The Descent of the West from God: From Theism, Naturalism, to Nihilism and Existentialism

We see a slide taking place in regard to worldview. For human history some form of religion or deism was the chief worldview. Yet over the history of humanity, we see the descent of human worldview, as if one were taking steps down a flight of stairs, from theism, the original underpinnings of western civilization, to deism, then into naturalism, and naturalism in turn gave birth to nihilism, and in response to the emptiness of nihilism, existentialism came to attempt to restore meaning. This is the descent from theism. We will consider the effects of this descent of worldview on contemporary humanity in western civilization, particularly the United States. We will see how the descent of worldview led to existentialism, and in turn existentialism split in two directions, one deeper into the abyss through the lenses of self, and one which led back toward God on uncertain footing. We will also see that nihilism and existentialism have a divided hold in the United States, vying for power and philosophical authority with the remnants of theism which previously held dominance in western civilization.

What is the trajectory taking place? First, we see theism, Christianity and Judaism and the influence they’ve had in western civilization. This worldview indicates that there is a creator of the cosmos, but not only that, he actively sustains the cosmos, has a moral right to judge the cosmos, and is personal and knowable by humanity. This is the perspective upon which documents like the declaration of independence and the constitution were founded. All humans have value because they are created by a personal God. Man should not murder. Man should not steal. Man should not commit adultery. These concepts were placed into the laws of the nation. Laws that make littering illegal, laws that make animal torture illegal, laws that make stealing illegal, laws that moderate speed limits on roads, laws that protect children, laws that mandate legal counsel for the accused, laws that make perjury illegal, all of these laws are built on the bedding one might say, of theism. God is moral. Humanity is moral. Humanity is made by God. All humans are equal and have basic intrinsic value. These are expressions of the theistic worldview being lived out in human society.

But then we see the descent to deism. If deism is true, there is a creator of the universe, however, this creator made the universe and simply disappeared. This creator has no current interaction in the universe. There are no miracles in which the creator intervenes in the universe. There is no final moral judgment. There is no heaven or hell. We can already see the effects that this worldview would have on laws and conditions of society. Is every human life sacred and equal if the only creator is one who created the universe and disappeared? Wouldn’t that perhaps lead to the conclusion that humanity is of little or no value, if the creator who made it desires no contact with the lifeforms he created? If that’s the case, why should humanity bar things like stealing or adultery or perjury or racketeering? Once one has lost the moral personal God and the value of humanity, this leaves deists to try to find the basis for absolutes and moral imperatives in nebulous concepts like natural law, and later, legal positivism. As soon as the moral personal God is removed, it’s as if we see an entire nation, buildings, people, land, animals, and water, being flooded away and off a cliff, like a dam has burst.

With naturalism we see the codification of the descent away from theism. Why even bother with any sort of deity? It isn’t needed. So here we find the concept that the only things that are real are the natural world, and human reason. There is no god. There is no spiritual realm. And the slide produced by the breaking of the dam truly surges in power in this departure from theism and deism. However, questions of morality, meaning, truth, and justice are largely left unanswered, or left to human reason, as the ultimate deducer of all things. But soon philosophers realized, “How can we trust human reason if there is no ontic referent?”

So next we see the development of the worldview of nihilism. Nihilism rejects all previous worldviews and regards itself as “the righteous and honorable resistance of a people crushed under an iron rule” (Gertz, 2019, p. 2). The iron rule being referenced are previous worldviews like theism and deism that often-regarded human nature as sinful or bad, or allowed for economic oppression or slavery (Gertz, 2019, p. 2-3). The solution to this problem of previous worldviews then, according to early Russian Nihilists, was to “destroy the society as a whole in order to build a new society out of whatever survived their destruction.”

How would this be achieved? “The Nihilists first attempted to destroy society by advocating for the destruction of social practices and traditional values, such as private property, marriage, and religion” (Gertz, 2019, p. 3). But as far as nihilism as a philosophy, it’s generally considered to be a worldview that sees the culmination of all things stated in the world to be nothing. It’s not as much an attempt to define nothingness, but more so a rejection of all current worldviews as nothing (Gertz, 2019, p. 8). When considering nihilism, it seems to me to simply be the logical outworking of naturalism. If Darwin was right, and the universe is nothing but pitiless indifference and all creatures are evolved from stardust, to the primordial soup, through the zoo creatures, to humanity, then truly, nihilism is logical, because nothing became something and something shall most certainly one day become nothing again, because from nothing the universe came and toward nothing the universe does now head.

