EVS Theology
[EDITING NEEDED: This page was pasted from legacy context when EVS was called “WvS” and before it significant work on systems dynamics was integrated.]
Worldview Systems (WvS) Theory, if it is to have any value for ministry or missions, must demonstrate its theological relevance. As simply a humanistic sociological theory it will fall short. WvS must correlate with the revelation of God and find its functionality in His work and mission. It will be the purpose of the next few sections to explore the expression of WvS ideas in the Scriptures, the underlying principles of these expressions, and the application in ministry of these principles.
3.1 God as the Source and Substance of Reality
Science has, in a way, returned to religion. Science has done so because its observations have humbled it. Once science thought it would alone reveal the true nature of the universe and uncover the solutions to the great human problems of our time. At an ever accelerating rate, technology has opened new doors of awareness and possibility. However, once the doors were opened, science found no neat answers within: only vast chambers of more questions. Now, portions of the scientific community are coming to faith to find answers to complex and profound questions.
While faith welcomes the reconciliation with its old competitor, it has not anticipated science’s curiosity. Not long into the reunion, difficult and troubling questions are posed by the prodigal: What is the nature of the universe? Why are we here? Who is our Creator and what is he like? They bring volumes of information and questions the faithful have never considered and they will not accept clichés as answers.
Their information makes faith uncomfortable. Their view of the universe places God too far out of reach. How can we understand a being that creates and maintains on levels infinitely large and infinitely small simultaneously? As the borders of our astronomical awareness have been enlarged to include billions of galaxies by modern astronomy, new questions pop into our heads: If we are the center of God’s attention, why is all this other stuff required? At the same time, we are discovering a world far below the level of microscopy with sub-atomic particles and sub-sub-atomic participles. Matter can be divided down to a level where tiny particles, called virtual particles, only sort of exist some of the time.1 If the universe was built for humans like a gerbil’s aquarium, why should matter exist in smaller divisions than molecules or atoms? How can truth exist if reality and possibility have no division? If God is like this — this new scientifically revealed God — the more we discover about him, the greater the volume of unanswered questions will be.
Like David, in the face of such complexity we cannot help but ask God, “What is man, that you consider him [or] the son of man that you care for him?”2 Yet, the same God who “stretches out the heavens”3 also “knit [us] together in [our] mother’s womb.”4 Although God knows the massive machinery of the cosmos, he is also “familiar with all [our individual] ways.”5 While God is beyond human comprehension, he is amazingly close in proximity: “he is not far from from each one of us, ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.'”6 In fact, the Creator is also Immanuel – “God with us.”7
At the dawn of our history, the Creator simply spoke. The force of his Word was the energy for the genesis of all things — including life. Einstein proved that energy and matter are two forms of one substance,8 but it was God who long before demonstrated the principle, creating matter from the power of his will alone. This same energy — the Word — became a man who was the “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace.”9 The connection between man and God is so intimate in Christ that God can live in us and we can live in him.10 Now, humans are the building that holds the infinitely gigantic Lord of Heaven and Earth.11
Indwelling and yet expansive, God is so pervasive he is literally everywhere.12 Such a concept leads to the conclusion: God is reality. Two things should immediately qualify this statement. First, it should be understood that reality is only one expression of God, not his entirety. Just as John 1 says, “the Word was God,” the Word is only part of whole picture of God as much as Son, Spirit, and Father are only partial pictures of God’s entirety. Therefore, it is correct to say “the Word was God” but not “God was the Word”. The Word is derived from God much the same way that reality is derived from God, but not all of God himself. This concept — that God is the source and substance of reality, but that reality is not the sole substance of God — means that omnipresence is true but pantheism is not.
Second, it should be noted that the “reality” we experience is not always God or God derived. Human perception muddies the picture. Also, free will and sin have lead to an “alternate reality” which God allows to exist outside of his reality for a time until Judgment.13 This “alternate reality” is false and leads to decay and destruction, opposite to God’s will and true reality which are creation and life.14 At some point in the past there was only one reality and at some point in the future there will only be one again. Therefore, there is only one true reality because there is only one enduring reality: the alternate will eventually be discontinued. Living within the reality of God, or by his Word and revelation, then is existence within true reality.
The idea that God is the source and substance of reality uniquely qualifies God to understand all things as they actually are. For God there is no searching or question, no perspective, just certainty. Therefore, God knows the world and the human situation for what it actually is. The term “worldview” is inappropriate in the case of God because it invites one to equate God’s thinking system with human worldviews. God does not “view” the world in the sense that he must use limited senses to form a model of the cosmos. Instead, God simply is absolute reality and his thinking system is absolute truth.
