THEOLOGICAL WORLDVIEW AND ITS IMPACT ON THE SDA CHURCH

Presentation made at the General Conference of the Seventh_day Adventist Church Autumn
Council _ October 2, 1995
Fernando L. Canale

1. Introduction

We have already been introduced to the existence of the worldviews and the pervasive way in
which they penetrates our daily lives. The fact that the worldviews operating in Christian
theologies differ radically from the worldview operating in biblical thinking has also been
underlined. Within this general context I am supposed to help you "see" the way in which a
worldview, when working within theology, impacts the life of the church, specifically, the
Seventh_day Adventist Church. Why should the attention of the Church be distracted from its
essential task of Proclaiming to Gospel to dealing with a theoretical issue? Is theworldview
issue relevant for the life and the mission of the Church today?

My presentation will attempt to explain a technical issue in everyday language in the hope
that the connection that exists between worldview, theology, and life may be clearly
perceived. With this goal in mind I will first review the general notion and role of worldview
and then address the impact thatworldview has on the theology and the life of the Adventist
Church.

2. Clarifying the Notion of Worldview

Definition: Set of First Principles

We can define the notion of worldview in various ways. Ronald H. Nash has advanced a
simple way to define the concept of Worldview. He suggests that "a worldview is a set of
beliefs about the most important issues in life" (Worldviews in Conflict: Choosing
Christianity in a World of Ideas [Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1992], 16). In more
elaborate fashion, it is possible to suggest that a worldview is an ensemble of ideas about
reality that, because of their general nature and broad scope, condition the entire range of
human thought and action.

Some Implications of the definition In first place, it is important to recognize that we are
using the concept "worldview" technically. We are not referring literally to a "view of the
world" as in Cosmology (the study of the world as natural phenomenon). In this presentation
the term worldview has a much broader connotation. For instance, it involves, among other
foundational issues, general notions about God, human beings, and human history. The
definitions also reveal that the worldview belongs to the realm of human knowledge, in other
words, to the cognitive domain. Further, we must emphasize the fact that precisely due to its
cognitive nature and role [to be discussed later] worldview is an essential component of
human nature. Scripture states the anthropological principle that "as he [man and woman]
thinketh in his heart, so [is] he" (Prov 23:7 [KJV]). Ellen G. White, fully working her thought
based on this Scriptural principle, explains that "the mind controls the whole man. All our
actions, good or bad, have their source in the mind" (EGW, Mind, Character, and Personality,
1:72). Precisely because human beings are what they think, cherish, and decide in their
thoughts, worldview plays such an important and decisive role, not only in the thinking, but
also in the life and action of the Church. Let us turn now to explore briefly the general role
that worldviewplays in the experience of human beings.

Role: Ultimate Presuppositions

What does worldview do within the area of knowledge and life? The answer to this question
is simple and foundational for understanding the impact of worldview on the life of the
church. The specific direct role played by worldview consists in determining the way in
which human beings think. From this it follows that worldview determines the way in which
human beings act. Let me explain the role of worldview by using some analogies. Let us
think of worldview as a pair of eyeglasses. As eyeglasses allow the individual to perceive
reality, worldview allows us to see (understand) the teachings of Scripture. This analogy
underlines the fact that worldview functions as the ultimate presupposition involved in the
process of thinking and interpreting Scripture. Imagine a very primitive, underdeveloped
culture of aborigines. They are human beings like we are with the only difference that they
have no knowledge of our technology. They are as capable of knowing things as we are.
Consequently, they have a Worldview through which they can understand reality and even
themselves. In this context, imagine bringing a car to their village, ready to be driven. What
would happen? Would any of them open the door, turn on the ignition, and drive away?
Certainly not. Imagine the same situation in the Bronx. Would the residents of the Bronx act
in the same way as the villagers? Certainly not. What factor is responsible for the difference?
The factor responsible for the difference is not the car, but the worldview that each group
uses to interpret the same situation. The same happens in the realm of theology. Scripture is
the same but theologies are different because of the worldviews used in its interpretation.

The role played by worldview can also be likened to a computer program. As a computer
programworldview allows us to interpret the entire range of biblical data without eliminating
any piece or ignoring the natural connections. Specifically, the break down of the comparison
between worldview and the computer would be as follow. The hardware corresponds to the
human brain. The software (program) to run the computer corresponds to the Worldview. The
data being processed or interpreted in our case come from Scripture. The outcome the
computer produces, for instance a printout, corresponds to theology and preaching. Finally, in
a very real way worldview produces a domino effect. The presuppositional role played by
aworldview trickles down, affecting the way in which we understand each portion and
doctrine of Scripture. I hope you are familiar with the very popular table game called
"Dominoes." One plays the domino game with many small, flat blocks. The face of each
block has two squares, each either blank or bearing dots. These flats are used in a game in
which the ends of such pieces are matched. My analogy does not refer to the domino game
but to the domino effect that is obtained when these flats are arranged in a vertical position in
close proximity to each other and in a consecutive order thus forming a line or series of lines.
The domino effect is obtained when the first domino in the consecutive series is tilted toward
the one standing immediately next to it. As we very well know, tilting the first flat in the
series unleashes a chain reaction that tumbles the whole series of dominoes. In the theological
task the worldview functions like the first domino flat, or the first few flats in the entire
sequence, whose action determines a chain reaction that brings the whole line to the floor. In
the same way the worldview initiates a chain reaction that affects the whole thinking and life
of the church.
Summary: Some Important facts about the Worldview

