WORlOVlfWS OVfR

~Offff AT STARBU~KS

WH EN CHR IS TIA NS SEE A ROOK ahout world views, they automat ically
assume it is about apologetics-a defense of the ChriHian faith. That
assumption is correct for thi s book as weB, but thi s is apologetics with
an im porta nt twist. Like: oth er w orld view books, w e: atte m pt to demon -
strate the: inadequacie~ of non-Christ ian thought systems or life orie n-
Tations, and to convince readers that Christian it ~· offen something bet-
ter. But that is not o ur only goal, and perhaps it is not even our primary
purpose . The twist is that thi s apologetics book also aims to provoke
Christians to adopt a Christian world view. Too often, we assume that
non-Ch ristian worldviews stay safely on the other side of the chu rch
door. A s you will see below, we believe that th is is far from the ease. I n
fact, much of this book grows out of ou r own self-reflection to isolate
areas where hidden worldviews, alien to Christianity, have crept into
our thoughts a nd lifestyles.
T he theory that Christians arc largely immune to the influe nce of
non- Christia n thought structures is often unconsciously perpetuated

c ~ ightod m3~
12

by worldview book. that identify "theistic existentialism . postffiodern

deconstrllcrionism, M arxism or similar p h ilosophical systems as C h ris-
tianity's main comper;rorj. These worldviews are, to be sure, .onlr.>ry
10 " Christian "iew of the world in fundamemal ways, and it ;s com-
p le tely proper to frame an imellecrual response to them . Howevu,
stopping here has Iwo important lim itat ions. First, somewhere along
the line, Chris t ians howe bought into t he idea Ihat philo,ophie~ born
and perpetuated in " niv.roilin topn:,em the greatc>! challenge to a
Chri,t ian worldvie",. \V. bdi.". that i . wrong-headed. How many
people do you know who are locked in deep conflict ovcr whethu to
become an mheist ic existentialist o r a Chri,tian? H o w man\' comm it-
ted 1I-hrxi51s do you run into on a daily basis? T he reality is that we
don't r<'ally encounte r mass ive hcrd~ of people entked by the thou ght
'ystems found in a typical ",orldview hook.
T he second limitation of mo", world,·ie", book. i. t hm they let
Christian readers off the hook too ea.ily. After reading such books ,
they fre<I'lently will co nchlde ,hatth. author is correct "bout t he defi-
ciencies of competing idea~ and the sufficiency ofChr ist i;m idea,. Be-
cause of thi. agr.ement, Chri.tian. often further conclude t hnt t heir
faith remain. lm{>~inted by contrary worldvicw,. Thi, create, a danger-
ous situation if the real compet ition for the heart< and mind. ofChri.-
tian. and non-C h ri. tians alike doc. nOt spring from the academy, where
the world,·iew. arc dearly for mubted and expressed. \V h", if the real
co mpetit ion co me ' from worldvicw. We do nM Se C al all, eVen if they
su rround us?
W e believe Ihi. i.the ,itllation. 11 i. not Ih~ world view. that begin a,
theories or intellectual systems that mold the live. and beliefs of 100",
peopic. Inste ad, the most powerful infllenee. cOme from worldv ;ew!
that emerge fro m culture. They arc "II around us, but are s(> dee ply em-
bedded in culture thaI we don't sec them. In olher word" the se w orld-
views ,lfe hidden in piain . ight. \.y~ wi ll o<;c asionally ca ll1h~m "lived
w
world,·ie w . becau se w e "r. mOre l ikcl,· to "hsorb Ihem t hro ugh cu h ur~1

CO ll1ad than adopt t hem through ~ rational c\·" lualion of compcling

the"rie ~ . The se lind w"rld\";ew! arc l'opllhir phil os<>phits of life Ih"l
h~\"e few inlclk ctual proponents bot ,",,$t nUlTl be ," of 1'1'~~(il;one rs .

