Worldview, Theology, and Cultural Formation: An Analysis of the Influence of Ideas on the Construction of a People's Mindset

WORLDVIEW, THEOLOGY, AND CULTURAL FORMATION: AN ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF IDEAS ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PEOPLE’S MINDSET

New Life Community Church – USA Theological Conference: Reverse Mission 2026

Abstract

This article investigates the relationship between worldview, theology, and cultural formation, beginning with the premise that no society develops within an intellectual, religious, or metaphysical vacuum. Behind institutions, political systems, social structures, and cultural practices lie fundamental assumptions about reality, truth, morality, human nature, and the meaning of history. These assumptions constitute what may be described as a worldview and exert significant influence on the way individuals and communities interpret the world and organize their collective lives. In this sense, theology cannot be understood simply as a collection of abstract religious propositions, because its affirmations concerning God, creation, sin, redemption, and human nature carry cultural, ethical, and social consequences.

From this perspective, the study examines the relationship between theology and culture, using twentieth-century Germany as a case study to demonstrate how religious, philosophical, cultural, and political ideas can be reinterpreted and instrumentalized in the construction of exclusionary and dehumanizing social imaginaries. The purpose is not to establish a simplistic causal relationship between Christianity, the Protestant Reformation, and National Socialism, but rather to demonstrate the importance of the history of ideas and the responsibility of theology in the formation of cultural consciousness. In contrast to processes of ethnocentrism and dehumanization, Christian anthropology provides foundations for a universal understanding of human dignity, particularly through the doctrines of the imago Dei, the universality of sin, and redemption in Christ.

The article further argues that contemporary cultural transformation requires the Church to renew its missionary consciousness. The Gospel remains unchanged, but the cultural contexts in which the Gospel is proclaimed are continually changing. In this context, the question WIN — What’s Important Now? is proposed as an instrument of missiological discernment. From this question, Reverse Mission is presented as a response to the new landscape of global Christianity, in which mission can no longer be understood predominantly as moving in a single geographical or cultural direction. The proposal is structured around three pillars: Reset Mission; Reset Culture; and Reset Identity. These three movements seek to respond to transformations in mission, culture, and identity produced by globalization, migration, cultural pluralization, and the growth of Christianity in the Global South.

The article concludes that a robust Christ-centered worldview has the potential not only to shape individuals and communities but also to confront ethnocentrism, dehumanization, and cultural absolutization. In this context, Reverse Mission does not represent a change to the Gospel, but rather a change in consciousness regarding how the global Church participates in the mission of God in a changing world.

Keywords: Worldview; Theology; Culture; Ethnocentrism; Christian Anthropology; Human Dignity; Reverse Mission; Globalization; Diaspora; TCK; Global Gospel.

1. Introduction

Human history demonstrates that societies are not built solely by economic, political, or military forces. Behind every civilization lies a particular way of interpreting reality, understanding human nature, establishing values, and answering the fundamental questions of existence. Before a society builds institutions, it constructs meanings; before it establishes laws, it establishes assumptions about what it considers true, good, just, or desirable. In this sense, every culture possesses a profoundly philosophical and, in many cases, religious dimension. People do not live merely within social structures; they live within interpretations of reality. These interpretations function as lenses through which individuals and communities understand themselves, others, and the world around them.

It is within this framework that the concept of worldview becomes fundamental to understanding cultural formation. A worldview may be understood as a set of fundamental assumptions through which a person or community interprets reality. It answers, explicitly or implicitly, questions such as: What is real? Who is the human being? Where did we come from? What is humanity’s fundamental problem? Is there objective truth? What is morally right? What is the purpose of existence? Is there a transcendent reality? What is humanity’s ultimate destiny? The answers to these questions do not remain confined to the private sphere. They produce consequences in the way societies educate their children, establish their laws, organize their institutions, define their enemies, construct their identities, and relate to other peoples.

Within this framework, theology possesses particular significance. If worldview seeks to answer the great questions of reality, Christian theology seeks to understand these questions in light of God’s revelation. Our conception of God inevitably influences our conception of humanity. Our understanding of creation influences the way we understand nature. The doctrine of sin influences our understanding of morality. The doctrine of redemption influences our vision of hope, justice, and restoration. Consequently, theology cannot be treated as a discipline isolated from cultural life. Theology produced within concrete communities inevitably engages concrete cultures and, when incorporated into discipleship, education, and communal life, contributes to forming people who will subsequently participate in shaping culture itself.