And out of this inexhaustible vacuum came a worldview reacting against the nothingness of nihilism, existentialism. Existentialism comes in two forms, theistic existentialism and atheistic existentialism. Existentialism generally regards all of the key concepts of nihilism to be true, as well as general tenants of naturalism, the only difference being that an existentialist would say that one can find meaning, morality, and purpose through self-referencing. The existentialist believes that by looking inward, and seeing the value of the self, one can find personal meaning and value in life and the world. It gave birth to subjectivity. Something could be true, at least to one person, because they believed it. But it failed to provide a referent outside itself for morality (Sire, 2020, p. 120).

But what about theistic existentialism? Theistic existentialism is an entirely different animal. It reflects all the key tenants of Christian theism, and yet it makes many subtle adjustments on how Christianity is perceived. While atheistic existentialism was a reaction against dead nihilism, theistic existentialism was a reaction against dead religion. Many of the concepts of theistic existentialism can be seen in modern evangelical Christianity, the concept of following God is seen as a relationship, not rules to follow, the Christian life is seen as to live a life pleasing to the Lord, not simply obeying commandments, forgiveness is seen as a renewal of fellowship rather than simply the cancelling of a moral guilt (Sire, 2020, p. 125). History is viewed as less important in detail and more important as something to be presently lived in theistic existentialism, reason less important than faith, the personal experience more important than the words on the page, knowledge is seen as more subjective and paradoxical, and humans as alienated from the universe facing a difficult struggle to come to belief in God (Sire, 2020, p. 122-128).

So here we find two reactions to the bankruptcy of nihilism, atheistic existentialism and theistic existentialism. These are incredibly different departures from nihilism. Atheistic existentialism reacts away from nihilism by seeking out reason, morality, and truth in the subjective human experience, while theistic existentialism reacts against nihilism by climbing all the way back up the steps to Christian theism, but reviving it from dead religion to a living relationship. Yet, we also see certain concepts friendly to nihilism also forcibly inserted into Christianity, like subjectivity, the value of personal experience (above revelation), and a diminishing of the value of reason as well as history.

The first reaction to nihilism seems entirely useless as far as I can tell. It’s as if someone embraced all the core tenants of the very problem itself, nihilism’s emptiness, and while careening off the cliff turned inward and said, “Well, if I exist then at least that’s something.” They reference self, which, in itself seems to hold little value for finding renewed meaning. All they’ve done is deify the self, which in a pitiless universe means nothing, when death comes, the meaning is once again burnt out permanently.

The second reaction is much more interesting. One reacts against nihilism’s darkness by returning to the source, the original, the Christian theistic perspective, but tweaks it to find new life in what once was dead religion. This is of much more value in regard to solving the problems of nihilism. But it’s as if the individual solves the problem by returning to Christian theism, but also brings some of the material left over from nihilism, and molds it together with Christian theism. One would think of the statue depicted in Daniel chapter two in which the feet are made of iron mixed with clay, the iron being strong, but the clay mixed in weakens what might otherwise be a strong base for the structure.

From there, we see the theistic existentialist perspective split off into two camps. In one group we see liberal Christianity, progressive Christians, people like Rob Bell, who claim to be Christians but deny one or more of the key tenants of Christianity. This is the case in which theistic existentialism diverts too far toward nihilism, and ends in disaster, either apostasy (rejection of the key tenants of the authentic Christian faith) or a sort of a vapid milquetoast therapeutic deism, in which all things are acceptable, all roads lead to heaven, and no one is necessarily wrong about anything they do. This to me is a clear dead end. The elements of nihilism combined with Christianity have distorted and destroyed what Christianity actually is. In the second camp, I think we see a revitalized living, Spirit filled Christianity based on relationship, deep feeling, connectedness with Christ, and mystical experience, but all of these areas tempered and checked and balanced by scripture. We see Christians who find a new balance to their faith, balancing concept like rules and relationship, balancing theological truths like faith and works, repentance and renewal, heaven and hell, grace and truth. Out of the deep feeling, introspection, and communal focus of theistic existentialism comes a stronger faith, a faith balanced between hard truths of the scripture and the loving relationship between a gracious God of justice and the redeemed heirs of eternal life.

Could one even go back to the beginning of the fragmentation of worldviews, from deism, to naturalism, to nihilism, and existentialism and see that the descent began because of an experience of dead religion in the world? That may be a bridge too far. The truth is humanity is prone to wander, apart from whether Christianity was dead or spirit filled. But a dead religion may have encouraged the wandering. As always, there is a way back. But there is also a way out too. God gives all people free will, to seek Him, or to refuse Him.