,
 13

The eight belief system s we id entify as hidden wo rldv iews-individ -

ualism, consum erism, nat ional ism, moral relat ivism, naturalism, th e
ew A ge , pos rmodern rribj,l ism and s:.livat ion by th erapy-fit this
model. This is certainly not an exhaust ive list,1 bur they arc among th e
m ost pervasive life-s haping per spectives in North Am erican cu lture. Tf
YOll obse rve ca refully, yo u h ear and se e them everywhere-i n offices ,
d or m ito ries, Internet ch at roo ms and o vcr-coffce-at-Starbucks co nvcr-
satiol1S. l\1 o rcovcr. th ey arc no t li mit ed to secular venue s. Bcc:'lU SC of
their stealthy nature, these world views find their way behind the church
d oors, m ixe d in with Christ ian ideas and sometimes identified as
Christian positions.
This acco unts fo r the "apologetic rwist" mention ed at th e begi nning
of th e book. Many C hri sti ans have impo rted ch unks of these world-
views w it h out being aware of it. Thi s is difficult to avoid because they
arc embed ded throughout North American cult ure. M oreover, because
we do not encount er them as intellectu al system s, th ey usu ally fly under
the radar of co nsc ious thought. Thus, their power oVer liS is in creased
since we are oft en unaware of how th ey shape our life and ideas. In
sh ort, n o one is immune fr om the influence of the se pe rspect ives . They
a re very real competitors with Christian ity, and they st ake their claim
o n the lives of C hri stians and nonbelieve rs alike.
B ecause we wiJi exam ine world views t h at are absorbed through cu l-
t ure rather than ad opt ed through ration al appraisa l, the structure and
approach o f th is b ook w ill differ from many ot h ers in the "w orld view"
category. M ost world view books proceed by invest igating the writ ings
of t h ose who propose intcllectu ::d t hought systems, and then they un-
dertttkc a t ho rough evalu atio n o f t h e coh erence of t h ese ideas. This
m akes perfect sense w h en exam ining worldviews that o riginate as the-
o retical systems. H owever, th e ove r-co ffee - at- Starbucks worldviews
we exam in e do not h ave this sort of starting po int. They m ay ind eed
h ave philoso ph ical and academic con nections or origin s, but by th e

'You mighl note. for el:ample, that we do nO! address the majo r world religions, which certa inly
fir the e ~l e gory ofli l'ed worldviews. \Ve h:we nm examined Ihese for two reasons. Fits!, we
wanl lO foc us On Ihe North AmericB tI cu ll ur:,l cOluext. a rid eve n Iho ugh the influence of other
religion. is growing here, we do nOt believc their imp;lcl is ns direct as those wc have selected.
Second, ;Id d~,sin g this a rc:1 in an :.tdeq uatc m;lnncr would double rhc lengTh of this book.
14 HID DEN \V O IU.DV TEW S

time these id eas trick le down to popular American culture, they man-
ifest them selves in different 'ways. For example, what we call posrm od-
ern tribalism ha s roots in p os tmodern phi losophy, as th e name implies,
but it is not the sa me as po st mo dern philosophy. Capitalist eco no m ic
the ory has influenced both consumerism and individu alism, two
worldviews examined later in this book. h is a mistake, h owever, to
eq uate either with capital ism o r, for that m:l.tter, to assume that capi-
talism is the only influcI1cC on the se systems. Thu s, we will examine
worldvicws in their everyd ay express ion, no t their more purified the o-
ret ical forms, because that is h ow most people experience them and are
drawn under their influence. (This also, by the: way, cms down sig-
nificantly on the number o f footnotes.)
Our second departure from the traditi onal mo del is to approach
worldviews as more than just intellectual sys tem s. Some reade rs wi1i
take us to task for this because they define worldview as an intentional
attempt to frame answe rs to the deepest quest ions in life. Such attem pts
co nsc iously begin with the aim o f di rectly addres sing que stions about
G o d, real ity, knowledge, goodness, human n ature and other founda-
tional questions. M ost of the li\'ed worldviews we will examine do not
start h ere . Never theless, as we will see, they imply answers to all of the
questions that theoret ical worldviews attempt to address. Jo.10reover,
the effect of our lived worldviews is the sa me sought by their theoretical
co usins. They ttll us what we should love or despise , what is valuable or
unimportant, and what is good or evil. All worldviews offer definitions
of the fundamental human problem and how we might fix it. \,yh en
you ge t right down to it, every worldview attempts to answer the ques-
tion "Wh at mu st we d o to be saved?" Regardless of whether it comes to
us as a theoretical constru ct or is so aked tip by osmosis fr om culture,
our w orldview will have a deep imp:lct on h ow we view our universe,
ourselves and OlLr act ions.
Because these hidden world views d o what theoretical worldview s do
(propose answers to fundamental guesrions and shape our lives) , we do
not h esitate to use the term worldview to describe the systems in this
book. VVhile we do n ot reject the validity of the intentiona l, rationa l
exam ination of these questions, we think it stops too soon. The real ity
 15

oflife is that, while humans a re rational beings, we are n ot just rat ional
bei ngs. The vast majority of liS do not commit to a worldview by initiat-
ing a purely intellectual compa ri son of compet ing ph ilosoph ies and
choosing what appea rs to be the m ost coherent one. W e don't just think
our way into w orldviews, we experienu them.
For m ost of us, our worldviews come to li S more like a story or faith
commitment rather than a syste m of ideas we select among a buffet of
intel lectual opti ons. h is certainly the case that we arc able to ext ract
ideas that characterize each w orldview, and this will occupy a signifi-
cant amou nt of O Uf attention in each chapt er. Nevertheless, we want to
be aware that, for most of li S, wo rldviews are n ot primarily systems of
interl inked ideas and beliefs, but they are experienced, :tbso rbed and
expre ssed in the midst o f life .