First, we have stated in various ways that the Worldview is a bunch of foundational ideas
about realities which, working as presuppositions, are directly involved in the process by
which human beings understand, and relate to, reality. Moreover, the universal reach of
worldview needs to be recognized and accepted as an unavoidable reality. Possessing a
worldview is not optional. All human beings think and act within a worldview even when
unaware of such a fact. Next, all human beings initially get a worldviewthrough a process of
cultural assimilation. Worldviews usually spread by way of an uncritical process of
assimilation of whatever is available in the cultural milieu. Worldviews also spread through
cultural assimilation in the more sophisticated levels of academia. Worldview works as a pair
of glasses, as a computer program that allows us to see and determines the way we
understand things including Scripture. A veritable chain reaction (Domino effect) generating
from the Worldview reaches the entire range of human thinking, experience, and action.

Finally, we need to realize that human beings are not predetermined to function within the
worldviewprevalent in the culture in which they have been educated. On the contrary, by way
of some reflective process they can choose the worldview they want to adopt. Of course, the
choice between availableworldviews becomes possible only after the individual recognizes
the existence and role of a worldview in his/her own thinking and life. Worldview is
programmable. We are not bound to cultural slavery by means of the Worldview. To get a
Worldview by cultural assimilation is not like getting a terminal disease. Even when we have
assimilated one or several components of different worldviews, replacing them by another
one is possible. The worldview we operate with is not absolute or unchangeable. On the
contrary, we can program our operative Worldview and even exchange it with another. In
fact, a variety of worldviews from which to choose is always available. This fact brings hope
for the consciousness and work of the Church.

After this brief review of some important aspects of worldview, we now turn our attention to
the way in which the worldview impacts the task of Christian theology and the thinking and
life of the Seventh_day Adventist Church. As we continue let us keep in mind the following
question: Why should we change our operative Worldview?

3. Worldview's Impact on Theology

Clarity demands that I briefly define the way in which I am going to use the word "theology"
in the following pages. By the world "theology" I mean the understanding of Scripture. Our
previous discussion has made us aware of the fact that the interpretation of Scripture always
involves a worldview. Theology, then, is always subordinated to the worldview theologians,
pastors, and believers operate with. This being the case, we should ask ourselves whether
Adventist theology can adopt any worldview without contradicting its biblical foundations.
Previous presentations and Dr. Humberto Rasi's paper mention the existence of three major
options from which Adventism could choose, namely, the Naturalistic, Pantheistic, and
Theistic Worldviews.Clearly, Adventism cannot adopt either the Naturalistic or the
Pantheistic Worldviews without contradicting itself. Consequently, in this presentation I am
going to deal specifically with the Theistic Worldview operating in most of classical and
modern theologies. The conception of God we find working in the Biblical Worldview is
neither pantheistic nor naturalistic but theistic. The Biblical God cannot be confused or
identified with His creation. In this sense we can argue that the Biblical Worldview is Theist.
Yet, when the Biblical Worldview is compared with the Classical Worldview operative in
Christian theology, which is generally designated as Theistic Worldview, one discovers the
existence of foundational differences between the classical and the biblical way of
understanding God which generate different interpretations of Theism. To avoid confusion in
my presentation I will call classical theism Theistic Worldview, and, biblical theism Biblical
Worldview. Comparing the Theistic and Biblical Worldviews is a complex enterprise. The
intricacy of the issue and the specific purpose of this presentation calls for simplification.
Thus, I will deal only with two main factors that are at the very root of the difference that
exists between the Theistic and Biblical Worldviews. These two components exercise their
role at the very beginning of the chain reaction characteristic of the way in which a
worldview works. Thomas Aquinas recognized the importance of giving careful thought to
the way in which the theological task is started. The first words of his Being and Essence
warn all theologians that "a small mistake in the beginning is a great one in the end." The two
components are first, the question of the origin of one's Worldview, and second, the way in
which the basic nature of reality as a whole is understood. Since most of us are more familiar
with the Biblical than with the Theistic Worldview, I am going to concentrate my attention on
the Theistic Worldview.

