omniscient, sovereign and good

2.   God created the cosmos ex nihilo to operate with a uniformity of natural causes in an open system

3.   Human beings are created in the image of God and thus possess personality, self-transcendence, intelligence, morality, gregariousness and creativity

4.   Human beings can know both the world around them and God himself because God has built into them the capacity to do so and because he takes an active role in communicating with them

5.   Human beings were created good, but through the Fall the image of god became defaced, though not so ruined as not to be capable of restoration; through the work of Christ God redeemed humanity and began the process of restoring people to goodness, though any given person may choose to reject that redemption

6.   For each person death is either the gate to life with God and his people or the gate to eternal separation from the only thing that will ultimately fulfill human aspirations

7.   Ethics is transcendent and is based on the character of God as good (holy and loving)

8.   History is linear, a meaningful sequence of events leading to the fulfillment of God’s purposes for humanity

 

The Grandeur of God

3.   The Clockwork Universe: Deism

Basic Deism

1.   A transcendent God, as a First Cause, created the universe but then left it to run on its own. God is thus not immanent, not fully personal, not sovereign over human affairs, not providential.

2.   The cosmos God created is determined because it is created as a uniformity of cause and effect in a closed system; no miracle is possible.

Closed to God’s reordering, because he is not interested in it

• Closed to human reordering, because it is locked up in a clocklike fashion (de-emphasized)

3.   Human beings, though personal, are a part of the clockwork of the universe.

4.   The cosmos, this world, is understood to be in its normal state; it is not fallen or abnormal. We can know the universe, and we can determine what God is like by studying it.

5.   Ethics is limited to general revelation; because the universe is normal, it reveals what is right.

6.   History is linear, for the course of the cosmos was determined at creation.

• An Unstable Compound

4.   The Silence of Finite Space: Naturalism

Basic Naturalism

1.   Matter exists eternally and is all there is. God does not exist.

2.   The cosmos exists as a uniformity of cause and effect in a closed system.

3.   Human beings are complex “machines”; personality is an interrelation of chemical and physical properties we do not yet fully understand.

4.   Death is extinction of personality and individuality.

5.   History is a linear stream of events linked by cause and effect without an overarching purpose.

6.   Ethics is related only to human beings.

• Naturalism in Practice: Secular Humanism
• Naturalism in Practice: Marxism
• The Persistence of Naturalism

 

5.   Zero Point: Nihilism

• The First Bridge: Necessity and Chance
• The Second Bridge: The Great Cloud of Unknowing
• The Third Bridge: Is and Ought
• The Loss of Meaning
• Inner Tensions in Nihilism

 

6.   Beyond Nihilism: Existentialism

Basic Atheistic Existentialism

1.   The cosmos is composed solely of matter, but to human beings reality appears in two forms—subjective and objective.

2.   For human beings alone, existence precedes essence; people make themselves who they are.

3.   Each person is totally free as regards their nature and destiny.

4.   The highly wrought and tightly organized objective world stands over against human beings and appears absurd.

5.   In full recognition of and against the absurdity of the objective world, the authentic person must revolt and create value.

• A Saint without God

 

How Far beyond Nihilism?

Basic Theistic Existentialism

1.   Human beings are personal beings who, when they come to full consciousness, find themselves in an alien universe; whether or not God exists is a tough question to be solved not by reason but by faith.

2.   The personal is the valuable.

3.   Knowledge is subjectivity; the whole truth is often paradoxical.

4.   History as a record of events is uncertain and unimportant, but history as a model, or type, or myth to be made present and lived is of supreme importance.

• Concluding Remarks

7.   Journey to the East: Eastern Pantheistic Monism

Basic Eastern Pantheistic Monism

1.   Atman is Brahman; that is, the soul of each and every human being is the Soul of the cosmos.

2.   Some things are more one than others.

3.   Many (if not all) roads lead to the One.

4.   To realize one’s oneness with the cosmos is to pass beyond personality.

5.   To realize one’s oneness with the cosmos is to pass beyond knowledge. The principle of noncontradiction does not apply where ultimate reality is concerned.

6.   To realize one’s oneness with the cosmos is to pass beyond good and evil; the cosmos is perfect at every moment.

7.   Death is the end of individual, personal existence, but it changes nothing essential in an individual’s nature.

8.   To realize one’s oneness with the One is to pass beyond time. Time is unreal. History is cyclical.

 

East and West: A Problem in Communication

8.   A Separate Reality: The New Age The Radical Transformation of Human Nature The Panoramic Sweep of New Age Thought

• Psychology
• Drug Therapy
• Transpersonal Psychology
• Sociology and Cultural History
• Anthropology
• Natural Science
• Health
• Politics
• Science Fiction
• Movies
• Sports
• Psychic Theorists

 

Relationship to Other World Views

The Basic Tenets of the New Age

1.   Whatever the nature of being (idea or matter, energy or particle) the self is the kingpin—the prime reality. As human beings grow in their awareness and grasp of this fact, the human race is on the verge of a radical change in human nature; even now we see harbingers of transformed humanity and prototypes of the New Age.

2.   The cosmos, while unified in the self, is manifested in two more dimensions: the visible universe, accessible through ordinary consciousness, and the invisible universe (or Mind at Large), accessible through altered states of consciousness.

3.   The core experience of the New Age is cosmic consciousness, in which ordinary categories of space, time, and morality tend to disappear.

4.   Physical death is not the end of the self; under the experience of cosmic consciousness, the fear of death is removed.

5.   Three distinct attitudes are taken to the metaphysical question of the nature of reality under the general framework of the New Age

(1)  The occult version in which the beings and things perceived in states of altered consciousness exist apart from the self that is conscious

(2)  The psychedelic version in which these things and beings are projections of the conscious self

(3)  The conceptual relativist version in which the cosmic consciousness is the conscious activity of a mind using one of many nonordinary models for reality, none of which is any “truer” than any other

Shirley MacLaine: A New Age Exemplar

Cracks in the New Consciousness

 

 

9.   The Examined Life Choosing a World View Christian Theism Revisited

 

 

 

Understanding Basic Beliefs

By Jim Leffel

Everyone has a set of beliefs. In this chapter, we will discuss the concept of “basic beliefs,” and describe the basic belief systems that shape contemporary ideologies. In the next chapter, we will examine how to critically assess basic beliefs.

Setting a foundation

Our capacity to ask “why” is one thing that makes us distinct as human beings. Even at a very early age, children seem preoccupied with this question. In perpetually asking “why,” children are building a framework of ideas to interact with the world, to make sense of it. What we see so clearly in children is true of adults too. Human history is the story of people seeking answers to questions that only beings aware of their own existence could ask. These questions relate to the meaning of life, the inevitability of death, and the rules governing society, the nature of reality and so on. These are the concerns that force us into forming basic beliefs.

A basic belief is an idea we hold that can not be explained by some other idea. Its truth seems self-evident to us. That is what makes it basic or foundational. Let me provide an illustration. In teaching philosophy to undergraduates, I sometimes begin with a little exercise to help students get in touch with the fact that they hold basic beliefs. The exercise goes something like this:

“Tell me, why are you here in my class?”

The typical answer: “To satisfy a humanities requirement.”

“All right then,” I ask, “why do you want to satisfy a humanities requirement?”

Obvious response: “To complete my college degree.”

“Fair enough, but why do you want to get a degree?”

“Well, to get a job of course,” they say, as if it were somehow self- evident.

The inquiry continues, “Why do you want to get a job?”

The somewhat exasperated response is, “To make money!”

“Ah, yes,” I continue, “But why do you want to make money?”

“It takes money to buy things,” they retort, as if I were nuts.

“Okay, but why do you want to buy things?”

“Well, to be happy,” they somewhat hesitatingly urge.

Then I press the issue further by saying, “Yes, that’s nice, but why do you want to be happy?”

To this, there is no response. We finally arrive at a basic belief: The goal of life is to be happy, and the acquisition of things is the way to be happy. Of course this is not the only reason why people take classes, work and so on. But by peeling the layers of belief back in this way, we are able to arrive at some irreducible or basic beliefs. When we come to the point in asking “why” where there is no more “because,” we have identified a basic belief.

Everyone has basic beliefs. But people are largely unaware of them, which is why exercises like the one I described are so important for introducing students to the world of ideas. Basic beliefs are often revealed through life-defining decisions, such as whom to marry; whether or not to have children; the choice of a career, and so on. Also, times of anguish bring us face to face with our basic beliefs. For example, the death of a loved one, revelation of a life-threatening disease, or the personal tragedy of divorce or arrest. These events cause us to ask “why?” And the answers provided by our basic beliefs will either enable us to make sense of life, or perhaps, drive us toward despair. The kind of life we live is tied to the adequacy of our foundational belief system. Consider the words of Jesus Christ:

“Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock. And the rains descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and it fell, and great was its fall.” Matthew 7:24-27

Whether we agree with Jesus’ message or not, basic beliefs are the foundation on which we build our lives. From them, we form other beliefs. Our interrelated basic beliefs and other ideas that derive from them are referred to as a “belief system,” or “world view.” A world view is a philosophy of life or a way of looking at reality. World views play an important role in our lives, by assigning meaning to our experiences and providing a framework for important decisions we need to make. But where do we get our world view? Constructing a world view is a life-long endeavor. They tend to be fluid, being shaped by many influences. Our upbringing is a major factor in the making of a world view. Our outlook on life is formed largely from our families. Beliefs about how we should live, religious convictions and other crucial aspects of our belief system are often formed in our youth. But there are also influences from the wider culture in which we live. In the last chapter, we discussed the role media and education in belief formation. We could also include sub-cultural identity, significant life experiences, and even our attempts to morally justify decisions we make.

For most people, world views are formed subtly, over time, and without much conscious reflection. We tend to uncritically absorb the zeitgeist of our culture in the formation of our belief systems. So, if we are to get a handle on how people think, we need to probe more deeply in the realm of basic beliefs.

What makes up our basic beliefs?

A world view is based on beliefs in four general areas. Here, we will briefly outline the four foundational ideas, then in the next section, examine major ideological currents in our culture that relate to each of them.

1. Reality

 

The primary component of a world view relates to the question “what exists?” While few people sit around contemplating the nature of reality, everyone has ideas about it. Every one has beliefs about whether or not God exists. Those who deny the existence of God have beliefs about the nature of the universe. Specifically, they hold that the universe is all there is, and that it is composed of material objects governed by natural laws. Those who accept the belief of God also have beliefs about what he is like. Some conceive God an impersonal force, like gravity, while others view him as personal.

Beliefs about God have other implications. For an atheist, the universe has no intrinsic meaning or overarching significance. On the other hand, those who accept belief in God typically see the universe as serving some kind of divinely inspired purpose. The way we view reality has a bearing on all of our other beliefs.