Finally, we consider the present day effects on society of these worldviews. I see a society in the United States deeply divided in worldview. We see the remnants of theism, biblical Christianity, mainline Protestantism, Judaism, theistic existentialism and other theistic worldviews attempting from various angles and approaches to keep the USA tethered to concepts like objective morality, biblical authority, natural law, God given rights, and personal liberty. We see the slightly dominant worldviews of naturalism, nihilism, atheistic existentialism, and various secular forces attempting to change and rewrite society, jettison past norms of society, remove reference of God from government, and rework the laws and politics of the United States to center on more equality-based concepts of justice, law, and reason. Many of the intellectual elites of this movement would much rather jettison the current US system all together and start from scratch, which reminds one of the idea of tearing down society and starting anew which is prominent in the nihilistic worldview. Meanwhile many of the theistic perspective would rather see a society based entirely on biblical principles, and religion at the center of all public life. Here we see the worldviews splitting between warring factions, as fragmentation of worldview continues in the country, we see a country in deadlock, unable to move forward, because there is no longer near as much common ground to find, and so little of a shared vision of the future to work toward. And indeed, how can there be? Can there be anything more diametrically different than the concepts of the future described in worldviews like nihilism and atheistic existentialism when compared with Christian theism? Many consider the divide irreconcilable, and in fact it may be just that.

In any case, we see how the descent of worldview took place drifting from theism down the steps to deism, naturalism, nihilism, and existential. We see the paths split from existentialism, one road leading deeper into the abyss of the rejection of theism, and the second road leading back toward theism, either into a compromised milquetoast religion or into an energized biblical Christianity. And we see the battle of worldviews taking place in the United States as western humanity wrestles with who we are, who we were, what we are, and where we’re going. The struggle rages on and on to this very day.



References

Gertz, N. (2019). Nihilism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Sire, J. W. (2020). The universe next door: A basic worldview catalog. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, an imprint of InterVarsity Press.

Shaveta ‘ad YHWH, Return to the Lord

When all these blessings and curses I have set before you come on you and you take them to heart wherever the Lord your God disperses you among the nations, 2 and when you and your children return to the Lord your God and obey him with all your heart and with all your soul according to everything I command you today, 3 then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes[a] and have compassion on you and gather you again from all the nations where he scattered you. -Deuteronomy 30:2-3

Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you.” -James 4:8

It’s interesting that time and again when we read the scriptures, it talks about seeking God, seek after the Lord, return to God, come to Him. Draw near to Him, and what, he will draw near to you? So it seems to be our responsibility as Christians to come and sit down with God and discover who he is. Then God responds and joins us, and we sit down together and we learn about Him. And he shares mysteries with us.

The Hebrew word for return, as in return to God, is interesting. It’s actually very similar to the Hebrew word for rest. Isn’t that interesting? We’re invited in many ways to cease from our sorrow, and striving, and angry and self-seeking, and rest in God.

There are many people in my life who are currently fleeing from God. They don’t want God. They sense his calling to them. But they run the opposite direction. I see them buzzing around town, miserable, stressed, seeking for what they want, working out schemes, texting and calling, manipulating people to do what they want, and it’s miserable. It’s a miserable existence. It’s empty.

God says return to me and find rest. End the circus, end the constant self-seeking and rest in my loving arms. Return to me, he says.

Which brings us to our Hebrew word, the last of the series, return to the Lord. Now, when we return to God, when we turn back to Him, we must do so in two ways, with both heart and soul.

It’s quite possible to return to God intellectually, with our mind, but not with our heart. We can know God is there and believe he is real without being in relationship with Him. We can also return to God with our passions, with our heart, but when we leave out the intellect, it lacks substance. It’s just a vague feeling, without truth attached to it.

So we want to return to God with our heart and our soul, with our mind and our passion. This is all certainly very true when we are unsaved, and we realize our need for Christ as our savior, and then we give ourselves over to God in our mind and in our heart. That is true.

But I also want to suggest to you today that many of us as active Christians needs to return to God at variance points in our lives.

We start to drift off a bit, and maybe we stop studying his word as much and we stop thinking about God, and our minds become filled with junk of the world. There have been several times where my mind has drifted from God, as worldly things begin to clammer in, and God will speak to me and say, alright, time to return to me with your mind.

He'll guide me to study his word. He’ll guide me away from tv and away from YouTube, and toward prayer and Bible study, and groups I need to attend. That is one way to return in the mind.

I think just as common is when we drift away from God in our heart. We intellectually know god, know the doctrine of Christ, know about the Bible, and maybe we’re even praying and studying the word daily, but our heart has disappeared from it.

Maybe something very dark or painful or traumatic happened that left us wondering at why God would allow it. And we begin to pull our heart away from God, because deep inside we don’t think we can trust God with it anymore, after what he allowed to happen.

So for you who struggles this way, and you’ve pulled your heart back from God, or maybe you’ve just lost your passion for the faith, and it’s become stale and plain, let me challenge you to return to falling in love passionately with God.

Bring your heart back to Him. And entrust it back to him. You can trust Him. He doesn’t promise there won’t be any pain. But he is God. And he knows what it best for our growth and prospering.