REAl-L IFE. WHOL E- LIFE WORLOVIEWS

If what we have sa id so far m akes se n se, it means that the entire
wo rldview ente rprise is a lot messier than is often implied by many
b oo ks on the top ic. ) :tmes Si re's u nderst:tndi ng of wo rldview help s il-
lumin::ne some re:tsons behind thi s messiness. As he defines it, "A
worldview is 3. commitment, ::1 fundamental or ientati on of the heart,
that can be expressed as a st ory or in a set of presuppos itions (assump -
tions which may be true, partially tfue or entirely false) which we
ho ld (co n sc io usly o r subco n sc iously, con sistently or incon sistently)
:tbou t th e b:ts ic co n stitution of re ality, and that provides the founda-
tion o n which we live and move and have o ur being."2 We will break
Sire's definition d ow n into pieces slowly, hut it is important fro m the
beginning to cl arify what he means by hearl. Our culture tend s to
speak of th e heart in reference t o feelings o r emotions. Sire remind s
us, h owever, th at the biblical concept o f heart is much richer than
this. It includes the emotions, but also encompasses wisdom, desire
and will, sp irituality and intellect. In sho rt, the heart is, "the central
defining element of the human person."l

IJam~5 Sire, No1millg Ihr E/tpho/ll: lI'()rld'fJi~ :1J us iI C()/lup! (Do .... ners Gral· ... IlL: ImerV:trsity
Preu, 2004), p. 122.
lIbid., p. 124 .
16 H IDDEN \V O IU.DV TE WS

Equating heart with the entire person helps us idenrify one impor-
tant factor that contribute s to real-lite w orldview mess iness . W orld-
views arc not just cognitive const ructs in which the relative amo unts o f
truth and crror included in them determine the relative succes s o r
failure of our lives . Real hum a n b eings, b eings with " h eart," arc multi-
dimensional; our lives possess physical , economic, p sycholog ica l, po -
liti cal, spiritual, soc ial and intelle ctual fa cets. This is why we intuit ively
recognize th at a perso n with a clear and coherent grasp o f intellectual
truth still lives a less than complete life if they arc eco nomically careless
or a psychological basket case (or, we would add, spir itu ally indiffer-
ent). T o isolate the intellectu al co mponent as the exclu sive concern o f
worldview formation, as m any world view b ooks do, is redu ctionistic. It
co ndenses a real multidimensional person to a sing le asp ect of hi s or her
actua l exi sten ce. T o be sure, our intellect is important, but if taken in
isolation it fail s to put complete and real peo ple in the picture.
The charge of redu ctio nism is one you will h ear frequently th rough-
our rhe following chapters be cau se the strength of each w orldview we
exa mine also turns out to b e its "A chille s' hed" when that in sight is
absolutized. C on sumerism, for example, corre ctly remind s us that we
are finite beings who perish unle ss we co nsume at least so me of ou r
environment's resources. Consumerisn1's big mistake, h owever, is that
it def ine s u s solely as p hysical, co nsuming b eings. Stated otherwise,
co n sumerism is a reductionistic worldview because it absolutizes our
physical and economic dimension s and g ives in sufficient attention to
remaining asp ects of human existence. O th er w orldviews, in turn, ab-
soluti ze some other h cet of our experien ce to the excl usion of others.
A s you mtty anticipate, then, pa rt o f ou r arg um ent is t hat C hristian-
ity avo id s and co rrect s the redu ction ism s of these competing system s
and offe rs a full -orbed ;'t ccollnt of h uma n life. Thu s, w e will find much
that we can co nsent to and learn fr om within n o n~Chri s ti a n w orld-
view s. At th e same time, we m",int",in that allY perspective that fail s to
do justice to every G od-created dimen sion of human life canno t be
described as a Christian w orldview. T o put it in the language of Sire's
defmition , if "h eart" refer s to the whole p erson , w e mus t pursue a
wholehearted worldvi ew that avo id s reduct ionism.
 Ii

