Does a worldview have to be livable?
Published: 8 May 2010(GMT+10)
Following Lita Cosner’s reply to Canadian correspondent Samroon R. about his questions concerning Hitler, the Dalai Lama, sin and salvation, Samroon responded:
Is our pride attributable to the first man’s sin? Your beliefs about whether we are descended from Adam will affect not only your view about a “sinful nature”, but your entire worldview.
Grace to you in Christ. Thank you so much for the reply. You really helped me think clearly. May God bless you richly with wisdom and understanding. Anyways some questions again.
Do you believe that a worldview or philosophy, if true, has to be liveable. Suppose if a worldview denies freedom to human beings can we say it’s a false worldview since it denies a basic need of human beings such as Islam or suppose in Buddhism to attain nirvana or to reach a spiritual higher level you have to give up desiring which is not humanly possible since trying to reach nirvana has started as a desire in the heart. So do you think we can judge a worldview if it’s true or not by checking if it’s liveable or not. I hope you see what I mean.
And during evangelism when people are presented with the truth of Jesus Christ sometimes they would believe what they want to believe rather than what they should believe. Do you think this is because of the pride we humans have and this pride is there because of the original sin? Would you agree that God allowed that we inherit sin nature without our own choice so he can teach us submission which is opposite of pride? What is your take on this—I would be looking forward to your response.
Thanks & God bless you!
Lita Cosner answers:
I believe that the ‘livability’ of a worldview is evidence for its truth. For example, there is a worldview that says men are perfect, and only want education or wealth or whatever else to achieve this state. We can see that it is patently false when we see that the most educated and wealthy people, far from being the most benevolent and kindest, are sometimes capable of committing the worst sort of atrocities.
… it’s not that one thing proves that Christianity is true, it is that everything fits when one presupposes Christianity.
G.K. Chesterton actually used this as one of his main defenses for the truth of the Christian faith. To paraphrase his argument in from Orthodoxy, it’s not that one thing proves that Christianity is true, it is that everything fits when one presupposes Christianity. When one assumes the basic tenets of the Christian faith, everything from the huge philosophical questions concerning where we came from and why we’re here, to the everyday problems of why little Johnny keeps pulling his sister’s hair, come into focus. Any worldview may fit a few truths in it; Islam can explain a few things about the condition of humanity, and the Eastern religions might have a little truth in them too; it’s very hard for anything to be completely wrong at every single point. But this is like a stick fitting a hole in a rock; it is something that could easily happen by accident. Chesterton argues, however, that the way Christianity fits reality is more akin to a key fitting a lock; and when a lock fits a key, we can be sure that it is the right key.
… our sin nature is something that we inherit by default because we are descended from the first sinner, Adam.
I think there are any number of reasons why people claim that they can’t accept the Gospel; for some, it is the problem of evil. For others, it is that they like living with their girlfriends and they don’t want a moral system that will tell them that it is a sin. For some, they don’t want to be told that there is such a thing as sin. But I think that all these reasons can be described as symptoms of the main problem: the desperate wickedness of the fallen human heart. The unregenerate man is utterly hostile to God and His truth, which is the reason why no one is able to come to Him without the influence of the Holy Spirit. Not only can’t he come, he doesn’t want to, and that is why it is a culpable offense. Not only does he have a fallen nature that will sin and cause him to be hostile to God, he cooperates with it at every stage.
I think that there would have been far better ways for God to teach us submission than to cause us to inherit a trait that makes us utterly hostile to Him and incapable of submission to His will. Rather, our sin nature is something that we inherit by default because we are descended from the first sinner, Adam. We cannot submit to God until He regenerates us with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and even then not fully; we remain sinful as long as we are in the fallen creation, and we have to wait for the Resurrection for the complete defeat of sin.
I hope these further answers have been helpful for you.
Creation Ministries International
This is fantastic! I have noticed the same connectedness in my life since understanding the foundation laid down by Genesis and the rest of the Bible. When I surrendered to Jesus Christ things began to take shape in a concise framework that included “all” of reality not just the physical world but the immaterial as well such as love joy peace logic reason and hope.
But it really started making complete sense when I faced my unbelief and insecurity in the Genesis record. Here is where the foundation was finally laid down and provided security that the Bible was and is true and authorative for not only spritual law but the physical laws that govern reality. In short if God is true then His word also explains the “real” world too. My witness has become more sure and confident as a result. Studying Genesis from a historical perspective has helped against unbelief to a degree I did not expect.
I now appreciate how so many sciences now make sense by the history of civilisation as captured in the Bible … I’d say: Anthropology, paleontology, archeology, psychology, sociology, astrophysics, biology. Laws of matter, logic, information, intelligence … these all presuppose a law maker.
Now ‘love’, ‘justice’, ‘hope’, ‘truth’ all have a defining ‘person’ behind them … not arbitrary or mystic … but clearly displayed & explained for 2000 years, and still refreshing everyday because the alternatives dished up to us daily are such hatchet jobs.
I saw a quote somewhere how everything is connected, and if you try and take something out or put something false into our reality there will be disconnects.
The great disconnect for me about evolution is the only allowed paradigm of chance totally disconnects with the order and functionality of living things … the integration of bone, muscle, organs, organ function, organ placement, the plumbing, wiring, chemical function and regulation … nothing about it even remotely seems random, per chance … it’s all they've got and it doesn't fit the picture we are presented with at all.