The topic of "world view" is a division of philosophy. Although many people are not interested in philosophy as a subject, every human being holds some or other world view, consciously or unconsciously. Some of the main underlying principles or beliefs that constitute your world view is your view of God (if any), your view of science, the origin of life, the meaning of life, human nature, ethics, law, politics, media, history, etc. Your world view refers to your underlying (or even subconscious) principles and beliefs that determines the interpretation and integration of your environment. It is your set of beliefs that you use to assign meaning to your world and that determines the way in which you obtain and process knowledge (epistemology). There are many factors that can make up a world view. The most common factors are social environment, science, education, religion and media. A central concept in all of these factors is assigned authority. This refers to the extent in which you assign authority to these factors that influence your conscious world. In this overview, I will attempt to outline some of the main world views and then work towards a biblical world view. Many people hold on to a specific world view without ever questioning its foundations or its origins.

(For the fist three world views, see mostly Noebel, 1991)

The Marxist-Leninist world view

The concepts of evolution, dialectical materialism and atheism lie at the foundation of this world view.

Evolution. They regard the concept of evolution as foundational to their theology, philosophy, biology, ethics, law, psychology, sociology, politics, economics and history. They religiously believe that evolution is a fact. To them the whole world is in a constant process of progressive evolution, biologically, sociologically, politically and economically. According to their belief, the whole world will inevitably evolve into a state of utopia: a type of earthly paradise where everything will exist within a communistic, classless society.

Dialectical Materialism is the way or manner in which evolution happens. "Dialectical" refers to the idea of thesis, followed by anti-thesis, evolving into a new synthesis. This idea has been taken over from Hegel. They tend to understand evolution as a punctuated process. All of this happens within the context of class struggles. They see history as a history of class struggles. War and especially revolution is a necessary step toward a new synthesis, ultimately culminating into an utopian, classless society. Materialism refers to their view that all reality is material. A spiritual or metaphysical dimension is not acknowledged. Everything in life is some or other form of matter, even the human "soul" or "mind" is viewed as a function of the human brain: e.g. neurons, synapses and chemicals. Behaviorism is therefore key to their psychology. Therein the human psyche is solely seen as a product of their environment. Ethics are defined within the goals and objectives of communist morality. E.g. killing, raping or stealing is acceptable in as far as it serves the greater goal of creating a classless, communist society (the end justifies the means). The social or political world is just a higher form of matter. Materialism is closely related to naturalism in the sense that no super-natural dimension is acknowledged.

Atheism goes hand in hand with materialism. This is the belief that there is no original Cause that brought the universe into existence. The concept of "God" to the Marxist is viewed as a dangerous narcotic to the masses and needs to be eliminated.

The concepts of evolution, naturalism and atheism lie at the foundation of this world view.

Evolution: Similar to Marxism-Leninism, they view natural evolution as foundational to all other subject disciplines (exact sciences as well as psychological and social sciences). They also believe that evolution is a fact. They do not share the notion of dialectical materialism though. They believe that society will inevitably evolve into an earthly paradisal state that will be a "New world Order."

Naturalism is the belief that the physical cosmos is the only reality that exists. Anything that is believed to exist (e.g. God) that is not scientifically verifiable in terms of empirical methods, does not exist to them. They do not acknowledge anything super-natural. They view creationism as an enemy to science. They tend to view religious belief as a mental illness. Everything needs to be explained in terms of natural causes. The scope of that which is knowable (their epistemology) is restricted to natural senses (that which can be seen, heard, felt, tasted, smelled). In other words the empirical, scientific method is the only valid way in which knowledge can be obtained. This type of epistemology is called positivism. The human psyche is viewed as the sole result of natural, progressive evolution that is potentially good and constantly evolving. It has to be developed by way of self-actualization. All behaviour that is not normal is treated mechanically by way of self-help techniques. They hold onto complete ethical relativism. Morality is purely subjective, and is subject to the situation (situation ethics). One universal value seems to be that anything is acceptable as long as no harm to others are done. This may evolve as the situation evolves. The majority of society determines what is acceptable and what not. They envision a perfect, utopian society with One World Government. That will be the end of evolution, where people will be fully educated and self-actualized in terms of every person's "inherent goodness."