2. Human nature

 

If we have survived adolescence, we understand the importance of the question “who am I?” Because we are conscious of our existence, we naturally ask such questions. What does it mean to be a human being? We form beliefs about whether or not there is a spiritual aspect to our nature. This helps us adjust to our mortality. It is also instrumental in the quest for meaning in life. Is there some purpose life serves, or are we, like animals, the product of impersonal biological forces that are indifferent to our existential reflections? We also are concerned about whether or not human history is going anywhere. Should we be optimistic about the direction of human society, or pessimistic? Are we going in any direction at all?

3. Values

 

People act on the basis of principles. We make judgments constantly about our preferences, and our approval or disapproval of things. The word “good” is the most broadly used expression in the English language. All of us have beliefs about the nature of goodness. Are there any standards of judgment that are true whether the individual cares to accept them or not? Are there standards for living that apply to everyone, or are values dependent on individual choice alone? We also form beliefs about the nature of moral responsibility. When, if ever, are we morally guilty? And finally, we form beliefs in the area of values that direct the goals we pursue in life. We embody our basic convictions about “the good life” in the motivations and choices that drive us toward life goals.

4. Truth

 

The category of truth involves our beliefs about the nature and limitations of knowledge. This seems quite abstract to the surface of it. What can be known? What is the difference between rationality and irrationality? Does the same truth hold for all people, or does it differ depending on culture or personal belief? Of all the categories making up a world view, truth is perhaps the most difficult. We hold convictions, sometimes deep ones, that our beliefs are true. But is quite another matter to rationally justify our beliefs—either to ourselves or to others.

Three Basic World Views

By describing three general world views, we will have much of the background needed to examine and critically interact with scientism and postmodernism. The three world views that are discussed in this chapter are broad systems from which scientism and postmodernism draw their beliefs. By understanding these basic world views, we will be conversant in the world of modern and postmodern ideas. Many of the terms and critical issues in scientism and postmodernism are defined within these world views. Because many of the concepts introduced in this section will be used throughout the text, a glossary is provided. In the next chapter, we will provide a framework for critically analyzing these world views.

Theism

We begin with a description of the world view most familiar to us. Theism is the set of beliefs shared by the religions that are based on the Old Testament: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Jews, Muslims and Christians view God somewhat differently, but they all believe that there is one God. This is called “monotheism.”

Theism views reality as both material and spiritual. Sometimes, this is referred to as metaphysical dualism, which means that reality consists of two distinct realms. Ultimately, reality is grounded in an infinite, personal and transcendent God. By personal, theism asserts that God is volitional, moral, creative, purposive, rational and knowable to other persons. We refer to God as “him,” not “it.” Transcendent means that God is distinct from the universe. He is able and willing to interact with the creation, but his existence is not bound by or limited to the universe.

Everything that exists is contingent upon God’s creative act. He created both an immaterial realm of spiritual personal beings, and a world of material objects. God is both creator and sustainer of all things. Thus, the universe is an open system of cause and effect. An open system means that God maintains access to the created order and involves himself with it as he chooses. Cause and effect means that God has designed the universe in such a way that nature follows a recognizable pattern. Finally, because God acts with purpose, reality is inherently meaningful. This has substantial implications for the theistic view of human nature and values.

Human nature is both biological and spiritual. Human existence cannot be explained wholly by reference to neurochemical or evolutionary processes. We are, in the words of Genesis 1:27, “in the image of God.” Humans are the unique creation of a personal God, and shares in his likeness as a personal being. Therefore, we have intrinsic worth as human beings. We were created to enjoy an eternal relationship with our Maker. Our lives have objective meaning and purpose. Because human nature is a composite of eternal spirit and mortal flesh, the death of the body is not the end of personal existence. We live eternally, either in conscious communion with God, or under his righteous judgment.

God remains invested in humanity. History, consequently, is going some place. Sometimes, the biblical view of history is termed “linear history.” It means that history had a beginning, followed by a meaningful sequence of events, and will culminate in state of resolution (what the Bible calls the Kingdom of God). Human history is not a random sequence of purposeless events, but the unfolding of God’s plan to restore his just and loving rule over the earth. There is an objective purpose to the ebb and flow of human civilization.

In the theistic world view, values are the expression of an absolute moral Being. By referring to the nature of God, we have objective standards for moral evaluations. Right and wrong are universal moral rules, binding on all people at all times and in all places. We call the theistic view of morality “absolutism.” Absolutism means that moral values are objective and universal. Objective means that moral values exist independent of us. They are true whether we accept them or not. Universal means that moral rules apply to everyone, regardless the culture in which we live.

In the area of truth, theism holds that since God is personal, his creation is orderly and understandable. We can have genuine, if limited, knowledge of the world. We can trust the observations of science, because God has made the universe with an intelligible order. Further, because we are personal and self-aware, we can have intuitive knowledge of morality. And lastly, we can know God. General knowledge of God’s existence comes through moral awareness and sense experience of the natural order (Romans 1:18 ff; Ps. 19:1-4a). Specific knowledge of God is available in God’s self-disclosure in the scripture.

Naturalism

World views are commonly defined by reference to the “reality” category. Naturalism, then, is a world view founded on some beliefs about nature. It is the belief that only the natural realm exists. And by the natural realm, we mean the world of material objects. Consequently, sometimes naturalism is referred to as “materialism,” or “materialistic naturalism.” Carl Sagan, an astronomer and well known naturalist, succinctly summarized the naturalistic view of reality by stating in Cosmos, “The universe: all that was, all that is, all that there will ever be.” The physical universe is all there is, and it is governed by the laws of nature. Everything can, in principle, be explained by material objects guided by natural law.

Naturalistic world views include atheism, scientism, secular humanism, existentialism and nihilism. Postmodernism is also heavily influenced by naturalism. These concepts are introduced and defined below.

While materialistic naturalism is ancient in origin, it has been the dominant world view of the West since the enlightenment period of the 18^th century. During this era, great advances of science, especially Newtonian physics, were interpreted as the key to understanding the universe. Naturalistic philosophers optimistically assumed that by reference to the laws of nature alone, all of the mysteries of the universe could be unlocked. This belief led to the conclusion that God was not needed to explain reality. So while theists view the universe is an open system of cause and effect, naturalists conceive it as a closed system. Naturalism rejects either the existence of God, or the relevance of God’s existence to the affairs of the universe. Naturalists hold that if he exists, God is uninvolved with the universe. This view exists today in the form of scientism.

Materialistic naturalism has direct implications for understanding human nature. If reality is wholly explained in materialistic terms, then human nature is too. Man is fully accounted for biologically. There is no qualitative difference between man and animals. There is no “mind” over and above the biological functions of the brain. There is no spiritual aspect to human personhood. Man is the product of a series of genetic mutations that survived according to the law of “survival of the fittest.”

But what does this analysis of human personhood mean? What about our perceived sense of dignity and uniqueness? What does naturalism say about the inherent value of human life? Harvard professor B.F. Skinner, father of behaviorism, addressed this question:

“What is being abolished is autonomous man—the man defended by the literature of freedom and dignity. His abolition has been long overdue. Autonomous man has been constructed from our ignorance, as our understanding increases, the very stuff of which he is composed vanishes. To man qua man we readily say good riddance.”

Skinner is saying that under the naturalistic view, there is no room for human dignity and freedom. No room for dignity, because we are not qualitatively distinct from any other species or organism. No room for freedom (of choice) because we are explained purely in terms of biochemical or neurochemical reactions which follow the prescribed laws of nature. We are determined biologically and environmentally. Skinner quite properly excludes the language of freedom and dignity from the naturalistic view: Man is nothing other than a stimulus-response machine. There is no room to speak of a “mind” or “soul” since there is no non material realm.

A naturalistic view of human existence includes an awareness of the transitory state of life. Our existence as a species is the product of chance. Our lives do not fit into an ultimate purpose. We came into being by random biological chance, live a relatively short life, and then become fertilizer. The realization that naturalism implies purposelessness for human life is termed nihilism. It is a philosophy of deep despair. Any attempt to create meaning out of a meaningless universe is considered by nihilists to be arbitrary and artificial. French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre illustrates this point well in his short story “The Wall.” It is a story about three prisoners of war who stay up all night talking about life as they await execution at dawn. By a strange twist of affairs, one man is saved from the firing squad. But after spending the night contemplating the meaning of life from a materialistic view of reality, Sartre’s protagonist says,

“At that moment I felt that I had my whole life in front of me and I thought, ‘It’s a damned’ it was worth nothing because it was finished. I wondered how I’d been able to talk, to laugh with the girls: I wouldn’t have moved so much my little finger if I had only imagined I would die like this….I spent my time counterfeiting eternity, I had understood nothing….In the state I was in, if someone had come and told me I could go home quietly, that they would leave me my life whole, it would have left me cold: several hours or several years of waiting is all the same when you have lost the illusion of being eternal.”

Realizing that human existence is purposeless is shattering for those who consistently and honestly maintain a naturalistic world view. The true naturalist strips away the “illusion of being eternal,” to face the absurdity of existence. Because this sobering implication is contrary to our sense that life is meaningful, most naturalists’ basic beliefs are inconsistent. Naturalists usually live and act as though there was some objective purpose for life. Albert Camus, a long time friend of Sartre, saw the contradiction between what naturalists believe and how they live. In reference to his own nihilistic writing Camus admitted, “a literature of despair is a contradiction in terms.” In the creative act, whether it be writing or painting, the nihilist is attempting to “transcend nihilism.”

If the concept of human personhood is difficult for naturalism, values also pose a significant tension. The naturalistic world view extends to the realm of morality in a way that most naturalists are slow to recognize. If we begin by assuming that reality is matter, then there is no room for morality. Nature is amoral. Nature is neither good nor bad. It just is. It is impossible derive a statement of value from a valueless universe. Consider again the words of Sartre,

“[T]his is the tendency of everything called reformism in France—nothing will be changed if God does not exist. We shall find ourselves with the same norms of honesty, progress, and humanism, and we shall have made of God an outdated hypothesis which will peacefully die off by itself. The existentialist, on the contrary, thinks it is very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an objective Good, since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. Nowhere is it written that the Good exists, that we must be honest, that we must not lie; because the fact is we are on a plane where there are only men. Dostoevsky said, ‘If God didn’t exist, everything would be possible.’”

No objective meaning can be given to our moral judgments if naturalism is true. In an amoral universe of material objects, any attempt to erect an ethical system is, by definition, arbitrary fiction. British philosopher A.J. Ayer expressed this clearly:

“We can now see why it is impossible to find a criterion for determining the validity of ethical judgments. It is not because they have an absolute validity which is mysteriously independent of ordinary sense experience, but because they have no objective validity whatsoever. If a sentence makes no statement at all, there is obviously no sense in asking whether what is says is true or false.”

For Ayer and other naturalists, ethical judgments are expressions of emotion. They reflect personal idiosyncratic preference. Ultimately, saying “X is good” is equivalent to the aesthetic judgment, “I like X.” Values are matters of personal taste. Moral disagreements are ultimately unresolvable on moral grounds.