3.2 Humans as Imperfect Perceivers
Humans, as products of the reality of God and as created beings, do not intrinsically “know” the cosmos.15 Instead, they must collect information about their world through the means of instinct, sensation, and imagination. In addition to these means, humans possess a memory for recording information. They also have a mind, which could be defined as a field for processing information stored by the memory, gathered by the senses, preprogrammed in the instincts, and conceptualized in the imagination. In the mind, humans can use combinations of all these factors to develop thought structures, of which worldview is one, and behaviors.
Instinct refers to preprogrammed information passed on from generation to generation through mostly biological means. Humans, although they are not as programmed as some creatures like insects (which exhibit mostly instinctual behaviors), do have many behaviors and thought patterns that are “hard-wired” from birth.16 For example: the “rooting reflex” that causes babies to open their mouths when their cheek is touched is an instinctual behavior17 — something God hard-wired into the baby worldview (WvS-I) to facilitate feeding. Current medical research is revealing that this type of “hard-wiring” may even mean that humans come into the world preprogrammed for belief in God.18
The five senses are the source of sensation. We learn a great deal about the world from electrical signals sent from sense organs to our brain, where they are processed. The condition of our sensory organs and our brain directly effects our perception of the world. For example: slight distortions in eye shape cause images to be out of focus. If a child is born this such a distortion, he/she must be taught that images are not in actuality blurry. If the problem can be corrected at some later point, he/she may view the world as if it is totally new and alien compared to the world they knew before.
It is also apparent that our sense have limitations that allow us only to perceive a portion of reality. For example: elephants are known to communicate with subsonic grunts and growls. These sounds are so low in frequency that they are below the threshold of the human ear. Biologists studying these sounds are required to use special sound altering devices to bring these sounds into the threshold of human hearing. Many aspects of scientific research have been recently advanced by technology that adjust natural phenomenon to be perceived by humans. Radio signals are part of the electromagnetic spectrum just as is visible light. However, human eyes cannot see radio waves. Using a combination of advanced electronic receiving equipment and computer imaging, astronomers can now see radio signals emitted by far away stars. Although such advances are being made, this enforces the idea that human sensation is limited in accuracy and sensitivity.
Human beings have a unique ability to think of possibilities that are not yet reality. This is called imagination. Literally defined, this is the human ability to picture in the mind what may or may not be real. Although the products of our imagination may not have any real substance, they are related to the perception of reality in that they are based on real concepts. For example: it was imagination that first conceived of human flight. However, the dream of human flight was based on the real observation of animal flight. After a long period of building and testing imagined devices for flight, mankind was successful in building a flying machine — thus imagination perceived the reality of animal flight, imagined the possibility of human flight, conceptualized the apparatus of human flight and produced the real product of the first manned flight.
Imagination allows predictive thinking as well. For example: a batter will duck if a ball comes too close. He does this because he predicts that if the ball strikes him it will cause pain (a likely proposition). Although he has no real evidence that a ball might hit him or that it will hurt (such evidence can only be after the fact), he can use his senses in combination with his imagination to estimate to trajectory of a ball. Also, he imagines that since being struck with the ball hurt before it will hurt every time. This power of predictive thinking in imagination has real implications about our ability to theorize scientifically. Quantum physics, quantum electrodynamics, and quantum chromodynamics — three of the most advanced fields of science — have as much to do with imaginative ability as they do with mathematical ability (which is also part of the realm of imagination since numbers are representative symbols of reality).
Although the capabilities of human perception are so advanced in comparison to other life forms, they do not even approach the ability of God to simply know reality. The more we learn about the physical world, the more we see that at best our abilities of perception allow us to see a minute portion of reality. This posses no problem to our existence as long as our problems and their answers lay within the realm of our perception. If the acquisition of food is our problem, it requires only the ability to locate that food, obtain it, and stuff it into our mouths — abilities well within the perceptual capability of most humans. However, if problems exceed the scope of the human perception, we are required to either some how find a source to supplement our perception or use our imagination to formulate concepts and strategies (worldviews) to deal with unknown or invisible realities.
3.3 Revelation as Divine Worldview
God does not leave us alone with our perceptions to muddle through life dangerously and with little success. Instead, he reveals reality to us in indirect and direct ways. The created world itself is, in a sense, one aspect of God’s revelation because it illustrates in concrete clarity fundament principles about the Creator and creature relationship.19 Logically, a better understanding of the creation yields a better understanding of the Creator. However, the creation, like all forms of revelation, is still subject to the limitations of human perception.
God also chooses more direct roots of revelation, such as prophecy and scripture.20 The Word, which is the creative force of the universe and the incarnated God in Jesus Christ in John 1, is also the guidepost of human endeavor21 and a portion of true reality itself.22 These messages from God define who the human “self” is, who “other” is and the interaction between the two. They uncover the mechanics of the world, reveal the nature and work of the spiritual realm, and create new products of human behavior and culture. Because the direct revelation of God has this capability it could be considered a worldview of its own (see Defining Worldview).