This observation leads to a fundamental question for the contemporary Church: if theology influences the way a society understands humanity, how should the Church think theologically in a world that is changing rapidly? The contemporary challenge of mission does not simply consist of the need to bring a new message to people. The Christian Gospel does not need to be reinvented for every generation. Its central message remains: God created, humanity fell, Christ redeemed, and God is bringing history toward its consummation. Yet while the message remains, the contexts in which that message is received are changing profoundly.

For this reason, one statement becomes central to this study:

The Gospel has not changed. But the world in which we carry the Gospel has changed.

This statement establishes a tension that the Church must learn to navigate. On one hand, there is the necessity of faithfulness: we cannot alter the essential content of the Gospel in order to make it culturally acceptable. On the other hand, there is the necessity of relevance: we cannot simply repeat cultural and methodological models developed in another historical context as though they were themselves part of the essence of the Gospel. Mission requires faithfulness to the message and sensitivity to the context.

It is precisely at this point that the question WIN — What’s Important Now? becomes significant. The question is not intended to relativize biblical truth or transform the Church into an institution governed by cultural trends. Rather, it seeks to cultivate a posture of discernment. To ask, “What’s important now?” means seeking to understand what transformations are taking place in the world, what questions are being asked by new generations, what identities are being formed, what groups are emerging, what cultural boundaries are being crossed, and what opportunities God is placing before the Church.

From this perspective, this article proposes that Reverse Mission can offer a relevant response to this new landscape. Reverse Mission does not simply mean reversing the historical direction of mission by replacing Western missionaries with missionaries from the Global South. It represents a deeper paradigm shift: recognizing that God is forming a truly global Church and that contemporary mission occurs in multiple directions. The West is not merely a region that sends missionaries; it is also a mission field. The immigrant is not merely someone who needs to be reached; the immigrant can also become an instrument for reaching others. The diaspora is not merely a consequence of globalization; it can become a missionary platform. TCKs are not merely people who live between cultures; they can become strategic bridges between cultures.

2. Worldview as a Matrix of Cultural Formation

Worldview can be understood as an interpretive framework that organizes the way individuals and communities perceive reality. It is not limited to consciously formulated intellectual propositions but also includes assumptions that frequently remain invisible because they have been incorporated into everyday life. Many people cannot philosophically articulate their worldview, yet they live according to it every day. The way a society defines family, authority, freedom, justice, sexuality, property, work, education, and death reveals deeper assumptions about reality and humanity.

Consequently, culture and worldview maintain a dynamic relationship. Worldview influences culture, but culture also reinforces and transmits worldviews. Families, schools, churches, universities, media, political institutions, and communities play important roles in transmitting particular interpretations of reality. A child does not learn merely academic content; a child also implicitly learns what the community considers important, true, desirable, and worthy of preservation.

For this reason, cultural formation cannot be reduced to the transmission of customs. Culture is also the transmission of meaning. A society transmits not only behaviors but interpretations. It teaches its members how to respond to the fundamental questions of life.

Theology enters this process as one of the most powerful sources of meaning available to the Christian community. When the Church teaches that humanity was created in the image of God, it is not simply teaching an abstract doctrine. It is establishing an anthropology. It is declaring that human dignity does not depend upon productivity, nationality, ethnicity, intelligence, social position, or political power. Dignity precedes every social contribution because it is grounded in creation itself.

Likewise, when the Church teaches that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, it is dismantling every claim to absolute moral superiority. No people, nation, social class, or culture can claim intrinsic moral purity. Sin crosses cultures because sin crosses humanity.

This perspective has profound implications for mission. If all people are created in the image of God and all are equally in need of grace, then no culture can occupy an ontologically superior position over another. Christianity cannot be reduced to the culture of a particular people. The Christian faith must distinguish between the Gospel and the cultural forms through which the Gospel has historically been communicated.

This distinction is indispensable to Reverse Mission.

3. Theology, Culture, and Historical Responsibility

Church history demonstrates that the relationship between theology and culture is complex. Christian faith can confront deeply rooted elements of a culture, but it can also be interpreted through the cultural lenses of a particular society. Therefore, the Church must continually exercise an internal critique of its own culture.

