wholly intersections
  • My Blog
  • Home
  • About Me
  • Intro to Theology

What is Truth? 2017 edition

1/30/2017

1 Comment

 
facts - empirically verifiable realities in the world of space and time; of diminishing value as "facts" the more they are expressed in generalities; can sometimes be expressed mathematically and in relation to other mathematical facts (e.g. "greater than," "less than," largest, smallest, etc.)

alternative facts - an appropriate expression for different-but-comparable data sets.
            Appropriate: at one point, alternative facts told us with some accuracy that there were more slaves in the world today than ever before in history AND a smaller proportion of the human population was enslaved than ever before in history - because of population growth, these are both "facts", though somewhat generally expressed and needing further definition
             NOT Appropriate: the crowd in a particular American city on a particular inauguration day was the largest ever AND the same crowd in the same American city on a particular inauguration day was NOT the largest ever - because of the specificity involved, these are NOT appropriately termed "alternative facts"

opinion - unverifiable expressions of personal/individual preference; often articulated in qualitative judgements like "good" or "bad," "best" or "worst," etc., but prone to reasonable and rapid dismissal without argument by others who merely disagree

T/truth - sometimes used interchangeably with "fact," but unlike "facts" T/truth is not always verifiable, but is usually worth an argument; often depends on some authority larger than the individual, like divine revelation or widely and strongly held communal ideals; a story that points to a larger truth can be deemed true, even if it is not factual (eg. "The Little Red Hen" "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" etc.). Since it is not always verifiable, and authorities may only be recognized by their particular communities, humility is needed and agreement should not necessarily be expected, but contradictory claims that cannot be reconciled through clarification should not BOTH be granted the status of "truth"

paradox - apparently contradictory truth claims that, upon closer examination, turn out NOT to be contradictory, for a variety of reasons (terms are used differently, different times, places and circumstances are being referred to, different perspectives or angles are being offered)
1 Comment

unChristian Biblical Worldview Part 2

10/24/2010

0 Comments

 
In my last post, I described the recent attention to young adult faith and religiosity and The Barna Group's "Biblical Worldview" or BWV as I call it.  So, what do I think this survey means exactly?  Well, the reason I am calling these posts "unChristian Biblical Worldview" is because the set of items that Barna describes approvingly as the BWV seems likely to produce precisely the kinds of Christians that ultimately produce the kinds of responses to Christians described in unchristian.  Yet, Barna is promoting their version of the BWV and producing materials designed to nurture and foster it.
unchristian respondents described Christians as hypocritical, insincere and only concerned with converting people, antihomosexual, sheltered, too political, and judgemental.  If, as the article cited in my last post suggests, BWV actually results in strong disapproval of various behaviors, then judgemental and antihomosexual make sense.  If, as I infer from the same article, BWV results in more disapproval than actual behavioral compliance (the article only lists behavioral compliance on gambling, getting drunk and viewing porn), then hypocritical makes sense too.  

A more foundational consideration is the selection of items that constitute the BWV.  For instance, why is sharing faith the only behavioral obligation on the BWV list, as opposed to say compassionate interaction with others?  The latter has more frequent and consistent Biblical support and would likely result in more sincere interaction, while the former could more easily correlate to an offensive preoccupation with the conversion of others.  I'm not arguing that Christians don't have this obligation, but I question whether it is more foundational to a worldview shaped by the Bible than some other obligations.  I would have similar questions about the BWV items about the reality of Satan and the sinlessness of Jesus, not because they aren't "Biblical" but because they don't seem as foundational, frequent or pervasive in the Bible itself as say... the sinfulness of human beings or the reality of angels for instance.  I might also ask questions about the BWV's association of "truth" with "accuracy" (this is derived from Barna's book Think Like Jesus) but that is for the next post.