But many naturalists find this implication threatening. From the earliest days of naturalism the attempt was made to find some basis for values. The ancient Greek philosopher Protagoras was the first to espouse humanism in his famous dictum, “Man is the measure of all things.” Protagoras meant that while we live in a valueless universe, each man has the ability to create values. Man is the standard of good and evil, right and wrong. Humanistically based values regard man as the definition of goodness. Historically, this led to optimistic humanism, expressed in the tradition of enlightenment rationalism—the notion that the human race is perfectible. Enlightenment humanists believed that given sufficient knowledge and technology, we can better our world. Humanistic optimism is echoed in the famous words of John F. Kennedy, “All of man’s problems have been created by man and can be solved by man.”

But who decides what is right or wrong, just or unjust?” Most contemporary naturalists are ethical relativists. Relativism means that values are defined either by individuals, or by cultures. So what is right for one person or society may not be right for another individual or culture. Moral truths are subjective. This means the sphere of truth is limited to the individual or to the culture in which ethical standards are defined. As we will show later in the text, relativism plays a prominent role in postmodern thought.

Ethical Absolutism. Absolute values are objective and universal. “Objective” means that moral truths are independent of what people believe. “Universal” means that moral truths apply to everyone in every place throughout history.

Ethical Relativism. Relative values are subjective and individual. “Subjective” means that they are the creation of some person, not discovered in a world outside of the individual. By individual, we mean that the sphere of truth is limited to the individual (or to the culture that accepts the same moral beliefs).

The naturalistic view of reality is closely related to the nature and limits of knowledge. Since man is only a biological entity, knowledge is based on physical, sense experience. Sense perception as the basis of knowledge is called empiricism. Empiricism states, “Nothing is in the intellect which is not first in the senses.” How does a person come to know something? Because they see it, hear it, feel it, smell it or taste it. Put simply, “seeing is believing.”

Empiricism has substantial implications for what, in principle, can be known. Since knowledge is rooted in sense perception of material things, we can not know anything beyond the realm of possible sense experience. The sciences become the final arbiter of truth in the naturalistic world view. Atheism is the naturalistic view of reality. The naturalistic view of knowledge entails agnosticism. Agnosticism is the position that no knowledge of God is possible, because God is not something that can be experienced by the senses.

Pantheism

Pantheism is the religious world view of the East. It includes Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism. In its Westernized form, pantheism is the basic assumption of Transcendental Meditation and some aspects of New Age mysticism.

Pantheists view reality like naturalists in the sense that both are monistic theories. Monism means that reality has one dimension. In contrast to the naturalistic view, pantheism rejects the existence of matter. Pantheists believe only the spiritual dimension exists. Since this is such a difficult concept for us in the West, we will need to explore a bit further.

While subtle differences exist between Eastern religions, they are unified in the view that ultimate reality is spirit. But it would be a mistake to interpret the Eastern concept of the spiritual in Western monotheistic terms. Eastern pantheists believe spiritual reality is ultimately impersonal and unknowable. Spirit is more like energy than a personal God as we conceive him in the West. Strange from our perspective, is fact that most of the pantheistic religions involve devotion to a host of gods. The practice of Hinduism, for example, consists of devotion to three hundred million nature deities. Hindu scholars recognize that devotion to these deities is simply an attempt to explain the unexplainable, and to make Hinduism accessible to the popular, uneducated masses. Ritual and devotion to nature gods is to be understood wholly in light of the philosophical categories of the Upanishads (Hindu scriptures), not in Western monotheistic terms. As D.S. Sharma, a noted Hindu scholar states, “The particular name and form of any deities are limitations which we in our weakness impose on the all pervading spirit which is nameless and formless. The supreme being is a person only in relation to ourselves and our needs….the highest theism is only a sort of glorified anthropomorphism, but we cannot do without it.” Sharma means that all attempts to personalize the ultimately impersonal are the product our human propensity to ascribe to reality attributes that we observe in ourselves. Because we are persons, we personify the cosmos.

Nothing is more foreign to us in the West than the denial of the material realm. But it is equally strange from the Eastern viewpoint that Westerners deny the spiritual realm. Materialism and pantheism seem to be complete opposites. On one level this is true. Yet, there is actually much similarity in outlook between them. Pantheists refer to the perception of a material reality as Maya, which means illusion. But illusion is the same term often used by materialistic intellectuals in the West to describe our awareness of the spiritual realm. For example, Freud’s influential work on the psychic origins of belief in God (and the soul) is titled The Future of an Illusion. Another similarity between Eastern and naturalistic Western thinking is that in the realm of ultimate reality, both hold reality to be impersonal and undefinable. What, after all is matter? Matter can no more be defined than absolute impersonal spirit.

Both pantheism and naturalism teach that illusion is grounded in ignorance. For the Westerner, as Skinner stated, the illusion of a non material aspect to man is based on ignorance. One day, when we gain sufficient knowledge of neurophysiology and environmental determiners, the belief in non natural aspects of personhood will evaporate. In the pantheistic tradition, the reverse is the case. When we overcome the illusion of duality (distinct spiritual and physical realms), and experience oneness with the universal spirit, we will recognize the material as illusory.

The pantheistic view of reality applies to human nature in much the same way as it does in naturalism. What is true of the whole of reality is true of the individual. If ultimate reality is impersonal, undefinable spirit, then so is man. The Hindu term for the human essence is atman. Since only Brahman exists (impersonal spiritual reality), atman is also impersonal, undefinable, spiritual reality. That is, “atman is Brahman.” No ultimate distinction exists between individuals and ultimate reality. All things are one. Reality is unity without individuality. But this raises a further question. Human experience tells us that we are individuals, that there is a difference between one another’s’ existence and personality. This perception, in classical pantheistic thought, is the consequence of ignorance—it is a manifestation of Maya, or illusion. Because this view of man and reality is beyond rational description, Eastern thinkers typically express their thought in parable. The following is one of the most famous parables from the Upanishads, in which a guru seeks to explain to his son the impersonal nature of man.

“Bring me a fruit from this banyan tree,” the guru asks.

“Here it is, father,” his son replies.

“Break it.”

“It is broken, Sir.”

“What do you see in it?”

“Very small seeds, Sir.”

 

“Break one of them, my son.”

“It is broken, Sir.”

“What do you see in it?”

“Nothing at all, Sir.”

“My son, from the very essence in the seed which you cannot see comes in truth this vast banyan tree. Believe me, my son, an invisible and subtle essence is the Spirit of the whole universe. That is Reality. That is Atman. That is you.”

Having defined human nature, we can now investigate the question of life’s purpose. The guiding ideal for life in Hinduism and Buddhism is to achieve experiential unity with the One, universal spirit. While this may be acquired through a variety of means, the one most familiar to us in the West is meditation. Meditation is the practice of ridding consciousness of any thought of the self as distinct from the One. It is an attempt to rid consciousness of the world of Maya, or illusion. Through a rigorous discipline, we are able to achieve experiential consciousness of unity with ultimate reality. This is termed enlightenment. Once enlightened, atman is forever united with Brahman upon death of the illusory, physical body. The imagery of water is often used to express the unity of atman with Brahman. When a cup of water is thrown into the river, it is no longer identifiable as an individual cup of water. It is part of the flow of the river. So too is the soul or atman as it merges with ultimate spiritual reality.

Atman’s unity with Brahman is called nirvana, which means “the blowing out” (as in the snuffing out of a candle). Nirvana is a state of nonexistence as a self-aware individual. In Western terms, nirvana is equivalent to death. Hence, the final state in pantheism is actually identical to the final state in materialistic naturalism. Human history, like human life, serves no ultimate purpose in pantheism. It is like naturalism in this way. Objective value to human life is the sole possession of the theistic world view.

The pantheistic world view makes no ultimate distinction between good and evil because ultimate reality is pure impersonal unity. Moral distinctions between good and evil express not unity, but plurality (the existence of opposites). Siddhartha, the founder of Buddhism put it this way:

“The world is not imperfect or slowly evolving along a long path to perfection. No, it is perfect at every moment; every sin already carries grace within it, all small children are potentially old men, all sucklings have death within them, all dying people—eternal life….Therefore, it seems to me that everything that exists is good—death as well as life, sin as well as holiness, wisdom as well as folly.”

This statement enables us to understand the why anthropomorphic representations of reality in Hinduism portray god as creator (Brahma), sustainer (Vishnu) and with striking polarity, death and destruction (Shiva). Since they are equally absolute, there are no final or ultimate moral categories. No objective distinction between good and evil is possible.

The course of life is not, strictly speaking, moral. Rather, it is pragmatic: seeking wisdom and enlightenment which are necessary to enter nirvana. Yet, there is a practical code of conduct which the wise recognize. Wisdom means removing from our consciousness any desire that keeps our soul enslaved to Maya, or illusion. Detached from the world of sense experience, we avoid the lure of Maya and consciousness remains fixed on its ultimate path. The Buddhist scripture states, “Let no man love anything; loss of the beloved is evil. Those who love nothing and hate nothing, have no fetters.”

Sometimes we think that the Eastern notion of karma is a moral principle. But in reality, karmic law is simply an amoral principle of cause and effect. Those who do not seek enlightenment are bound to the cycle of life according to karmic law. This is the Eastern meaning of reincarnation. The goal of Eastern mysticism is to avoid reincarnation by transcending ignorance and finding enlightenment. It is interesting how we in the West have romanticized the idea of reincarnation. Western distortions of reincarnation are discussed in greater length in the chapter on New Age consciousness.

Perhaps the most frustrating facet of Eastern pantheism for Western culture is the area of truth. Reason is based on an objective distinction between true and false. That is, if a proposition X is correct, then not-X is false. This is called the law of non contradiction. This law is the basis of rational thought. In pantheism, however, the distinction does not hold in the area of ultimate reality. Brahman, the One, absolute spirit is by definition beyond rational understanding. This is because ultimate reality is impersonal, non rational and unknowable. The Upanishads state,

“Verily, in the beginning this world was Brahman, the limitless One—limitless to the east, limitless to the north, limitless in every direction. Incomprehensible is that supreme Soul, unlimited, unborn, not to be reasoned about, unthinkable—He whose soul is space.”

Zen Buddhism provides one of the clearest examples of the essentially non rational nature of Eastern religion. World religions expert Lewis Hopfe notes, “….reason is to be distrusted more than anything else because it cannot possibly lead people to real truth. In fact, people must deliberately confuse reason before they can find the truth.” For this reason, pantheism is often refereed to as mysticism. Mysticism means that reality cannot be apprehended by reason. Only personal, non rational experience leads to a genuine encounter with reality.

One of the appealing features of the pantheistic view of truth is its tolerance of opposing religions or philosophies. Since there is no rational distinction between truth and falsehood, pantheism teaches that all religions are ultimately espousing the same message. In his address to the International Congress on World Religions, Hindu scholar Vivekananda stated,

“I am proud to belong to a religion which has taught the world both tolerance and universal acceptance. We believe not only in universal toleration, but we accept all religions as true. As different streams having different sources all mingle their waters in the sea, so different paths which men take through different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to God.”

Vivekananda view is now almost the consensus in religious thought today. We will have much to say about this position when we discuss postmodern religion.