The issue is not simply whether a particular culture possesses good or bad values. The deeper issue is recognizing that every culture tends to regard its own values, habits, and structures as normal. Ethnocentrism emerges precisely when a culture ceases to recognize its particularity and begins to regard its own experience as the universal measure of humanity.

This tendency can also affect Christian communities. A church may confuse biblical faithfulness with loyalty to particular cultural expressions. It may interpret a particular worship style, leadership model, organizational structure, communication style, or evangelistic strategy as though it were an essential component of Christian faith when, in reality, such elements may be historical products of a particular culture.

Mission requires discernment because the missionary must cross cultures without turning his or her own culture into the Gospel.

This question becomes even more important in a globalized world. The contemporary Church encounters people from different backgrounds within the same cities, schools, universities, businesses, and congregations. Cultural boundaries no longer exist only on maps. They are present in neighborhoods, families, and churches.

Therefore, the missionary question has changed.

It is not enough to ask:

“Where should we send missionaries?”

We must also ask:

“Whom has God already sent to our cities?”

This change in the question carries enormous missiological significance.

4. Twentieth-Century Germany: Ideas, Religion, and Exclusionary Imaginaries

The rise of National Socialism in Germany constitutes one of the most important historical examples for understanding how ideas can produce concrete consequences in the life of a society. It is essential, however, to avoid monocausal explanations. Nazism did not arise simply from a particular theology or a single religious tradition. Its rise involved a complex combination of radical nationalism, racism, antisemitism, economic crisis, political instability, national resentment, propaganda, authoritarianism, and social transformations following World War I.

Nevertheless, recognizing the complexity of the phenomenon does not mean ignoring the history of ideas. European culture already contained traditions of anti-Judaism that predated Nazism by centuries. Some of Martin Luther’s later writings, particularly Von den Juden und ihren Lügen (On the Jews and Their Lies, 1543), contain deeply anti-Jewish positions. These writings cannot be used simplistically to claim that the Protestant Reformation produced Nazism, but neither should they be ignored when examining the historical formation of certain cultural repertoires.

The central point is not to establish direct causation but to understand the capacity of ideas to survive, be reinterpreted, and be instrumentalized in later historical contexts. An idea may emerge in one context, acquire new meanings in another, and be employed by actors who do not necessarily share the original theological system.

This observation leads to an important responsibility for theology: ideas matter. Words matter. Anthropological categories matter. The way a community speaks about the “other” can contribute either to humanization or to dehumanization.

For this reason, the Church must cultivate a theology that not only teaches rightly about God but also produces an anthropology consistent with the Gospel. Christian doctrine must produce ethical consequences.

5. Christian Anthropology Against Ethnocentrism

Christian anthropology possesses particularly strong theological resources for confronting ethnocentrism. The doctrine of the imago Dei establishes the universal dignity of humanity. Genesis 1 presents humanity as created in the image and likeness of God, providing a theological foundation for recognizing intrinsic value in every person.

Acts 17:26 reinforces the unity of humanity by affirming that God made every nation from one common origin. The diversity of peoples does not imply a hierarchy of value among them. The existence of different languages, cultures, histories, and identities does not establish ontological superiority.

Romans 3:23 adds another essential element: “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” The universality of sin destroys any possibility of moral superiority based simply upon belonging to a particular group.

Finally, Galatians 3:28 points toward the new reality inaugurated in Christ, in which ethnic and social distinctions do not function as mechanisms of superiority within the body of Christ.

Together, these doctrines form a powerful theological framework against ethnocentrism. The Christian Church can celebrate cultural differences without transforming difference into hierarchy. It can recognize particular identities without making them absolute. It can affirm national belonging without making nationality the ultimate foundation of human dignity.

In this sense, a truly Christ-centered Church must also be a Church capable of crossing cultural boundaries.

6. The Contemporary Challenge: The Gospel Remains, the Context Changes

The missionary challenge of the twenty-first century is not simply reaching people who live geographically far away. It is reaching people who live within cultural contexts profoundly different from those in which many traditional models of evangelism were developed.

Globalization, international migration, urbanization, the digital revolution, and academic and professional mobility have produced culturally complex societies. Within a single city there may be dozens or even hundreds of nationalities, languages, religious traditions, and migration experiences.

In this context, the Church needs to develop a missionary theology capable of understanding mobility, diaspora, multiculturalism, and intercultural identity.

The old missionary map — in which certain regions were considered “sending” regions and others “receiving” regions — is no longer sufficient to explain contemporary global Christianity.

