2. Objectivism
Notes
Transcript
Handout
Summary of Last Week’s Lesson
Summary of Last Week’s Lesson
Apologetics = Defense
Apologetics = Defense
Four Reasons to Study Apologetics:
Four Reasons to Study Apologetics:
To advance the Gospel
To promote tolerance for Christianity.
To preserve sound doctrine (orthodoxy) and refute heresy.
To promote steadfastness of believers by demonstrating the rationality of the faith.
Sources of Knowledge
Sources of Knowledge
General Revelation—Things that God has revealed to all people, everywhere through Creation, without respect to whether or not they believe in Him.
Special Revelation—Particular and specific truths that God has revealed through his Word, the Bible.
These two categories of knowledge are going to become extremely important this week as we dive even deeper into the question of knowledge and truth and ask the question, “How can we know anything at all?”
QA w/Sean--“Why does truth even matter?”
Secular non-Christian Approaches to Truth
Secular non-Christian Approaches to Truth
We’re going to focus primarily upon moral truth, or truth as it pertains to morality and religion, because that’s what we’re most interested in with apologetics.
One of the most popular approaches to moral truth today is to simply dismiss it as non-existent.
Moral Relativism
Moral Relativism
“Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.”
Emrys Westacott, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://iep.utm.edu/moral-re/
View became popular in the 1800’s and 1900’s as globalization increased and people came into contact with more and more diverse cultures.
People noticed that many cultures have vastly differing ideas about what is right and wrong. The collapse of and disillusionment with colonialism in this time period also led to this idea.
“Who are we to judge another culture?”
Examples from the Culture
Examples from the Culture
“The Acolyte,” a new Disney Star Wars spin off, blurs the lines between the good guys (Jedi) and the bad guys (Sith). One of the actors in the show, Charlie Barnett, praised this saying, “The best parts about Star Wars is there is no good or evil, depends on what side you’re standing on.”
“From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!”
— Anakin Skywalker, Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith
Regrets, I've had a few
But then again, too few to mention
I did what I had to do
And saw it through without exemption
I planned each charted course
Each careful step along the byway
And more, much more than this, I did it my way
—Frank Sinatra, “My Way”
This worldview is particularly insidious because of how easily camouflaged it is. Tons of movies nowadays cast traditionally evil characters and bad guys in a sympathetic light and justify their misdeeds through building sympathy with their situation and perspective, with little or no appeal to objective standards of “good” and “evil.”
In 2002, the Barna Group found that 83 percent of American teenagers said moral truth depends on circumstances (only 6 percent said objective moral values exist); 75 percent of adults (ages 18–35) claimed to embrace moral relativism.1
Paul Copan
Materialism—reality consists only of matter, energy, and physical processes.
Materialism—reality consists only of matter, energy, and physical processes.
Objectivistic in its claims of truth in the natural realm.
Tends towards relativism in matters of morality.
If there is no spiritual realm, there is no basis for the moral code of any religion. Thus, morality must be a mere social construct or the product of biochemical processes.
Examples in Scripture
Examples in Scripture
37 Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” 38 Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” After he had said this, he went back outside to the Jews and told them, “I find no guilt in him.
Pilate’s rhetorical question “What is truth?” reveals the internal struggle that he’s going through. Ultimately, he capitulates to what is expedient (moral relativism) rather than his internal moral compass of right and wrong.
25 In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.
Eastern Religions (Bahá’í)
Eastern Religions (Bahá’í)
“The fundamental principle enunciated by Bahá’u’lláh…is that religious truth is not absolute but relative, that Divine Revelation is a continuous and progressive process, that all the great religions of the world are divine in origin, that their basic principles are in complete harmony, that their aims and purposes are one and the same, that their teachings are but facets of one truth, that their functions are complementary, that they differ only in the nonessential aspects of their doctrines, and that their missions represent successive stages in the spiritual evolution of human society…”
— Shoghi Effendi, The Promised Day is Come, Preface to the 1980 edition
religious truth is not absolute but relative
Divine Revelation is a continuous and progressive process
All the great religions of the world are divine in origin
their basic principles are in complete harmony, their aims and purposes are one and the same, their teachings are but facets of one truth, their functions are complementary, they differ only in the nonessential aspects of their doctrines
their missions represent successive stages in the spiritual evolution of human society
Non-Christian Objectivism
Non-Christian Objectivism
Moral Objectivism is the belief that there is a universal, unchanging, transcendent standard of right and wrong, truth and falsehood.