Atheism is closely related to naturalism. If no super-natural agents are acknowledged, there is no room for belief in God. All religious traditions are seen as products of culture and myth.

This is also known as a New Age world view. This world view is difficult to define, since it is not built upon strict dogma's and is per definition anti-dogmatic. The concepts of pantheism, relativism, enlightenment and evolution are central to this world view.

Pantheism refers to their belief that everything that exists is God. Man and God are ontologically one (of the same being). God is not viewed as a personal God, but as a cosmic force. Everything that exists is seen as spiritual and to be understood from the perspective of the supernatural. The concept of Gaia (mother nature) is also related to this. The whole cosmos is viewed as an actual living organism.

Inner enlightenment is achieved through meditation where your consciousness becomes one with a cosmic consciousness. It is seen as a journey of inner soul searching. Channeling, astrology, ouija boards, etc. are often suggested to facilitate this process. The ultimate truth is seen as within every person. Every person is God. Some talk about "Christ consciousness" or "higher consciousness." The concept of "individual soul" falls away, since all men share a "universal soul." This gives rise to the belief of reincarnation.

Ethics is completely relativistic. All ethical principles are discovered from within. Truth is completely subjective. There are no clear boundaries between good and evil. The idea of the "good side" and the "dark side" of "the force," as well as "yin-yang" are cosmic humanist concepts. With many the idea exists that Lucifer and Christ are essentially the same.

Evolution is understood as a punctuated process towards an utopian, enlightened state where all will share a collective consciousness. You will not work for money any more, but the universe will pay you to be yourself and to do what you love. This is often referred to as a "New World Order" with one world government. Interestingly enough, religious preference will not be tolerated.

To correctly understand a biblical world view, one has to make some important distictions and clarifications:

Dualism is the biblical view. According to this understanding, God is ontologically separate from the physical world. He is not of the same being / substance than the physical world. He is transcendent and exists within a metaphysical dimension (metaphysical = after/beyond physical). This is the only way in which the concept of incarnation (where God entered the physical world and took on human form) makes any sense. It is also the only way in where there is room for a personal, mutual relationship between God and man. In the same manner the spiritual world (angels, demons, powers, etc.) is seen as separate from the material world. Jesus conversed with Satan in the desert in person, not as some extension of is own being or as a projection of his own mind (Luk 4). Dualism also defines a human being as consisting of both a physical (body) and metaphysical dimention (soul [mind, will, emotions] and spirit). Heb 4:12 says: "For the Word of God is living and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing apart of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Every person is an individual with a unique soul and personality.

2. Epistemology and science

As mentioned earlier, positivism is the belief that the empirical, scientific method is the only way in which knowledge can be obtained. Positivism ignores the underlying principle of faith and or preconceived notion as an underlying principle of all knowledge. There is no such thing as total objective knowledge. Although this is less evident in more exact sciences like mathematics (although axioms and postulates are present), it is more evident in interpretive sciences like origin science for example. There are many "beliefs" that are foundational to the current mainstream evolution idea (I call this an idea for not all the criteria are met in order to make it qualify as a scientific theory). Let me name just a few of the "beliefs" or preconceived notions that are foundational to the evolution idea:

(Beliefs 1 through 8 comes from Gitt 1993:13-17)

The belief that evolution is a "fact" is very far from the truth. It is believed so strongly that everything that defies the belief in evolution is seen by evolutionists as unscientific or viewed as the product of religious bias. The mainstream scientific community has adopted the evolution idea in such a way that they discriminate against any opposing theory. They will neither peer-review non-evolutionist theories, nor view them as scientific. Ironically, according to the above mentioned beliefs, it is more accurate to refer to the idea of evolution as a religion, and not a science.