The Theistic Worldview departs from the Biblical one

The Theistic and Biblical Worldviews disagree at the very beginning of the theological task
on two major counts. First, in adopting the Theistic Worldview Christian theology explicitly
recognizes that the theological worldview originates in some human philosophy. The Biblical
Worldview, on the contrary, originates in divine revelation as inspired in the scriptural
record. That the worldview operative in Christian theology originates in human philosophy
rather than in biblical revelation is a presupposition widely accepted in Christian theology.
The Theistic Worldview operating in Christian Theology originated in Greek philosophy,
particularly in the writings of Plato and Aristotle. The basic ideas of Plato's worldvieware so
influential that some thinkers see the whole history of western thinking as a footnote to Plato.

The content of the Theistic Worldview operative in most Christian theologies has been, and
continues to be, decided by general tenets of Greek philosophy or some modified version of
it. From this source, a dualisticworldview has developed. As Adventists we are familiar with
the anthropological dualism manifested in the soul_body dichotomy generally embraced by
Christianity. We know that such a dichotomy does not come from biblical thinking. Where
does it come from? It comes from Greek philosophy as a requirement of the grounding
dualistic worldview. Let me succinctly explain some basic features of the dualistic worldview
of theism. Plato conceived the world as having two tiers, the heavenly and the earthly. The
basic characteristic of the heavenly tier is its immutability. In heaven there is no change, no
movement, no space, no time, no history, in a word, nothing ever happens in heaven.
Precisely because of these characteristics Plato conceived that heaven is real in the true and
ultimate sense. The earthly tier, on the other hand, is the duplication of the heavenly but
under a not so real dimension where change, movement, space, time and history rein.

When applied to Christian theology, this worldview requires that God and His actions should
always meet the basic requirements of the heavenly tier. God cannot interact within the
earthly tier. No action of God involves, then, any change, movement, or involvement with
space, time, and history. This dualisticworldview determines that God acts in His world while
human beings act in theirs. A basic incompatibility between the heavenly and earthly orders
is established. I hope you can see that the Theistic worldview is incompatible with the
biblical one. If you ask me to put the Biblical worldview in one word, I will use three: The
Great Controversy. Yet, when the Theistic Worldview is operating the Great Controversy
idea and all its components are to be discarded because God is not involved with space, time,
and history. No wonder Christian theology has been unable through the centuries to make
sense of Scripture. The first step anybody needs to understand God's revelation in Scripture is
to approach it on its own terms. In other words, to understand the cognitive content of God's
revelation one needs to read Scripture using the Biblical rather than the Theistic Worldview.
The direct application that this issue has for the witnessing and evangelism of the Church
deserves that pastors and lay members should take it seriously. Summing up this section, let
me suggest that Adventism cannot face the challenge of adopting a worldviewby uncritically
absorbing the theistic interpretation of it. The Adventist position requires faithfulness to
Scripture above any human idea. Consequently, the contents of the worldview cannot be
drawn from the philosophical supermarket. Christians need to turn to Scripture in order to
discover the worldviewoperating in it. Then, this discovery must become operative in the way
the Church as a whole relates to the prompting of the Holy Spirit as it reads Scriptures,
thinks, and acts. Additionally, Adventism cannot adopt the Theistic Worldview because it
rules out the basic biblical view that God dwells and acts within our human history. To make
this suggestion clearer we turn our attention now to some consequences of doing theology
under the Theistic Worldview.

Theological Implications of the Theistic Worldview

As a sample, we are going to consider only one way in which the adoption of the Theistic
Worldviewaffects the task of theology. I am referring to the issue of God's actions. We have
already explained that when the Greek dichotomous worldview is adopted, God can only act
outside time and history. Conversely, according to the Theistic Worldview God cannot act
historically within the flux of time and history. Catholic and Protestant theologies, whether in
their classical or liberal traditions, adopt this feature. The issues I have selected as samples
are: the manner of God's activity, the role of Scripture, creation, the experience of salvation,
the cross, and the atonement.

The Manner of God's Activity. When the Theistic Worldview is applied, God's action in the
human world can only occur in the instantaneous event. In other words, God's action occurs
always at the point of intersection (the instantaneous event) between a vertical line
illustrating His nonhistorical eternal action and a horizontal line depicting the historical world
of human beings. God cannot simply act within the historical world of human beings in the
historical way that is proper to them. This view clearly contradicts the historical way in which
Scripture portrays the actions of God. The conception of the manner in which His activity
takes place affects the interpretation of all divine actions and therefore the entire range of
biblical interpretation and doctrinal teachings.