WORLOVI EWS AS ST ORY

If Sire's definition of worldview a s a " h eart orient ation," a set of co m -
m itments that encompasses th e ent ire perso n, reveals on e factor that
c1uffers up our task, his sugge stion that w orldviews can be told as a
st OfY di scl oses :l second messy dement in our appro :l.ch. The usu:tl
mode o f operatio n in worldvicw books is to compare and eva luate
prop ositional syst em s, which because they are syst em s, are neat and
orderly. Sto ries , o n the o ther hand, arc: n o t guite as tidy. H o wever, w e
bdicvt! that th e con cept o f story as a metaph or for wo rldvicw is mo rc:
t ru e- to- life than a recital of proposit io ns that o ne believes to be tflU::,
for two reaso ns.
The fir st re ason we prefer the concept o f w orldview as story is that
we believe that our knowledge of God is revealed in a manner that is
more analogous to a narrative tha n a set o f pro pos itions. It does n't take
a deep investigation of Scripture to discover that it is not written as a
logically constru cted, tightly interco nnected and cross-referenced sys -
tem o f truthful propositions. We may certainly be able t o distill fro m
the Bible sll ch a system, but it d ocs not come packaged in that way.
Instead, as we will develop in chapter ten, Scripture's overall struct ure
resembles an epic story stretching from creation to hi story's COllSUln -

mation, encompassing smaller stories o f C od's inrcraction with people

over a broad span of years and cultural co ntexts. This bigger na rrative
of G od's invo lvement with us, what we will Gtll "God's story," provide s
the foundatio n on which we attempt to di sce rn a Christian worldvicw
and the broad horizon against which we all live our individuallives (or
stories).
Second, in add ition to G od's revelat ion co ming in a manner similar
to story, o ur worJdvicws unfo ld in a storylikc manner. C o nsider how we
come to kn ow others. Vve do no t di scover wh o someone really is byask-
ing for a set of propo sirions they as sent to , although this may playa
part. I nstead , we gain insight into a person's identity by learning wh ere
the), come from , key life experiences, what they love, what sorts of re-
lat ionships they have and a multitude of o ther storylike features. While
we may talk abo ut these matters in propos itional terms, even these
propositions are products of our expe riences. Thu s, while propositional
18 H IDDEN \V O IU.DVTEWS

belie fs are an essentia l aspect o f worldview exa mi nat ion, these spring
from the messy process that w e will ca ll "OliT sto ry."

OUR STORY ANO WORl OVI EW FORMAT ION

At birth, we arrive in a wo rld filled with com peting visions of pu rpose,
truth and goodness, and we experience th em in a mulritude o f ways.
W orld views come at us, not as fully -form ed system s of interrelated
ideas, but in bits and pieces. We encounter them thro ugh national her-
itage, religion, fa m ily influen ce, the educat ional syst em, p eer g roups ,
various med ia and countl ess ad dition al source s. They are tran smitted
by the se sources through such d ive rse fo rms as mu sic, polit ical speeches,
advert ising, u nso licited adv ice from friend s o r fami ly an d, yes, via our
co ffe e-at-Sta rbucks conversatio ns. And so metimes wh at is not sa id ex-
plicitly in t hese different m od es of co mmun ication shapes our worl d-
views as much as wh at is sa id . In short, t hese infl uences arc so pervasive
t hroughout cultu re that we may not even sec them at all.
M oreove r, wo rld view for mation , like a story, is not a st:ui c affair.
Every good narr:\tive, includin g our own , has a dy namic q uality. Like
storie s, live s have a beginning, a middle and an end ing that include
spec ific co ntexts, un ique characters, plot twists, conflic ts or crises,
alo ng with resolut ions that set up the next episo de. A s a resu lt, even
wh en the fundamenta l ou tl ines of our world view hold up over a li fe-
time , th e detail s go through modificat io ns based on ou r psychologica l
development, new events or rel atio nships, expos ure to new id eas o r a
num ber of other factors.
A s the story unfolds, however, the sequence, actors and plot develop-
ment are only the most visible features. In rea lity, our stories :ire struc-
tured, in large part. by fo rces th at reside beneath th e surface. My actions
manifest the subterranean influence of my sel f- und erstanding, my convic-
tions and my valu es. Things that happen to me and around me, many of
them beyond my immediate co ntrol, provide the setting for my story.
Nevertheless, what occurs in th e various chapters, what my character be-
comes, is also molded by what I believe and value. Thu s, in t.h e following
diagram we w ill trace the components of our story, our ·w orldview, as they
radiate fro m ou r interior stories toward ex ternal express ion and action.
 19

Sia n

Idend! II

COIl\'i.:riolls

ValutsiElhics

!\'loralsiActions

SroTy: 1'1...: ce mral narr:uillC of ou r life

IdeOTi l~': How we ~e ourstlvts "od prrsenr o ur ~ I"u ro others
Com-iel io",: ThoK beliefs that ma k" up how Tralltyworks for us
Val ut'siEdlics: \<Vh (l{ we bel ieve we sho uld do a nd wn:lt we !:Ike to be'
Ollr hi ghes t priorili es
.M orals/Act ions: TIle re:llm o f d oing lh ul indudcs all of o ur activ ities

Figure 1. Tra n ~ formati on mDdt l (developed by Dr. S te ve Gree n)

