Comments on: The Urgent Need for a Biblical Worldview

By: david skinner

david skinner — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 08:44:03 +0000

As the world becomes technologically more and more sophisticated many of us, especially those of the older generation, feel more and more helpless in being able to understand and cope with modern life. These feelings of inadequacy are engendered not only by those around us living the technologically smart life but by their smart Hegelian philosophy and lifestyle. But let us not forget that nothing is new. Ecclesiastes written perhaps three thousand years ago describes precisely a modern world view with man at its centre – and its futility.

Some say that the word repent is derived from to re-think but in order to do this something far more visceral has to take place. If to repent is merely an intellectual operation then half wits like myself and children are excluded. The key element that is lacking from modern philosophies and much of present day, so-called Christian teaching, is a deep sense of our sinfulness and the need for forgiveness.

And here we come to a crucial point of the Christian’s dilemma. For the Christian to talk about the sinfulness or the essential evil nature of man, from birth – and his accountability to a higher, more pure authority in the universe – will invoke the rage of the evolutionary humanist who can see no higher authority than man and who is supposedly continually evolving into something unheard of before – of being absolutely new. So new, that former moral codes are totally unfit for the purpose of a modern, 21st century, diverse, society. They believe that If only human reason were emancipated from the superstition of religion, civilisation would make progress in leaps and bounds

What we have to do is to have the courage to upset people and invoke their rage. Our Christian worldview, though infinitely superior to all others, must never for those who grasp it become a cause for intellectual arrogance. Instead it should be an offence, a stench in the nostrils of its hearers. Only then can God’s forgiveness and healing begin to work.

David Skinner, UK

By: Stephen Frost

Stephen Frost — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:12:35 +0000

Bill, I am now just two chapters from finishing Moreland and Craig’s Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview which you previously recommended to me … its been a big project to read (600+ pages), but very satisfying! For those like me who have more than just a superficial level of interest in philosophy, its a very useful training tool. It has shown me areas where my knowledge has been deficient, but also has revealed areas where the arguments of opponents are likewise lacking.
Stephen Frost, Melbourne

By: Nancy

Nancy — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:25:53 +0000

To read more about the relationship between Biblical Worldview and Christian schooling, please visit www.discoverchristianschools.blogspot.com/
Nancy DeHaan

By: Christinewjc

Christinewjc — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:58:23 +0000

Your post reminded me of a “clash of worldviews” encounter between New Age guru, Deepak Chopra and Christian apologist Greg Koukl of “Stand to Reason.” It was originally broadcast on T.V. back in 2005. After viewing the entire show, I wrote:

This broadcast was absolutely fabulous! Greg Koukl pointed out the fact that people can have differing beliefs regarding faith, but that it is logically impossible for them all to be true at the same time.

His trust in Jesus Christ and God’s Word stood in direct contrast to Deepak Chopra who admitted “embracing his uncertainty.” Koukl’s view demonstrates a steadfast and true faith where Chopra’s view can only lead to theological oblivion.

The following is a brief synopsis of what occurred:

One commenter (identified as “KP”) wrote:

Messengers of an Impersonal God?

I watched Greg Koukl and Deepak Chopra discuss the future of faith on Lee Strobel’s Faith Under Fire last night (Jan. 2005). Dr. Chopra has written numerous books on New Age spirituality that have sold millions of copies. Greg did a superb job of representing the gospel in content and character, modeling the qualities of an ambassador that he and the folks at Stand to Reason seek to instill in others. He repeatedly demonstrated the problems with religious relativism and exposed the fact that, contrary to his denial that he is dogmatic, Dr. Chopra adheres to a theological position of which he seeks to persuade others.

As a sign of respect for Jesus, Dr. Chopra said that his teaching in the Sermon on the Mount is among his favorites and that he carries a copy of it with him. However, he considers Jesus only one among a number of God’s messengers. Not only is this a contradiction of the biblical witness to Jesus’ uniqueness, it’s also unintelligible given Dr. Chopra’s own concept of the nature of God. You see, Dr. Chopra emphatically denies that God is a personal being.

The concept of messenger presupposes two activities, both of which can only be performed by persons. The first is that of sending or commissioning. The summer before I went to college I worked as a messenger for a law firm in Manhattan. They sent me and my co-workers on various assignments to deliver important documents to other firms and businesses. I didn’t decide what my destination was to be. Nor did I decide at what times I would go on these errands. All of that was dictated to me by my employer. A messenger is one who is sent by someone not something.

The second activity presupposed by the concept of messenger is communication. A messenger is one who conveys a what? That’s right – a message. The task of a messenger is to convey some kind of communication from the one who sent him or her to the recipient. If I were to tell you that my toaster wanted me to tell you something, you’d think that I was either joking or something was seriously wrong with me. That’s because we know that toasters and other impersonal entities don’t communicate. So, how Dr. Chopra explains the concept of an impersonal God having messengers, I don’t know. I don’t think he can.

I thought the writer made an excellent point!

Christine Watson