The Role of Scripture. When the Theistic Worldview is adopted, the interpretation of the
manner of divine activity described above applies to all doctrines. The doctrine of Scripture
and its interpretation are no exception to the domino effect unleashed by the application of
the Theistic Worldview. If God acts only in the instant His action in revealing His will cannot
be historical. In revelation God does not speak or disclose information. Scripture, then, does
not originate in God's thinking process but in the mind and imagination of humans. Even if
some theologians maintain a high view of biblical inspiration, in the end, the Theistic
Worldview will undermine the divine authority of Scripture which the doctrine of inspiration
is supposed to have established. Biblical contents, then, hold human rather than divine
authority. The erosion of biblical authority we witness these days is due, among others
factors, to the application of theTheistic Worldview. When the Theistic Worldview is applied
to the doctrine and interpretation of Scripture a major clash occurs. On the one hand,
Scripture portrays God acting within the historical understanding of ultimate reality (as
unfolded in dynamics of the Great Controversy), on the other hand, the Theistic Worldview
does not make room for such a conception. It follows that the nonhistorical definition of
reality espoused by the Theistic Worldview requires a major reinterpretation of biblical
teachings therefore undermining its authority as text and exalting the authority of the reader.
This consequence of applying the Theistic Worldview clearly collides with the Adventist
position on the authority and role of Scripture.

Creation: Nonhistorical Instant. Since the theistic interpretation of worldview does not allow
historical divine activity within human time, Christian theologians see major problem in
conceding that the six days creation account of Genesis ever actually happened. It seems
clear to those using the Theistic Worldview that since Genesis speaks of creation as a
historical act of God, we should interpret it as an illustration or myth of God's timeless
instantaneous creative activity. As myth, Genesis is not referring to the historical process
through which our universe originated but to the ontological instant in which the whole
existence of our universe is grounded. According to this view, then, creation is not an account
of the historical side of the origin of the Universe but of its grounding on the other side of the
dichotomous worldview of theism. According to the requirements of the Theistic Worldview
one is led to assume that God does not act within the order of historical things but rather in
His own nonhistorical eternal never changing act. The interpretation of the way in which our
world originated belongs in the historical level (world), of theTheistic Worldview. It is
logical for those operating within this worldview to ask science for the most accurate
explanation of the historical side of the "creation" process. Within this framework an
increasing number of Christian theologians know no major problem in subscribing to theistic
evolutionism. TheTheistic Worldview, therefore, makes room for Theistic evolution. This
obviously contradicts the historical understanding of the origins of our universe essential to
Biblical and Adventist theologies.

The Experience of Salvation. According to the Theistic Worldview human beings experience
salvation only as an otherworldly event. That is, as an event which does not take place within
the flow of historical time. Salvation is experienced in the instant in which God's eternity and
human history intersect. Specifically speaking, the experience of salvation takes the form of
either "sacrament" (classical) or "encounter" (liberal). The dichotomous worldview of theism
requires that both the "sacrament" and the "encounter" should be understood in a dualistic
way as well. Sacrament and encounter have two sides, one visible but external and the other
invisible but real. Sacrament and encounter, then, take place in the nonhistorical side of the
instant in which the divine intersects with the human. Since the cognitive dimension of
humanity mainly belongs to the historical level (world), the Christian experience in
sacrament and encounter is non_cognitive in nature. This view contradicts Biblical Theology
because it does not integrate the historical consciousness of the individual in the process of
salvation. According to the Theistic Worldview, then, the knowledge of biblical revelation
contributes literally nothing to the essence of the way in which Christian believers experience
salvation.

The Cross. Since the Theistic interpretation of worldview does not make room for a historical
understanding of God's actions, the cross of Christ cannot involve a risk to God. In other
words, the temptations of Christ were not real temptations to God. Besides, since the cross as
presented in the New Testament is essentially a historical contingent event, God Himself can
never have experienced the cross. The cross only "happened" "for us." Again the dichotomy
of the Theistic Worldview requires a dichotomous interpretation. The cross, then, has two
sides. The real side occurs on the other side of time where time and risk do not exist. The
external side of the concrete historical cross transpires where time and risk exists. God's
action can only happen on the real side, the invisible side. We can access the invisible real
side only indirectly by faith. We can access the historical concrete side directly through
knowledge. It follows that the divine_human Christ never died or resurrected. Such actions
cannot occur within the nonhistorical level in which God exists and acts. Within this context,
then, the cross becomes only the most appropriate revelation to us of the eternal reality of
salvation always preexisting in God's being. Moreover, the biblical statement that the son
"learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of
eternal salvation" (Heb 5:8 [NIV]) cannot be understood literally. The spatial temporal event
of the cross cannot be understood as the cause of salvation because God cannot act in space
and time nor can salvation be the consequence of a historical action. The central stone of
Christian teaching is reinterpreted away. The cornerstone of the Great Controversy has been
removed.