The “Divine Worldview” (WvS-D) is God’s supplement, enhancement, and corrective for human perception. Adam was created as an adult. However, without prior life experience, Adam had no memory and no understanding of his new world. God had to deliver to Adam, either automatically during Adam’s creation, or over the period of his first few days on Earth, the essential information necessary for his survival. This WvS-D download included such essentials as language, self-care, and perceptions about “self,” “other,” and “world.” A portion of this initial WvS-D is recorded in Genesis 1:28-29. Here God defines Adam’s place in the newly created world and his mode of sustenance. His first command to Adam is the biological objective of the human race: “be fruitful and multiply.” Also in this first worldview, God defines man’s task of working the garden,23 his first moral boundaries in the prohibition of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil as food, and his relationship to Eve, the first “other,” with whom he would become one flesh.24
It is possible to conclude, in the very early days of creation, that mankind had no other worldview than WvS-D. First, he had no history or memory or life experience from which to develop a worldview, so any worldview must necessarily be provided by the Creator — the only one in at that time with history, memory, or life experience. Adam also has no existence problem as of yet, considering his location in Paradise and the care of God over his situation. Since existential problems are the genesis of human worldviews, there was no motive for humanity to develop a worldview of its own.
Later in human history, however, there were human worldviews in existence. WvS-D did not disappear. Rather, it was given in different forms: covenant, Law, oracle, Christ, gospel, epistle, etc. These revelations where intended to make up gaps where human perception did or would fall short. WvS-D was given again and again as a corrective to balance human dysfunction and misperception. This role of WvS-D will be discussed in greater detail in section 4.3, Divine Balance and Stabilization.
3.4 The Origin of Human Worldviews
The naked first man and his wife were born into the only true Utopia. The singular factor that made this possible was their total dependence on WvS-D. Human failure (generated by human WvS) has since been proven to be the bane of Utopia, and it became so in the case of the first people as well.
It was not far into human history that mankind was presented with its first existential problem, and thus the first opportunity to create a human WvS. This problem was posed by an outside source who asked the question, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden?”25 In a propaganda campaign against the character of God, the serpent made the Creator seem unduly harsh and then provided the first statement outside of the reality of WvS-D: “you will not surely die!”26 He continued, “for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”27 Suddenly man was faced with a problem: if the serpent was right, God was withholding pertinent, even vital information. The fact that Creator now seemed so harsh and seemed to be withholding something beneficial was troubling. Essentially man’s existential problem became, “can God be trusted?” It was well within human ability at this point to remain in WvS-D and allow God, at their next meeting, to explain himself and tell the truth about what the serpent said.
This situation was the first dependence crisis. Essentially, all existential problems create a dependence crisis. Reduced to their fundamental level, every existential problem asks the society or individual, “who will you depend upon?” Eve and Adam were positioned to make a decision concerning this very issue. Unfortunately, they chose to eat of the tree of “the knowledge of good and evil” in hopes of escaping their dependence on WvS-D, in which they had lost faith. They had in fact taken upon themselves the right to define reality — a position for which they were under-qualified. Disastrous results would follow, not only in the curses and separation from God but also in the generations to come (including their own murderous son) whose hearts conceived “only evil all the time.”28
It is questionable whether or not the fruit itself changed man’s ability for perceiving reality, to which good and evil belong. His previous moral structure was sufficient in God’s eyes — and who better to define reality, and therefore morality, than God himself. However, in the transition that occurred when man ate of the fruit, the first humans realized they were naked — an idea not introduced in WvS-D. In fact, the earlier creation record curiously records this as not a part of the first worldview (WvS-D): the man his wife were naked and not ashamed.29 If the fruit had truly enhanced man’s perception, why then did he make a step in the wrong direction? Anthropology tells us that modesty is culturally defined — a purely human institution. How else can a woman be comfortable without a shirt in portions of Africa, but naked when dressed the same in North America? The weakness of this human institution is revealed by double standards like a woman’s comfort in a bikini, but her shame if she wore underwear that provides equal or better coverage in public. It was especially illogical for the first man and woman. If the moral power of modesty is the prevention of lust, who was being protected by this new moral? There was no other man to lust after Eve and no other woman to lust after Adam.