We see in this phrase Shaveta ‘ad YHWH, is the name of God, YHWH. What’s interesting is that in this particular scripture in Deuteronomy 30, YHWH is in it’s feminine form. This form emphasizes the mercy of God and loving nature of God, the sort of motherly characteristics of who God is. So in this syntax of the phrase and the feminine use of YHWH, we’re being told to fall in love with YHWH again.

Go back to the garden of Eden with me, and if you recall God made Adam, and then made Eve to be a “helper” to Adam, and the Hebrew there is ‘ezer and an ‘ezer helps someone understand something deep.

“In the case of Eve, the woman was to help Adam to understand God- more specifically to understand the love of God and how to love Him in return.” -Chaim Bentorah

The way a man and woman fall in love, is a picture to us of how we ought to fall in love with God. We should fall in love with his nature. We should fall in love with how he works things out perfectly. We should fall in love what how he changes us. We should fall in love with his divine character. We should fall in love with him based on the time we spend together, the things we do together with God. And every day can be an adventure to God.

So that is the call today, to return to God, return with your mind and return with your heart.

We want to love God for more than what he does for us, yes he forgives our sins in Christ, he gives us eternal life, he saves us from damnation in hell, but we should love God because we love Him for who He is. It’s a heart thing, a passion for God, a zeal for God, a ravishing love for God that consumes our souls. Then we do more than have simple book knowledge of God, we experience an intense love relationship with him, and that is the goal.

The Parable of the Master & the Servant: Humility increases Faith

“William Beebe, the naturalist, used to tell this story about Teddy Roosevelt. At Sagamore Hill, after an evening of talk, the two would go out on the lawn and search the skies for a certain spot of star-like light near the lower left-hand corner of the Great Square of Pegasus. Then Roosevelt would recite: "That is
the Spiral Galaxy in Andromeda. It is as large as our Milky Way. It is one of a hundred million galaxies. It consists of one hundred billion suns, each larger than our sun."

Then Roosevelt would grin and say, "Now I think we are small enough! Let's go to bed." -Source Unknown.

And the Apostle Paul said

“I am the least of the apostles. 1 Corinthians 15:9

I am the very least of all the saints. Ephesians 3:8

I am the foremost of sinners. 1 Timothy 1:15

At his three descriptions of himself, dating respectively from around A.D. 59, 63, and 64. As the years pass he goes lower; he grows downward! And as his self-esteem sinks, so his rapture of praise and adoration for the God who so wonderfully saved him rises.

Undoubtedly, learning to praise God at all times for all that is good is a mark that we are growing in grace. One of my predecessors in my first parochial appointment died exceedingly painfully of cancer. But between fearful bouts of agony, in which he had to stuff his mouth with bedclothes to avoid biting his tongue, he would say aloud over and over again: "I will bless the Lord at all times; his praise shall continually be in my mouth" (Ps. 34:1). That was a passion for praise asserting itself in the most poignant extremity imaginable.

Cultivate humility and a passion for praise if you want to grow in grace.” -James Packer, Your Father Loves You, Harold Shaw Publishers, 1986.

Today we examine the parable of the master and the servant. We keep getting all these fascinating angles on how God sees truth, and how God’s kingdom operates. Today we find an incredibly important aspect of the kingdom of God.

But first let’s consider the context of this parable today. The context was difficult for me, because normally surrounding a particular portion of scripture you’ll see various elements that seem to tie into the general theme of what’s going on here.

But in this parable, at first you might think, how does any of this connect? This parable we only find in Luke’s gospel, it’s in Luke chapter 17, if you want to turn there in your Bibles. Just prior in Luke 16, Jesus had just shared the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, a parable of an arrogant rich man who refused to help a poor man who laid homeless near his house, and later ended up in torment in hell over it.

Then in chapter 17, first Jesus talks about how important it is to not cause children to stumble into sin, and to not tempt others into sin. And talks about the terrible punishment for those who tempt others to sin.

Then Jesus gives us an example of how often to forgive someone who comes to us and repents. He says even if they come 7 times in one day having sinned, then repenting honestly to you, you must forgive them. And one side note, I’ve always taking that to be true in our relationship with God. If we sin 7 times in one day, and keep coming to God honestly seeking his forgiveness and repenting he will forgive us over and over and over. Isn’t that wonderful? Now, that’s not an excuse to live in sin either. Repent quickly.

In any case, let’s take a look at the context. It says in Luke 17, “One day Jesus said to his disciples, “There will always be temptations to sin, but what sorrow awaits the person who does the tempting! 2 It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around your neck than to cause one of these little ones to fall into sin. 3 So watch yourselves!”

So Jesus tells us, watch yourself. Be careful what you say to others. Be careful what you post on social media. Be careful about your actions, and how they speak to others. Then he continues:

“If another believer sins, rebuke that person; then if there is repentance, forgive. 4 Even if that person wrongs you seven times a day and each time turns again and asks forgiveness, you must forgive.”