Today, missionaries may move from Africa to Europe, Latin America to the United States, Asia to Canada, Korea to Latin America, and from diaspora communities back to communities of origin.

Mission has become multidirectional.

And this requires a new imagination.

7. WIN — What’s Important Now?

It is within this context that the concept of WIN — What’s Important Now? emerges.

WIN is not an attempt to make the Church dependent upon cultural trends. It is a question of discernment.

The principle is simple: if the Gospel remains the same but the world changes, then the Church must understand the world in which it is ministering.

To ask, “What’s important now?” means asking what issues are shaping people’s consciousness, what changes are redefining human relationships, and what missionary opportunities are emerging amid these transformations.

What is happening to the family?

How are new generations understanding identity?

How is migration transforming our cities?

How is technology transforming relationships?

How is secularization changing the understanding of God?

How is Christianity in the Global South transforming the religious landscape of the West?

How are the children of immigrants forming hybrid identities?

How can the Church disciple people who live between cultures?

These questions do not change the Gospel. They help the Church understand the field in which the Gospel will be proclaimed.

WIN, therefore, functions as a bridge between theology and mission, between truth and context, and between faithfulness and relevance.

The question is not:

“What do we need to change in the Gospel?”

The question is:

“What do we need to understand about the world in order to communicate the Gospel faithfully?”

8. Reverse Mission and the Transformation of the Missionary Paradigm

For much of modern Protestant mission history, the missionary imagination was structured around a predominantly Western movement. Churches in Europe and later North America sent missionaries to Africa, Asia, Latin America, and other regions.

This movement produced extraordinary contributions to the expansion of Christianity, but the history of global Christianity did not end with this model.

The demographic center of Christianity has shifted.

The growth of Christianity in many regions of the Global South has profoundly altered the configuration of the worldwide Church. At the same time, migration movements have carried millions of Christians from these regions into European, North American, and other global cities.

As a result, an extraordinary missionary reality has emerged:

The mission field has come to the cities of the West.

This transformation requires a new understanding.

Reverse Mission recognizes that Christians and churches from the Global South can actively participate in evangelism, revitalization, discipleship, and church planting in the West.

But Reverse Mission is more than a geographical reversal.

It is a paradigm shift.

It recognizes that God is using different parts of the global body of Christ to reach different parts of the world.

The missionary movement is no longer simply:

“West to the World.”

It is:

“From everywhere to everywhere.”

Mission has become global, multidirectional, and intercultural.

9. RESET MISSION — Resetting Mission

The first pillar of Reverse Mission is RESET MISSION.

This reset begins with the understanding that mission belongs to God. The Church did not invent mission; it participates in the missio Dei. Therefore, no people, continent, or ecclesiastical tradition can claim a monopoly over the missionary task.

Reset Mission means moving beyond an excessively unilateral understanding of mission and recognizing the multiplicity of agents God is using in the contemporary world.

The missionary may be sent.

But the missionary may also be sent by God through migration.

Someone may cross an ocean for economic reasons and discover that God has placed them in a city where people need to hear the Gospel.

Someone may arrive as an immigrant and become an evangelist.

Someone may arrive as a student and become a church planter.

Someone may arrive as a refugee and become a witness.

Someone may arrive as a professional and become a missionary.

This reality requires the Church to expand its definition of mission.

Reset Mission means moving from a predominantly unidirectional mission toward a global and multidirectional mission.

10. RESET CULTURE — Resetting Culture

The second pillar is RESET CULTURE.

Mission takes place within culture. Therefore, the missionary must develop intercultural competence. It is not enough to know the Bible; one must also know the people to whom one intends to communicate the Bible.

This does not mean relativizing truth. It means recognizing that all communication occurs within a language, a history, and a particular context.

Jesus is the ultimate example of contextualization without compromising truth. The Word became flesh. The message was not merely spoken; it was embodied.

Likewise, Paul demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to cross cultural boundaries without abandoning the center of the Gospel. In different contexts, he used different forms of communication, arguments, and points of contact.

The contemporary Church needs to recover this cultural intelligence.

Reset Culture means learning again how to listen, observe, interpret, and communicate.

It means understanding that a multicultural society requires leaders capable of ministering across cultures, generations, languages, migration experiences, and different forms of belonging.

The missionary of the future will not simply be the person who knows how to cross geographical boundaries.

