Going through my worldview analysis class right now! We’re using “ An introduction to Christian worldview” by Anderson, Clark, and Naugle. The four worldview questions it presents are 1) what is our nature? 2) what is our world? 3) what is our problem? 4) what is our end? It’s a pretty good book. Another one we’re using is “cultural apologetics” by Paul Gould. This book has made it into my top five favorite books! Would definitely recommend everyone read it, especially or at least just chapters 2-5. His views on disenchantment and re enchantment were great and put a lot of my thoughts into words that I couldn’t.
The three questions you addressed are indeed covered by a "world view". I submit that these are subsets of the five major questions that all world views must answer; 1) where did we come from; 2) why are we here; 3) What are we supposed to do; 4) How should we live; and finally 5) where are we going. Answering these questions makes Christianity unique, logical, and true.
I actually think only 4 is of any real importance. If I was placed on the world by a benevolent and loving god, or a spiteful overlord who wanted me to inflict as much pain as possible, I should act in a way that is most fair in benefitting both myself and those with whom I share this world. If I am rewarded with eternal bliss for being a good person, or fade into an empty void of nothingness for being good, I should still be a good person.
Answering those questions does not make Christianity logical, or true... That is a really stupid claim... Unique maybe, as each different view would be.. But certainly not logical as it makes absolutely no sense, or true for the same reason... Christianity was designed for weak minded followers that won't question the stupid sh't they're fed... Start questioning and you will see...
@@joethi4981 "No , they have different paradigms not worldviews" paradigm: a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated worldview: a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world especially from a specific standpoint (both definitions from merriam webster). they mean essentially the same. What do you think the difference is?
The most interesting ‘world view’ is the one biologist Jeremy Griffith explains in his book Freedom- The End of The Human Condition. It’s the most comprehensive explanation and it’s based on science.
I’m glad you broke that down to those three because it reminds me why I now reject the later Christian view. I’m so over a “ God “who just reduces people he supposedly created as sinners, who must confess that or be annihilated…religion really is as evil as that damn snake in the garden- bait and switch
I’d really beg to differ on these. I don’t really concern myself with any of those questions. Worldviews simply encompass one’s: Metaphysics Ontology Epistemology Those questions can squeeze into these categories, but aren’t all encompassing of one’s outlook on reality.
I don't know if there are any higher powers. I don't know if we have true free will. I don't know how the universe got here. I don't know how brains can be conscious. I don't know whether this thing we call reality is some kind of computer simulation. So given this, what's my worldview supposed to be if its the case that I must have one?
Love not the things of the world. The Bible has proved it validity. The Bible prophecies have all came true so far except for a couple that are coming true now and soon after.
Nope. You are coloring the term "worldview" by Chrisianity's worldview... im an Advaita Vedantin (nondual Hinduism/Idealism) and there isn't any "problem" becuz all is God's Mind. So, there is no real beginning anymore than a dream has a beginning. No worries of a beginning, nothing is wrong, everything is God playing out reality in Mind. No need for redemption, because nothing is wrong. Ever.