To come back to epistemology. If we believe in the existence God that is metaphysical and ontologically separate from nature / matter, then it is purely logical that the existence of God or anything spiritual cannot be measured with natural, physical measuring instruments. In other words, if the "scientific method" cannot verify the existence of God and the spiritual dimension, there is no proof to conclude that a metaphysical dimension does not exist. There is no objective reason to accept a positivistic epistemology, for positivistic epistemology holds onto the belief that the metaphysical dimension does not exist, without being able to prove it.

There are too many realities that cannot be explained by natural science in order to discard the belief in the super-natural; e.g. life, mind, emotion, conscience, will, creativity, altruism, love, idea, belief. These realities in themselves suggest that a metaphysical dimension exists. Furthermore, we as humans obtain knowledge by more than our physical senses. We also obtain knowledge by emotional sensing and feeling, association, cognitive reasoning, interpretation, spiritual sensing, etc.

According to the Bible, that which is knowable, is limited (1 Cor 13:9). The scope of man’s epistemology is not complete and perfect. There are things that exist that are not knowable, or at most knowable in part. If everything that can be known by man is merely demarcated by "the scientific method" then man would not have a sense for art, poetry, politics, morality, etc. Neither has God ever intended that His presence may be measured with the use of empirical, physical measuring instruments (the scientific method). God is Spirit (Joh 4:24).

Paul explains this principle in

1 Cor 2:11-15 "For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of man within him? So also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. (12) But we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit from God, so that we might know the things that are freely given to us by God. (13) These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (14) But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (15) But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged by no one."

Paul distinguishes between the "natural man" and "spiritual things." As I understand it, he distinguishes between the natural, physical dimension and the spiritual, metaphysical dimension. The epistemology of the "natural man" is limited to the physical world, where the epistemology of the "spiritual (person)" is extended to the metaphysical world. Natural reason cannot escape the limitations of the physical realm. We can know God spiritually, but we cannot perfectly compile that knowledge into human words. Human language, words symbols and culture is subjected to the limitations of the physical world and cannot in itself transcend the natural dimension. Words and symbols about God and spiritual things in any language in any culture (even that of the Bible) are mere referents to a greater spiritual reality. That is why non-believers cannot be convinced to believe in God and the spiritual world merely by words and arguments. God reveals Himself by His Spirit within man’s spirit and He alone can convict man of sin, righteousness and judgment (Joh 16:8).

Some liberal theologians acknowledge the limitedness of human reason, but they are reluctant to acknowledge a transcendent, metaphysical dimension as a non-physical reality consisting of actual personal beings. They would rather prefer to talk about the element of mystery that kicks in at a certain stage of one's understanding. This is not to be confused with the acknowledgement of an actual personal metaphysical world, but it is just another way of expressing the limitation of natural epistemology.

To conclude, there is nothing wrong with the scientific method in itself to obtain knowledge, as long as man can acknowledge that not all knowledge comes through science. Ironically, something as profound as the idea of evolution is built on so many non-empirical, non-scientific, unproven principles (as noted above), that it unmasks the even more profound inconsistency in the science philosophy of the mainstream scientific community. I do not think however that all of them have blatant bad intentions. To many, it is just a matter of building onto previous assumptions without questioning it. A further reason is probably that people who qualify themselves in the natural sciences never work on an interdisciplinary level in the sense that they for example study science philosophy. On the other hand, many of the science philosophy scholars do not bother to question the underlying assumptions or preconceived notions of the natural sciences. A catch 22 situation results!

Just as there is nothing inherently wrong with the scientific method, there is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of faith. Just because people believe in certain things does not mean that everything that is believed (which cannot be verified by the scientific method) does not exist or is not true. It only means that some things can neither be scientifically verified nor falsified. It only confirms the limitedness of human epistemology, and even more importantly the limitedness of science.