Moral Objectivism is the belief that there is a universal, unchanging, transcendent standard of right and wrong, truth and falsehood.
aka, “Absolute Truth”
This moral code transcends culture, time, location, and circumstance. It applies to all people, everywhere, throughout history, even if it is not completely discerned or obeyed by all people equally.
This code has not changed over time, it remains the same
It transcends humanity—it is not a product of humanity, it exists outside of humanity and imposes itself upon humanity. Humanity is bound by it.
The New Encyclopedia of Christian Quotations Principles
“We must adjust to changing times and still hold to unchanging principles.”
—Jimmy Carter, quoting his high school teacher Julia Coleman
The New Encyclopedia of Christian Quotations Principles
“I am not bound to win but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed but I am bound to live up to what light I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right; stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.”
—Abraham Lincoln
Other Religions believe in objective moral truth, but argue that it is found elsewhere.
Other Religions believe in objective moral truth, but argue that it is found elsewhere.
Islam—truth is found in the Qu’ran and the prophet Mohammed (and the records of his life)
Judaism—truth is found in the Tanakh (OT) and the Rabbinical writings
Catholicism—truth is found equally in the Roman Catholic Church’s official dogma and the Bible
Mormonism—truth is found in the writings of Joseph Smith
The Christian worldview is strongly rooted in objectivism.
The Christian worldview is strongly rooted in objectivism.
Image of four approaches to Apologetics
Arguments from General Revelation:
Arguments from General Revelation:
Moral Relativism is self-defeating.
Moral Relativism is self-defeating.
The claim of moral relativism is itself a truth claim, and is therefore, self-contradictory.
You can’t claim that “There’s no such thing as ultimate truth” is truth, because you’ve just denied the existence of truth.
Another way of putting that is that if someone says, “There’s no such thing as absolute truth,” you can simply ask them, “Are you absolutely sure?”
Why the Bahai statement of faith is self-contradictory
“The foundation of all the divine religions is one. All are based upon reality. Reality does not admit plurality, yet amongst mankind there have arisen differences concerning the manifestations of God. Some have been Zoroastrians, some are Buddhists, some Jews, Christians, Mohammedans and so on. This has become a source of divergence whereas the teachings of the holy souls who founded the divine religions are one in essence and reality.
All these have served the world of humanity.... All have guided souls to the attainment of perfections, but among the nations certain imitations of ancestral forms of worship have arisen. These imitations are not the foundation and essence of the divine religions. Inasmuch as they differ from the reality and the essential teachings of the Manifestations of God, dissensions have arisen and prejudice has developed. Religious prejudice thus becomes the cause of warfare and battle.
If we abandon these time-worn imitations and investigate reality all of us will be unified. No discord will remain; antagonism will disappear. All will associate in fellowship. All will enjoy the cordial bonds of friendship. The world of creation will then attain composure. The dark and gloomy clouds of blind imitations and dogmatic variances will be scattered and dispelled; the Sun of Reality will shine most gloriously.”
Adapted by permission from "Bahá'í Teachings for a World Faith". Copyright © 1943, 1971, 1972 by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States of America. https://bahai.com/principles.html
Despite that the “The fundamental principle enunciated by Bahá’u’lláh…is that religious truth is not absolute but relative...”, Bahá'ís nevertheless are forced to admit that “Reality does not admit plurality...” They, therefore, recognize that many of the major religions “differ from the reality,” which sounds a lot like objectivism! What is their solution to these differing takes on reality? Simple—to “abandon these time-worn imitations and investigate reality.” I couldn’t agree more.