5 The apostles said to the Lord, “Show us how to increase our faith.”

6 The Lord answered, “If you had faith even as small as a mustard seed, you could say to this mulberry tree, ‘May you be uprooted and be planted in the sea,’ and it would obey you!”

So reading that I’m thinking to myself, wow what a mish-mash of different thoughts all kind of gathered together. First you have Jesus talking about temptation to sin and that it will always be that way, but don’t be one through whom it comes. Then we’re told that if a believer sins against us, we should forgive them, many times in the same day even, then the apostles ask Jesus, “Show us how to increase our faith.”

That’s a great question isn’t it. How can we have greater faith? Is faith something that can grow? I certainly think so. Some would say we’re appointed a certain level of faith and it’s just stuck like that, I don’t believe that, and neither did the disciples, when they asked Jesus, show us how to increase our faith.

And Jesus first comments to this question, that even with a tiny amount of faith you can pray something, believe it will happen, and then it will literally happen right in front of your eyes.

And it’s interesting that he says a mulberry tree would be uprooted and planted in the sea, because just a few verses earlier he talks about a person who causes others to be tempted that they would be uprooted in the next life and tossed into the depths of the sea with a millstone around their neck. What’s the connection there? A word for mulberry in Hebrew actually means “to weep.” Something to think about.

But then he shares this really interesting parable, as a response it seems, to the question, how can we have greater faith? And what a strange way to respond to such a question. You think Jesus might tell some parable about a man who wasn’t very faithful, but then something happens inside him to make him more faithful. But Jesus doesn’t do that. Instead he tells this parable, take a look, it says:

Luke 17:7-10 (NLT) “When a servant comes in from plowing or taking care of sheep, does his master say, ‘Come in and eat with me’? 8 No, he says, ‘Prepare my meal, put on your apron, and serve me while I eat. Then you can eat later.’ 9 And does the master thank the servant for doing what he was told to do? Of course not. 10 In the same way, when you obey me you should say, ‘We are unworthy servants who have simply done our duty.’”

Now when I first read this parable what comes to mind is that Jesus is challenging us to be very humble as we serve Him. We have to remember that we are servants of God.

And that is our question today, to reflect on during the message: Is there pride hidden in my life?

But we’re children of God, we’re princes and princesses of the kingdom of God, yes that’s true, but while we pilgrimage through this life, we’re to live like Jesus. Was Jesus treated like the King he is while he was on Earth? Not at all. And he didn’t seek that. Jesus constantly served people. And he constantly served God the Father on the Earth. That is your calling.

Yes, you’re a prince or princess of God’s kingdom, but remember your role right now on the Earth you are a servant.

In times of war in medieval times, sometimes a wise king, would be on his throne, surrounded by counselors and leaders, in fine clothes, with fine food, but he would step down, and put on common rags, and a disguise, dirty himself, and go walk among the common people, and listen to what they are saying about him, the country, and the various wars going on. It’s similar for you and I.

We are royalty in Christ, but in this world, we are not treated like royalty, we are treated like nobodies. So get your hands muddy, and your feet dirty, and when you do something for God don’t expect to get some big high five from God. Instead say to God, I was just doing my duty, you are Lord, we are your servants.

So very good, we’re talking about humility today. That’s of great value. But I have to ask myself, how does this relate to increasing our faith?

And it really truly does. It really does. Because without faith it is impossible to please God. And what faith do we have if we see ourselves as equal to our master? We are not equal to our master in any way whatsoever. He is God. We our humans. We are made in His image yes it’s true, but we’re so incredibly different than God. A similar difference to say, you and your dog or cat. Or the difference between myself and a mouse or ant. The difference is massive in intellect, thought, concept of life, and goals.

And if we start to get arrogant and prideful, thinking we know best, we start to argue with God, we start to battle him, and push for our own way, and less and less we live by faith, and instead live by self-rule.

How do we have great faith? We constantly stay humble and meek, and this constantly reminds us of our total dependence on God. And what is faith? It’s trust, it’s leaning on, it’s hope in, it’s placing faith in God. And how could we ever do that if we’re prideful? And even if we’re just a little prideful, already, faith is being transferred away from God, and onto ourselves and our talents and abilities. Wow.

Jesus’ parable is the perfect answer to how to build our faith in God. It’s to realize we are unworthy servants, to wait on God as God sits at the table, hand and foot, and at the end of the day, we can smile and say, it’s just my job, I’ve done my duty. Nothing more.

And this equation of humility, forces all our trust and faith on God, more and more faith grows out of that humility, to realize, I’m not special, I’m not some hero, I’m a humble servant, waiting on my infinite master who takes care of everything, as I do the footwork.