The missionary of the future will be the person who knows how to cross cultural boundaries.

11. RESET IDENTITY — Resetting Identity

The third pillar is RESET IDENTITY.

Globalization has produced millions of people whose experience of identity cannot be contained within a single culture. Among them are immigrants, children of immigrants, members of diaspora communities, and Third Culture Kids — TCKs.

These individuals frequently live in an in-between reality. They may carry more than one language, more than one culture, more than one family reference point, and more than one national experience.

Traditionally, these experiences have been interpreted primarily as challenges of adaptation. However, the Church must also recognize their missionary potential.

A person who lives between cultures may develop a unique capacity to build bridges.

The TCK may understand different cultural codes.

The child of immigrants may move between the culture of the family and the culture of the surrounding society.

The Christian in the diaspora may connect communities that were previously separated by geographical boundaries.

The immigrant may carry a faith experience that challenges the local Church to see Christianity in a more global way.

Therefore, Reset Identity proposes a change of perspective: rather than viewing these people merely as individuals who need to find their place, we should begin to see them as people who can occupy a strategic position in the mission of God.

Intercultural identity can become more than an issue of adaptation; it can become a missionary platform.

12. Reverse Mission as a Response to Ethnocentrism

Reverse Mission also offers an important contribution to the fight against ethnocentrism.

When churches from the Global South minister in the West, they challenge the idea that Christianity culturally belongs to a particular region of the world. When a Brazilian pastor preaches in an American church, when an African missionary plants a church in Europe, or when an Asian Christian leads a multicultural community, the very composition of the body of Christ becomes a visible demonstration of the universality of the Gospel.

This does not mean that all cultures are identical or that cultural differences should disappear. On the contrary, Revelation presents an eschatological vision in which people from different peoples, languages, and nations participate in the worship of the Lamb.

Christian unity does not eliminate diversity.

Diversity does not have to destroy unity.

The Gospel offers a reality in which different peoples can remain different while belonging to the same body.

Perhaps this is one of the greatest contributions of the global Church to the contemporary world: demonstrating that difference does not have to produce hierarchy and that diversity does not have to produce fragmentation.

13. The Church in a Changing World

If the world is changing, the Church must resist two opposite temptations.

The first is the temptation of irrelevance. This occurs when the Church repeats cultural forms from the past without recognizing that the people to whom it ministers already live in another world.

The second is the temptation of assimilation. This occurs when the Church abandons its theological identity simply to reproduce the prevailing cultural values.

Between these two extremes lies a more difficult path:

Contextualized faithfulness.

The Church must remain sufficiently rooted in Scripture so that it is not absorbed by culture, and sufficiently aware of culture so that it does not become incapable of communicating the Gospel.

This balance requires theological maturity.

We must know what cannot change while also recognizing what may need to change.

The content of the Gospel does not change.

The centrality of Christ does not change.

The authority of Scripture does not change.

The need for repentance and faith does not change.

The mission of the Church does not change.

But languages, methods, structures, strategies, and forms of communication may need to be reevaluated.

This is precisely where WIN becomes essential.

14. The Gospel Has Not Changed, But the World Has Changed

The central statement of this article can be expressed simply:

The Gospel has not changed. But the world in which we carry the Gospel has changed.

This statement does not represent relativism. It represents missionary awareness.

The Gospel remains the good news of Jesus Christ.

The Church remains called to make disciples of all nations.

Mission remains the mission of God.

But the nations are now in our cities.

The peoples are in our neighborhoods.

The languages are in our schools.

The cultures are inside our churches.

The diaspora is before us.

And perhaps the most important question is not simply:

“Where are the peoples?”

but:

“Whom is God bringing to us?”

This shift in perspective can completely transform the missionary strategy of the Church.

15. A New Vision for Global Mission

Reverse Mission represents an opportunity for the global Church to recognize that God is working through movements that were often not planned by traditional mission structures.

Migration, urbanization, and globalization can be viewed merely as social challenges. But they can also be understood as movements through which God creates encounters, relationships, and opportunities for the Gospel.

The biblical narrative repeatedly presents God working through human movement. Joseph was taken to Egypt. Daniel was taken to Babylon. Esther was placed in a strategic position. Paul crossed the Mediterranean world. The Church was born in Jerusalem and quickly spread among the nations.

The movement of people may be a political and economic reality, but it can also become a missionary reality.

