_____________________________________________________________

  The Biblical Worldview

“What we need is a framework that ties everything together, that allows us to understand society, the world, and our place in it, and that could help us to make critical decisions which will shape our future.”^[i]

I found the website of Principia Cybernetica Project (PCP) a couple of weeks ago as I was reading through some of my assigned Schaeffer material. The thought occurred to me that I could get some alternative views on what I was learning if I googled the word ‘worldview.’ When I did, the above website was one of the first results listed. Clicking the link, I soon was fascinated to learn that this website had a listing of eighteen “eternal philosophical questions” that “every person reflecting about the world and his or her place in it has been asking throughout the ages.”^[ii] Hmmm. Upon further investigation, I found that the purpose of Principia Cybernetica is “to develop a complete philosophical system or worldview.”^[iii] So here we have an international organization that is dedicated solely to explaining the world we see around us. This, I was impressed with. I thought, “Yes! Someone’s finally catching on and realizing the need for a worldview!” Then, as I thought about how I’d never heard about a Christian organization like this one, I remembered that there’s a reason for that: Christians understand that we have no “need” for what God has already given us. Principia Cybernetica struggles to answer questions that our Creator has already explained.

            One of the “vital philosophical questions” listed on the PCP website is, “Is there a God?”  The Christian adds to that question and asks “What is He Like?” Since this course is about the Biblical worldview, I am not going to set out to “prove” the answer to the first question. “The Bible takes this stance, assuming God’s existence to be true, and not something to be proven (Gen. 1:1, Ex. 3:14, Rev. 1:8).”^[iv] So rather that answering the question “Is there a God?” I’m likewise going to accept the presupposition that God does exist, and instead address the question “What is He like?”

            This can be summed up in two words. The first is “infinite.” God is infinite. (This alone should tell you that it is impossible to adequately describe Him in a 3-5 page essay.) We can see this aspect of Him throughout Scripture, beginning with the very first verse: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”^[v] If God already existed at the moment of the “beginning,” he must be infinite.  We later learn that God created the world by fiat, out of nothing. In order to do that, God would have to be infinite, “lacking limits or bounds.”^[vi] He could not create out of nothing if he had limits. As is often the case, here we find an instance where God is best described by a name which He gives Himself. In Rev. 1:8 God says: “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” Alpha and Omega refer to the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The first and the last. Yet even this does not fully describe the vastness of God because “beginnings” and “ends” are limits. God has none of these.

The second word that can be used to describe God is “personal.” This is something that is unique to Christianity. Many other religions have come up with some powerful god in order to explain the world around them, but the concept of an infinite and personal God is something that they haven’t been able to understand. I think Principia Cybernetica reflects this lack of acceptance of a personal God. They state on their website that “There is no need to postulate [assume the existence of] a personal God.”^[vii] In one sense, this statement is false, for how do you explain personal men without a personal God? In another sense, however, there is also some truth to the statement. This is really one of the things that make Christianity so beautiful. God could have just created us (using evolution or some other means) and left us to our own devices. But He didn’t. He decided to intercede directly in the lives of men. He interacted with them. Gen.. 3:8 says “And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day …”

            “Often in a discussion someone will say, ‘Didn’t God, then, if He is personal and if He loves, need an object for His love? Didn’t he have to create? And therefore, isn’t the universe just as necessary to Him as He is to the universe?’ But the answer is, No. He did not have to create something face-to-face with Himself in order to love, because there already was the Trinity.”^[viii]

This is a huge aspect of His love, which reflects the personal nature of God.^[ix]  (Matt. 3:17, 1 John 4:8, John 14:31)

             Another of the “eternal philosophical questions” is “Where did it all come from?” This sounds a lot like the vital question that asks “What is the nature of the universe – its origin and structure?” We already learned that God created the world by fiat, out of nothing. That, however, does not cover all of the word “create.” Albert M. Wolters states in his book Creation Regained:

“The fact is that the same Creator God and the same sovereign power that called the cosmos into existence in the beginning has kept the cosmos in existence from moment to moment to this day. ‘Long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and with water,’ writes the apostle Peter, referring to the creation story in Genesis 1, but ‘by the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept.’”^[x]