With a basic understanding of the three major world views, we now turn to the practical issue of identifying basic beliefs. See “Assessing Basic Beliefs,” by Jim Leffel

Copyright by Jim Leffel, 1994

Testing Basic Beliefs

By Jim Leffel

We all have a set of basic beliefs, a world view. Everyone is a philosopher in this way. In this chapter, our concern is to provide criteria that distinguish a good set of basic beliefs from a poor one. This seems overwhelming perhaps. But in fact, it is a natural process, and one that we are involved in all the time. Whenever we take action, form an opinion, or consider other’s views, we are testing a belief system—either ours or someone else’s. So our present task is to make explicit what we naturally do by providing a framework to assess world views.

Basic beliefs as hypotheses

We will consider a basic belief as a hypothesis. A Hypothesis is an idea or a set of ideas we form in order to understand or explain something. We use hypotheses in all forms of reasoning, from the simplest process of everyday decision making, to extremely complex scientific discovery. By understanding the nature of hypothetical reasoning, we will be able to get a handle on how to assess basic beliefs.

Every day we make countless decisions based on hypothetical reasoning. And if we look closely into this reasoning process, we find we are actually testing some of our basic beliefs. Recently, I flew in an airplane. As the aircraft taxied down the runway, I felt my heart beating more rapidly. “Why am I nervous?” I thought to myself, “I’ve flown many times before.” With that thought, I began to relax. This is an example of how we naturally use hypothetical reasoning without even being aware of it. What went into the self-reassuring reflection, “I’ve flown many times before?” Consider the following thoughts:

This airplane is like the others I have been on.

Airplanes rarely crash.

The laws of nature that got me airborne before are still in operation.

Therefore, this ride will be safe.

And of course, the safe trip to Atlanta helped to further confirm the truth of these beliefs. My basic belief in the stability of natural law and the belief that statistical odds are a reliable guide to action enabled me to enjoy the trip. I adjusted to the situation based on my deeply imbedded conviction that these root hypotheses were true and sufficient. Like these ideas, many of our basic beliefs are deeply embedded. We do not always consciously interact with them, even though they provide the foundation for our decision making.

Let’s look at another example of how hypotheses work. Consider a detective faced with a violent crime scene. Suppose a woman has been murdered in her apartment. The detective enters and begins to survey the grounds. Everything in the apartment is a potential clue at first. The dwelling appears undisturbed, but he notices empty wine glasses on the coffee table, he finds a small container of cocaine on the floor, a car key on the kitchen counter, and so on. To begin the crime solving process, the detective must formulate a hypothesis: The key on the kitchen counter fits the murderer’s car. This hypothesis may not be right, but the detective must start with some kind of assumption. Otherwise, there is no way to proceed with the case.

From this hypothesis a number of implications are drawn. Suppose the key fits a late-model Mercedes. Further, if the key is the only one the murder had with him (how many of us carry around two sets of keys?), it follows that the car may be parked nearby. In his haste, the murderer may have left on foot. A third implication is that the murderer’s name may be on the record of a local Mercedes dealership or registered with the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. To test these implications, the detective conducts a search of the streets in the area and contacts the local Mercedes dealers to get a list of recent buyers.

We note three things about this hypothesis. First, the hypothesis was imposed on the evidence, not derived from it. A hypothesis is a belief used to unveil the reality beneath the surface of our observations. Basic beliefs are not discovered like a new species of fish, they are mental constructs, ideas, and we apply to our experience of the world. For example, naturalists do not discover that the universe is a closed system of cause and effect by observing the cosmos. This belief is applied to the observable data. As we discuss basic beliefs as hypotheses, it will be important to keep this in mind. Data and interpretation of the data need to be carefully separated if we are to remain objective.

Second, we note that a hypothesis directs the search for evidence. Without a hypothesis, all evidence is of equal value. The temperature of the room or the day of the month is as relevant as the key on the counter without the presence of a hypothesis. World views act like hypotheses in this way too. Forming basic beliefs is the way we try to make rational sense out of life.

Third, hypotheses can be assessed, which is our main concern here. The most obvious way to evaluate a hypothesis is by seeing whether or not its implications turn out to be true. In our example, the detective may find his hypothesis was wrong, because the key fit the car belonging to the victim. In this way, the hypothesis failed, or was falsified. But what if the key did fit a Mercedes parked close to the apartment? And further, it had been purchased recently by someone who knew the victim? Does this prove that the owner of the car was the murderer? Clearly not. The hypothesis is too general to establish a murderer, even though some of the implications may turn out to be true. The car could have belonged to the victim’s mother, who left an extra set of keys with her daughter in case she lost them. So hypotheses, like world views, can be a bit tricky. We need a closer assessment of hypothetical reasoning if we are to have the skills necessary to effectively interact with basic belief systems.

Testing hypotheses

As this illustration indicates, confirming a hypothesis is more difficult than determining it’s falsity. In the realm of world views this is especially true. In this section, we will present four rules for the acceptance or rejection of a hypothesis and show how they relate to the assessment of basic beliefs.

1. Adequacy

 

A hypothesis is adequate when it explains all of the relevant data. If a hypothesis meets the criterion of adequacy, we “tentatively” accept it. Tentatively, because the hypothesis is confirmed or disconfirmed only after all four tests are applied. When a hypothesis explains some, but not all of the relevant facts, it is either false, or insufficient. By insufficient, we mean that it is at best partially true. Adequacy concerns the comprehensiveness of the hypothesis. The more comprehensively a hypothesis explains the data, the higher the degree of confirmation. When two competing hypotheses are being considered, the one explaining the most data is preferred.

Let’s assume the victim’s brother owned the Mercedes and on the detective’s hypothesis, was charged with the murder. Further, suppose that the brother’s finger prints were found on one of the wine glasses, and he had a reputation as a desperate cocaine addict. Friends of the family also testified that the brother was violent with his sister when she refused to give him money for his addiction. So far, the detective’s hypothesis seems to be well supported by the evidence. But on further investigation, two friends surface and testify that the brother had been out of town visiting them during the week of the murder. The hypothesis is now in jeopardy because it cannot reconcile all of the relevant data.

Optimistic humanism is based on the belief that humans are progressing toward the perfection of our species. Eighteenth and nineteenth century humanists confidently asserted that with time and knowledge, man’s goodness would blossom into a utopian culture. But the devastation of World War One crushed this belief. Humanists could not reconcile their confidence in the progress and perfectibility of man with the fact that the most advanced civilization in the world was capable of such barbarism. The inadequacy of optimistic humanism gave rise to pessimism in the decades after the “war to end all wars.”

2. Internal Coherence

 

The criterion of internal coherence is the most basic test of a hypothesis. It states: a hypothesis is internally coherent if its component ideas are rationally interconnected. If a theory or a world view contains self-contradictory ideas, then it is false. The principle of internal coherence is based on the logical law of “non contradiction.” The law of non contradiction is the foundation for all rational thought. It means that if a statement is true, then any statement contradicting it is necessarily false. For example, if it is true that the earth revolves around the sun, it must be false that the sun revolves around the earth. Reason demands we reject contradictory assertions. The internal coherence criterion differs from the other three tests. These criteria “tentatively” confirm or disconfirm a hypothesis. Confirmation of a hypothesis can change in light of new information. But a hypothesis that fails the internal coherence test can never be accepted. No amount of evidence can make a contradictory statement true.

Let’s go back to our illustration. The brother’s alibi is that he was out of town visiting friends at the time of the murder. Thus, the prosecution’s hypothesis appears inadequate. Let’s further imagine that the friends the accused was purported to have been visiting are giving testimony. One friend, George, confidently asserts that the brother was visiting him 500 miles away from the crime during the week of the murder. But the other witness, Martha, stated that the accused did not visit them until the week following the murder. Both swear they are telling the truth. What can members of the jury do? They must either believe George or Martha is lying, or that both are mistaken. But they cannot accept both testimonies as true. To believe both testimonies is to accept the thesis that the brother was 500 miles away and not 500 miles away at the same time. Such contradictory evidence is incoherent. There may be reason to believe Martha over George, but both cannot be believed.

Internal coherence is the most decisive test for a set of basic beliefs. We need to carefully examine the relationship between world view categories. If statements about the nature of reality contradict assertions made about human nature, truth or values, then the world view under investigation is incoherent. One of the two (or both) of the contradictory components must be rejected. Because metaphysics is the most basic world view category, we find incoherence most often in the relationship between it and the other three categories. When naturalists believe in objective moral standards, their world view is incoherent. It is not possible to derive a statement of value in a valueless universe. Naturalists must abandon either belief in materialism, or in the possibility of making objective value claims. This dilemma, termed the “naturalistic fallacy” will be discussed in greater length in our section of fallacious reasoning.

Incoherence in a world view is identified most frequently when a basic belief that can only be explained in one system is brought over into another system. We refer to this transaction as “borrowed capital.” True beliefs are often (unconsciously) included in world views that are by definition, rationally inconsistent with the imported belief. Theistic beliefs about human nature and values are commonly borrowed by naturalistic and pantheistic world views.

3. External Consistency

 

.A hypothesis is externally consistent when it conforms to other well-established bodies of knowledge. This is common sense. When a hypothesis is consistent with beliefs that are widely accepted based on overwhelming evidence, it gains plausibility. This is the kind of hypothetical reasoning I appealed to in dealing with the flight to Atlanta mentioned earlier.

Hypothesis inconsistent with other well accepted hypotheses are not necessarily false. But the “burden of proof” is on the hypothesis that contradicts other well grounded ones. The theory inconsistent with well established hypotheses needs to both explain the same data and show why it is more adequate than the others. The history of science is replete with examples of theories that were rejected because they failed to conform to wider, well confirmed hypotheses. Sometimes the doubted theory replaces or causes revisions in formerly well-established hypotheses. Two of the most significant examples in science are the Copernican Revolution and Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. Both were accepted only after close assessment, but radically changed the way we view nature.

World views that are strongly counterintuitive have a burden of proof. Where basic beliefs contradict universal human experience, we have reason to doubt their truth. The pantheistic doctrine of Maya is one such example. Denying the reality of the material world violates universal human experience. That does not prove that pantheism is false, but it puts a great deal of pressure on the pantheist to account for this illusion.

4. Fruitful

 

A hypothesis is fruitful when it suggests further directions for application. When a scientific hypothesis not only explains an initial problem, but directs the way to new insight, it is fruitful. Newton’s theory of universal gravitation is an example of a fruitful hypothesis. It was originated to solve the problem of falling bodies, but it also explained such things as the ebb and flow of tides, the orbital motion of the moon and planets, and the fluctuations in planetary motion caused by a planet’s interaction with other planets.

When a theoretical hypothesis such as a world view is fruitful, it provides a meaningful framework to address practical issues. Fruitfulness in this context is termed “livability.” Fruitful basic beliefs can be lived out consistently as new dilemmas and decisions present themselves. By contrast, when basic beliefs can not be consistently lived out, we have reason to doubt them.