STORY: MOV IN G TOWARD ACTION

In the opening scene of Fiddler 011 the R oof, Tevye sa.ys t hat, because of
tradit ion, "everyone knows who he is ," That is what our stor y d oes; it
gives us an ident ity. The ident ity level of our being encompasses such
th ings as our concept of success o r whe re we believe we fit into the scheme
of things. In the myri ad of relationships-with G od, myself, others and
the physical world- my story provides an interpretive grid that expresses
the importance and value of the various "others" I encounter. If my iden-
tity is inve sted in fi na ncial well-being rather that' in friendsh ips, J may
not th ink twice about a long-distal,ce relocation when offe red the dream
job with a fat raise, even ifit means leaving long-term friend sh ips. H ow-
20 H I D DEN \V O IU.DV TE WS

ever, if my identity has been closely connected with Iny job starus and
finan cial well-being for some rime, it is unlikely that I will have m any
real friend ships to consider when the job offer come s. The definition o f
succes s w ithin a consumerist worldview will be much different from
someone whose story emphasizes enduring relationships.
Closely intertwin ed with ollr identity is what we call our conv Ic-
ti ons. Our conviction s might b e viewed as a di stillation o f ou r story as
it is filtered through our sen se of identity into a system of propos itions
that forms the ideological framework for our st ory. These co nvictio ns
play a central role in O tlf story b ecau se we believe them to be true de -
script ion s of what Sire's definitio n refers to as "the basic con stitution o f
reality." Th ey express ollr ideas abo ut what the whole world is like, how
it works , th e means by which we understand it p rop erly, and wh at its
purpose is .
These conviction s arc vital b ecaus e they d escrib e h ow w e underst and
and inter pret th e w orld . It is the m eans by which we artic ulate our
worldview. We can illu strate this by contrasting the co nviction s o f a
sc ient ific natur alis t with a Christian thei st . A s we will see below, sc i-
entific naturalis m's centtal conviction s arg ue that the world is a clos ed
system, co ntaining n othing m ore than physical co mponents whose in-
teractions arc detetm.ined by ironclad, ab solute laws. This rule s out the
existen ce of any nonphysical realit y, G od in clud ed. By contrast, the
Chri stian theist view s the world as open to the activity a fG od. For the
th eist , th en, the laws that govern nature o rig in ate fro m G od and pro-
vide an accurnte descripti on of phys ical interactions within creation.
However, sin ce thcse laws arc c reation s o f G od, they arc not ab solute.
Realitie s exist that transcend such laws.
Thu s, th e stories behind a naturalist's and a theist's conviction s dif-
fer radic;llly. Both m ay see the same fa ct s, but th e convictions that shape
their resp ective inte rpretations of these fa cts are quite different. In fa ct,
it is not an overstatement to say that a naturalist and a theist cou ld live
in the same h ou se and, at the same time, inhabit two entirely different
univer ses. What exists {and do es not ('xist) in my universe, the mean s
by which it is known m ost accurately, my place in this universe , and a
h ost of other qu estio ns will have answ ers that a re m old ed by my conv ic-
 21

tions. I f! change my convictions, my world, at least as I experience it,

changes with them,
Convictional bel iefs about the n ature of reality and how that real-
ity is known radiate outward co shape our eth ics (what we believe we
should or sh ould no t d o) and values (what we take to be priorities).
What is the good o r right way to live? vVhich mor;).1 principles, if any,
are nonnegot iable? '¥hich :lrc relative or conditional? Which values
sh ould mark th e pr ior ities that sh ape w h o we arc :md how we usc o ur
time? To illustrate, we freq u ently say that we d o n ot have enough tim e
for some thing. In reality, th ese statements are rarely true. If we are
honest, "not enough tim e" can almost always be tran slated as, "I did
not do that because it wa s not a high prio rity." Someone co mmitted to
an individu :.d istic wo rldview will find t ime fo r different things than
we wou ld see on a ew Ager's schedule. S imilarly, the highest ethical
loyalties of a nationalist wm vary significantly from those of a com-
mitted Christian.
Finally, ou r ethics shapes ou r acti ons. This is the realm of doing that
includes activities from our vot ing p:l.tterns to our use o f money to the
time we spend with family, and everything in b etween. Thi s is the part
of our stories that is most evident to those around us, and it is certainly
how most people start to learn what we think of ourselves, what ethical
principles we embrace, and what conv ict ions govern our lives. In short,
our behav iors arc the stage on whi ch we play out our sto ries.
Now that we have reached the o uter byer of ollr stories, two things
sh ould become evident as we think about the rdatio nsh ip between our
actions, which fo rm the m ore public face t o f our lives, and the interior,
more private aspects of our stories. The fi rst was hinted at above; our
action s do not exist in a vacuum , disconn ected from other aspects of
life. There is, as th e saying goes, much more to us than meets th e eye.
Second, it seems clear that our visible act ions are not always consistent
with t h ose other p~trts of o ur live s that don't "meet the eye." \ "'hat I do
is not always congruent with what 1 believe. I n fact , an impo rtant
premise of this book is that what we believe, ual/ybelieve, i" n ot always
congruent with w hat we say we believe or thin k we want to believe.
One can , for example, profess Christianity and live like an individu a\-
22 H I D DEN \V O IU.DV TE WS

isr. We probably ought to fix that, and a careful evaluation o f our w orld-
view can be an important part of that fix.

