Christian Worldview and Culture Essay Example for Free

Christian Worldview and Culture Essay Today’s cultural landscape has been shaped by the likes of MTV (entertainment), Steve Jobs (technology), and Mark Zuckerberg (social networking). Society often prefers accepting the â€Å"worldviews† of these and other influential people, rather than hearing the message of the Good News of Jesus Christ which offers redemption to a â€Å"fallen† world. We cannot ignore the reality that a vast majority of cultural advancements are produced by â€Å"non-Christian culture-makers, who, as they become more self-conscious and consistent with their anti-Christian stance, will express their unbelief in their artifacts with increasing boldness. Christians cannot dismiss the impact and relevance these contributions have made on society. One of the great challenges believers are confronted with is developing an understanding of the importance of expressing and sharing our Christian worldview in the midst of various competing ideologies. One of the hidden ideologies that secular culture promotes is that we can â€Å"take care of ourselves† thus, refuting any notion that we are dependent on Christ to meet every human need, including the need for salvation. Christian disengagement from culture is contrary to Christ’s example of Incarnation. Christ did not consider human culture unworthy of his attention and love. He set aside his divinity and put on human flesh so that he could engage us on a social and cultural level. The great commission is an affirmation of Christ’s desire for his followers to â€Å"go into all the word†, engaging culture and preaching the gospel. What is â€Å"Culture†? Culture can be defined using three different approaches: agricultural, sociological, and anthropological. The agricultural approach to defining culture â€Å"is derived from the Latin cultura†¦ meaning to plow or till. † Culture is understood from a farming or agricultural perspective which entails the â€Å"practice of cultivating the soil, producing crops, and raising livestock. † The reference to someone being â€Å"cultured† is drawn from this farming metaphor. Education in this sense is the â€Å"cultivation† of the mind. The sociological approach to defining culture deals with social class distinctions of â€Å"high† (elite) and â€Å"low† (mass) culture. This aesthetic standpoint is mainly concerned with the â€Å"intellectual and artistic achievements of a society. † High culture is associated with the highest ideals of what is (in a subjective sense) â€Å"good†. A cultured person is one who has been acquainted with and educated in the â€Å"finer things† of art, literature, music, etiquette, socialization, as so on. The anthropological perspective regarding culture is concerned with â€Å"the whole way of life of a group or society, not just its better achievements. † Unlike the sociological perspective, this approach does not make distinctions between sophisticated and primitive social groups. It simply acknowledges that all â€Å"activity† which is produced by a social group (texts, art, music, food, artifacts, philosophy, ethics, etc. is that group’s culture. H. Richard Niebuhr states, â€Å"[S]ocial life is always cultural† and culture is the product of â€Å"human achievement†. Humanity Was Created For â€Å"Good Works† Culture, as expressed by the creativity of human activity, is a reflection of God who Himself is a creative being. Human understanding of order and beauty is only possible because of God’s magnificent creation of the heavens and the earth. God validated the beauty of creation when He â€Å"saw all that he had made†¦ was very good† (Genesis 1:31). Man and woman were created in the divine image and likeness (imago dei) of God and were entrusted by God to care for and tend to His creation. Man was given the responsibility of â€Å"cultivating† the Garden of Eden and in doing so bringing glory to the Creator. Here we should take notice between the similarities of the word cultura (plow, till) and cultus which is a â€Å"veneration of the divine†. This should give us a greater insight regarding how â€Å"the human race [was] called to interact deliberately with the earth—[working, tilling, cultivating]—while at the same time lovingly serving his divine Master†¦ and worshiping his Maker. Adam â€Å"performed his culturative activities in response to and as a reflection of God’s creative acts. † Competing Worldviews All of humanity’s artistic and creative works reflect the worldview of those who created them. As a result of the Fall the imago dei has become distorted, causing humanity to shift the focus of their creative and culturative activities away from exclusive worship to God. As a result humanity has developed â€Å"unholy motives†¦ even though superficially [our creative activities] may be of some benefit. Man’s creative outlet is disoriented—seeking to glorify himself through the works of his own hands. Once we understand that all human creative efforts are a reflection of the inner beliefs and values of the mind and spirit, we can assess the intention of human activity properly. The Tower of Babel (Genesis 11) was the product of human efforts to succeed, using human ability, independent of God. Today’s â€Å"pop† culture seeks to create a new Babel in which human achievement and technological advancement create the false notion that we can live independent of God, or even worse, have no need of God. Thus, culture always reflects a society’s religious and philosophical values, â€Å"[flowing] out of the heart—as it were—of the society which produces it. † A Christian worldview based on God’s Word will discern the â€Å"the ideological bias of the medium and ideological content of the message of non-Christian (and Christian) artifacts. † This is essential for the Christian because there is no neutrality in the message embedded in the works of man. We are not idle spectators, â€Å"[We] must take sides at all times in everything [we] do. † Christian Approach to Culture (Christ and Culture) There has been much debate as to the extent in which Christians are to engage the culture that we live and worship in. Should Christians adapt a Monastic approach secluding ourselves from society? Or, are we to engage the world in such manner that our Christian distinctiveness is lost? H. Richard Niebuhr, in his book Christ and Culture, suggests several â€Å"Christian answers to the problem of Christ and culture. † Niebuhr offers five approaches Christians have historically taken in an effort to understand their position in Christ and involvement with culture. These are: â€Å"Christ against culture,† â€Å"Christ of