3. Natural evolution versus special creation

4. Man as being "inherently good" versus being "inherently evil."

Another clear tendency in the three above mentioned world views is that all of them view the natural man as being inherently good. So called "social evils" or "abnormalities" are eliminated by anything from proper education, self-actualization, psychological techniques to inner enlightenment, soul searching or "tuning in" to a global consciousness. In all three these views, a paridisal, utopian state is envisioned where man creates his own destiny in the way that he facilitates the inevitable force of evolution. Man’s understanding of the cosmos and his epistemology is seen as constantly evolving for the better. Society is becoming better and better towards the end result of evolution. Man is his own god.

And yet, everything in the world is pointing to the other direction. Man is degrading genetically, global warming is becoming an increasing concern, deserts increase in size, wars and terrorism is increasing, famine and political instability is wide-spread, etc. In the first world, man has become more morally promiscuous (anything goes), more inclined towards lack of commitment, fleshly pleasures and entertainment, consumerism, shallowness, conformity, etc. In stead of pointing to evolution, this rather points to devolution. Besides that, the evolution idea had a profound influence on the actions of someone like Adolf Hitler. It is on the basis of evolution that he decided to create a so called "super race" (ubermensch). Many other forms of racism can be traced back to evolutionism.

The biblical world view sees the natural man is being inherently evil (Rom 3:23). Since sin has come into the world through Adam and Eve, man is inherently corrupt (Rom 5:12). This is more consistent with what we see in the world today as well as in the history of man. Therefore, man cannot save himself. He is in desperate need of a Saviour. It is only through Christ that man can be freed form sin and death (Rom 7:24-25). Only God can change man’s inherently evil nature by spiritual rebirth (Joh 1:12,13; Joh 3:5-6; 2 Cor 5:17; Rom 6:5-6) and transform the fleshly patterns of his mind (Rom 12:2). No technique, training or self-help can accomplish that.

This current world is deemed for complete destruction (2 Pet 3:10-12) as God’s judgment will come upon the sinful world. This in itself is incompatible with the idea of evolution.

5. Subjective and objective morality

This is closely related to man as being inherently good versus being inherently evil. Morality in all three above mentioned worldviews is subjective, not absolute, and made up by man himself according to his own desire. It is bound to situation and requirement (situation ethics).

Biblical morality is objective and timeless, for it is founded within the unchangeable character of God Himself (Heb 13:8). It has been revealed to His people by way of God’s written law in the Old Testament (Ex 20) and later replaced by the Law of the Spirit in the New Testament (Rom 8:2). Because of the fact that morality is rooted in the character of God’s Spirit, it is timeless, objective and unchangeable for every generation and every culture. In essence, sin has stayed the same through all ages.

The four world views that I have touched upon up to this point (Marxism-Leninism, Secular Humanism, Cosmic Humanism, Biblical Christianity) are by no means meant to be a comprehensive set of world views, but they are probably the most relevant in the Western World. Other world views include the other two monotheistic world views (Islam and orthodox Judaism) who share a lot of the basic principles with the Biblical Christian world view (e.g. God as Creator, objective morality, dualism). Some of the other eastern world views and religions include the Vedic / Dharmaic world views (e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism). They have a lot in common with the cosmic humanist world view (inner enlightenment, man as being inherently good, spiritual monism to a large extent).

The other important fact is that the world views of people can take on very individualistic twists at many points that can contain elements of different main world view types. In this sense, one can refer to hybrid world views. There are many examples. One of the examples is progressive (non-orthodox) Judaism. The belief in kabbalah for example is associated with secret, mystic, esoteric knowledge. It is related to the belief in the movement and ordering of mystical forces through signs and symbols. Some rabbinic traditions held the belief that matter was pre-existent (before creation). With many progressive Judaists there are traces of pantheism and panentheism.