One other correlate is crucial to aligning the lists from the BWV and unchristian data.  David Kinnaman spoke at a conference at Messiah College (my alma mater and current employer) this past summer.  I found him refreshing and winsome.  I will say more about his presentation in the next post about the demographic gap and young adults.  Kinnaman revealed one piece of data that I have not found anywhere else:  He told the audience that 60% of Christians with a BWV also would support a federal amendment declaring Christianity the official religion of the United States!!  I think I can safely say that this could be considered a contribution to the "too political" perception of non-Christians in unchristian. The question is whether this makes them (in my opinion) unchristian (supporting a kind of power-grab that seems very contra-Jesus) or un-American (rejecting a fundamental item of the First Amendment). 

Since only 19% of those Barna described as "born-again Christians" had a BWV, and in
another Barna release, only half of Protestant pastors had a BWV, the BWV clearly cannot be held responsible for the perceptions cited in unchristian, unless Christians with a BWV have a massively disproportionate influence on the general perception of all Christians.  We certainly can't blame the Bible, since (it seems to me) the Barna BWV is an odd set of priorities Biblically speaking.  What seems possible is: since significantly more pastors do have a BWV, they may be doing a better job at communicating an obligation to disapprove than inculcating the particular Barna BWV.  

In my next post I will consider the generation gap in the BWV and the "truth" factor.
0 Comments

unChristian Biblical Worldview Part 1

10/23/2010

10 Comments

 
Picture
It seems that nothing is hotter these days than the faith and religious practices of youth and young adults, and maybe the 20-somethings in general.  Young adults leaving church is occasionally front page news.  Major studies have been published by sociologists Christian Smith and Robert Wuthnow, as well as Christian publisher Lifeway, and books about young adult ministry methodology abound (by ministers of all ages, and various locations in Christian tradition). The Barna Group has been at this longer than most.  In 2007, Barna research commissioned by Gabe Lyons confirmed what most Americans already know; that non-Christians think that Christians are pretty unchristian (which resulted in the book by that title). 

Another Barna research project has involved research into Americans’ adherence to “The Biblical Worldview” (BWV hereafter) and resulted in George Barna’s book Think Like Jesus.  A 2003 article called A Biblical Worldview Has A Radical Affect On A Person’s Life, reported on some of the results of this research, which included levels of adherence to BWV (about 4% of the population in 2003, 9% in a 2009 article) as well as the implications for certain standards of behavioral compliance.  Not surprisingly, Americans with a BWV were much more likely to adhere to the standards of morality affirmed by people with a BWV (which largely consists of disapproval of certain sexual behaviors, drunkenness and gambling).  While it is highly unlikely that any American would possess a BWV under the Barna framework, it is much more likely if one is a White married Protestant, over 30 years of age who lives in Texas or North Carolina. Hm.
At this point, I suspect you’re wondering: What IS the BWV?  I’ll tell you (although iterations vary from the 2003 to the 2009 article).

The Barna Group measures adherence to the BWV according to belief-agreement with 8 items:

Absolute moral truth exists;  34/46

-       Such truth is defined by the Bible

The Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches.  50/79

Satan is considered to be a real being or force, not merely symbolic.  27/40

A person cannot earn their way into Heaven by trying to be good or do good works.  28/47

Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth.  40/62

God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the world who still rules the universe today. 70/93

Christians have an obligation to share their faith with others.

So
, what does this mean and why is it important? What does it have to do with young adults?
And what are those numbers about
? 
I’ll tell you what I think in my next post.


10 Comments

    Matt Hunter, Ph.D

    Multidisciplinary religious scholar and practitioner

    Archives

    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010

    Categories

    All
    American Religion
    Barna
    Biblical Worldview
    Christianity
    C.S. Lewis
    Data
    Dissertation
    Education
    Evangelism
    Interfaith
    Nationalism
    Patriotism
    Race
    Religion
    Religion And Pop Culture
    Religion And Pop-culture
    Religious History
    Science
    Sociology
    Teaching
    Theology
    Unchristian
    Violence
    Visual Culture
    Young Adults

    RSS Feed

    View my profile on LinkedIn
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.