Fruitfulness turns out to be more of a practical way to confirm world views than purely conceptual or theoretical. In this way fruitfulness differs from the other three criteria for testing hypotheses.

Testing Hypotheses: A Summary

1. Adequacy: A hypothesis is adequate when it explains all of the relevant data.
2. Internal Coherence. A hypothesis is internally coherent to the extent that all of its ideas are logically interconnected. Hypotheses with contradictory concepts are false.
3. External Consistency. A hypothesis is externally consistent to the extent that it conforms to other well established hypotheses.
4. Fruitfulness: A hypothesis is fruitful when it can be successfully applied, and suggest a direction for future application.

 

We can draw some conclusions from what has been discussed. First, everyone has a world view. Regardless of the context of belief, everyone is a believer. In this way, we all have faith. Second, standards exist to assess the rational merits of our beliefs. These standards, embodied in the hypothetical method, are presupposed in all reasoning processes. It is possible to demonstrate that some belief systems are rationally incoherent, and consequently false. But there is no “ultimate proof” for world views that pass the test of internal coherence. To have absolute certainty or knowledge beyond a shadow of doubt that a belief system is true requires an infinite mind. Since our minds are limited, the best we can do is hold beliefs that are true beyond a reasonable doubt. True beyond reasonable doubt means that our basic beliefs are internally coherent, that they explain the data of human experience and observation, and provide an applicable guide to life.

Copyright by Jim Leffel, 1994

Apostasy in the Christian church

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it [Jesus’ return] will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,” (2 Thess. 2:3, NASB).

Apostasy means to fall away from the truth.  Therefore, an apostate is someone who has once believed and then rejected the truth of God.  Apostasy is a rebellion against God because it is a rebellion against truth.  In the Old Testament God warned the Jewish people about their idolatry and their lack of trust in Him.  In the New Testament the epistles warn us about not falling away from the truth.  Apostasy is a very real and dangerous threat.

The verse at the top of the page tells us that there will be an apostasy that is associated with the appearance of the Antichrist.  Most Christians are looking for the arrival of the Antichrist, but very few are looking for “the apostasy” that must come first.  the arrival of the Antichrist cannot occur until sufficient apostasy has happened in the world.  The Antichrist, who is the ultimate of liars, cannot abide in a world where the truth of God’s word is taught.  This is why the Bible says that the apostasy will come first and then the Antichrist will be revealed.

Therefore, we must, as Christians, ask this question, “Is there an apostasy occurring in the Christian church today?”  Some would say no and others yes.  But, as we look for the arrival of the Antichrist, should we not also be looking for the arrival of apostasy?  And where else should we first look but in our own house for the Bible tells us that judgment will begin in the house of the Lord (1 Peter 4:17).

If there is indeed an apostasy occurring in the Christian Church, we would not know it unless we first examined the Bible closely and then compared the Church to the Word of God. It is only after truth is established that we would then have a measuring rod by which apostasy can be detected.  Therefore, I propose the following list of biblical truths as a sample of essential Christian and non-essential doctrines by which we might compare other teachings and phenomena.   Note this is not absolute and the nuances of several can be debated as not all will agree with the categorization of all points.

1. Primary Essentials (Nature and work of Christ) – Cannot deny and be Christian since they are explicitly stated as required in scripture.

1. Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14;8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).

2. Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21).

3. Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 5:1-5).

4. The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9).

5. There is only one God (Exodus 20:1-3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)

2. Secondary Essentials – (Nature of God) Cannot deny and be Christian.

1. God exists as a Trinity of persons:  Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (See Trinity)

2. Virgin Birth of Jesus – relates to incarnation of Christ as God and man.

3. Primary Non-Essentials (Bible, Church ordinances, and practice) – Denial does not void salvation, yet principles are clearly taught in scripture.  Denial suggests apostasy.

1. Male eldership and pastorate

2. Fidelity in marriage in heterosexual relationships

3. The condemnation of homosexuality

4. Inerrancy of Scripture

4. Secondary Non-Essentials – does not affect one’s salvation relationship with God.  Debated within Christianity.  Denial or acceptance does not suggest apostasy.

1. Baptism for adults or infants

2. Predestination, election, and free will

3. Communion every week, monthly, or quarterly, etc.

4. Saturday or Sunday Worship

5. Worship with or without instruments, traditional or contemporary.

6. Pretribulation rapture, midtribulation rapture, posttribulation rapture.

7. Premillennialism, amillennialism, and post millennialism.

8. Continuation or cessation of the charismatic gifts

9. Etc.

 

Of course, the non-essentials are debatable (which unfortunately leads to denominational fragmentation).  But by way of explanation, the Primary Essentials, are those doctrines that the Bible states if they are denied, damnation follows.  I have written on this in Essential Doctrines.  For brevity, the Bible states that if you deny Jesus is God, you are dead in your sins (John 8:24,58 cf. Exodus 3:14); that if you deny Jesus’ physical resurrection, your faith is in vain (1 Cor. 15:14, cf. John 2:19-21); that if you add works to salvation, you are not in Christ (Gal. 3:1-3; 5:1-4); and that if you preach a gospel contrary to what the apostles preached, you are accursed (Gal. 1:8-9, cf., 1 Cor. 15:1-4).  Therefore, to deny any of these doctrines, according to scripture, is to be outside the camp of Christ, and invited eternal damnation.  This would obviously be apostasy.

The Secondary Essentials are essentials that further clarify orthodoxy, but there is no explicitly scriptural statement regarding each (that I am aware of) which states that denying them results in damnation the way the Primary Essentials do.  The Secondary Essentials deal with the nature of God, primarily.  The fact that there is one God who is a Trinity, is clearly essential to Christian orthodoxy, but there is no scriptural statement stating that to believe in the Trinity is necessary for salvation.  However, that does not mean that denial of the Trinity is acceptable.  A person can be saved without knowing about the Trinity.  But, since the Trinity is a biblical truth, and the believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit who bears witness of truth, a true Christian will not openly denounce the Trinity once he has been taught it from scripture.  So, it could be said that the Secondary Essentials are essentials to the faith as well as the Primary Essentials are.

The Primary Non-Essentials are biblical teachings that if denied do not affect one’s salvation.  But, because the Bible teaches then, denying them is a sign of apostasy.  The Secondary Non-Essentials do not affect ones position with God nor do they affirm or deny biblical teaching since they are debatable.  Having differing beliefs in these is not a sign of apostasy, just differences of opinion.  Again, I am aware that the categorization of the non-essentials is debatable, but I must draw the line somewhere.  Sadly, it is in Secondary non-essential doctrines that most denominational fragmentation occurs.   This is a sad display that most division occurs over that which is least important.  Furthermore, I believe that it is in the area of the Non-Essentials that apostasy can first be detected.

2 Thessalonians 2

As quoted above, there is a prophecy in 2 Thessalonians about a coming apostasy that is associated with the disclosure of the anti-Christ.

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it [Jesus’ return] will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,” (2 Thess. 2:3, NASB).

Have you been looking for the coming of the anti-Christ?  Are you waiting for him to pop up on the world scene?  If you are, are you also looking for the related apostasy?  Most Christians are looking for the anti-Christ but are not looking for signs of apostasy.

The Bible is God’s word and it tells us what is right and wrong.  To the degree that anyone disagrees with the truths of God’s word, to that same degree they are falling away from it.  What, then, might be some of the signs of apostasy?  I’ve compiled a representative list of issues.  You may or may not agree with all of these, but I provide them as food for thought.

1. Denial of basic Christian doctrines such as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the deity of the Holy Spirit, salvation by grace, and moral absolutes as found in the Bible.

1. God’s word is true.  Deviation from the basics of its truth is surely apostasy.

2. Countless denominational divisions that contradict John 13:35 and 1 Cor. 1:10.

1. Of course, there are bound to be divisions in the body of Christ and differences of opinions are permitted (Rom. 14:1-12).  But, the amount of divisions in the Church is ridiculous and contrary to Col. 3:14.

3. Ordination of homosexuals

1. Homosexuality is clearly condemned in God’s word (Lev. 18:22; 1 Cor. 6:9).  To ordain homosexuals into ministry is clearly contrary to biblical truth and clearly apostasy.

4. Women elders and pastors

1. Whether people like it or not in this politically correct environment, the Bible does not support women as elders or as pastors (1 Tim. 2:12-14; 3:2; Titus 1:5-7).  Men are called to be leaders in the church.  The fact that women elders and pastors exist is a sign that men are not doing their God-given job.

2. Also, if you believe in women pastors and elders, do not dismiss this article.  you must always examine yourself to see if what you believe is biblical.

5. Not preaching the gospel per 1 Cor. 15:1-4.

1. The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus for our sins.  It is not a message of convenience or embarrassment.  Do not be ashamed of the gospel (Rom. 1:16).

6. Using the Lord’s name in vain, something a surprising number of Christians do.

1. God’s name and title are to be used only by Christians in a reverent and respectful manner, never in casual exclamation.  Just because the sinners do it, does not mean it is okay for the Christians.

7. Not sending out or failing to support missionaries (or cutting back unnecessarily) in violation of Matt. 28:18-20.

1. Carrying out the Great Commission is the command of Jesus.  Any church that is able to support missionary work and does not, is in direct violation of Christ’s command in the Great Commission.

8. Marketing and merchandising

1. Those in ministry should make a living from their labor.  Churches should seek to spread the gospel best they can and selling things to do it is acceptable.  But, how many trinkets and bobbles are offered in the name of Christ that do not honor God but are merely for the purpose of financial gain?  Is the duty of the church business or the gospel?  Remember how Jesus cleansed the temple?

9. Pastors who are more concerned with growing a church than preaching the truth.

1. Whoever and wherever they are, they need to repent.  Pastors must stand on the truth of God’s word, even if it costs them financially and materially.

10. Pastors who don’t pray and seek God’s face

1. Of course, this should be rare.  But, any pastor who does not seek God’s face in humility is seeking to do a job, not a ministry, under his own power.

11. Pastors who cave in to pressures from the church in contradiction to the word of  God.

1. Any pastor who does this should repent now or step down from the pulpit.  Pastors are to stand upon and for God’s word, no matter what the obstacles or the cost.

12. Pastors who fail to equip their congregations according to God’s word.

1. Pastors are called to equip the Christian for the work of the ministry in all aspects of life (Eph. 4:11):  apologetics, evangelism, missionary work, prayer, service, love, etc.  Far too many congregations are not being equipped with even the basics of Christianity and are instead being taught political correctness.

13. Pastors who don’t teach damnation.

1. We are not saying that you must preach fire and brimstone all the time.  But the fact is, the gospel that offends no one is not the gospel of the Bible.  the truth of the gospel is that people will face damnation.  This is part of the Christian message and it should be part of Christian preaching.

14. Christians gathering teachers to themselves to make them feel good

1. Is comfort or truth the primary objective for the Christians?  Are we divine in nature or sinners saved by grace?  Do we deserve to be saved or are we saved by God’s free choice?  Christians who want merely to be entertained and comforted from the pulpit are still children.  They should be challenged to grow and take risks.