Another example of a hybrid world view is theistic evolution. This view tries to hold onto Biblical values on the one hand (e.g. God as Creator) and on evolutionistic values (where no Creator is needed) on the other hand. The intention of this is to harmonise the Bible with main stream science.

Hybrid world views can take on many forms. Most forms of liberal Christianity or postmodern Christianity are hybrid world views. A good example is the theology of Walter Wink. He calls his world view an "Integral world view." He says:

"This new world view (see fig 5.) is emerging from a confluence of sources: the reflections of Carl Jung, Theilhard de Chardin, Morton Kelsey, Thomas Berry, Matthew Fox, process philosophy, and the new physics. It sees everything as having an outer and an inner aspect. It attempts to take seriously the spiritual insights of the ancient or biblical worldview by affirming a withinness or interiority in all things, but sees this inner spiritual reality as inextricably related to an outer concretion or physical manifestation." (Wink 1992:5) (own accentuations).

He sees the spiritual an physical worlds as "inner" and "outer" aspects of the same reality (Wink 1992:6). This is a monistic view (as explained above). This view of God can also be described as a version of panentheism (the belief that all things is in God; just as a soul is related to the body, so too, God is related to the world - the soul fills the body as God fills the world).

see http://www.apologetics.org/glossary.html

In this sense one can clearly see how Wink's ideas are related to the Cosmic Humanist (New Age) world view. In Wink's case, he deconstructs the spiritual realm (e.g. Satan, demons, angels, powers) as human-made worldly systems of domination. It is along similar lines that other liberal theologians deconstruct the spiritual realm. On this point it is important to acknowledge some of the other sets of preconceived notions that are foundational to liberal theology, with special reference to demythologization (see especially the works of the modernistic theologian: Rudolf Bultmann). This refers to the notion to deconstruct super-natural elements in the Bible, by understanding it as myth. Some of the underlying preconceived notions are:

1) that human epistemology has evolved (evolution) and that the Biblical world view is seen as outdated and archaic.
2) that a super-natural dimension does not exist (naturalistic monism) and has to be explained along the lines of a natural cause (which in this case would be an "outdated," "mythological" world view).

Cognitive dissonance refers to the notion to hold onto opposing / contradicting views at the same time. This is to some degree present with all hybrid world views.

In the case of theistic evolution, it holds onto God as Creator as well as on naturalistic evolution (that does not need a Creator). In practice, this contradiction is rarely acknowledged though. As I see it, it is either present with 1) those who are more theologically inclined and are not aware / interested in the philosophical tenets of evolutionists, or 2) with those who have a mainstream scientific viewpoint, and are not aware / interested in the basic theological tenets underlying a Biblical world view.

The concept of cognitive dissonance is very much related to postmodernism, for since there is no absolute truth according to postmodern thought, "opposing viewpoints" seem to fade away against this notion. In this sense it is closely related to the New Age world view.

Liberal Christianity (as described above), tries to hold onto God as a super-natural Being (except in full blown New Age Christianity that embraced complete pantheism) on the one hand, but deconstructs and demythologizes Biblical texts that have super-natural elements (e.g. Gen 1 is viewed as a mythological creation story [not as historically or literally true], Jonah in the fish is viewed as a mythological story, some go further to deconstruct the devil, demons, angels, and some go even further and render the resurrection of Jesus and His virgin birth as mythological [not physical], etc.)

Another inconsistency that can be identified within liberal theology is the tendency to absolutise the hermeneutic discontinuity of the world view of the persent reader and the world view of the people in the Bible. This is being portrayed as more than a mere "cultural difference" but as being a worldview completely alien to anything that the postmodern reader understand as true today. This is done in order to deconstruct the ontological status of the spiritual world as being a mere projection of the so called "ancient" biblical world view. In spite of the fact that this carries overtones of the notion that today's world view and epistemology has evolved since biblical times, it makes assumptions about the ontological status of the spiritual world portrayed in the biblical world view, relative to a modernistic, naturalistic secular humanist world view. Deconstruction is always relative to something else. It is never objective. In other words, postmodern, liberal theology is inconsistent with their deconstruction, for it fails to deconstruct the underlying naturalistic beliefs of liberal theology.

