Make your own free website on Tripod.com
please disregard the advertisment above

|HOME | GUN KATTA |TRIBE |REVIEWS |ABOUT MYSELF PHILOSOPHY


The Reconstructionist, Reformed Worldview

By Jonathan Kayser

A worldview is the basis by which we interpret and react to everything around us. James Nickel gives a good definition, ďA worldview is a network of presuppositions not authenticated by the procedure of natural science, a perspective through which everything in human experience is interpreted and human reason is guided.Ē A presupposition is simply a basis for some belief. An axiom is the core presupposition to all that any person believes. If their axiom is faulty, then their belief is faulty. For a worldview to be any use, it must apply universally. For example, ďThou shalt not murderĒ is pointless unless it applies everywhere, for who can say that it applies here and not there? The Reformed Christian Worldview is divided up into three major categories: Metaphysics, Epistemology and Ethics.

Metaphysics is the study of reality, nature and the origin of nature, and is composed of three subcategories: Cosmology, Cosmogony and Ontology. Cosmology is the study of how the universe works, and how it is structured. Cosmogony deals with how the universe came into being, and Ontology deals with the nature of how things exist. ďIn the beginning God created the heavens and the earthĒ2 is a good example of Cosmogony in the Bible. God questioned Job regarding Cosmology in Job 38-39. Revelation 4:11 says, ďFor You created all things, and by Your will they exist and were created.Ē Our existence is defined by God.

Epistemology deals with the theory of knowledge, and how we come to know something. How can we know that murder is wrong in every instance? How do we know that God is unchanging? How do we know that the Bible is infallible? Because we define our existence through God, we must define our knowledge through God. We know that murder is wrong because the Bible says so; we know that God is unchanging because the Bible says so. The Bible is infallible because it says so. Then the liberals would say, ďThat is circular reasoning!Ē, but they are missing the point. All reasoning is circular reasoning. If you start with manís mind, you will end with manís mind. If you start with Godís mind, you end with Godís mind. But Godís circle of knowledge encompasses everything. Manís circle is imcomputably small. God has set the Bible as our axiom, our starting point from which all of our knowledge is derived. After we prove the existence of God by using the transcendental argument3 , we go on to establish that His Word is inherrant:

God knows all things(Psalm 139:4)

God cannot lie(Titus 1:2)

The Bible is the Word of God(2 Timothy 3:16)

Therefore the Bible is infallible.

Our knowledge must have itís foundation in God. If it isnít, then we are no better off than the atheists, who have no foundation for their knowledge. Once again, the circle of manís comprehension is incomputably small, thus not being sufficient to account for universal presuppositions such as logic, morality etc. etc. Godís circle is sufficient because it encompasses all knowledge; God is omniscient.

Ethics is a big controversy today because everyone has different opinions. Our view of ethics must be an epistemologically correct one, for how can anyone know that murder is wrong in every circumstance, in every place, and any time? My point is very basic: no one can know.........unless someone who does know tells them so. Anyone who legislates morality is deriving his conclusions from his axiom, and our axiom is the infallible Word of God. How many finite, falible, arbitrary people think that they are infallibly omniscient? (Those who do are crazy!) No one can rationally legislate morality unless they base it ony Godís completed Revelation; The Bible. As I mentioned earlier, atheists have no rational foundation for knowledge, which I will expound upon through two points:

First, they have no way of rationally deriving knowledge from past experience. In other words, just because it happened that way in the past does not mean it will happen that way in the future. The principle of induction is the study of particular evidences one by one in order to arrive at a generalization. Unless a person was omniscient (knowing every fact) he could not arrive at a valid conclusion from induction. Atheists are forced to use empiricism, which in and of itself is still not a rational system of thought.

Secondly, atheists have no foundation for knowledge because they have no way of proving the validity of the methods they use to interpret the facts that surround them. In other words, they donít know how to correctly interpret the information that they receive. For example, Creationists and Evolutionists have exactly the same evidence, yet they draw completely different conclusions. Our worldview is what we use to interpret information around us, and if we have a faulty worldview, our conclusions will be false.

Our view of ethics is deduced from the infallible Word of God, which is the only document that is sufficient to account for morality. Christian ethics, which ought to be solidly based in theonomy4, must be applied to all areas of life. Godís Law is not to be a burden to us, and we are to meditate upon it ďday and nightĒ5. Any person who adopts empiricism and induction as their primary axioms in life will get nowhere, because when you start with the fallible human mind, you are only asserting ďtheoriesĒ and not facts. Reformed Christians believe many doctrines such as foreknowledge, salvation through justification, limited atonement, total depravity, unconditional election, irresistible grace, divine creation and the divine inspiration of the Scriptures; Yet, we insist that the only doctrines that the Christian Church can rationally implement are those that are solidly grounded in Scripture, which is the only foundation that can rationally account for Theology, Metaphysics, Epistemology and Ethics.