Wolters later gives the word “law” to describe this second kind of “created” as constant regulation by God. While this may not be “structure” in the strictly scientific sense, it still applies. The current structure of the universe is directly dependant on the Creator, who keeps it in order and operation. Origin and structure directly relate to each other. Wolters says:

“The word creation has a double meaning. When we talk about “the story of creation” we are referring to God’s activity of making the world; when we speak of ‘the beauties of creation’ we are referring to the created order as the resulting cosmos. Creating activity and created order are not to be confused.”^[xi]

Again we see that origin and structure relate to each other. And not only that, but they reflect each other. When I look around me at all of the order, intricacy, vastness and harmony, I come to an obvious conclusion about its beginning. It clearly is the product of millions and millions of years of random chance. Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. When I see all of these things, I see an infinite-personal God who created them. And when I read in the Bible about the infinite-personal God creating the universe, I think about the world that I see around me, and it fits.

            Principia Cybernetica also offers questions like, “How should we act?” “Do we have a ‘free will’?” and “What is consciousness?”^[xii] Though not directly, these questions correspond to the vital question “What is the essential nature of man?” This is one of those questions that have a “simply complicated” answer. As strange as it sounds, man is essentially good and essentially evil simultaneously. To explain this, we need to go back to shortly after the creation of the world, when God first created man. When God first created man, He created him without sin, to have perfect communion with Himself. This is best expressed when the Bible says that God made man “in His own image.” (Gen. 1:27) Moreover, in contrast to the rest of creation, which He saw was “good”, when God finished creating man, He saw that it was ”very good.” This is what man was intended to be. But when man chose sin, and brought it into the world, he was marred by it. So even though he was still made in God’s image, and inherently good, his heart was now “deceitful above all things, and desperately evil.” (Jer. 17:9) Man is simultaneously inherently good in the created sense, and inherently evil in the moral sense. But even this is temporary. From before the first verse in the Bible God had a plan to restore his creation – long before He had created it, and longer still before it had fallen.

            So what we have in the Bible is a perfect unity of a worldview. Principia Cybernetica can only, at best, attempt to give answers to these questions that do not contradict themselves. The Bible, however, achieves so much more than that. These three questions are so closely related that it’s almost impossible to address one without also addressing another. The character of God is found in creation, and in the person of man. You cannot fully learn about the origin of the universe, without knowing about the curse that marred it. You cannot understand the curse without discovering the inherent nature of man. Etcetera. Everything is absolutely interrelated. That’s why there are no Christian groups out there trying to piece together a coherent worldview. We already have it. We have had it for thousands of years, and it still continues to consistently proclaim the answers to questions that “every person reflecting about the world and his or her place in it has been asking throughout the ages.”^[xiii] 

^[i] “Introduction to Principia Cybernetica,” Principia Cybernetica, http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/INTRO.html

^[ii] “Eternal Philosophical Questions,” Principia Cybernetica, http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ETERQUES.html

^[iii] Ibid.

^[iv] David Wright, “Get Answers,”  Answers, Fall 2007, 90

^[v] Gen.1:1 The Bible

^[vi] Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language

^[vii] “Eternal Philosophical Questions,” Principia Cybernetica, http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ETERQUES.html

^[viii] Frances Schaeffer, The Complete Works of Frances A.  Schaeffer a Christian Worldview (Westchester, Il: Crossway Books, 1982) 1:15

^[ix] 1 John 4:8 (God is love); Matthew 3:17 (the Father loves the Son); John 14:31 (the Son loves the Father).

^[x] Albert M. Wolters, Creation Regained,(Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.  Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2005), 13.

^[xi] Ibid.

^[xii] Eternal Philosophical Questions,” Principia Cybernetica, http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ETERQUES.html

^[xiii] Ibid.

____________________________________________

Science vs. God

“Let me explain the problem science has with God.” The atheist
professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of
his new students to stand.

“You’re a Christian, aren’t you, son?”

“Yes sir,” the student says.

“So you believe in God?”

“Absolutely.”

“Is God good?”

“Sure! God’s good.”

“Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?”

“Yes.”

“Are you good or evil?”

“The Bible says I’m evil.”

The professor grins knowingly. “Aha! The Bible!” He considers for a
moment.

“Here’s one for you. Let’s say there’s a sick person over here and
you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?”

“Yes sir, I would.”