The Atonement. Since God's action belongs to the nonhistorical side of the theistic
dichotomousworldview, divine salvation cannot be understood as a process of historical acts.
According to the Theistic Worldview God achieves the salvation of human beings by way of
one perfect and eternal act equal to Himself. Thus, the biblical idea of a historical process in
which God is involved and through which He works out the salvation of human beings, the
world, and the universe, is unthinkable under the domain of the Theistic Worldview. Again,
the dichotomous worldview of theism requires a dichotomous view of the atonement. The
atonement can only be a divine act. Therefore, it must occur in the nonhistorical invisible side
of reality. The atonement, then, was always real. It never becomes real. Such eternal reality is
complete and completely revealed in the cross of Jesus. Nothing can be added to its
completeness by God because the atonement is an eternal reality in God Himself. Conversely,
the biblical doctrine of the sanctuary which presents a God still involved in achieving human
and universal salvation within space and time becomes simply contradictory and senseless
under the Theistic Worldview. When the Theistic Worldview is adopted, the sanctuary
doctrine becomes another historical symbol of the eternal atonement whose reality belongs to
the invisible nonhistorical side.

Summary

The content of the worldview, working as a presupposition, unleashes a chain reaction (a

domino effect) which determines the interpretation of Scripture and the understanding of the
doctrines of Christianity. We have concentrated our attention on worldview which has
exercised a dominant influence on Christian theology ever since its beginnings. We have also
attempted a brief comparison between the Theistic and the Biblical Worldviews. The impact
of the Theistic Worldview on Adventist theology (understanding of Scripture) is momentous
and negative. If I should sum up this impact, a word comes to mind: assimilation to Catholic
and Protestant theologies. Concretely, the application of the Theistic Worldview to Adventist
theology would require a major departure from Biblical theology and the historical landmarks
of Adventist Theology. To clarify the kind of reinterpretation I am talking about let me
mention some, by way of example. In the first place, Scripture has to capitulate to philosophy
its rightful role as ultimate theological authority. Consequently, all Biblical teachings must
undergo a process of reinterpretation to bring them in line with the nonhistorical
presuppositions of the Theistic Worldview. In this way foundational features of theBiblical
Worldview (the Great Controversy and the Sanctuary) will be eliminated as illustrations or
myths. As a result, biblical thinking will become distorted and replaced by ideas originating
in human imagination. The requirements of the Theistic Worldview,if accepted, would bring
Adventist theology to deny the reason for its existence (faithfulness to the entire record of
divine revelation as recorded in the Old and New Testaments).

Meanwhile, the careful identification and use of the Biblical Worldview in the task of
interpreting Scripture and doing theology will impact Adventist theology in a positive way.
To clarify what I mean let me mention some points by way of examples. Scripture rightfully
and completely exercises its role as the ultimate theological authority. Biblical teachings are
interpreted within the worldview in which they were originally conceived and expressed by
God. The Great Controversy and Sanctuary are called to play an essential role at the
presuppositional level. As a result, biblical thinking is recovered to its full extent and
richness. In this way Adventist theology could work within the sophisticated level of
contemporary scholarship while affirming its reason for existence: "God will have a people
upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and
basis of all reforms" (GC, 594_595). By developing the theological enterprise of the Church
based on the Biblical Worldview Adventist theology will produce a Biblical Theology as an
alternative to the Ecumenical Theology that has become pervasive at the end of the second
millennium.

4. Worldview's Impact on the Life of the Church

We are now able to attempt answering the question proposed to us by the title of this
presentation, namely, "what is the impact of the theological worldview on the life of the SDA
Church?" The impact of theological worldview on the life of the SDA Church depends on the
way in which we come to interpret the operative worldview. We have described two major
choices presenting themselves to us, namely, the Theistic and the Biblical Worldviews. In the
preceding section we have briefly dealt with the theological consequences. Now we address
the repercussions for the life and action of the SDA Church. I will start by referring to the
impact that adopting the Theistic Worldview will have on the life of the Church. I think the
impact of the Theistic Worldview will be felt, at least, in the following areas: The thinking of
the SDA Church, the structure of the community of faith, the way the community of faith
carries on its mission, and the way in which Adventism relates to the Christian world.

Impact of the Theistic Worldview on the Adventist Church

The impact of the Worldview on the life of the Church flows from the grounding impact of
the worldviewon the thinking and theology of the Church. The application of the Theistic
Worldview to the study of Scripture and thinking of the Church will lead to a subtle
assimilation of various kinds of Catholic and Protestant theologies available in the
supermarket of theology. Such a trend, if integrated into the thinking of the Church, would
translate itself inexorably (domino effect) in the fabric of everyday life.