A CON GR UENT STOR Y

Several years ago a fa scinating story hit the new s about a se vent y-three-
year- old Cath olic w oman, E leanor Boyer, wh o had w on th e New Jersey
State lotte ry. After fed eral and state taxe s were deducted, sh e had over
eigh t milli on doll ars left. We don't know your fin ancial situation, but
this is a sum sufficient to capture our attention. So is the amount o f
m oney th is wo m an gave away. In fac t , sh e gave it all away-ro her
church and to organ izatio ns in h er town that helped p eopl e in n eed.
When th e reporter asked h er why she don ated all the winnings, her
resp o nse was "G o d take s ca re of me."
I fwe would pas te our own pictu re into rhi s sto ry, we quick ly recog-
nize h ow difficult it is to bring congruity to our worldview.l\1any pe o-
ple arc quick to say that G od w ill provid e for their needs or that it
would be wrong to spend money extravagan tly when it coul d provide
life-sa ving relief to pe ople in dire need . Yet ou r action s, if we would
receive an unexpe ct ed, after-tax eight-million - doHar windfa ll, may not
have as mu ch congruency with statements mad e about our conviction s
before we hit the jackpot as t hos e o f the wo man above. This example,
and m illions o f ot hers w e could create, remind s us of t h e vast differen ce
between what we call conjim ional beliefs, ideas th at rem ain exclu sively
on the intelle ctual level, and cOllviclional beliefs, belief.<; that are re-
fle ct ed in our actio ns .
C areful wo rldview examination require s that we con stantly hold up
our conviction s again st the mirror of our actions to sec w here our con-
fessional b eliefs arc incongru ou s w ith our conviction al beliefs . C hris-
tian s often find it mllch easier to talk a goo d game by reciting the right
creed s and embracing the proper doctrinal statements than to actually
live by the pr inciples embo died in them. Bu t Christians arc not the o nly
people susceptible to incong ruity (or hypocr isy, if you prefer that w ord).
In extreme circumstances , scientifi c n aturalists may fmd them selves in
prayer to G od. A moral relativist may live as if universa l m oral standard s
do exist. R egardl ess of one's w orldview, it is important to integrate wh at
 23

we:: say we believe :lnd what we actually do. This is not possible unless we
live refle ctively, carefu lly examining both our ideas and actions to see if
they arc in sync. Th at is, then, one of our main tas ks in this book.
A second reaso n to subje ct various world views to rigorous exam ina-
tion brings l1 S back to the m ore traditiona l apologeti c task of contrast-
ing a C hristian worldview with competin g id eas. Christ ians wi ll agre e
tha t it is o ften difficult t o live a life that is con sistent with o ur co nv ic-
tions. At th e sa me time, t h ey sh ould also agree t h at (1) the ccntr:l1
conv ict iom of a C hristian world view are consist ent with each other and
(2) acti ng in accordance with C hristian convict ions yields good resu lts
in o u r lives. W e don't believe that either is the case with the competing
world views we exam ine in this boo k. For example, a bed rock belief for
moral relativ ism is that no uni versally valid mo ral principl es ex ist.
H owever, a second relativist conviction is that we should be to ler:mt of
those 'w hose moral views differ from ours. The glarin g contrad iction
h ere is that the demand of tolerance by all and for all is a moral stan -
dard t hat is in consistent w ith the relativist's claim t h at no universal
moral stand ards exist. Th is is certai n ly in tens ion with (I ) abo ve, which
argues that a worldview sh ould be internally consistent.
1\10ral relativism also r u ns afo ul of (2 ), which says that living out
one's worldview sh ou ld lead to beneficial results. We will argue that
moral relativ ists really d on't live out th e fi rst conviction (n o universal
mora l p rincip les exist), an d it is a good th ing they don't. T h e logical
outcome of t h is convict ion is d og-eat-d og chaos, n ot exac tly the type of
b enefic ial resu lt we look for in a good world view. In sum , t hen , we
encourage reflection o n a ~e r i es of worldviews becau se it can reveal
t heir logica l o r practical flaws, an d h ope fu lly h elp us avoid t h em.
Our third reason for vigilance about worldview in co ngruities is spe-
cific to oll r ta sk of helping Christians develop a C hrist ian worldview.
With out retl ection, ideas contrary to a C h ristian worldview cree p into
our convictional beliefs, and we might not even realize it. The problem
here is t h at, wh il e confessio nal bdiefs exist o n the conscious level
(which must be t h e case if we "confess" them), many of ou r conv ict ionai
bel iefs work on the subconscious level, as Sire's world view d efi nition
rem ind s us. W e m ay n ot be aware o f what our t rue convi ct ions are, but
24 HID DEN \V OIU.DVTEWS