culture,† â€Å"Christ above culture,† â€Å"Christ and culture in paradox,† and â€Å"Christ the transformer of culture. † The â€Å"Christ against culture† approach proposes that loyalty to Christ is a â€Å"rejection of cultural society†. He critiques this stance as a â€Å"radically Christian answer to the problem of culture†. Indeed, it is impossible for a Christian, or any person, to totally reject and remove themselves from the influence of and involvement with culture. God has taken the opposite approach. He did not reject the world when Adam sinned, but rather engaged the world and put into motion the plan of redemption through Jesus Christ. Christ stepped into our earthly realm and became subject to the influences and temptations of human culture â€Å"yet was without sin† (Hebrews 4:15). Christ’s relationship to culture was to use the elements of culture to reveal God the Father and the Kingdom of Heaven to fallen humanity. The second model, â€Å"Christ of culture,† is the opposite of the â€Å"against culture† model. It seeks social and cultural engagement with the world. It attempts to make the gospel meaningful to society by extending its reach beyond â€Å"a selected little band of saints† and is able to engage those of â€Å"high† and â€Å"low† social strata. While the effort to make Christ a part of culture may reach those who would remain otherwise unreached, there is a susceptibility to â€Å"distort the figure of the New Testament Jesus† in an effort to accommodate a social-gospel agenda. This is done by relegating Jesus into what we need him to be in an attempt to address our social and cultural problems. Jesus is a great humanitarian if we are fighting for human rights or a great teacher if we are engaged in philosophical debate. Again, this model can be useful in reaching out to the culture, but we cannot compromise the truthfulness of the gospel for a specific social agenda. The third paradigm is â€Å"Christ above culture†. This view proposes that â€Å"the fundamental issue does not lie between Christ and the world†¦ but between God and man. † By placing Christ at the center, and not against culture, this approach avoids separating â€Å"the experience of grace from cultural activity†. There are three distinct groups in this category: â€Å"synthesists,† â€Å"dualists,† and â€Å"conversionists†. Synthesists affirm â€Å"Christ and culture† (both/and) rejecting a â€Å"Christ or culture† (either/or) approach. They maintain that Jesus â€Å"is both God and man, one person with two natures† and that the works of human nature cannot be separated from the grace of God, â€Å"for all those works are possible only by grace. † Essentially, Christ cannot be against culture because God created nature. Likewise Christ’s incarnation allowed him to actively participate nd engage with the culture of his day. One area that could lead to problems in this approach is by synthesizing Christ and culture in such a manner where Christ becomes subservient to culture. If culture assumes the dominant role in this synthesis, the Church will risk becoming more â€Å"cultural† and less Christ-like because it has elevated culture to the same status as Christ through whom all things were made and exist and â€Å"without him nothing was made that has been made† (John1:3). The dualist approach sees â€Å"Christ and culture in paradox†. This view â€Å"makes sharp distinctions between the temporal and the spiritual life, or between what is external and internal, between body and soul, between the reign of Christ and the world of human works and culture. † There is a line drawn between God and â€Å"us†. In the dualist’s view all of human culture is fallen. For dualists the works of Christians within the church and non-Christians outside of the church are equally corrupt. The dualists are in a state of paradox since they cannot reconcile the concept of â€Å"law† and â€Å"grace†. They fail to realize that Christ came to earth to remove the line of separation between man and God. As Christians we must understand that while the world is in a fallen state and under â€Å"law†, at the same time it is under â€Å"grace† and we are to â€Å"go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation† (Mark 16:15). The third group that embraces a â€Å"Christ above culture† paradigm is the conversionists. â€Å"What distinguishes conversionists from dualists is their more positive and hopeful attitude toward culture. Conversionists see Christ as the transformer of culture. They embrace the redemptive work of Christ in the here and now. They are not looking to some eschatological future where one day they all will be restored. The conversionists have a hopeful outlook regarding culture and look forward to its restoration from a corrupt state. â€Å"Christ transforms the fallen culture in that â€Å"he redirects, reinvigorates, and re generates† the life of man from a corrupted state. Once man has been regenerated, he will produce â€Å"good works†. The transformative power of Christ in the life of fallen humanity redeems us: â€Å"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them† (Eph. 2:10). It is not our works which cause us to be redeemed but rather, our works are a testimony to the world that we are no longer bound by the curse of sin and corruption. Conclusion Because we live in a period of world history that offers the greatest tools and opportunities for cultural engagement, we cannot ignore the importance of understanding Christ role, through the Church, in today’s culture. To engage with culture, theology and ecclesiology needs to be both critical and artistic†¦ such engagements require theology to be open to the insights of cultural studies and alert to the ways in which contemporary culture is shaping religion. † Social networking sites, email, iPhones, cable TV, movies, music, art, and literature are the vehicles th at are being used to promote the beliefs and values of our society. Satan has done a great job in using culture to enslave society, tempting us to sin and forfeit our relationship with God our Creator. Our fleshly appetites are satisfied by images of sexuality, greed, power, and self-assertion. The danger of a culturally advanced society is that it seeks to replace God with its achievements. It seeks salvation, joy, peace, and prosperity via its own human efforts and imaginations. Because we have been brought from â€Å"darkness to light† we must shine the light of the gospel of Christ by engaging the culture in which we live, work, play, and worship. For this reason, every Christian must â€Å"seize the opportunity that the contemporary circumstances present to us and boldly set out to transform the earth. †