15. Evolution

1. Denominations that either adopt evolutionary principles or refuse to take a stand on evolution.

 

Apostasy is all around us in varying degrees.  As Christians, we need to be very sure that we are clinging to the truth of God’s word and resisting the inclusion of liberalism, moral relativism, and the oncoming secularism that is all around us.  We need to stand on the word of God and never be ashamed of the truth of the Gospel:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek,” (Rom. 1:16).

The Hydra -

The Many-Headed Monster of Secular Humanism

by Dr. Steven C. Riser

 

How to Make Sense Out of Our Increasingly Secular Society

Introduction

Is it possible to be practical when talking about the world of ideas, especially when considering various philosophical and religious worldviews? Since what we think affects what we do, both individually and collectively, it is not only practical but also essential if we are to be like “the men of Issachar” and “understand the times” in which we live (1 Chr. 12:32). The aim in this article is to be brief, understandable and accurate as well as biblical and practical. It isn’t an easy task when dealing with the way that people think, but let’s try.

In Greek mythology, the hydra was a nine-headed serpent slain by Hercules as one of his twelve labors: when any of the heads was cut off, two others replaced it. There is a “hydra” loose in our contemporary culture and it is not a myth; this hydra, this many-headed monster, which is even more dangerous is called secularism, and it threatens you, your faith, your family, the church and our nation. The sad fact is that America is becoming increasingly influenced by secularism, which shows itself in a variety of ways; each one can be likened to one of the many heads of the hydra. The term hydra has come to be known as: any persistent evil with many sources or causes.

We may know the meaning of secular, but what is secularism? The addition of the suffix “ism” changes a word into a system of thought which affects the way in which we look at life. This system of thought is called a worldview. Secularism is the dominant “ism” of our society.

Secularism at its root is ignoring the eternal. It is living for this world only as if there is no God and no eternal consequence for our actions. It is the mark of a fool. “A fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1). It is not living in light of eternity. It is easy to see how this kind of thinking is a logical outgrowth of denying God’s existence (atheism).

The monster is secularism, but what do the various heads of the hydra represent? What are the components of secularism? The following “isms” contribute to our increasingly secular society. (Some of these ways of thinking are old, some are new but they’re all compatible with and reinforce the dominant worldview in our culture: secularism.)

1.   Pessimistic Existentialism— this cynical, fatalistic belief system asserts that man is a useless passionate creature with no intrinsic meaning or purpose in life. Feelings, instead of truth become the new standard for evaluating human significance. The most important question is not, “What do you think?” but, “How do you feel?” The problem is that how we feel may have no correspondence to what is true. “There is a way which seems right to a man but its end is the way of death” (Prov. 14:12). Paul tells us that we are to be babes in evil but mature in our understanding. Proverbs 18:2a says that, “a fool finds no pleasure in understanding.”

2.   Moral Relativism— this belief system assumes that God does not exist, so there is no objective basis for believing in absolute morality; therefore, “everything is relative”—including morality and ethics. The basis of right and wrong becomes a function of individual opinion or group consensus, both of which are continually subject to change. According to George Barna, 71% of Americans subscribe in some way to this belief system. Judges 17:6 says, “…everyone did as he saw fit.” That’s the logical outcome of moral relativism.

3.   Pragmatic Utilitarianism— Instead of asking, “Is it true? “pragmatism asks, “Does it work?” This is a results-oriented point of view, which says that the ends justify the means. Its motto: “Where there is a will, there is a way.” Modern man tends to be pragmatic and tends not to engage in ethical and religious reflection and thought. Instead of saying “because it’s true, it works,” pragmatism says, “because it works, it’s true.” Since God’s will must be done God’s way, the ends do not necessarily justify the means.

4.   Logical Positivism, or empiricism, is the belief that reality is limited only to what can be measured by the empirical senses—eyes, ears, nose, tongue and fingers. It involves the application of rationality and empiricism through science and technology. In other words, science becomes our “sacred cow” or god. Any truth that can’t be observed or experienced, such as moral or spiritual truth, is relative. The “scientist,” like Carl Sagan, would be the “high priest” in this modern movement. Motto: “The cosmos is all there is or ever will be.” Paul says that the Christian is to “live by faith and not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7).

5.   Darwinian Evolution— this belief system assumes that God does not exist, so it needs to arrive at an alternative explanation for creation and the development of the human species. Theistic evolution is an oxymoron. If creation can be explained apart from a Creator, there is no longer any need for God as an explanation for the creation. This theory requires a strong “faith” since it is based on assumptions, that can’t be proven. The writer of Hebrews says, “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible” (11:3). The fact is that the creation of the universe is outside the purview of scientific investigation.

6.   Pagan Hedonism— the motto of hedonism is: “You only go around once in life so you’ve got to grab for all the gusto that you can get.” Instead of focusing on truth and falsehood, or good and evil, the hedonist focuses on pleasure and pain. In simple terms, the hedonist makes the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain paramount to all other pursuits in life. It says, “Let us eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we shall die” (1 Cor. 15:32). Paul said that if Christ wasn’t resurrected, this way of thinking might make sense.

7.   Crass Materialism— this involves the unbridled acquisition of things. Its motto: “Money isn’t everything, but whatever is in second place is sure far behind.” Jesus contradicted this point of view when he said, “life does not consist in the abundance of things that you possess” (Luke 12:15). You can’t serve two masters, you can’t serve God and materialism (Matt. 6: 24). Materialists consider shopping or consumerism a form of “therapy.” Unfortunately, greed and disillusionment get the best of such people.

8.   Secular Humanism is a worldview that is man-centered rather than God-centered. In its simplest form it views man “as the measure of all things.” Man, not God, is the standard by which all norms and values are ultimately determined–all reality and life is centered on man. This belief system is summarized in the Humanist Manifesto I & II. Its motto: “I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul.” Man-centered secular humanism is the most popular alternative to God-centered Christianity.

9.   Marxist Communism is an atheistic and materialistic form of government with a socialistic economy based upon the government owning the means of production. Historically, virtually every significant effort aimed at improving people’s standard of living invested by socialistic or communistic theories of economics has failed miserably. Since communism is not compatible with human nature, it has never worked in the “real” world. Perhaps the last bastion of communism in America is the secular university.

10. Atheism is the belief that there is no God. The most important factor in any worldview is whether or not one believes in God. The Bible never tries to prove God’s existence; it merely assumes it and states that we are without excuse if we fail to come to that conclusion based upon the evidence (Rom. 1:18ff). Proverbs 14:1 says, “A fool says in his heart, ‘there is no God.’” Studies show that most people have some concept of God. Many people who claim to be atheists are simply mad at God. Others choose to adopt a lifestyle that is not compatible with God’s existence so they rule Him out of their lives. If you define God as your ultimate object of loyalty, then everyone has a god. We will all trust in something or someone, the question is in whom or what will we trust? Is the object for our faith worthy?

11. Historical Revisionism is the attempt on the part of secular humanists to rewrite history based on the assumptions of what is considered to be a politically correct way of thinking. In particular, they would like to rewrite the history of the founding of our nation to cover up the fact that our founding fathers had deep religious roots and used the Bible as the primary source document for their writings. They prayed regularly and included God in numerous official documents and practices of our nation. Revisionists would have us believe that our nation had a strictly secular foundation.

12. Narcissism is the excessive interest in one’s appearance, comfort, importance and abilities. It could be defined as extreme and unhealthy self-love to the point of self-absorption. A related term is “hubris”—arrogance resulting from excessive pride. This way of thinking is the result of our failure to think realistically and to regard ourselves and not God as the center of our universe. James 4:6 says, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” Narcissism is the logical consequence of enthroning one in the kingdom of self. Paul says, we are not to think more highly of ourselves than we ought to think (Romans 12:3).

13. Multiculturalism is the belief based on postmodernism, which assumes that all truth is culturally biased and so there is no morality or truth that transcends every culture. Therefore, no one culture is any better than any other culture, just different. All cultures must be equally tolerated and celebrated. Multiculturalism is the result of the collective application of moral relativism.

14. Pluralism is the condition that exists in a society or culture, which possesses many different religions, worldviews and truth-claims when none is dominant. It is the belief that there is no way to bring divergent ideas into a coherent whole. It does not believe in universal truth or moral absolutes. Pluralism results from a failure to realize that all truth is God’s truth and He is the cohesive force uniting all of the universe. Colossians 1:17 says that Christ “is before all things and in Him all things adhere or hold together.”

15. Postmodernism is a particular worldview based on the belief that truth does not exist in any objective sense and is created rather than discovered. Truth is culturally biased, subjective and therefore relative. This way of thinking can best be understood as a reaction to the empiricism of modernism, which limits one’s understanding of reality to the five senses. Christians believe that truth is discovered, discerned or revealed rather than created. We are not the source of truth, God is. Jesus said, “I am the truth…” (Jn. 14:6) and “…Thy word is truth” (Jn. 17:17).

16. Political Correctness is the belief that is approved and the behavior that is accepted when measured by the worldview and assumptions of secular humanism, postmodernism, multiculturalism and universalism. The bottom line is that secular humanism is considered socially acceptable while biblical Christianity is not considered politically correct. Political correctness is a means of putting social pressure on Christians to suppress their speech. Christians are called not be ashamed of the Gospel, but to speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15).

17. Universalism is a religious belief, which says, in effect, “all roads lead to Rome.” All religions lead to God. All worldviews can be valid avenues of salvation and any religion or worldview that attempts to be unique or exclusive is “wrong.” According to George Barna, 64% of Americans subscribe to this point of view. The simple truth is that either one religion is correct, true and valid, or none are. All religions are mutually exclusive or contradictory to one another. Christianity is the only religion that teaches salvation “by grace…through faith” (Eph. 2:8,9). If it is true, all other religions must be false.

18. The New Tolerance is based upon the belief that all truth is relative and therefore every individual’s beliefs, values, worldview, lifestyle, and perceptions of truth are equally valid. Multiculturalism is simply secular tolerance applied to the culture rather than to the individual. Tolerance is the greatest virtue in a culture that is void of absolute truth and morality. It would appear that the only people not to be tolerated are biblical Christians, because their worldview is the only one that poses a threat to secularism’s relativistic morals.

19. Naturalism, as opposed to supernaturalism, states that this natural, material world is all that exists. Since there is no such thing as the supernatural, there’s no such thing as God or miracles. Whatever exists can be explained by natural causes; therefore the supernatural cannot exist. This belief is at the heart of the theory of evolution. Some naturalists refer to themselves as scientific materialists—the name makes no difference; Materialism, naturalism and evolution go hand in hand—you can’t have one without the other.

20. Globalism (one world government)— if God does not exist, then He can’t help us solve our problems. We have to depend upon ourselves to solve our problems. The best way to do that is through Globalism, or a one-world government, with a socialist economy of course. There are currently serious efforts going on in our world through such organizations as the United Nations and World Court to do just that. Under such a government, all nations would have to surrender their sovereign status. In the last days, the Bible says that the antichrist will be in charge of a worldwide government.