that d oes not make them less real or determinative for our lives. Thus,
a careful examination of postmodern tribalism , for example , might re -
veal arC:lS where Christians have allowed un-Chr istian ideas about race,
gend e r or national superiority to infiltrate their worldvicw. Or, as il-
lu strated above, considering how we might handle an unforeseen cash
windfall might show us that, despite o ur claim s to worship God alone,
we have becom e mamm on-worshiping consumer ists. Therefore, Ch ri s-
tians need to learn what the se com p eting storic s sa)'. In d oi ng so , we
can discover how our convictions have been shaped by worldviews that
are incompatible with what we want to bel ieve. Without carefu l, con-
sciolls reflection, our Christian story ca n easily be hijacked by al ien
stories that take our lives in directions we don't want to go , B ecause
what we are n ot conscious of can hurt us, it is important to take an in -
ventorv of ou r true convictions,
Each of the world views in this book is part of the cultural air we
breathe, M oreover, each of these worldviews has the power to distort
our Christiansro ry, a power that grows in proport ion to o ur lack o f
:\wareness o f its influen ce, Paul reminds liS of this in R omans 12:2
when he states, "Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this
world." Aioll, the w ord translated as "'world," is more literally translated
"age." The "pattern of this age" refers ro the dominant ways o f think-
ing, th e stories , that shape the world arou nd us. Paul is not, therefore,
ta lking abollt avoiding any part icular kind of activities. H e warns us
against a deeper, more p ervasive danger, t h e danger o f conformi ng to a
story that differs fr om G od's story for us.

TR ANS FORMATION TO GOO'S STORY

Paul's antidote to conformity to the "patterns of this age" is found in the
last part of the verse: " but be transformed by the renewing of your
mind. Then you will be able to te st and approve w h at G od's will is-his
good, pleasing and perfect wil!." In stead of conforming to the stories of
our age, Paul says that we need to be transformed to G od 's stor y, G od 's
"good, pleasing and pedect w ilL" This raises a point th at is too o ften
fo rgotten. The wocldvicw of:\ Ch rist ian, if it is to remain a Christi an
worldview, need s to be set \vith in G od's sto ry.
26 HID DEN \V O IU.D VTEW S

but needs to occur withi n the contex t of a community. ]n fact, this book
itself was birthed out of d iscussions on these matters within adult Bible
classes and unive rsity discipleship g roups. With out all three dements-
mento ri ng, reflective fell owship and worldvic:w formation- t he c:ver-
present non - Christian worldviews begin to w ork theif corrosive effects
on ollr lives.
I n the following chapte rs, we will exam ine eight sto rics, wide spread
within American culture, that co mpete with a Christian wo rldvic\\'.
They are, to so me ex tent, artific ial constructio ns; probably no person
alive exemplifies any of t hese types in a pure form. These influences, as
we have said, com e at li S in fragment s from muhiple direction s, and
m ost real lives are a comp osite of these force s. Chr ist ians are not ex-
empt from this. and this premi se stands at the heart o f thi s b ook. Our
worldview, if we live an unexamined life, can be adulte rated by h idden
dements that dilute and corrupt it.
As we evaluate these cornpeting stories, we will focus heavily on the
character istic co nvictions of each worldview. Thi s intellectual co mpo-
nent is necessa ry be causc, as we havc seen ab ove, our co nvictions playa
central role in ollr world views. H owever, it will be impor tant to re-
member that the stakes a re much higher than simply a co nte st about
which ide ology comes out the winner. Worldviews are ultimately about
full - orbed . multid imensio nal, rea l human lives, and how we can get the
most from them. In sh ort, as we will say oft en in the following chap-
ters, all worldviews are ultimately ahou t salvation, even if they don't use
that \1ocabul ary.
The Chri stian worldview places an extremely high value on life,
which is the reason it is so d eeply intere sted in salvation. l flife is valu-
able, it make s sen se to examine the stories that sh ape our lives to make
certain we experience the abundan ce God desires for th em. T o this
end. we will close the book with two chapters about Christian w orld-
view s. The first (ch apter ten ) outlines the contours of a Christ ian
worldview in a narrative form and explores places where it differs fro m
the ot hers examined in this tex t. Our fina,1 chapter (chapter eleven)
explores the qu estion of h ow o ne devel op s a nd nurtures a real-life,
whole-life w orldv iew.
 25