Nakedness and modesty have remained components of human WvS, perhaps as a divine reminder to their origin. The first people, now burdened by several new existence problems, some of which came as a direct result of their action and some as a result of the following curses, had already made the choice to leave WvS-D behind. Now their problems, combined with the self-dependency they chose in the first dependence crisis, would be the synthesis for the first human WvS. While little is said of Adam and and Eve after this episode, we can assume from the generations that followed them that the resulting worldview was of the WvS-F type.30
The account of the fall of mankind illustrates the following pattern of developmental conditions required for the synthesis of human worldviews: (1) the emergence of an existential problem which, in the individual or society’s opinion, the current worldview cannot remedy; (2) self-dependence resulting from a decision during a dependence crisis; (3) a new strategy to answer the existential problem. Should one of these factors be missing or not occur, it is doubtful that a new human WvS will result.
For an example of a situation in which a new human WvS did not occur although two conditions were present, we could look to Abram (Abraham). Abram, was raised in WvS-F society,31 which was steeped in idolatry:32 a WvS-F dysfunction. When God called Abram to leave his kinship group and his homeland and its idolatry, he was presenting Abram with a dependence crisis which would require him to consider WvS-D. The mere fact hat God spoke to Abram created the existential problem: “if this God speaks to me and mine do not, which it the real God with real power?” Abram’s choice would bring his WvS-F into WvS-D moderation. He was still in WvS-F, evidenced by his interests in God’s promise to make him a great nation, but he was dependent on God who balanced out the socio-centric dysfunction of idolatry.33
Although a existential problem too great for WvS-F alone had emerged and he was plunged into a dependence crisis, the missing developmental condition for a new human worldview was a decision for self-dependence in the dependence crisis. Since Abram chose to depend on God, he ended up with a WvS-D moderated WvS, rather than a new human WvS. The new strategy component was also present — he left his homeland — but it also was a direct result of WvS-D moderation.
The next section will explore in more detail the generation, dysfunction, and weakness of human worldviews and the role of WvS-D in moderating and stabilizing these worldviews. Concepts, such as dependence crisis, that received only a brief introduction here will be explained in more detail.
Notes [Reformat to use efn!!]
1Robert L. Herrmann, “How Large Is God? How Deep is Reality?”, How Large Is God?, edited by John Marks Templeton (Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press, 1997), 234-249. [back to text]
3Psalm 104:2, NIV. [back to text]
4Psalm 139:13, NIV. [back to text]
5Psalm 139:3, NIV. [back to text]
6Acts 17:27-28, NIV. [back to text]
7Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:23. [back to text]
8Einstein’s theory of relativity proposed that E=MC2 where “E” is energy, “M” is matter, and “C” is the velocity of light. This theory in the foundation of nuclear physics. [back to text]
9John 1:1-5 and Isaiah 9:6, respectively. [back to text]
10John 6:56, 15:3-11, 1 John 2:5-6. [back to text]
111 Corinthians 3:16. [back to text]
12Psalm 139:7-10. [back to text]
13Romans 1:18-20, 2 Peter 3:3-10. [back to text]
14Proverbs 11:19; Romans 6:13, 23; 8:6. [back to text]
15In Job 38-41 God’s asks Job to answer several questions that require the special knowledge of the Creator. Job acknowledges he cannot and his position relative to God and His wisdom in 42:1-6. Some of the questions posed by God in this narrative are still far beyond the scope of modern science. [back to text]
16Peter H. Raven, George B. Johnson, Biology, 2nd edition (Boston: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishing, 1989), 1119. [back to text]
17Robert V. Johnson, ed., Mayo Clinic Complete Book of Pregnancy & Baby’s First Year (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1994), 442. [back to text]
18Herbert Benson and Marg Stark, “How Large Is Faith?”, How Large Is God?, edited by John Marks Templeton (Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press, 1997), 95-111. [back to text]
19Romans 1:18-20. [back to text]
20Deuteronomy 18:18; 2 Timothy 3:16. [back to text]
21Psalm 119:105. [back to text]
22Psalm 119:160; John 17:17. [back to text]
23Genesis 2:15. [back to text]
24Genesis 2:24. [back to text]
29Genesis 2:25. [back to text]
30Genesis 4 indicates a society based on agriculture and simple crafts. Also, the references concerning Jabal and Tubal-Cain indicate that occupation was based on descent groups. Based on these descriptions and the cultures present after Noah. there can be little doubt that the first cultures operated on WvS-F tribalism. [back to text]
31The language “your country, your people, and your father’s household” in Gen 12:1 indicate WvS-F dominance as does the description of Terah’s family in the previous genealogy. [back to text]
33WvS-F sees the world as mysterious and uncontrollable. One tribal strategy to gain control is shamanism. In this strategy a number of local spirits become spiritual “handles” that human’s can use to manipulate otherwise incontrollable conditions. Through ritual and sacrifice, the spirits are agitated or appeased in order to produce results in the real world. The knowledge of how to perform this magic is a guarded secret generally kept by the elder “guardians” of the old ways. This stratification of magical power allows for social control. In the act of following God, Abram had to cast off any dependence on the local spirits, the social control of his older family members and kinsmen (which may account for God approaching Abram after his father died), and his people’s understanding of how the world worked. [back to text]
4.1 WvS Dysfunction and Weakness
Human worldviews are limited in scope because of the very nature of human perception (see 3.2, Humans as Imperfect Perceivers). The more limited the scope of a worldview is, the less complex it is. The less complex it is, the fewer issues, variables, and conditions the worldview can understand and respond to. For example: people who see health as a primarily spiritual issue may lack the necessary means within themselves to prevent infection through sanitation — since this strategy is linked to the idea of “germs” instead of “spirits” as pathogens. If the persons of this worldview were presented with the idea of germs and germ theory was demonstrated in a trial run of a sanitation program, the worldview might adopt germ theory and sanitation and become more complex. This new complexity would increase the range of physiological problems the worldview can address.