As mentioned right in the beginning, any world view held by a particular person is related to the amount of authority that that person assigns to the sources of that particular world view (or elements of a particular world view). Not one single person can verify first hand everything that he/she believes or hold as true. We are all subject to sources of information. Some of these sources are: the popular media, main stream science (often featured on the main stream media), education, religion, culture, upbringing and social environment.

The natural tendency for any person is to "go with the flow." No person wants to stand out from the group unless they have strong inner convictions about something. Social pressure can take on many forms. According to a biblical world view, the family is the core social structure. In western society this has changed. A child's education (especially regarding world view or core beliefs) is not seen as the responsibility of the parents, but of the educational institutions. The post-modern tendency is that there is not so much pressure from the family, but rather from mainstream society. Friends and peers play an important role. A teen does not want to be "out" with the main stream trend. Even in academic circles, academic peer pressure is immense in order to retain "academic integrity" or to keep a job as a lecturer. There is e.g. just no funding and no opportunities for creation scientists in mainstream science (e.g. they will not peer-review their articles for they do not view creation science as science). It is much easier for any person to conform to the main stream. The other factor that plays a role is the fact that many scholars are not aware of, or do not even bother to question the preconceived notions of the main stream view of the field they study.

In a sense, the tendency to go with the flow is related to the tendency of an external locus of control. That is if your core values are determined by external factors and not by internal conviction. According to the Bible, the Word of God is the only solid basis on which we can build our house (figuratively: Luk 6:48). This Word has to live in us by the Person of the Holy Spirit (Col 3:16; Gal 4:6). In difficult times, the house that is built on sand (e.g. trend, mainstream, society) will tumble. The tenets of Biblical Christianity has never been rooted in the main stream of society. The whole history of the Bible points to the exclusiveness and otherness of God's people (e.g. Noah, Joseph, Jesus).

According to a biblical world view, there is more to the biblical text than being a mere human, culturally (out)dated product. There is a transcendent, divine dimension to the Bible, that transcends the limitations of human symbols, language and culture that are mere referents to a greater spiritual reality. We need the same Spirit that inspired the authors of the Bible in a special way, to be our Hermeneut and Interpreter to understand the deeper meaning of the Biblical text. There is no authority to the Bible apart from the active working of the Holy Spirit. Without the Spirit's working, all interpretations of the Bible will be subjective and connected to some or other human made ideology and preconceived notion.

Another important question on the value of any world view or aspect of a world view is its origin. Where did it originate? Was Christian monism and theistic evolution for example part of the authentic tradition of Christianity, or is it a recent view? Was demythologization part of the authentic Christian tradition or did it originate from naturalistic notions?

Another question worth asking is what the fruit is of a certain view? Is there anything within liberal theology that the world can be offended with, or that one can suffer or die for, or that makes one a stranger within this world? Is there any spiritual power within liberal theology that can transform a person? Or is it not as this Scripture portion says:

2 Tim 3:1-7 "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. (2) For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, (3) Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, (4) Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; (5) Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. (6) For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, (7) Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

or as this Scripture portion says:

Rom 1:20-25 "For the unseen things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being realized by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, for them to be without excuse. (21) Because, knowing God, they did not glorify Him as God, neither were thankful. But they became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (22) Professing to be wise, they became fools (23) and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, and birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things. (24) Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves. (25) For they changed the truth of God into a lie, and they worshiped and served the created thing more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen."

Gitt, W 1993. Did God use Evolution? Ebner Ulm: Germany.

Noebel, David A. 1991. Understanding the Times. The religious worldviews of our day and the search for truth. Harvest House: Oregon.

Wink, Walter 1992. Engaging the Powers. Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination. Fortress Press: Minneapolis

Philip du Toit