Secularism. As theology becomes assimilated to mainline Christian thinking, the process of

secularization that such a trend has already brought to most Christian congregations, will find
no restraint to its universal expansion. On the contrary, Adventist pastors will argue in favor
of secularizing thinking and practices to match the already secular mind of their
congregations. The Bible will only play the role of an honoris causa in the life of the Church.
Human opinion will replace the Word of God that has been entrusted to our corporate
stewardship. Of course, since such practices occur within the Church, their proponents will
claim that theirs are endorsed by the Holy Spirit even when contradicting Scripture or the
counsel of Ellen White. We can already observe some of this secularization in some places.
Some will argue that, to reach secular minded persons, adapting our ways to the culture of the
times is necessary. This is the same argument that many Christian theologians have espoused
for centuries. As Adventist congregations assimilate themselves to their local cultural
environment the unity of the universal Church will break up in many pieces. This brings us to
the next consequence of adopting the Theistic Worldview.

Internal Divisions. If the Theistic Worldview were to be adopted, a chain reaction would be
unleashed. Theology would depart from Scripture and pay obeisance to the ideas of human
beings. This would cause the thinking of the Church to adapt to the cultural environment, that
is, the thinking of the Church would secularize. The next sept in this relentless chain reaction
is the fragmentation of the Church. The divisions that the Theistic Worldview has produced
in Christianity would be reproduced in Adventism. We are painfully aware that this aspect is
already present in the life of the SDA Church. Maybe some Adventists will consider these
internal divisions as a healthy expression of diversity. I think that diversity is healthy and to
be encouraged. What I am dealing with here is much deeper than what is usually meant by
diversity. I am talking about a division in the foundational structure of thinking and acting.
As explained earlier on in this presentation the Worldview stands at the very basis of the
thinking and life of the Church. A disagreement at this level divides us into de facto different
communities. I know that some may need time to digest this idea. For that reason let me
explore another consequence of adopting the Theistic Worldview that all pastors may more
concretely understand.

Growth Decline. As we have seen, the adoption of the Theistic Worldview will lead us to
embrace the views and teachings of main line Christian denominations. If Adventism
assimilates its teachings to the theologies of Christian denominations working within the
same Theistic Worldview, it necessarily follows that we will not only have the same
problems they have but, that we will become stagnant in our growth. If Adventism believes
that its theology is basically identical to the theology of the rest of Protestantism, there is no
reason why we should invite anybody to become "Adventist" instead of Catholic or
Protestant. As the mission of the Church loses its theological foundation it becomes
unnecessary. Mission cannot be the task of proclaiming forgotten biblical truths any longer.
The mission of the Church will stand in need of reinterpretation. Instead of proclaiming
biblical truths the mission of the Church may be reinterpreted as social involvement, political
activism and the like. I invite all those directly involved in the mission of the Church to
consider this point very carefully. Why is the growth of the Adventist Church stagnant or not
as energetic as it should be? Deficiency of consecration? Absence of the Holy Spirit's power?
Shortage of methods and human resources? We have emphasized these factors for years.
Could it be that the factor we have been dismissing all along is, after all, the real reason of
our calling as ministers? Could it be that a clearly developed theology firmly and faithfully
grounded in divine revelation as given to us in Scripture is a necessary condition for the
growth of the Church and the accomplishment of its Final mission? I am not saying that it is
the only factor involved. I am only suggesting that it be a necessary one. We cannot
systematically neglect this aspect and still expect God's blessings on our pitiful human ideas,
imagination, and culture. Could it be? Could it be that now is the time for the Church to go
back to Scripture as seriously as our pioneers did? That is the whole point for talking about
the issue concerning worldview.

Assimilation to the Ecumenical Movement. If Adventism adopted the Theistic Worldview its
theology would assimilate to traditional or current trends. When theological differences are
belittled, eventually we forget them. Adventism came to existence because one reason: to
bring biblical religion back to its full potential. This goal, basic for the reason of existence
and mission of Adventism, cannot be accomplished without a theology faithful to Scripture.
Adopting the Theistic Worldview will destroy the reason for the existence and mission of
Adventism. The assimilation of traditional or current theological trends will lead present and
future generations of Adventists to forget the biblical teachings that brought the Remnant
Church into existence. Moreover, if future generations think and act assuming the Theistic
Worldview, they will not understand the biblical doctrines that originated this movement.
Remember that worldviewworks as eyeglasses allowing us to see some things and completely
miss others as if they were nonexistent. If this scenario takes place, it will not surprise me to
hear poignant arguments addressed to this body in favor of joining the Ecumenical
movement.