Paul clearly indicates that the kind of transformation that aligns us

with G od's story has to impact our minds. By this, however, he is no t
just speaking of a collectio n of confess io nal beliefs. As we have see n,
what we claim to believe d oes not always tran sfo rm our lives. Instead,
the renewal of our mind s envisions a transformation of our whole
beings- our intell ects, wills, d esires, relationships and spirituality (and
thu s enco mpass es what Sire ea rlier refers to as "heart"). Paul 's call for a
rcncw:ll of the mind st:l nd s in contra st to most Christian preach ing and
teaching , which is focused on changing the outermo st circle of our
story- the behavioral level. VI/hile th e actions of the Christian sh ould
undergo a transformative proce ss, changing behaviors alo ne is no t
transfo rmation. It attack s the symptom s rather than the disease. ] n th e
end, behavioral change is a pale counterfeit o f:l wh ole-person tran sfor-
mation that works from the mind outward.
Transformation that doc s not involve the mind com es at a h igh cost.
Steve Garber's boo k The Fabric a/Faithf ulness asked a probing questi on:
"Why do some Christians leave college, and five to ten years later they
have also left Christianity? Why do o the r C h ristians co mplete colleg e
and continue to integrate their Christian faith with a new set of life
circumstances?" His findings were fa scinating. Without exception,
those 'w h o successfully integrated fa it h with life followed three prac-
tices. They developed a relat ionship with a mentor who pract iced an
act ive Christian life. Second, they met regularly with peers who were
deeply committed to living out th eir Christianity. Finally, they had
develo ped a C hristian worldvi ew sufficient to meet the chall enge s of
the co mpeting worldviews they encountered a fte r leaving college.
Our book's eye is obviou sly foclI sed on the t hird critical element that
Garber id entifies. ' '''hen our minds do not undergo continuing trans-
formation through reflection on om en tire life, om stori es inevit ably
deviate fro m G od's plotline. H owever, developm ent of a Chr istian
worldvic::w sufficient to meet th e challenges of the co mpeting world-
views is not unrelated to the first two factors noted by Garber. Our
relation ship s frame the context of our stories, and it is with in the ac-
countability of such relationship s that we alig n our stories to G od's
story. Our examination o flife should not just be an individu al endeavor
28 HID DEN \V O IU.DV TEW S

celebrate s the individu al who creates his o r her own unique path. Thus,
like the other lived worldviews in this book, individualism does n ot re -
ally find its or igins in:.m intellectual system, but as a type o f story about
wh o we should be.
Perhaps the best analysis of American individualism today is found
in the book Ha bits 0/ thl! HenrI written by Robert Bellah and his col-
1t:agucs. Ha bits refers to two distinct typ es of individual ism, both com-
m on in Amer ican culture. The first fo rm is "utilitarian individu:tlism."
Utilitarian individualism has been a d ominant force in America since
its founding and has often fueled the quest fo r the "American Dream."
This version of individuali sm focu ses o n perso nal achievement and ma-
terial success, and believe s that the social goo d auto matically follows
from the individual pursuit of o ne's own intere sts. Thu s, the utilitarian
ind ividualism d oes no t necessa rily reject t he structures and rule s of so-
ciety. I nstead, th ey arc viewed primarily as guidel ines or tools that help
the individua l work effi ciently within the syst em. In other words, there
is a willingness to accept certain restr ictions on personal behavior, such
as laws prohibiting bribery, because a system that requires honest busi-
ne ss d eal ings ultimately benefits those who work hard.
The second fo rm Bellah identifies, "expressive individualism," is a
reaction to the limitations o f utilitarian individualism. While the latter
generally advises that we pursue individual succe ss by con formity to th e
rules and comm on practices of soc iety, expressive individll:llism wor-
ships the freed om to express our lIni'lueness again st constraints and
conventions. Becau se rule s and social conventio ns encou rage co nfor-
mity, they arc viewed as a threat to personal expression :md individual-
ity. The danger is that we will be absorbed into th e herd. Thus, libera-
tion and fulfi llment are central themes in expressive individualism and
find articulation in statem ents like "J need to be free to be me." Free-
dom beco me s the rationale for redu cing any resp onsibilitie s perceived
as limitatio ns to my personal auto nomy o r fu lfillm ent, whether those
respon sibilitie s are social, moral, relig ious or fami ly duties. Where util-
itarian ind ividuali sm sees our social system s as a means for attaining
our individual goals, express ive indiv idualism genera lly views these
system s as obstacles to individual fr eedom.