Each human WvS has a conceptual orientation of one of two types: socio-centric or egocentric. Socio-centric worldviews see the group as the center of life, while egocentric worldviews emphasize the individual. Based on this “center of gravity,” the worldview defines the environment around them and the relationships between the various elements. Perception begins at the center of gravity and extends outward. Generally speaking, the closer an element is to the center, the better it is understood. For example: isolated WvS-F tribes often call themselves “the people” in their language. Outsiders are known as “not the people” and usually the tribe has an explanation of their origin as well. These outsiders are viewed with extreme suspicion because they exist on the margin of the tribe’s perception — far from the socio-centric center of gravity.
In the past WvS-H kings posed harsh taxation on the peasantry. The king saw this as necessary for the maintenance of his power. He would be generally unaware if the humble masses suffered by his policy, or he would respond that it was there lot in life. Eventually, as the peasantry grew in power and a middle class emerged, this lack of understanding on the kings part would turn into rebellion. The king’s egocentric center of gravity allowed him only to see and understand issues directly effecting himself, so many reacted in shock when such uprisings occurred.
In the first case, the sense of “we” pulled so strongly at the tribe that they had little or no understanding of their neighbors. Likewise, the king’s sense of “I” left him ignorant of the feelings of the common people. This lack of perception caused by the pull of the WvS center is called WvS weakness. If problems result from the weakness, limiting the functionality of the WvS, WvS dysfunction results. In other words, weakness is the possibility for problems to occur due to some lack of perception. Dysfunction is the problem generated by this weakness.
Not only can dysfunction be caused by a lack of perception: it can also be caused by inaccurate assumptions. The idea that the WvS-H king doesn’t know about the plight of his people is a lack of perception. On the other hand, if he knows and responds that it is their station in life to suffer, he is making a errant assumption — one that will be costly.
Assumptions are often related to WvS center of gravity. Socio-centric worldviews make assumptions based on the group’s identity, concepts, and behaviors. Regardless of functionality, Socio-centric worldviews may maintain the groups view of the world stubbornly even in the face of failure with dire consequences. To the other extreme, egocentric worldviews often make assumptions based purely on individual experience, opinion, and interests.
An illustration of socio-centric weakness can be found in the nation of Israel:
When the nation of Israel left Egypt, they were a nation of WvS-F tribes.1 Moses used a WvS-D moderated form of WvS-H to lead the people, but they did not share this worldview with him. This was clearly evidenced by their reversion back into their idolatry when Moses was absent on the mountain (Ex. 32:1). They lacked his vision, demonstrated by their lack of confidence concerning the conquest of the Promised Land (Deut 1:26-40). Repeatedly, it is the entire group of “the people” who cause trouble as they grumble and complain and stumble into idolatry (Ex 14:10-13; 16:3-4, 27-28; 17:1-3; 32:1)
Israel’s problems arose from two interrelated WvS-F dysfunctions: lack of overall solidarity and idolatry. Although WvS-F is group-oriented, their ties seldom extend beyond narrow ethnic boundaries, usually no larger than family groups. Solidarity existed within the tribes themselves, but was lacking between the tribes as a complete nation. In fact, the Reubenites and Gadites did not want to participate in the conquest once they saw that land on the East side of the Jordan was suitable for their flocks. Moses rebuked them saying, “Shall your country men go to war while you sit here?” That was exactly their idea (Numbers 32:1-15). Later in Israelite history, this WvS-F dysfunction would lead to the divided kingdom as the northern tribes asked, “What share do we have in David” (1 Kings 12:1-17).
