Skip to main content

Do you really know what a world view is?

I am reading my second Leslie Newbigin book, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (1989). Reading Newbigin is everytime like a conversion experience, like having bandages taken off your eyes. I have heard a lot of talk about "Christian World View" both in college and in the wider Christian world, but the problem is that what is most often meant by this phrase is having a set of magic spectacles that allow you to come up with the correct Christian answer on a contemporary issue. So for many a Christian World View is simply really a case of having the "correct" Christian opinions on various subjects. E.g. in a Christian World View abortion, homosexuality, marijuana, etc are wrong. Of course if you already have a list of right and wrong opinions there is not much need to develop a world view because that world view is just an end to being right about stuff, and if you already know you are right, what's the point?

But as I'm reading the Newbigin book I am realising that many who claim to have a Christian World View are actually still just as hostage to the rationalistic, violent and satanic hegemony of the prevailing western mindset as everyone else. They may have "Christian opinions" but their world view, that is their reflexive cultural linguistic reasoning, is actually distinctly un-Christian. Kim Fabricus gives testimony to this condition in this doodling
Sure, theologians may, in good faith, advance weighty arguments against same-sex relationships, but it is overwhelmingly clear that, among the pewtariat, homophobia is sustained by ignorance and prejudice.
Now I need to stop blogging and do the dishes, but my point is I don't think having right opinions is any substitute for having a mind transformed and renewed into the image of Christ - where every thought is taken captive. Perhaps no one would disagree with that, but here is the more controversial idea: is the one with the right opinions but the wrong thinking better off than the one with the right thinking but the wrong opinions? Or even, with which is the world better off? Better an orthodox bigot than a liberal saint?

Let me know what you think,
but for now . . . suds await.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ANZABS 2018 program and abstracts

ANZABS CONFERENCE 2018
6-7 December, 2018


Venue: Wesley Hall, Trinity Methodist College,

202A St Johns Rd, Meadowbank, Auckland 1072

Thursday 6 December
9.30 am – REGISTRATION
10.00-10.10 – mihi
10.10-11.00 – Keynote speaker: Robert Myles – Fishing for Eyewitnesses in the Fourth Gospel
11.00-11.30 – Morning tea
11.30-12.00 – Lyndon Drake – Economic Capital in the Hebrew Bible
12.00-12.30 – Anne Aalbers – Resurrection and Celibacy: Two Sides of the Same Coin?
12.30-1.00 – Jonathan Robinson – "And he was with the beasts," (Mark 1:13): Ambiguity,
Interpretation and Mark as a Jewish Author
1.00-2.00 – Lunch
2.00-2.30 – Ben Hudson – Ethical Exhortation and the Decalogue in Ephesians
2.30-3.00 – Csilla Saysell – The Servant as 'a covenant of/for people' in Deutero-Isaiah
3.00-3.30 – Afternoon tea
3.30-4.00 – Jacqueline Lloyd – Did Jesus minister in Gaulanitis?
4.00-4.30 – Mark Keown – Jesus as the New Joshua
4.30 – AGM
Friday 7 December
9.30-10.00 – Ben Ong – Pākehā Readin…

Updated Current Research and Book Reviews

So, my PhD must be going well because I have just spent the morning updating my blog pages for Current Research and brand spanking new Book Reviews page. But it is not just procrastination, it is good to stop and and get an overview.

I had totally forgotten about half the book reviews I had done on this blog, they go back to 2009! I am still working on writing the sort of reviews I really enjoy reading, but now that I'm regularly doing reviews for journals it is great to also review books on this blog where I have stylistic freedom and no space limitations. I had always hoped this blog would be a good source of free books, but while it was a source of free books they were not good ones. Reviewing for journals (as a PhD student) has been much better and is helping me keep my broader education going even as I delve deep into my PhD subject. Looking at my old book reviews helps me realise how far I have come. Hopefully, much growth as a blogger, scholar and human being (perhaps not i…

Again, on Mark 2:23-28

I think this is different enough to the "solutions" shared earlier to be worth a post. I'm afraid I haven't had a chance to absorb it yet, been reading too much today, so I can't say if I think he is on to something or not, but do let me know what you think :-)


James M. Hamilton Jr. in "The Typology of David's Rise to Power: Messianic Patterns in the Book of Samuel" JSBT 16, 2012, 4-25, at p13 writes,

Considering the way that Jesus appeals to the Davidic type in Mark 2:23-28, Goppelt draws attention to the way that Jesus not only makes a connection between himself and David in Mark 2:25, he also links his disciples to “those who were with [David].”70 This would seem to invite Mark’s audience to make other connections between those involved in these two events. Much discussion has been generated by the fact that Mark 2:26 portrays Jesus referring to “the time of Abiathar the high priest,” when it appears that at the time, Ahimelech would have been the…