Google Groups Home
Help | Sign in
Group info
Recent pages and files
A Christian Worldview    

In an earlier thread I defined a worldview as the way one looked at and interpreted the world around them.  And further, that a rational worldview was one that was internally consistent and that provided a reasonable explanation for the way things are.  I also noted that it is not necessary for a rational worldview to be true.  I want to apply that criteria to Christianity and make a case for it being a rational worldview.  I have two problems in doing this though.  First, Christianity means something different to me than it does too many others as evidenced by the trouble we had in being able to define what a Christian is.  My ‘Christian worldview’ is likely very different from Stephen’s ‘Christian worldview’.  The other problem is that fully detailing a Christian worldview, or any other for that matter, on a newsgroup like this is nigh on to impossible.  It is just too big a topic.  As a result I will instead lay out a simple version of OldMan’s worldview.  I will not initially try to defend it but will do so in respond to any objections to it’s rationality that someone might raise, and I have no doubt that will happen.  I will also be willing to try and flesh it out some, addressing points that are not included here in response to your questions or input.  The intent here is not to prove that it is true; only that it is a rational worldview.

 

  • There is an uncaused creator who is responsible for the universe that we live in.  This uncaused creator is called God.
  • This creator provided all of the necessary raw materials and the necessary natural processes to, over a period of around 14 billion years, shape our universe and to bring life to at least one planet.
  • The creator is not required to be actively managing the universe or the affairs of this planet.  But that does not say that he does not interact with us when he chooses to.
  • Science is a reliable guide to how the universe, this planet and the life on it physically functions.
  • We live on a planet that is very active, producing earthquakes and storms.  In general these are not directed by God to punish humanity.
  • God created this universe for a purpose.  And humanity is central to that purpose.
  • Left to ourselves we have little chance of knowing much about God.
  • The Bible is in some way inspired by God and it reflects an ongoing revelation of God and his purpose.  This revelation reaches its highest point in the New Testament.
  • The stories in the early part of Genesis should not be taken as literal accounts of creation, the fall, the flood, and the dispersal of nations.  Rather they reflect a primitive people’s belief in the sovereignty of God and his activity in the world.  These stories reflect a growing understanding of the nature of God and of man.
  • God has revealed himself to us most completely in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.  Jesus was God in human form.
  • God’s purpose for humanity is to produce a people that he can use after this universe is gone.
  • The quality that God is looking for is faith.  Trusting in him without seeing him.
  • The history of humanity has demonstrated recognition that there is something bigger than us that we are answerable to as well as a self-centeredness that rebels against authority.
  • Evil in this world is caused by humanities self-centeredness.
  • Jesus of Nazareth was the means that God used to bring people into the desired relationship with himself.
  • All who believe in Jesus, including his redemptive death and victory over death, become a part of the Kingdom of God, or his people.
  • Belief in Jesus is more than an intellectual exercise.  It entails commitment of ones life to him.
  • While we live on this earth we should live under the authority of the government that is over us, obeying its rules and laws so long as they do not violate the law of God. 
  • We should live in a way that brings honor to God.
  • We should be faithful to represent God to the people we come in contact with.
Version: 
Latest 3 messages about this page (69 total) - view full discussion
Jul 18 2007 by Delusional?
The idea of "worldview" is really a simplified notion of "lifeworld"
from phenomenological philosophy. To this degree one's lifeword is
something that has an irreducible conditioning effect on the set of
one's experience. So I prefer Habermas' definition of lifeworld in
place of worldview. In short, we can sum it up like this:
Jul 18 2007 by Delusional?
Not a big fan of this. The idea of "worldview" is really a simplified
notion of "lifeworld" from phenomenological philosophy. To this
degree one's lifeword is something that has an irreducible
conditioning effect on the set of one's experience. So I prefer
Habermas' definition of lifeworld in place of worldview. In short, we
Jul 18 2007 by Delusional?
Not a big fan of this. The idea of "worldview" is really a simplified
notion of "lifeworld" from phenomenological philosophy. To this
degree one's lifeword is something that has an irreducible
conditioning effect on the set of one's experience. So I prefer
Habermas' definition of lifeworld in place of worldview. In short, we
66 more messages »
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google