 

Conclusion

What do all these “isms” have in common? They have all rejected the love of God as revealed in the Gospel of Christ and they have all rejected the wisdom of God as revealed in His Word–the Bible. They do not respect God or take Him seriously nor do they have any regard for His Word. Paul described it this way in Romans 1:21, “For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.” The way to avoid being adversely influenced by these non-Christian worldviews is to develop a Christian worldview—that is, to learn to think biblically.

If we want to avoid becoming the proverbial frog in the kettle, we must not allow the world to squeeze us into its own mold but rather we must allow God to transform us by the renewing of our mind (Rom. 12:1-2). But more than this, we are called to go on the offensive and use the “sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17). In 2 Corinthians 10:3-5, Paul said, “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” Only the “sword of the Spirit” can slay the secular monster called the hydra.

What’s the Big Deal About Worldview?
by Dr. Steven C. Riser

Introduction: Why do we need to develop a biblical worldview?First Peter 2:21 says that: Jesus is our example and we should “follow in His steps”. Jesus said in John 13:34-35 that we should love others “as He has loved us.”Question: How can we love and act like Jesus if we don’t learn to think like Jesus? We must first learn to think just like Jesus before we can begin to act like Jesus.Learning to think like Jesus is tantamount to developing a biblical worldview. According to a survey conducted by George Barna, the following have a biblical worldview: 1% of Roman Catholics; 4% of Americans; 9% of “born-again” Christians; 50% of Protestant pastors.1  What is a Worldview? It is the mental framework by which we perceive reality, make sense out of our life and the world around us. It’s both prescriptive (what should be) and descriptive (what is). It is a conceptual scheme into which we consciously or unconsciously place or fit everything we believe and by which we interpret and evaluate reality. Many disagreements among individuals and groups can be traced to competing worldviews. One of the reasons that some people reject the Gospel is that they have an anti-Christian conceptual scheme in some form or fashion.The word “worldview” actually comes from the German weltanschauung, coined by Immanuel Kant in 1790. It refers to how one looks at the world and life, and how that view influences the way one lives. Everyone has a basic perspective—convictions, axioms, presuppositions that help him interpret reality and make ethical choices. It is the sum total of what we believe about the world. We usually don’t examine them; many may be subconscious.A worldview basically is the philosophical/religious orientation of a person. It deals with the basic questions of human existence. John Calvin said that all people are incurably religious. Religion in the broadest sense of the term is that to which you are ultimately committed. In that sense, there is no such thing as a non-religious person. What is a biblical worldview? A biblical worldview is based on our belief in the authority of Scripture. Someone with a biblical worldview believes that his or her primary reason for living is to know, love and serve God. When we believe that the Bible is true, then we allow it to be the foundation of everything we think, say and do.Paul said in 2 Corinthians 10:3-5, “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” Why is it important to view Christianity as a worldview? Our major task in life is to discover what is true and then to act in line with that truth. Truth is found only in relationship to God and His revelation. God’s revelation in Scripture is intended to be the basis of all of life. While all truth is God’s truth, Jesus Christ claims to be the embodiment or personification of truth. Genuine Christianity is more than a personal and saving relationship with Jesus; it is more than just a set of isolated doctrines. It is a way of seeing and understanding all of reality; it is a worldview. Understanding Christianity as a worldview will help us to better understand and evaluate the merits of the Christian faith and other points of view. Many elements of any worldview are philosophical in nature; therefore it is vital that Christians become more conscious of the importance of philosophy. Christianity has an intrinsic connection to philosophy and to the world of ideas. Though philosophy and religion use a different language and may end up with different conclusions, they often ask the same questions. It is important to understand Christianity as a worldview for three reasons: 1. It enables us to make more sense of the world we live in and order our lives more ratio-nally. 2. It enables us to understand the forces hostile to our faith, thereby better enabling us to   share and defend the faith as well as positively impacting upon our culture! 3. Just as we can harm ourselves when we violate God’s physical laws, so we can also harm   ourselves when we violate God’s moral laws. We seek to co-operate not conflict or contradict with God’s laws. (No transgression of God’s moral law is without painful consequence.) Understand and cooperating with God’s laws is what the Bible calls wisdom. To be wise is to know reality and then to accommodate oneself to it. Those who refuse to accommodate themselves to reality are foolish and stubborn and are swimming against the stream of the universe—spitting in the wind, coloring outside the lines. To deny God is to blind ourselves to reality and the inevitable consequence is that we bump up against reality in painful ways. Christians live happier, more fulfilled and more productive lives! Why is our worldview so important? Just as the proper eyeglasses can put the world into proper focus, so also, the correct worldview can function in much the same way. Consistent godly (biblical) thinking will lead to consistent godly living. We cannot act like Christians if we first do not think like Christians. Our worldview lies at the root of all our values, priorities and choices. It impacts every aspect of our lives: how we spend our time, our money, how we interact with people in public and private, how we order our priorities and even how we perceive God. We need an accurate worldview for the following reasons:   1. To unify thought and life—consistency between thinking, speaking and acting.   2. To define what constitutes success—identification of the good life.   3. To find hope and meaning in life—to understand the purpose of life.   4. To guide our thinking and our actions—proper direction. It helps us…   5. To function in a diverse culture by understanding other worldviews. We are faced with a smorgasbord of worldviews, all of which make claims concerning truth. Worldviews are so much a part of our lives that we see and hear them daily whether we recognize them or not. Every aspect of our culture is affected by worldviews. If we ignore their importance, we do so to our detriment. What is considered “politically correct” is a reflection of a particular worldview. Our worldview directly impacts on our beliefs and indirectly on our feelings and actions. A personal worldview is a combination of all you believe to be true and becomes the driving force behind every emotion, decision and action. Your worldview affects your response in every area of life. What could be more important? What are some tests for evaluating a worldview? 1. It should be rational; it should not ask us to believe contradictory things. In logic this is   called the law of non-contradiction. 2. It should be supported by evidence that is consistent with what one observes; i.e., Chris-  tian Science—this world is a dream—not real. 3. It should give a satisfying comprehensive explanation of reality. In other words, it should   account for the most facts in the best way. 4. It should be able to explain why things are the way they are; i.e., it should be able to   ex-  plain a Mother Theresa and an Adolf Hitler. 5. It should provide a satisfactory basis for living—an accurate map for navigation. It should   help us to find our way in the world. What questions can we ask to help us discern various worldviews? 1. Why is there something rather than nothing? Can something create itself? Can something   come from nothing? Or, did someone create it? 2. How does one explain human nature? Is human nature basically good, bad or neutral? In   what ways are people similar or different? 3. What happens to a person at death? Does the body simply decay and decompose or is it   reincarnated or does it go to heaven or hell? 4. How does one determine what is right and wrong? Is morality relative or absolute? Is it   determined by God, the group, or the person? 5. How does one know what one knows? Is our knowledge limited to the five senses? What is   the place of reason and revelation? 6. What is the meaning of history? Does life have any meaning or purpose or is it absurd?   How will history be consummated? What are some examples of different worldviews? Secularism, Humanism, Pragmatism, Pluralism, Hedonism, Positivism, Modernism, Postmodernism, Nationalism, Feminism, Behaviorism, Pacifism, Liberalism, Deism, Nihilism, Existentialism, Christian Theism, Naturalism and The New Age Movement. How important are one’s assumptions or presuppositions? Truth is based on what God is and says and forms the basis of our assumptions. We all make assumptions; we all hold a number of beliefs that we presuppose or accept without conclusive support from other beliefs or evidence. These assumptions are necessary if we are to think at all. Augustine said that, “We must believe something before we can know anything.” Whenever we think, we take certain things for granted. The consequences of our presuppositions can be very significant. For example, do we assume that the material universe was created or do we assume that it always existed? The assumptions that we make are often unexpressed, sometimes unrecognized and often unproved. The most important assumptions are the beliefs we have about God, man and the world. These assumptions form a perspective, which influences how we interpret, events, circumstances and experiences. These basic assumptions provide the boundaries within which all other beliefs are held. Further, basic assumptions or presuppositions are important because of the way they determine the method and goal of thought. They can be compared to a train running on tracks that have no switches. Once a person commits to a certain set of assumptions, the direction and destination of his thinking is determined. Any worldview contains basic assumptions about the nature of reality in an attempt to make sense out of our world. The assumptions that we make clearly color every aspect of our worldview. Our assumptions affect our perception and understanding of the world in which we live. We are all familiar with the expression “garbage in, garbage out.” If you start with the assumptions of a particular worldview, you will end up with the conclusions of that worldview. The non-Christian has great difficulty acting in a consistent fashion with his presuppositions because they do not reflect reality. For example, it hard to consistently live as if everything is morally relative. Only the Christian can act consistent with the Christian worldview because his assumptions are consistent with the way the world really is. The assumptions that we hold determine our perception and the distinctions that we recognize. Assumptions are what we believe to be true, but we do not comprehend all truth; however, our assumptions are foundational to our ability to make distinctions. What are some of the basic elements of a worldview? 1. The fact of the matter is that something exists; the universe is rational and predictable.   Why? Where did it come from? 2. Second, all people have absolutes. Everyone has an ultimate object of loyalty—a true   reference point of reality. For some this is God. For others man is the measure of all   things. 3. Two contradictory statements cannot be right. This primary law of logic is denied by   many. Ideally speaking only one worldview can correctly mirror reality. 4. All people exercise faith. All of us presuppose certain things to be true without absolute   proof—inferences or assumptions upon which a belief is based. 5. Our worldview includes ourselves, our relationship to God, others and the world in which   we live, as well as our understanding about how to rectify what’s wrong with the world. A well-rounded worldview includes beliefs in the following areas: 1. God (Theology) 2. Reality (Metaphysics) 3. Creation (Cosmology) 4. Knowledge (Epistemology) 5. Morality (Ethics) 6. Human Nature (Psychology) 7. Redemption (Soteriology) 8. Purpose (Teleology) 9. The Future (Eschatology) 10. Ideals (The way things ought to be) (See Appendix A for a more detailed break down of this question) What is the single most important ingredient is our worldview? The biggest factor is our understanding of God. Who is our ultimate object of loyalty? “What comes to our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us” (A. W. Tozer). (Note: our most important value is the source of our core values—those values which are most important to us.) How is it most frequently developed? George Barna has made the following observations: 1. While everyone has a worldview; only a few have a coherent one or are able to articulate it. 2. Most people don’t think their worldview is a central defining element in their life, but it is. 3. They spend surprisingly little time intentionally considering and developing their worldview. 4. Most people develop their worldview through unconscious evolution and social acceptance. 5. Americans rarely interact with each other on a substantive level regarding matters and   issues that relate to worldview development and clarification. They seldom talk about it. 6. They have little idea how to process the interaction or how to progress from their existing   position, consequently they fail to develop or more realistically refine their worldview. 