The Christian Worldview and Religious Nonrealism

By Douglas Groothuis

Like every other worldview, a Christian worldview, at its deepest level, is a system of truth claims or assertions about reality. This must be underscored because some have wanted to erase Christianity’s claim on truth while retaining some other form of “Christianity.” This is akin to the smile of Lewis Carroll’s Cheshire Cat when the cat has disappeared. Nevertheless, some contemporary writers influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein—particularly Don Cupitt and D. Z. Phillips—have claimed that Christianity can exist apart from any objective truth claims because the essence of religion is not a description or explanation of reality, but a way or form of life that is meaningful. For example, belief in “the last judgment” is not the expectation that we will literally stand before God one day to give an account for all we have done. It is rather an approach to life where responsibility is at the forefront of our thinking. It is a statement of value, not of fact. This approach is known as religious nonrealism. Some “postliberal” theologians seem to move in this direction as well, since they exchange any objective claims of biblical revelation for merely living within the parameters of the biblical narratives. Instead of viewing biblical revelation as propositional (or truth affirming), they see it as expressive of the thoughts and feelings of the biblical writers.

The best antidote to any form of Christian nonrealism is some sustained reading of the Bible itself, as well as a healthy dose of the great thinkers and activists who have sworn allegiance to it. Martyrs have not gone to the death for a “way of life” divorced from truth claims. Apologists such as Augustine, Aquinas, and Pascal have not defended the meaningfulness of living within the Christian narrative apart from its objective and eternal truth. No, the truth of the Christian narrative is precisely what makes the Christian life meaningful and worthwhile. Nonrealists to the contrary, statements of theological value that have meaning are also assertions about reality. Christians strive to live a good and faithful life because they know their deeds will eventually come under the final scrutiny of God. Fact and value meet and kiss each other. The only sufficient reason for wanting to blend one’s own narrative with the narrative of the Bible is that what the Bible describes about creation, fall, and redemption is true and worth believing and obeying. If it is not, then to live within this story line is literally to live a lie—and to advocate that others live this lie as well.

What really lies behind nonrealist forms of religion is a capitulation to non-Christian worldviews. The reasoning is that if Christianity cannot succeed in the world of ideas—if it cannot compete, say, with the materialistic worldview—then its only recourse is to abandon all truth claims and emphasize tradition, ritual, symbolism, experience, and community. There are two compelling reasons to reject such a move. First . . . Christianity has not lost out in the world of ideas. Therefore, there is no reason to exempt it from the demands of reality. Second, if Christianity cannot intellectually compete with other worldviews, the only sane and logical alternative is to abandon it completely. Christianity claims to be true. If it is not, it has lied and must be left behind. As Paul said, if Christ has not been raised from the dead, Christians are the most deceived and miserable urchins on the planet (1 Cor 15:17‑19).

When one speaks of “the Christian worldview,” this does not mean that Christians can or should agree on everything, but that they must agree that their view aims at biblical truth. Christians throughout history and today differ in their understanding of what their convictions should be. However, a biblical worldview tries to capture the essential ideas of Christianity, its fundamental doctrines, and how they hang together in explaining God, the universe, and humans. Some, to the contrary, think of Christianity as more of a set of behaviors and feelings and symbols, as opposed to a bona fide worldview. Dorothy Sayers lamented during the dark days of World War II that “we have rather lost sight of the idea that Christianity is supposed to be an interpretation of the universe.” Even Nietzsche, that colossal anti-Christian, knew this. When speaking of the English tendency to reject belief in God but to keep Christian ethics, Nietzsche proclaimed, “Christianity is a system, a whole view of things thought out together. By breaking one main concept out of it, the faith in God, one breaks the whole: Nothing necessarily remains in one’s hands.”

While the vast majority of Americans believe in a God, few have well-articulated worldviews. This is revealed in poll after poll showing that high percentages of Americans both (1) believe in God and (2) are moral relativists. This means that God, the ultimate reality in any theistic worldview, has nothing to say about the conduct of one’s life. This mass of worldview underachievers includes professing evangelical Christians. Many polls indicate massive biblical illiteracy, which may at least partially account for the dearth of evangelical influence in the world of ideas. Many Christians live in an intellectual ghost town and possess ghost minds. They may know something of a rich (but lost) intellectual heritage and be able to point to a few intellectuals “on our side” (like C. S. Lewis), but they have not attuned themselves to the cultivation of their inner map of reality.

Putting forth the lineaments of a Christian worldview is necessary in order to stipulate just what the rest of this book will advance as true and reasonable. We cannot defend something of which we are ignorant. As William Wilberforce observed, people admit that “vigorous resolution, strenuous diligence, and steady perseverance” are required for learning, wealth, and military excellence, yet we “expect to be Christians without labor, study or inquiry!”

This is more preposterous because Christianity, a revelation from God and not a human, shows us new relations with their correspondent duties. It contains also doctrines, motives, and precepts peculiar to itself. We cannot reasonably expect to become proficient accidentally.

The very articulation of the Christian worldview may have a weighty apologetic effect, even apart from its philosophical defense. There are at least two salient reasons for this. First, by clearly explaining what Christianity affirms and what it does not affirm, we may remove obstacles to belief generated by false stereotypes. Second, when the Christian vision is presented in its wholeness and significance as a view of all of existence, which has engaged some of the greatest minds of history, this may constructively influence those in search of a broad and deep worldview. The same effect may be produced when a vitally functioning Christian mind (rooted in a Christian worldview) is brought to bear on any number of pertinent social, political, moral and aesthetic issues. Harry Blamires notes that the Christian mind is “a mind trained, informed, equipped to handle the data of secular controversy within a framework of reference which is constructed of Christian presuppositions.”

— Douglas Groothuis is Professor of Philosophy at Denver Seminary, where he has served since 1993. He is the author of twelve books, including Philosophy in Seven Sentences and Walking Through Twilight. He has also authored over thirty academic papers.

The above excerpt is taken from Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith, 2nd edition, by Douglas Groothuis. Copyright © 2022 by Douglas Groothuis. Published by InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL. www.ivpress.com.

Find this new second edition of Christian Apologetics at Amazon, InterVarsity Press, and other major booksellers.

Image by reuben Farrugia from Pixabay

* This is a sponsored post.