What is the source of that liberty, equality and fraternity that are now the guiding principles of the West, if not the modern world?
Historians note the anomaly that these principles originated and developed only in Western civilization. In this sense, they are not universal. Of late, however, these principles are being exported to the rest of the world. One may say they are Western in origin but universal in their application.
But where do the principles come from? With the death of Heidegger and Sartre, Jurgen Habermas is now regarded as perhaps our leading living philosopher. Habermas is also an atheist. Yet when Habermas found out that the European Union in its charter gave full acknowledgement to ancient Greece and Rome, but none to Christianity, he erupted in learned outrage.
Habermas's argument is that it is philosophically illiterate to locate the roots of the West in Athens but not in Jerusalem. In fact, Habermas argues that Jerusalem--by which he means Judaism and Christianity--is far more responsible than Athens for the modern principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. In "A Time of Transition," Habermas writes:
For the normative self-understanding of modernity, Christianity has functioned as more than just a precursor or catalyst. Universalistic egalitarianism, from which sprang the ideals of freedom and a collective life in solidarity, the autonomous conduct of life and emancipation, the individual morality of conscience, human rights and democracy, is the direct legacy of the Judaic ethic of justice and the Christian ethic of love.
Habermas's point is that there is too much arrogance in contemporary atheism. Even the atheist is standing on mountain erected by Christianity. How ungrateful it is to scorn the mountain that is still holding you up! How ridiculous the posture of the man who cannot acknowledge the very foundation that sustains him from below!
This is what Christians mean when they say that America is a Christian society. This is not a call for theocracy or "rule of the priests" but rather a call for a public acknowledgement of the historic role of Christianity in shaping our institutions, our values and our culture. The opinions of several leading Supreme Court justices on church-and-state issues would benefit greatly from a slight familiarity with the history that Habermas is talking about.
Habermas's argument would have struck a chord with the greatest atheist of modern times, the philosopher Nietzsche. Nietzsche argued that if you want to get rid of the Christian God, at least have the honesty and the guts to repudiate the Christian ideals of human dignity, human equality and human liberty.
Yet our village atheists want to have it both ways. They want to reject God but preserve at least certain core aspects of the Christian legacy. Nietzsche would have had nothing but scorn for these little men of unbelief, Lilliputians hurling their tiny javelins at the Christian God while they continue to live off His inheritance.
Reader Comments ( Page 28 of 29)
406. Jesse
If there is absolute morals and values, where is the companion book to the Bible explaining the relationship to differing crimes?
Surely murder is the worst, or raping, torturing then murdering?
How about your sentence should depend on how your case is presented to the judge and jury?
Should we go with the Middle Ages deal where if you could show the judge that you could read and write by memorizing a Psalm and pretending to read it?
'Benefit of clergy' sounds good for Christians at least.
Crime of passion/ premeditated murder, which is worse? Why?
How about hate crime, demonizing individuals on the basis that their entire group is 'bad' or 'not worthy' etc.?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, I really would like to know how crime and punishment can be 'absolute'.
not-pboyfloyd at 10:26PM on Aug 11th 2008
407. ::we might think ripping a still beating heart from someone's chest was "right". But they didn't... so we don't.
Yet neither, presently, do certain among us think it would be really wrong if they did...
Jesse at 10:29PM on Aug 11th 2008
408. Jesse: "Yet neither, presently, do certain among us think it would be really wrong if they did..."
And yet that has nothing really to do with the truthiness of the matter.
Ryan Anderson at 10:32PM on Aug 11th 2008
409. I'll tell you what floyd and Ryan, I'll present my case for objective goodness and absolute morality if you'll both stand by your positions, be intellectually honest, and affirm your positions as I affirm my own.
I'll go first.
I, Jesse, affirm that the holocaust was really wrong, really evil.
Yours, to be clear, should look like this:
I, (state your name), affirm that the holocaust was not really wrong, not really evil.
Jesse at 10:52PM on Aug 11th 2008
410.
Jesse why did Lewis ignore the idea of jesus 'being wrong'? He doesn't take that into account with his trilemma. Does Lewis explore that stipulation?
JefFlyingV at 10:59PM on Aug 11th 2008
411.
Renzo, evil is the hook that brought you into the religious camp?
JefFlyingV at 11:02PM on Aug 11th 2008
412. ::Jesse why did Lewis ignore the idea of jesus 'being wrong'? He doesn't take that into account with his trilemma. Does Lewis explore that stipulation?
Jet -- Liar, Lunatic, or Lord. Does someone who's not a lunatic, and who is not really God, think they're God? In other words, does a sane human being actually identify himself as God, the I AM?
Jesse at 11:06PM on Aug 11th 2008
413. "Oh ya, Renzo, I ask to meet in a PUBLIC place and invite along fellow blog posters from both sides of these debates to come along. Instead of a rational argument, you give evidence to the world a deranged paranoia with the assertion that little ole me is a murderer worthy of fear. If you don't think that's an ad hominem, it's no wonder you claim the title of "Christian". More pathetic obfuscation, as has been your pattern all along."
Sign me up. I'll be there.
Botts at 11:05PM on Aug 11th 2008
414.
Renzo one of the main reasons I have rejected religion is the holocaust. A loving god would not turn his back on millions of souls. If ever a time was needed for intercession from the supernatural, it would seem the holocaust was that time.
JefFlyingV at 11:09PM on Aug 11th 2008
415. No Jesse, it certainly was wrong of Hitler and his boys to demonize a group of people and proceed to exterminate them.
It starts with the demonizing though, doesn't it?
not-pboyfloyd at 11:13PM on Aug 11th 2008
416.
Jesse, Lewis's argument is a poor hook for conversion. He should have stuck with childrens books and child philosophies. Lewis's trilemma is
one step above the idea of christianity makes idiotic claims, therefore I belive because of the idiocy.
JefFlyingV at 11:21PM on Aug 11th 2008
417. but, again, you've already denied that a prescriptive statement can be true, so apparently you're stuck with the unfortunate position that nothing -- meaning every particular thing we think evil, like murder, rape, etc.; that nothing is really wrong. Again I ask, do you affirm this, np? Does nothing within you seek an out?
Jesse at 7:50PM on Aug 11th 2008
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jesse - Thanks for the reply. I enjoyed reading your comment. As you must suspect, I have discussed this opinion with others, and have heard responses similar to yours.
I'm sure all of those with whom you share your opinions don't always agree with you.
Now it's bedtime and still have a couple things to do. Back at you tommorrow.
Regards,
naturalpuppy at 12:10AM on Aug 12th 2008
418. ::Jesse, Lewis's argument is a poor hook for conversion.
Why?
Jesse at 5:16AM on Aug 12th 2008
419. Jesse, why, why?
JefFlyingV at 5:28AM on Aug 12th 2008
420.
Jesse if jesus existed, when did he ever claim to be god?
JefFlyingV at 5:31AM on Aug 12th 2008