Therefore, the Church needs to ask:

What is God doing through human mobility?

Perhaps part of the answer is already before us in millions of immigrants, diaspora communities, TCKs, and global Christians who are already living in the world’s great cities.

16. Conclusion

This study has sought to demonstrate that worldviews and theological systems exert profound influence upon the formation of cultures and civilizations. Societies are constructed upon assumptions concerning reality, truth, morality, and human nature, and these assumptions ultimately produce concrete consequences in social life. For this reason, theology cannot be considered irrelevant to cultural formation. Theology participates in constructing the categories through which people understand themselves and others.

History also demonstrates that ideas can be used either to build or to destroy. The case of twentieth-century Germany demonstrates the importance of understanding how cultural, religious, philosophical, and political traditions can interact in the construction of collective imaginaries. There is no historical justification for establishing a simplistic causal relationship between Christian theology and Nazism. Nevertheless, there is a genuine theological responsibility to recognize that words, concepts, and categories can be reinterpreted and instrumentalized, and that healthy theology must produce an anthropology capable of resisting dehumanization.

Christian anthropology possesses extraordinary resources for this task. The imago Dei affirms the universal dignity of humanity. The universality of sin prevents the moral arrogance of any particular group. Redemption in Christ points toward a community in which different peoples find their unity not in cultural uniformity but in Christ.

This reality has direct implications for mission.

The world has changed.

Globalization has transformed cities. Migration has transformed societies. Technology has transformed communication. New generations are constructing different identities. Christianity has become increasingly global. The West can no longer be understood merely as a center from which mission is sent. It must also be recognized as a mission field.

In this context, the question emerges:

WIN — WHAT’S IMPORTANT NOW?

What is important now?

The answer is not a new Gospel.

The answer is a new missionary consciousness.

This is where Reverse Mission offers a significant contribution. It recognizes that God’s mission does not flow exclusively from one part of the world toward another. God is forming a global Church capable of participating in His mission in multidirectional ways.

RESET MISSION calls us to rethink the direction and structure of mission.

RESET CULTURE calls us to develop intercultural competence to minister within societies, generations, and cultures undergoing transformation.

RESET IDENTITY calls us to recognize the missionary potential of immigrants, diaspora communities, TCKs, and the new generation of global Christians.

These three movements do not represent a departure from the Gospel.

They represent an attempt to recover the breadth of the Gospel itself.

The Gospel does not belong to the West.

The Gospel does not belong to the Global South.

The Gospel does not belong to any particular culture.

The Gospel belongs to Christ.

And the Church belongs to all nations.

Therefore, the great question for the contemporary Church is not whether we should change the Gospel. We should not.

The question is whether we are willing to change the way we think about mission, culture, and identity so that we can faithfully carry the same Gospel into a different world.

The message remains the same.

The mission remains the same.

But the context has changed.

And when the context changes, the Church must ask:

WIN — WHAT’S IMPORTANT NOW?

What is important now?

Perhaps the answer is already before us.

God is forming a global Church.

God is moving peoples.

God is crossing boundaries.

God is raising a new generation.

God is bringing the nations into our cities.

And perhaps the Church simply needs to recognize what God is already doing.

This is the opportunity of Reverse Mission.

Not changing the Gospel.

Not abandoning the mission.

Not denying tradition.

But recognizing that the circle of the Gospel is greater than we imagined.

The Gospel went out from Jerusalem, crossed cultures, reached the nations, and today returns to the nations through new witnesses, new voices, and new bridges.

This is Reverse Mission.

Completing the Circle of the Gospel.

References

AUGUSTINE. The City of God.

BERLIN, Isaiah. The Crooked Timber of Humanity.

CALVIN, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion.

HUNTER, James Davison. To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World.

LUTHER, Martin. On the Jews and Their Lies (1543).

NIEBUHR, H. Richard. Christ and Culture.

PLANTINGA, Alvin. Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism.

WOLTERS, Albert M. Creation Regained: The Biblical Basis for a Reformational Worldview.

New Life Community Church – USA Founder — Reverse Mission Completing the Circle of the Gospel www.reversemission.com

About the author

Lierte Soares Junior is a Brazilian-American pastor, missionary, and educator serving in New England. Sent from Brazil as part of the growing movement of reverse mission, he is engaged in strengthening and revitalizing churches across the region. He currently serves as president of the Baptist Churches of New England.