So briefly, let’s take a look at a few action steps.

1. Pray on your knees / on the floor

2. Give God all the glory for achievements

3. Admit when you’re wrong

4. Confess your sins to one another

5. When discovering pride bring it to God

6. Renounce pride when it appears

7. Reflect on the glories of God and your own limited nature

And we know that for each of us as servants of the living God, it is always required of a servant who has been given stewardship over something, to be found faithful. That’s from 1st Cor 4:2, and Paul is talking about ministry leaders, so that refers largely to me, but isn’t it true that we all have areas of concern where God has given us stewardship? If we have children, we are stewards over them. If we work, we have certain responsibilities. So I believe it’s fair to say we all must show ourselves faithful in what God has given us stewardship over.

The final evaluation of that stewardship will happen on the day of the Lord, what we consider judgment day, when every person will be judged before God.

And I know for every single person I’ve ministered to, God will evaluate what I taught them, to see if I taught the full gospel, to see if I left anything out or twisted God’s word to suite my own opinions. Lord, have mercy. Similarly, God will evaluate your life, to see if you really trusted in Jesus Christ, and not self, to see if you lived a poured out, humble life, and not a life of pride.

So then, God willing, on that glorious day, we will be greeted with a great smile from ear to ear of our savior Jesus the king when he says to us, “Well done, good and faithful servant.” That is what I want to hear on that precious day. And I dread, and plan, and faithfully trust in Christ, and live a poured out life, so I may never hear the words, “Depart from me you worker of lawlessness, I never knew you.” Lord, have mercy on us, and build our lives in humility and faith and reliance on you, so we may all hear, “Well done good and faithful servant.”

Upon reflection, we can see how everything fits together from the end of chapter 16 and into chapter 17.  In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich's man was prideful and thus had no faith. This faithlessness led him to hell. 

Tempting others to sin comes from pride and destroys faith, because once one gives in to sin, they drift away from faith and into pride. Yet Jesus also reminds us, one can always be forgiven and brought to repentance, even seven times a day, so there is always hope. Even faith as little as a mustard seed yields massive results. Though the prideful be tossed into the sea with a stone attached to their neck, still pride can be tossed out with faith and thrown into the sea just as easily, even with something as small as mustard sized faith. 

Bringing it all together Jesus tells the parable of the master and servant, indicating how to guard against pride, by regarding oneself from a humble perspective. It all fit together after all. 

8 Questions to ask Yourself in Regard to Worldview

Let us consider the basic aspects of a contemporary worldview. For this analysis we will consider eight questions carefully depicted by Professor James W. Sire in his work The Universe Next Door. There are other depictions of worldview that we might consider, but this form is direct and to the point in the clearest way possible. We will examine each of these eight areas of the mosaic of perspectives in the world and particularly reference their importance to how people identify themselves in our society in regard to race, ethnicity, gender and group socialization. I will be defending the thesis that these areas of identity are fundamental to establishing a worldview based on objective truth and knowledge of one’s self and the world, the past, and the future. Yet we will also see that God is able through His divine prevenient grace to draw any person, from any worldview, no matter how near or far from himself, to win them to His son Jesus Christ.

One: “What is prime reality- the really real?” (Sire, 2020, p. 8) What is the core reality of the universe and everything? Is it life and order, is it chaos and disorder? How does it all fit together? Many worldviews seem contradictory. They espouse a belief in God, but fail to live as if God were really real. Or they claim to believe in only a pitiless universe of howling nothingness but cry out for justice in the world with burning hot anger. But what justice exists in a pitiless universe? There is none. This is the most important question in my view: What is at the base of the structure on which you are forming your worldview?

For each of these areas of concern, race, ethnicity, gender, and group socialization we see certain factors that influence toward certain worldviews. But it’s important to note that each of these factors, race, ethnicity, gender, and group socialization are facets of worldviews built upon the bottom base, but they do not really define the bottom base. If our ancestors hail from a nation like Poland, like mine, I found myself raised in a Catholic church. Another may be more disconnected from their ethnicity. Some may take great stock in their race and form their identity around it, others may not. Obviously, the way a man and a woman grow up and live, will be very different from each other, and ethnicity and race will play into that dynamic as well. So will group socialization. Of each of these areas I believe group socialization is by far the most important because there the individual will find the influences of others, to even have a proper understanding of their gender, ethnicity, or race. In the group, we find our identity, whether it’s in a church, in a sports team, in a family unit, a university, or in a political/activist organization.

I would say that one will often not even consider this first question as they form their worldview. The worldview forms based on these areas of gender, ethnicity, race and group, and later as the individual grows and develops and ages, at some point they may eventually look back and ask the question, “What is prime reality?” From what I can tell from those I encounter on a daily basis, most do not even consider the big question of what prime reality is. They are busy defining themselves, making their plans, and living their lives, and the question of prime reality is missed entirely. This was also true for me, for many years of my early life, teens, and twenties. Let’s continue.