Impact of the Biblical Worldview on the Adventist Church

All along I have assumed a reasonable degree of awareness of the basic contents of the
Biblical Worldview. The first presentation this morning gave us a taste of some ideas that
play a paramount role in the Biblical Worldview. A full appreciation of the impact that the
Biblical Worldview will have on the Adventist Church requires a more detailed explanation
of some basic issues. For instance, the Church must carefully address issues like the nature
and role of worldview, its components, the biblical interpretation of its components, and the
theology produced by such a worldview. As you very well know, Adventism has not
accomplished these tasks yet. However, describing some results that we can logically expect
from faithfully retrieving, adopting, and applying the Biblical Worldview to the life of the
Church is possible. I will address the same topics explored in our analysis of the Theistic
Worldview's impact on the life of the SDA Church. This procedure will help us to compare
the different outcome each worldview produces.

Holiness. Contrary to secularization that results from the adoption of the Theistic Worldview,
we find the holiness resulting from the application of the Biblical Worldview. Adopting the
Biblical Worldview will help Christians to understand the inner logic of Christianity as
revealed in Scripture. Additionally, it will uncover the present relevancy of Christianity.
Christianity will appear as a transcendent option for our present history and culture rather
than being changed into the image of every new cultural fashion. Religious holiness,
however, does not result merely from adopting either the Biblical Worldview or the theology
it produces. Holiness becomes a personal experience only in the religious act of surrendering
to the Holy Spirit's promptings. Nevertheless, the personal experience of holiness as
separation from the world can only occur when theology is also separated from the ideology
of the world and is faithful to divine revelation as presented in Scripture. It is not in the
power of the Church to show the Holy Spirit what to do. Yet, a faithful representation of
God's intentions and plans is a specific task about which we can do something. God's plan
and intentions are never the result of cultural construction. They originate in God's revelation.
God's revelation grounds the real possibility of holiness, that is, of living in direct departure
from, and conflict with, the cultural ideologies of the times. If Christ was not of this world (
John 17:16) His disciples cannot dismiss biblical revelation by adopting every form of
cultural ideology. The adoption of the Biblical Worldview, then, will allow the Church to
retrieve divine teachings. Confronting human ideologies, Biblical Theology introduces a true
alternative for human life and history. By opening a divinely originated option within the
continuum of human culture, the Biblical Worldviewbrings real novelty to the relentless
determinism of human culture. Release from cultural determinism is one concrete outcome of
biblical religion. Holiness, thus, belongs to the essence of Christian theology and Christian
life. A word of clarification to the reader on this point is advisable. The total separation from
culture and philosophy I am advocating here applies to the level of the worldview. Only
when, excluding all philosophies and cultural ideologies, the Church firmly bases its
operative worldview on Scriptural ideas, judgement and use of specific aspects of various
cultures should be integrated into the life and mission of the community of faith.

Internal Unity. A deliberate search for, and adoption of, the Biblical Worldview is a
necessary condition for taking "captive every thought" and "to make it obedient to Christ" (2
Cor 10:5). Christian unity is not only a unity in action. Unity in action and mission is
grounded at a deeper level, namely, unity in mind and thought (1 Cor. 1:10). Adventism
cannot attempt to achieve internal unity just by working at worship, action, and mission while
failing to address the level where unity is grounded, namely, in thinking. The Biblical
Worldview becomes the indispensable tool for grounding the internal unity of the global
church. However, unity of thinking is not enough. Unity of surrender to the Lord of thinking
must be an ongoing reality in the Church. As each of us surrenders to Christ's thinking,
internal unity will become a reality. As we all know, unity is a condition for receiving the
latter rain. The dynamic unity of Biblical Christianity will be reproduced in Adventism. It is
time for Adventists to realize that administrative policies or total concentration in missionary
activities that neglect the thinking process of the Church cannot force internal unity. If
Adventism insists on promoting what is practical for the worship and mission thereof, while
forgetting the reflective level of the Church, the culture and ideologies of the times will, in
due course, take control of the Church. Thus, the honest desire to be practical and foster the
mission of the Church will be ultimately defeated.

