Photo by Francisco Gonzalez on Unsplash

Our worldview is, in many ways, the most important thing about us since we live in the world according to our deepest beliefs about reality. These beliefs concern the ultimate reality, the nature of human beings, the meaning of life, the basis of morality, and the afterlife. While our worldviews are deeply philosophical, they may be formed in less than intellectually rigorous ways. Few have put it better than Francis Schaeffer, a philosopher, theologian, apologist, and activist.

People have presuppositions, and they will live more consistently on the basis of these presuppositions than even they themselves may realize. By presuppositions we mean the basic way an individual looks at life, his basic world view, the grid through which he sees the world. Presuppositions rest upon that which a person considers to be the truth of what exists. People’s presuppositions lay a grid for all they bring forth into the external world. Their presuppositions also provide the basis for their values and therefore the basis for their decisions.

“As a man thinketh, so is he,” is really most profound. An individual is not just the product of the forces around him. He has a mind, an inner world. Then, having thought, a person can bring forth actions into the external world and thus influence it. People are apt to look at the outer theater of action, forgetting the actor who “lives in the mind” and who therefore is the true actor in the external world. The inner thought world determines the outward action.¹Schaeffer, Francis A.. How Should We Then Live? (pp. 19-20). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

Films can profoundly shape our presuppositions, which form our worldviews. Consider one.

I first watched “Field of Dreams,” starring Kevin Costner, when it appeared in 1989. I always remembered the line, “If you build it, they will come.” However, I misremembered it. The real line was, “If you build it, he will come.” I used to use this line to refer to the Talbot School of Theology model when J. P. Moreland founded the program in the early 1990s. They built it with excellent faculty, and the students came. The program has been a raging success.

Back to the film, which I watched again recently. There is a supernatural meaning grounded in restored relationships and the chance to fulfill dreams. The protagonist ventures out in faith on the basis of a voice he hears, “If you build it, they will come.” He doesn’t know what this means, but he builds a baseball field on his farm, which requires plowing under valuable corn crops. There was a call; there was cost. Sound familiar? Think of Abraham leaving his country at God’s call. However, that was God. God is nowhere to be found in this film.

I won’t belabor the story, which is clever and well-acted. I found it moving, particularly the final scene of reconciliation between father and son. How I wish I could “have a catch” with my dad now. However, my philosopher’s hat never comes off, so a worldview analysis is forthcoming.

The source of the magical voice and the inexplicable promptings to action are not revealed until the end. Unlike God’s revelation to us in the Bible, the messages are cryptic and enigmatic. It takes a leap (not a step) of faith to follow them, and the source is unknown. Circumstances confirm the meaning of the mysteries as the plot unfolds. But in the end, we find that the voice did not come from outside the protagonist but from within him. There are a few references to heaven, but we find that heaven is where your dreams come true. Thus, it is the deep or divine self that manifests the events of the film, not a purposeful or communicative God who controls events and gives signs.

This worldview ties the plot together but is an utterly false and irrational worldview. The supernatural events of the story—mostly related to dead baseball players returning to play in a baseball field constructed in a farmer’s field—could only have occurred through the purposes of a transcendent mind whose will brought it about–that is, by a personal and purposeful God. That God is not the self, given its obvious limits. But the film gives away this essentially New Age worldview along the way, and especially in the final scene. References are made to “needing karma” and to the universe bringing things about.²On the New Age worldview, see Douglas Groothuis, Unmasking the New Age (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1986) and Douglas Groothuis, Confronting the New Age (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988)

Thus, while the film tugs on your emotions—especially if you love baseball and lost a father young, as is true of me—but the story is held together by an untrue worldview, one which offers no ultimate hope for redemption. Heaven is not where all our dreams come true, but where God’s plan is fulfilled in the new heavens and the new earth (Revelation 21-22). Therein, God’s redeemed people will live and thrive eternally (John 3:16). It will be beyond our wildest dreams of happiness and human perfection. However, some people’s dreams will die outside the heavenly city and be turned into nightmares (Revelation 22:15).Ω

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor, Cornerstone University. He is the author of fifteen books, including Truth Decay, Philosophy in Seven Sentences, Christian Apologetics, 2^nd ed. (2022), and Fire in the Streets. He has published thirty academic articles in journals such as Philosophia Christi, Religious Studies, Academic Questions, and The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. He has written dozens of articles for publications such as Christianity Today, The Christian Research Journal, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Touchstone, Philosophy Now, and The Philosopher’s Magazine.

© 2025, Midwest Christian Outreach, Inc All rights reserved. Excerpts and links may be used if full and clear credit is given with specific direction to the original content.