Two: “What is the nature of external reality (that is, the world around us)?” (Sire, 2020, p. 8) What is happening on this messed up world called Earth? That is the question all people seem to wrestle with. It doesn’t matter if they are Christian, deist, naturalist, socialist, capitalist, Freudian, or Jungian, it’s a question on every person’s mind, what went wrong here? Once again we see that these areas of self-definition in society will play into this dynamic of understanding the problem with the world.  For a Christian, we understand the world went wrong when Adam and Eve joined Satan’s rebellion against God in the perfect garden of Eden. And as a result, all of reality was cursed and became fallen. For a deist, they may consider the brokenness of the universe to be the work of a disinterested deity who created and disappeared. For a naturalist, they may consider the brokenness of the world to be a result of the concept of survival of the fittest, that evolution is vicious and without remorse in how it plays out. For a post-modernist, they might say that the evil of the world is a result of western colonization and imperialism and abuse by westerners of the developing world. For a modernist or utopian, they might believe that the constant progress of society has not yet reached its perfection, but someday humanity will transcend all darkness and evil, and form an idyllic society. Ethnicity, race, gender, and group identity will all play a part in these definitions. It all depends on experience. The family unit will influence an individual toward their preferred religion, or lack of religion. One’s social peers, those of similar race and ethnicity will influence the individual toward certain social, political, and religious beliefs. It’s all a game of influence, to a certain extent. Yet, we also see a sovereign God in the world drawing people out of Islam and toward himself, drawing people out of Post-modernism and toward himself, drawing people out of political radicalism and toward himself, drawing people away from nihilism and toward himself. That is the beautiful thing about an infinite God, he can overcome any false worldview, with the objectively true worldview. And that is one contention I want to make very clearly, there is a worldview in which one is able to perceive ultimate truth albeit in a limited sense. And there are worldviews where people are believing and living by things that are not true. This must certainly be the case.

Three: “What is a human being?” (Sire, 2020, p. 8) What does it meant to be human? How does it all fit together? Am I born free? Do I have liberty? Am I just dancing to my DNA or do I have real choices to make? Once again, race, ethnicity, gender, and group socialization will all influence how someone answers these sorts of questions. Someone with an identity strongly rooted in their gender will identify who they are as a person more fundamentally in that way. I’m a woman, hear me roar, I’m a man, this is my core identity. Increasingly in the United States we see people identifying themselves and building much of their identity on their race. They form their basic identity as a person as claiming to be a person of color, or a Latino, or Indian, or Asian. And it becomes absolutely vital to their identity. And often this leads to group identity linked to race. It’s the same with gender, particularly as gender has been redefined to define an individual’s sexual preferences. This becomes over time much more than simply a personal preference for the individual, but instead becomes a core part of their identity and this link often expresses itself in who the individual socializes with. But once again I think to the largest degree we see the question of what is a human played out in group socialization. More and more so this is the direction fragmentation of group identity has taken in the United States. There are thousands of different denominations of churches. There are thousands of different interest groups. One might identify as an introvert and claim their identity in that. One might identify as their Meyers-Briggs type, or their Enneagram type. Others identify based on interests, some gather for special feudal festivals and dress up like knights in armor and maidens and joust together. Others gather in groups to play video games, others in Silicon Valley gather together for elite explicit sexual activities. We see an increasing fragmentation of society, as more and more groups and subgroups form and begin to identify themselves in unique ways in the group setting. But let’s continue.  

Four: “What happens to a person after death?” (Sire, 2020, p. 9) To me this question is often the question of worldview that is left out. We humans have an uncanny ability to avoid questions and thoughts that we find disturbing. This is one we often ignore. Though in American culture I find the milquetoast therapeutic deism perspective fairly common, indicating that pretty much everybody goes to heaven. Of course, as Christians we know that isn’t true. In fact, most people do not go to heaven, as far as I can tell. Now, whether an individual is a person of color of South African ethnicity female in gender and finds group socialization in a Baptist evangelical church, or an individual is Caucasian, of French descent, male, and gathers with group organizers at the local political office, both individuals may be equally uninterested in the question of what happens after death. Each of their worldviews may tend toward one conclusion or another, but it is my belief that God can grasp hold of either of them, and draw them to himself. Though that person certainly has free will and may either resist this pulling or engage with this pulling positively. But one worldview may be “closer” to a biblical Christian worldview than another. Now a man who considers himself an agnostic but loves to take walks at night and wonder at the mystery of the stars may actually be closer to knowing God than someone gathering at a Lutheran church on Sundays where dead religion is practiced and finds himself inoculated with dead religion from a knowledge of the living God. So worldview can be a deceptive measure of how close someone actually is to knowing God. Appearances can certainly be deceiving when examining one’s worldview.