Growth Explosion. The identification and utilization of the Biblical Worldview in the process
of understanding Scripture will open the gates of God's treasure house. It will also meet a
necessary condition for receiving God's blessings: unity of mind in submition to the mind of
God. Besides, the richness of biblical gems so far neglected will empower the missionary task
of the Church around the world. There is much more to minister to the world than our present
eyeglasses allow us to see and use. As we engage in ministerial in_reach and outreach we are
generally satisfied to use less than a tenth of the power harnessed in Scripture. Divine
teachings in all their scope and power need to be brought to the consciousness of the Church,
and to bear directly on its life and mission. I know that the growth and mission of the Church
are very important priorities in the agenda of church administrators. I think this is the way it
should be. We should always ask ourselves: How shall we accomplish our God given
mission? How can we help the global and local communities in the task of sharing the gospel
to the world? Generally we have answered these questions in a practical way. Better
communication skills and more efficient equipment may be the obvious answers for a global
mission. Another familiar approach to this issue suggests the need to strengthen the
spirituality of our lives. After all we know that we have the truth. What we need are not more
theological studies, we say, but more consistent lives and better ways to express the truth that
we already possess. Yet, do we possess the truth or are we wandering around in the
supermarket of ideas becoming more confused as time goes by? Does the present generation
of Adventists know the truth? The answer depends on what you mean by "knowing." If
knowing means being aware of the enunciation of foundational doctrines, you may be right.
Most Adventist believers may know the truth in this superficial sense. Nevertheless, to know
the truth has a much deeper meaning. We do not become transformed into the likeness of the
information we are aware of, but of the ideas we understand, accept and follow. Do we
understand the truth as it is in Jesus? Are we able to share that understanding with others?
The impact of the Theistic Worldview in Adventism, via cultural assimilation leads me to
suspect that such may not be the case. What if, instead of persisting in the old and ineffective
emphasis on practice alone we try to balance it with a retrieval of the reflective level where
we discover and share truths? What if that which we have been neglecting for decades is the
cornerstone of our mission? Think about it. Pray about it. Do something about it.

Alternative to the Ecumenical Movement. When the Biblical Worldview replaces the Theistic
Worldviewthe vast richness of divine truth is made available to everyone. Our ministry
consists in helping human beings to get acquainted with and use the Biblical Worldview as
they consider Scripture as divine revelation. When Scripture is studied without that simple
provision, the culture of the times will become a formidable stumbling block hindering and
even impeding a proper understanding of Scripture. We need to help human beings to see and
understand. As we attempt such a comprehensive task, our mission to the world will not only
be underway but it will take a surprising new form. In its universality it will present a real
alternative to the ecumenical movement. As we know it today, the ecumenical movement is
the necessary outcome of pursuing Christian Theology under the requirements of the Theistic
Worldview.Conversely, the adoption of the Biblical Worldview and its consistent application
to the life and mission of the Church will not only prevent believers from joining the
ecumenical movement, but will create a formidable alternative to it. This alternative has the
decisive advantage of being solidly based on God's revelation that is universally available in
Scripture. When the final scenes of the Great Controversy come to pass, this alternative will
help many other sincere Christians to stand, together with Adventist believers, in an
unwavering allegiance to the God of Scripture.

5. Conclusion

Can Adventism incorporate the Theistic Worldview without contradicting itself and forsaking
its mission? It seems clear to me that the Theistic Worldview, still operative in most Christian
theologies, is incompatible with the Biblical Worldview and, therefore, cannot be
incorporated into Adventism without contradicting its reason of existence and causing
irreparable damage to its experience and mission. What can we do? Can Adventism avoid
becoming assimilated to culture? Yes, Adventism can avoid the inroads of secularism and
institutionalism. The way I recommend is simple. However simple, it requires a change in the
logistics of Adventism. The movement should be able to function, not only on the basis of a
practical level of everyday life, but also based on the reflective mode of human experience
(see diagram). Within the reflective mode, we must observe unwavering faithfulness to the
authority of Scripture in the daily business of interpreting, thinking, and acting out God's will
in today's world. This is the only way in which Adventism can avoid the twin threat of
secularism and institutionalism. The task of retrieving the Biblical Worldview and using it in
the daily business of the Church should be undertaken simultaneously at all the levels of
Church life, including the administrative, pastoral, educational and research communities.
The choice before us is clear. On one side we can dismiss the worldview issue as another
theoretical non_essential to the life and mission of the Church. This attitude flows from
simple inertia which holds that "if we continue the usual routine but pray a little harder, every
problem will be solved. After all, God is still in control and in Him we trust." This is the
easier route. It requires neither effort nor the investment of time and money. As tempting as it
might seem this alternative will lead Adventism to assimilate the Theistic Worldview of main
line Christianity or some version of the Naturalistic or Pantheistic Worldviews. By the way,
this is the course some of us are exploring right now. If we allow it to continue unabated the
secularization of the Church will accelerate in the years to come. On the other side,
Adventism might make a bold move and break away from administrative inertia and cultural
determinism. The issue regarding worldview and its hidden work could be considered
essential to the life and mission of the Church as to include it in its permanent agenda. This
choice, through active involvement of all the levels of the Church, will lead to the recapturing
and retrieval of the Biblical Worldview. Retrieving the Biblical Worldview into the
consciousness and life of the Church will trigger a chain reaction (a domino effect) which,
among others aspects, will include the straightening of the internal unity of a Global Church,
and our moving beyond a simple growth explosion into the eschatological accomplishment of
the final mission of the Christian Church. The future of Adventism depends on the decision
we take today. To take no decision reinforces the status quo which in the end will bring
Adventism to absorb the Theistic Worldview and the chain reaction it originates.