Idolatry arises from the WvS-F insecurity with a world of invisible and uncontrollable forces. In classic WvS-F dysfunction, Israel sought to make a visible god, one that could be manipulated. First, they created the golden calf, pronouncing it “the god that took us out of Egypt” (Ex. 32:4).2 Later, they adopted the gods of the Canaanites and other ancient Palestinian tribes because they were physical “handles” to local spirit forces (Judges 2:12).3 The trouble is, this view of spirituality is far from reality — in fact it is downright ludicrous to think that a force powerful enough to create or rescue could be manipulated by humans (Isaiah 40:18-26; 44:12-20).
These WvS-F dysfunctions would have far reaching consequences. Each consequence caused further dysfunction, creating a “spiral down” effect of the society. The lack of national solidarity left tribes to subdue their inheritance land alone. Most tribes were only partially successful.4 WvS-F is only a successful worldview in isolation (either geographical or social), but the presence of these other nations would not allow it. Soon, the tribes were influenced by the peoples surrounding them — especially in the area of religion.5 Intermarriage intensified the situation as generations of half-Hebrew children were taught idolatry by a Canaanite parent (Judges 3:6). As idolatry increased, God refused to help the Hebrews displace the natives, intensifying their helplessness and exposure to idolatry (Judges 2:1-3). Soon idolatry and the loss of national solidarity exposed weak Israel to brutal attacks and oppression by neighboring peoples (Judges 2:10-23).
4.2 Reaction and Polarization
Eventually Israel was so weak that it could no longer resist the invading bands of Philistines. In a last-ditch effort to maintain control, the Israelites brought out the Ark of the covenant to take into battle with them. Stubbornly holding on to WvS-F dysfunction, they used the box of the covenant as if it were an idol to be manipulated — they thought the mere presence of the Ark would insure their victory. Much to their dismay the Israelites were horribly defeated and the Ark was captured (1 Samuel 4:1-11).
God raised up the last judge, Samuel, to restore order and repulse the enemy. Samuel was to return the people to the Lord by moderating their WvS-F with WvS-D. It was too late. Years of suffering in WvS-F dysfunction, capped by this last shameful defeat, had already initiated a worldview shift. Israel would not learn it’s lesson and moderated with WvS-D. Even though they acknowledge their sin and wanted God’s deliverance, they did not did take measures to remove idolatry and promote solidarity (1 Sam. 7:2-11). Instead, they demanded of God another human strategy: “appoint a king to lead us” (1 Sam. 8:5). The Israelites copied the idea from the WvS-H nations around them. In fact, it was no coincidence that recent Philistines attacks were lead by a WvS-H king. Israel noticed, and they wanted to give it a try.
God had been attempting to solve the problem all along. WvS-F, in its most extreme form, leaves people groups with almost no common direction. The addition of WvS-D (in the form of the Law) was intended to unite the tribes in a shared identity and direction. Also, God had been providing leaders — his representatives — to cast a singular vision for the people. Even in the case of Samuel, who at this point was the lone ruler over the people — it was actually God who ruled. Because the people, in WvS-F dysfunction, could not see their invisible ruler, they failed at following him and, instead, “every man did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6; 21:25). The God ordained version of individual leadership would have turned the WvS-F tribes back towards reality, but instead they requested a king, heading straight into WvS-H and its dysfunctions.
Despite the dark predictions of what life would be like for the people under a WvS-H king, the people demanded a dictator (1 Sam. 8:10-20). Israel’s existence problem of national defense was far too big for their extreme WvS-F to handle, and they knew it. When the dependence crisis was presented — choose God as your leader or solve the problem yourself — they chose the later. The formation of the new monarch-rule strategy completed the necessary conditions for WvS-H to arise, and a new human worldview was born in the Israelite nation.
This example from Israel’s history demonstrates that the generation of a worldview is primarily a reaction against a previous worldview that has become highly dysfunctional. Because the strategies of the old WvS are derived from and oriented to the center of gravity — either socio-centric or egocentric — the new worldview will orient to the the opposite center of gravity. The strategies of the new WvS are often opposite, as will be the dysfunctions, because they are derived from the opposite pole of the spectrum. This tendency for polarization leads to a high degree of difficulty in communication and interaction between worldviews: a problem that leads to generation gaps, international conflicts, and failed Christian missions.
4.3 Divine Balance and Stabilization
As mentioned before, God does not leave humans to struggle in ignorance and dysfunction. Instead, he actively attempts to return straying individuals and groups back to reality. In the case examined above, Yahweh pushed and pulled the people back to himself using covenants, military leaders, judges, heroes, prophets, enemies, and natural disasters. Almost all means at God’s disposal were employed to return the people to the truth. If only a single idea about God can be gained from these events it is this: Yahweh is passionate about the direction of his people. Later in Israel’s history, even in the midst of terrible, last resort efforts like an invading empire, still the prophets could see a God whose love was unfailing, simply because he would not allow his people to remain in dysfunction and darkness (Is. 16:5, 38:17, 43:4, 54:10, 63:9; Jer. 12:7, 31:3; Hosea 11:1-11).