Five: “Why is it possible to know anything at all?” (Sire, 2020, p. 9) Interestingly enough, in our current contemporary times, it’s not a given to say that truth is fixed and objective. We live in a time of deconstructionism and post-modernism. We live in a time when the phrase is often repeated: “All truth is relative.” But is everything really relative? For a Christian we know that truth is objective. If two plus two equals four, that truth is true for everyone, everywhere, at every time, and in every place. It’s a constant. But for a post-modernist or atheist, they might simply believe that truth is relative, for one, it may seem this way, for another it may seem different, and they are both right. But then again, why should one believe such a contention in the first place, by that standard, wouldn’t the statement of all truth being relative be a relative statement, which means it wouldn’t always be true for everyone? We see much in the United States being redefined and reshaped to fit personal preferences. This is in itself an expression of worldview. If nothing is absolutely true and all things are relative, then it follows that redefining basic realities of society like gender, identity, sexuality, and so on, is completely reasonable, since the only guiding principle is what feels right in regard to personal preference. This progressive redefinition of things in society like race, gender, marriage, and sanctity of life, can be linked back to particular worldviews; worldviews of the past, deism and Christianity, in contention with presently powerful worldviews like naturalism, nihilism and extremism. One seeks to hold to past norms of societal definition while the other seeks to redefine societal norms. Next we consider morality.

Six: “How do we know what is right and wrong?” (Sire, 2020, p. 9) This question links closely with question five. How do we know what is ethical? For Christians our measuring rod is the word of God, the Bible. We examine everything in the world, in the universe, and use the Bible as our guide to understand what is right and wrong.  For a woman who is a feminist, they may be influenced by the writers of the feminist movement when considering what is right and wrong. For a man who is a Marxist, he would be influenced by the writings of Marx and Engels, on what is right and wrong. For many in our world today, their guide for what is true and not true, what is right and wrong is the television, the news media, and they base their beliefs on what those networks share. For many of the wealthy in our society they will tend to share the beliefs of the academic elites, the scientific establishment, the think tanks, Hollywood, and the news media.

Very often in our society we get our ideas of right and wrong from many different sources. As we access these sources, social media, news media, friends, family, church, schools, and so on, narratives begin to take hold in our minds. Race, ethnicity, gender, and group socialization all play a part in which of the predominant narratives we follow and define ourselves with. There are increasingly various narratives at play in our society today as fragmentation of culture expands; a progressive narrative, a liberal narrative, a centrist narrative, a conservative narrative, a libertarian narrative, and a conspiracy theory narrative just to name a few. All of these narratives express themselves in different ways, and one’s gender, race, ethnicity, and group socialization will all play a role in which of these narratives the individual will glob onto. Much of this will relate back to one’s understanding of human history.

Seven: “What is the meaning of human history?” (Sire, 2020, p. 9) This question came into common discussion over the last few years in the United States in regard to the 1619 project. How would Americans define themselves? How would they see their history? Which narrative would prevail, the concept of America as a nation founded on slavery and imperialism, or the narrative that America was founded for religious freedom and economic prosperity? The meaning of human history for a Jewish person would probably be linked in many ways to the holocaust, the establishment of the nation of Israel, and antisemitism in the United States. For a Cuban American they might base much of their understanding of human history on Fidel Castro and communism and fleeing that nation to the United States. For a woman who has experienced domestic violence, or abuse, they might see human history in the context of the liberation of women from limited rights and mistreatment in the past. One’s identity in their race, gender, ethnicity, and social group will influence how one views history. All of this connects deeply with personal experience. So finally, we consider practical application.

Eight: “What personal, life-orienting core commitments are consistent with this worldview?” (Sire, 2020, p. 9). As Del Tackett said in his landmark work through Focus on the Family, The Truth Project, he asked the simple question: “Do you believe, what you believe, is really real?” That is the question that comes to mind when considering core commitments. As Christians we can claim a belief structure, but do we really live as if it were real? That is the question each worldview must answer.

Professor Frank Turek wrote the book Stealing from God with the supposition that atheists had to steal things like morality and truth from Christians to make their arguments for why God didn’t exist.

The true test of a worldview in my view is in the question: Is it livable? Is it really livable, once removing all systemic contradiction from its practice? That is the final and most important question for each worldview: How do I put it into practice? And having put it into practice, is it livable? Can we flourish? But that is not necessarily a test of its validity, is it? The ultimate test of its validity is whether it’s actually real or not. And that is a question only God can answer for us.

References

Sire, J. W. (2020). The universe next door: A basic worldview catalog. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, an imprint of InterVarsity Press.