“So you’re good…!”

“I wouldn’t say that.”

“But why not say that? You’d help a sick and maimed person if you
could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn’t.”

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. “He doesn’t,
does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though
he prayed to God to heal him How is this God good? Hmmm? Can you
answer that one?”

The student remains silent.

“No, you can’t, can you?” the professor says. He takes a sip of water
from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

“Let’s start again, young fella Is God good?”

“Er…yes,” the student says.

“Is Satan good?”

The student doesn’t hesitate on this one. “No.”

“Then where does Satan come from?”

The student : “From…God…”

“That’s right. God made Satan, didn’t he? Tell me, son. Is there evil
in this world?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Evil’s everywhere, isn’t it? And God did make everything, correct?”

“Yes.”

“So who created evil?” The professor continued, “If God created
everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according
to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.”

Without allowing the student to answer, the professor continues: “Is
there sickness? Immorality?
Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this
world?”

The student: “Yes.”

“So who created them?”

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his
question. “Who created them? There is still no answer. Suddenly the
lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is
mesmerized.

“Tell me,” he continues onto another student. “Do you believe in
Jesus Christ, son?”

The student’s voice is confident: “Yes, professor, I do.”

The old man stops pacing. “Science says you have five senses you use
to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen God?”

“No sir. I’ve never seen Him”

“Then tell us if you’ve ever heard your God?”

“No, sir, I have not.”

“Have you ever actually felt your Jesus, tasted your God or smelt
your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God?”

“No, sir, I’m afraid I haven’t.”

“Yet you still believe in him?”

“Yes.”

“According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable
protocol, science says your God doesn’t exist. What do you say to
that, son?”

“Nothing,” the student replies. “I only have my faith.”

“Yes, faith,” the professor repeats. “And that is the problem science
has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.”

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of
his own. “Professor, is there such thing as heat?”

“Yes,” the professor replies. “There’s heat.”

“And is there such a thing as cold?”

“Yes, son, there’s cold too.”

“No sir, there isn’t.”

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The
room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.

“You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat,
unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t
have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero,
which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no
such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the
lowest -458 degrees. Every body or object is susceptible to study
when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or
matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total
absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe
the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in
thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of
heat, sir, just the absence of it.”

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom,
sounding like a hammer.

“What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?”

“Yes,” the professor replies without hesitation. “What is night if it
isn’t darkness?”

“You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the
absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright
light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have
nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? That’s the meaning we use
to define the word. In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would
be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?”

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This
will be a good semester. “So what point are you making, young man?”

“Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to
start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.”

The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. “Flawed? Can
you explain how?”

“You are working on the premise of duality,” the student
explains. “You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a
good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as
something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even
explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never
seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the
opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot
exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just
the absence of it.”

“Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved
from a monkey?”

“If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man,
yes, of course I do”

“Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?”

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes
where the argument is going.
A very good semester, indeed.

“Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and
cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavour, are you
not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a
preacher?”

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the
commotion has subsided.

“To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student,
let me give you an example of what I mean.”

The student looks around the room. “Is there anyone in the class who
has ever seen the professor’s brain?” The class breaks out into
laughter.

“Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt
the professor’s brain, touched or smelled the professor’s brain? No
one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules
of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you
have no brain, with all due respect, sir. So if science says you have
no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?”

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his
face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. “I guess
you’ll have to take them on faith.”

“Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with
life,” the student continues.
“Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?”

Now uncertain, the professor responds, “Of course, there is. We see
it everyday. It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man.
It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world.
These manifestations are nothing else but evil.”

To this the student replied, “Evil does not exist sir, or at least it
does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is
just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe
the absence of God.

God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man
does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold
that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when
there is no light.”

The professor sat down.

I don’t have time to write some insightful launch post or anything at all like a “cutting of the ribbon.” My blog title should at least partially explain that. However, I do hereby vow that, when I do post, I’m not going to post anything frivolous (I love that word), such as the chores I completed, the area I organized, or the math problem set I finished.  My hope is to have a blog that, however small, is a orthodox, quality blog with thoughtful posts.

Duh, duh, duh…

Not to say that I won’t goof off every once in a while. So as to spare my family my… uniqueness.

Goodbye world! I’m off to write a couple of papers.