Although God proves he will take necessary measures to return his people to the truth, he is also active in preventing their divergence from WvS-D and reality. The Law of Moses is one example of these preventive actions. God had the foresight, to provide provisions in the Law to prevent dysfunctions of at least WvS-F and WvS-H, and perhaps for WvS-C and WvS-A as well.6
Consider the underlying objectives of certain commands: The establishment of the priesthood and prophets served to settle disputes and unify the people through service to God. This directly aimed at tying the people to a common standard and identity in God. Likewise, the cultic ceremonies and festivals that all males were required to attend built national identity and solidarity with God as the unifying center of Israelite life. Commands against idolatry kept the people from the perils of animism and shamanism, while instructions about the destruction, alliance, and association with other nations insured purity and isolation. On the other hand, the tabernacle worship, animal sacrifices, and cultic rituals provided a visual, hands-on religion to squelch the fear of the invisible spiritual realm — in a sense making the invisible God visible to the people. All these aspects of the law and many more were intended to address the specific weaknesses and dysfunctions of the WvS-F worldview.
The reach of the Law went beyond WvS-F, however. In anticipation of Israel’s move to set a king over themselves, God placed specific guidelines for any monarch in the Law (Deut. 17:14-20). These ordinances were designed to prevent the king from classic WvS-H abuses. Even though the king was sovereign, any ruler had to place himself on equal terms with his subjects before God. He was bound by the Law to the same extent as the least subject of his kingdom, and he was required to follow it without turning “to the right or to the left.”
This language — “to the right or to the left” — occurs at least six times in reference to the commands of God (Deuteronomy 5:32; 17:11, 20; 28:14; Joshua 1:7; 23:6). Some have taken this to be a prohibition of standards more stringent or more liberal than what God has ordained. Included in this idea would be activities leading to socio-centric and egocentric dysfunctions. In fact, conservative and liberal ideologies often coincide with socio-centrism and egocentrism. Conservative ideology often emphasizes the group’s way of doing things as normative. Jesus was criticized by socio-centric WvS-C Pharisees for not upholding their Sabbath standards. The Pharisees “enhanced” the Mosaic Law with many of their traditions, which they considered as binding as the Law itself (Matt. 12:1-13; Mk. 7:1-13). To the opposite extreme, liberal ideologies are often driven by personal agendas that bend or ignore the rules. In egocentric impatience, Saul sacrificed a burnt offering before battle, even though only a priest could perform such a rite, and lost his divine anointing as king (1 Sam. 13:7-14).
Whether in the Law or spoken by prophets or revealed directly, wherever WvS-D is applied, it serves to balance and stabilize human worldviews. David used WvS-H frequently. However, it was balanced and stabilized by certain WvS-D aspects. For example, WvS-H promotes a certain level of paranoia among leaders because its “might makes right” philosophy means a mighty subordinate can unseat his superior given he has sufficient political or military strength. Such paranoia leads to the elimination of competition by any means possible. David, who learned to depend on God as his own champion, refuses to enter the political revenge business. Repeatedly when faced with a competitor, David takes God as his judge instead of pursuing “justice” himself (1 Sam. 24:6, 25:32-34, 26:9-11, 2 Sam. 15:25-26, 16:10-12). David’s WvS-D moderated WvS-H mindset prevented David from stumbling into egocentric dysfunctions. The vital role of this WvS-D influence was proven when David twice (in the cases of Bathsheba and the army census) drifted away from God in error which caused himself, his family, and the kingdom much grief.
To the extent that WvS-D is applied to human worldviews by individuals and groups in the Biblical record, these people experience the health and blessings of God. To the extent that WvS-D is not applied, destruction, dysfunction, and pain rule. This is a central theme of the Biblical account, and though it may sound simplistic, it offers the key to integrated, transformative ministry today. Understanding human worldviews and God’s action and reaction to them gives us the power to understand each person’s place in God’s redemptive plan. Each individual and people group is called to find their way back from the outskirts of human thinking to the center of God’s will and blessing. Ministers must develop dynamic strategies to identify worldviews and lead the people back to God.
4.4 Testing and Dependence Crisis
Human worldviews do work, at least for a while. While these worldviews are in effect, it may be highly difficult for WvS-D in its various forms to make an impact. For example: God warned the Israelites not to forget God in their safety and prosperity (Deut. 6:10-14, 8:11-17). This command was designed to address WvS-A materialism and ethical apathy. After the reign of David, when peace was established and Israel became a center for international trade, these dysfunctions began to dominate the Hebrew nation. Current western culture shows that societies steeped in WvS-A dysfunction will not easily accept God since they have no felt need for him. If the economy is healthy, who needs a divine provider? Likewise, it was not until the ravages of war would leave the Israelites in poverty that they would once again seek after God (Isaiah 5:8-17; Hosea 12:1-10).