7. They do not know how to integrate core biblical principles to form a unified and meaningful   response to the challenges and opportunities of life.2 Are there any non-rational foundations of rational thinking? One cannot ignore the personal dimension in one’s acceptance and evaluation of a worldview. For example, human beings are never neutral with regard to their attitude toward God. We either worship the one true God and serve Him, or we involve ourselves in gross idolatry. We cannot change our worldview without first changing some of our basic assumptions about life. How can we determine if we have a biblical worldview? Can you answer all the following questions in the affirmative? 1. Does absolute (moral) truth exist? 2. Is absolute truth defined by the Bible? 3. Did Jesus live a sinless life? 4. Is God the all-powerful, all-knowing, Creator of the Universe, and does He still rule it today? 5. Is salvation a free gift from God that cannot be earned? 6. Is Satan a real being that exists and is at work in the world? 7. Does a Christian have a responsibility to share his faith in Christ with other people? 8. Is the Bible accurate in all its teachings? Only 9% of “born again Christians answered “yes” to all eight questions therefore only 9% have a biblical worldview. Our actions reveal what we believe to be real and true.3 How does a biblical worldview get diluted? We are all constantly bombarded by non-biblical worldview ideas from television, film, music, newspapers, magazines, books, advertisements and secular academia. Because of our intrinsic sinfulness, these ideas seductively appeal to our sinful nature and we often incorporate them into our personal worldview, often without out even knowing it. Paul said, “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will” (12:2). Romans 12:1 says, “…Don’t let the world squeeze you into its own mold…” (J.B. Phillips) Most people go through life not recognizing that their personal worldview has been deeply affected by the world. The secular humanistic view of the world affects our thinking more than we realize. We then are taken “captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ” (Col. 2: 8). What is our calling as Christians? Our calling is not only to order our lives by divine principles but also to engage the world. We are to fulfill both the great commission and the cultural commission. To engage the world requires that we understand the great idea that compete for people’s hearts and minds. It is great ideas that inform the mind, fire the imagination move the heart and shape the culture. History is the recording of the rise and fall of great ideas (worldviews) that form our values and move us to act. While the battles may involve specific issues, the war is for competing worldviews—between the Christian worldview and the various secular and spiritual worldviews arrayed against it. This is what we must understand if we are going to be effective in evangelizing our world and transforming our culture. What can we do in pursuing a biblical worldview? By diligently learning, understanding, assimilating and applying God’s truths in every area of our lives, we can begin to develop a deep comprehensive faith that will stand against the unrelenting tide of our culture’s non-biblical ideas. As we trust and obey biblical truth, empowered by God’s Holy Spirit, we will begin to make wise decisions, which will result in virtuous actions. We will be able to form appropriate responses to questions on abortion (sanctity of life), same sex marriage (sanctity of sex), moral relativism (sanctity of truth), etc. In the end, our decisions and actions will reveal what we ultimately believe, for good or ill.   We have briefly considered the subject of worldviews. Let’s return to one of the definitions we started with: A worldview provides a model of the world, which guides its adherents in the world. 1. If our model for the world includes an infinite personal God, as in Christian Theism, that   belief should provide guidance for one’s life. 2. If our model rejects God, as in Naturalism, again such a belief serves as a guide. Or… 3. If our model asserts that we are all part of god, as in New Age Pantheism, yet again our   life is being guided by such a conception. These examples remind us that we are living in a culture that puts us in touch constantly with many and varied ideas. They can’t all be true. How can we apply this article to our daily lives? 1. Some of us may be confronted with the need to think more deeply than ever before. 2. Some of us may need to purge those things that are contrary to a Christian worldview. 3. Some of us need to better understand how our thinking is directly related to our living. 4. Some of us may need to better understand that the abundant life is found only in Christ. 5. Some of us may need to let God guide our thoughts more completely. And— 6. Some of us may need to let God’s wise and loving principles more fully guide our actions Paul’s admonition to the believers in ancient Colossae couldn’t be more contemporary or helpful in light of our discussion. He wrote, “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ” (Col. 2: 8). The Bottom line: What measures are you taking to develop a biblical worldview?   Appendix A: What Are the Major Elements of a Worldview? A well-rounded worldview includes beliefs in the following areas: 1. God (Theology) The most important element in a worldview is what it says or doesn’t say about God. Worldviews differ greatly on this matter. Some important questions to ask are: • Does God exist? If so, what is the nature of God? Is there only one true God? • Is God a personal being?—The kind who can know, love and act? • Is God an impersonal force or power? Do atheists exist or is the term an oxymoron? Calvin said that man is incurably religious. There really is no such thing as an atheist. Everybody worships someone or something. Whatever that object of ultimate concern; it will be our god. People worship things, ideals, others, or themselves instead of God. 2. Ultimate Reality (Metaphysics—Cosmology) Metaphysics deals with what constitutes Ultimate reality. Questions in this area include: • What is the relationship between God and the universe? • Is the existence of the universe a fact? Are God and the world co-equal and interdependent? • Is it best understood in a mechanistic (non purposeful) way? • Is the universe a closed system? (No miracles) • Can someone outside the system circumvent natural law? (Miracles) 3. Creation (Cosmology) Cosmology has to do with the study of the universe and how it came into being. • Is the universe (matter) eternal? Or did it have a beginning? If so, when? How? • Did an eternal, personal, omnipotent God create the universe? • How old is the universe? How is it sustained? By what laws does it operate? • How, when and why was the earth created? Is it unique? • What is the nature and purpose of the universe? Or is there one? 4. Knowledge (Epistemology) This area deals with the question, how do we know what we know? Some questions in this area include: • Can we trust our senses? • What are the proper roles of reason and sense experience in knowledge? • Are our intuitions more or less dependable than our sense experience of the world? • Is truth relative or must it be the same for all rational beings? • What is the relationship between religious faith and reason? • Is the scientific method the only or best method of knowledge? • Is knowledge about God possible? If so, how? • Can God reveal Himself to human beings? Is so, how? • Can God reveal information to human beings? 5. Morality (Ethics) The area has to do with how do you determine right from wrong? Some important questions in this area are: • Are there moral laws that govern human conduct? • Is morality relative or absolute? Why or why not? Are moral laws discovered or created by people. • Is God or man the source of morality? Can the same thing be right for one person and wrong for another? What is the relation between ethics and the law of non-contradiction? • Does morality transcend individuals, cultures and history? 6. Human Nature (Psychology) This question deals with the true nature and make up of humankind. Some questions in this area include: • Is man simply a product of time plus chance? • Is he the creation of an infinite, personal God? • Is man created in God’s image? If so, what does that mean? • Is man simply another animal controlled by his instincts? • If so, how can he be held responsible for anything? • Is our nature any different now then when we were first created? • Does human nature change? What is wrong with man? • Is our main problem ignorance or something else? 7. Redemption (Soteriology) The subject deals with how to solve man’s most basic problem. Questions in this area include: • Is there such a thing as sin? Is there a need for salvation? • Was there such an historical event as the fall? What provision has God made for it? • Where were the effects of the fall and how can they be reversed. • Is there something we can do to save ourselves? • Is there something God has done to provide a way for us to be saved? If so, what? 8. Purpose (Theology) This area deals with the purpose for which we were created. Some important questions in this area include: • What am I here for? Is there any meaningful purpose in life? • Are we simply here to grab for all the gusto we can get? • If there is no ultimate purpose to life, does it really matter how we live? • How meaningful is life without a significant purpose in life. • Does my life really matter? Can I make a difference? • Is my life of any temporal or eternal consequence? • If I am only a product of evolution what meaning can my life have? • Am I responsible for determining the ultimate purpose of my life? • Does God love me and have a wonderful plan for my life? If so, what? • What will determine if my life is ultimately in vain? 9. The Future (Eschatology) This area deals with the end of history, as we know it. Questions include: • Where is history going? Is there any ultimate purpose in the universe? • Is there life after death? If so, what kind of future will I have? • Do my actions in this life affect the quality of my existence in the next life? Are there any other factors that can influence the outcome? • Is death simply the extinction of by being and the beginning of decomposition? • How will human history be consummated? With a bang or a whimper? • Is God in control of the universe and has He said how it will end? • Does God have an over-all purpose that he is working out and will bring to fruition? 10. Ideals (The way things should be) Can things be better that they currently are? Do we have ideals or a vision of how we think the world should be? Should there be less selfishness, less stupidity and less corruption? Should there be more just and less poverty? Should people make fewer excuses and accept more responsibility? Should people be more loving and less hurtful toward others? Should there be more justice and less injustice? How do we explain the disparity of the way things are and the way they ought to be? Each worldview has a different explanation of this disparity. Conclusion Whether we know it or not, whether we like it or not, each of us has a worldview. Worldviews function as interpretive conceptual schemes to explain why we see the world as we do, why we often think and act as we do. Competing worldviews often come into conflict. These clashes may be innocuous or they may result in a major war between nations. Competing worldviews is the cause of many of our disagreements. Worldviews are double-edged swords. They can greatly help or hinder our efforts in understanding God, the world and ourselves.   Appendix B: The Foundation of a Christian World View Developing a Christian World View, in part, involves asking and answering the most basic questions of human existence from a Biblicalperspective. Specifically, how would the Bible answer the following questions? 1. Does God exist? If so, what is He like?—The question of theology. 2. How do you know what you know? —The question of epistemology. 3. Why is there something rather than nothing? —The question cosmology 4. Where did I come from? —The question of origin. 5. Who am I? —The question of identity and relationships. 6. How can I explain human nature? —The question of the imago dei. 7. What went wrong? —The question of the nature of evil. 8. How can it be fixed? —The question of redemption. 9. How can I know right from wrong? —The question of morality. 10. What am I here for? —The question of purpose. 11. What happens when I die? —The question of immortality 12. Where am I going? —The question of destiny. 13. What is the meaning of history? —The question of eschatology.   Appendix C: The Gospel of the Grace of God as Revealed in Jesus Christ 3 Worldviews Religion Christianity Irreligion Moral inclination Moralistic-legalistic Moral-gracious Hedonistic-relative Righteousness Self-righteousness Christ-righteousness Unrighteous Truth and Grace Truth without grace Full of Grace with truth Grace without truth Acceptance w/God Through attainment Through Christ Human nature good Divine attribute Justice Holiness & Love God is all loving Relation to Christ Rejects the Savior Accepts the Savior Rejects the Savior Lordship Self in control Jesus is Lord Self in control Takes pride in Religion Christ Worldly pride Relation to Jesus Misuses Jesus Understand-accept Rejects Jesus Holy and gracious Misses God’s grace Affirms both Miss God’s holiness Relation to Culture Cultural Imperialism Cultural Flexibility Cultural Relativism Grace and sin Rejects grace Affirms both Rejects sin Seeking God Seek God wrongly Seek God rightly Don’t seek God Values Not based on grace Biblical values Only relative values Notes: 1 “A Biblical Worldview Has a Radical Effect on a Person’s Life,” http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate& BarnaUpdateID=154 2 George Barna, Think Like Jesus (Integrity Pub., 2003), pp. xviii-xix. 3 Ibid., p. 28.

Advertisement