When humans remain at the extremes of their worldview, God frequently uses testing to make room for WvS-D. God repeatedly tested Israel, causing a variety of situations leading to dependence crisis (Ex. 15:25, 16:4, 20:20; Judges 2:22; Jer. 6:27, 9:7). For example, God left the Canaanite nations in place after initial conquest of the Promised Land specifically to test Israel. Already, on the trip from Egypt and during the conquest, the people were steeped in WvS-F thinking. Leaving the nations in place pushed forward new existence problems which in turn raised issues of dependence. All this was intended to drive the people back to God and WvS-D. As Moses told the people, God brought about these situations “to humble you and to test you, and in the end to do you good” (Deut. 8:16).
God does not test mankind because he lacks information. In reality God knows the entire character of every human (John 2:24-25). Why then is such testing necessary? Such trails are designed to “test you, so that the fear of God will be with you to keep you from sinning” (Ex. 20:20). In other words, tests are designed to expose human frailty and failure where it exists and restore a fundamental trust in God. This picture of God is much more complex that a benevolent cosmic vending machine or Santa Claus who simply wants mankind to be happy. Instead, he is willing to make humanity miserable in order to force a dependence crisis. Each crisis allows people to choose God, and God will continue to generate crisis after crisis until the correct choice is made.
This message of dependence on God was clear in the ministry of Jesus. The rich young ruler, so sure of his adherence to the Law, was faced with a dependence crisis when Christ told him, “sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me” (Matt. 21:21). Repeatedly, the disciples were trust into situations where their faith was tested — all to teach these “men of little faith” to trust in God (Matt. 8:23-27, 14:22-33). In fact, it was not the image of the pious priests or strict scribes that Christ told his followers to imitate: it was the dependent child (Matt. 18:2-4; Mark 10:13-16; Luke 18:15-17).
Summary
Human worldviews are the result of existential problems arising from departure from reality and the divine worldview (WvS-D). When an existential problem surfaces, it forces a dependence crisis. If the individual or group chooses to rely on their own resources, a human worldview will be formed to address the issue. However, this worldview will synthesize dysfunctions undermining its effectiveness to deal with the issue. New issues may also arise, either as the consequence of dysfunctions or as divinely introduced problems intended to force a move back to WvS-D, generating new existential problems, dependence crisis, and new worldviews.
God actively seeks to balance and stabilize human worldviews by introducing various WvS-D influences. Standards, laws, covenants, and regulations are just some of the tactics that God employs to prevent WvS dysfunctions. He may be required to “test” individuals or groups in order to create an opportunity for WvS-D. Forcing such a dependence crisis allows the individual or group to choose God as the solution to the problem.
Ministry with WvS must understand the interaction of human WvS and God’s work with these thinking systems. God is constantly working to create opportunities for WvS-D to moderate individual and group worldviews. Ministers must identify this work of God in the lives of others and attempt to steer them toward God at the point of their dependence crisis. Also, as agents of the Word, ministers create spiritually-based existential problems according to the will of God that will lead to a crisis of faith. As an incarnation of Christ, ministers must then communicate God’s answer and assist in the transition to WvS-D when the correct dependence choice is made.
1Notice the use of “divisions” in Ex. 12:41, 51 NIV. [back to text]
2The calf was probably chosen because it was the form of a popular idol in Egypt. See: David Alexander and Pat Alexander, editors, Eerdmans Handbook to the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1992), 170. [back to text]
3Archeological evidence indicates that the Israelites may have continued to worship the Egyptian calf as well, even after their punishment at Sinai. See: David Alexander and Pat Alexander, editors, Eerdmans Handbook to the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publsihing, 1992), 170 (inset). [back to text]
4See various accounts in Judges 1. [back to text]
5This phenomenon of syncretism is common in WvS-F tribalism. In the southwestern United States Navajo Indians still maintain traditional animistic beliefs about local spirits. However, the Peyote religion is also popular with many because the hallucinogenic peyote buttons used in rituals produce “strong visions” and supposedly rid the body of evil. The emphasis is on religion that can be used, and the Navajos have no qualms adding to their spirituality other “effective” beliefs. [back to text]
6Worldviews more complex than WvS-A most likely did not exist or were rare before the time of Christ. Christ fulfilled the Law just as it was about to expire. In this way, the Law was designed to be limited and perishable — a testament to God’s control of the human timeframe. On the other hand, the teachings of Christ and his Apostles would span from WvS-F to WvS-U and perhaps beyond. [back to text]