Even a religion which is supposedly founded upon moral relativism and has this as a “fundamental principle” of its beliefs is forced to admit that moral relativism doesn’t work. What they actually want is for you to believe in moral relativism, and for you to dismiss the truth claims of your religion as relativistic preferences and pursue their definition of “reality.” In the end, they do not believe in moral relativism—they just want you to do so, because moral relativism is self-defeating. Any religion or worldview that actually adopts the ideology of moral relativism will inevitably self-destruct.
Moral relativism can’t be lived out consistently. Relativists typically are selective, and they don’t remain relativists when their rights are violated.
Paul Copan
C.S. Lewis wrote about this in his booklet “The Abolition of Man” where he argued that a society that fully embraced such moral relativism would inevitably destroy itself. Such thinking would lead to the “abolition of man.”
The Abolition of Man 1 Men Without Chests
And all the time—such is the tragi-comedy of our situation—we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more ‘drive’, or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or ‘creativity’. In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.
To put this in modern terms, everywhere we look, society rails against “fake news,” but if there is no such thing as “objective truth,” if it all depends upon your perspective, then there is no such thing as “fake news;” it’s just “my news” and “your news,” “my truth” and “your truth.”
Society demands compassion and empathy, but if there is no such thing as moral absolutes, then why should I care about you at all? What’s in it for me?
Society clamors for justice, but through our moral relativism we have rejected the standards of right and wrong by which justice is judged. As a society, we have removed the judge but demanded the verdict nonetheless.
Materialism is incapable of offering a source for truth outside of the material realm.
Materialism is incapable of offering a source for truth outside of the material realm.
Materialism believes that only what is made of matter is objectively verifiable.
But, moral and religious truth claims go beyond what can be observed and are, by definition, in the realm of the immaterial. Science has no means to assess such truth claims. Science can tell you how, when, and perhaps by whose hand a person died, but cannot establish whether the death was rightful or not. For that, you have to go to a court of law where the morality of the death is judged according to a moral standard.
The effect of an exclusively materialistic worldview is moral relativism. And, the effect of moral relativism is to relegate morality to the realm of personal preference, instinct, or sentimentalism.
Moral Objectivism is self-evident.
Moral Objectivism is self-evident.
Everyone has an internal moral compass that convicts or justifies them according to their actions. Paul drew upon this idea in Romans 2:
14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
While there are, indeed, many divergences in moral standards amongst the world’s cultures, there is a core of similarity in the most basic morals.
Aristotle said,
“For it is evident that, if the written law is counter to our case, we must have recourse to the general law and equity, as more in accordance with justice; and we must argue...that equity is ever constant and never changes, even as the general law, which is based on nature, whereas the written laws often vary...”
—Aristotle, Rhetoric, I. xv. 4-6
“...and further, that justice is real and expedient, but not that which only appears just; ...that it is the part of a better man to make use of and abide by the unwritten rather than the written law.”
—Aristotle, Rhetoric, I. xv. 4-6
Every culture has a moral code about things such as murder, theft, adultery, lying, respect and care for loved ones, etc. There are certain truths that are so self-evident they need no justification.
The New Encyclopedia of Christian Quotations Principles
We hold these truths to be
Mere Christianity 1. The Law of Human Nature
“...human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it.”
Arguments from Particular Revelation:
Arguments from Particular Revelation:
Scripture assumes the existence of truth and falsehood.
Scripture assumes the existence of truth and falsehood.
25 Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.
6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.
Jesus claimed to be the source of all truth.
Jesus claimed to be the source of all truth.
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
13 “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
Scripture claims to be the standard of all truth.
Scripture claims to be the standard of all truth.
3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.
17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
160 The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever.
20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
Scripture declares eternal consequences for believing and promoting falsehood.
Scripture declares eternal consequences for believing and promoting falsehood.
20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! 21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!
25 There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them...
24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
Conclusion: All of us innately desire to know the truth. Any system of thought that rejects objectivism is inherently flawed and self-contradictory. Any system of thought that attempts to reduce truth to the merely material is inherently flawed and self-limiting. The only systems of though left are those that are supernatural and objectivistic.
For more study on this topic, see:
For more study on this topic, see:
Lewis, C.S. The Abolition of Man.
Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity. C. S. Lewis Pte. Ltd., 1952.
Quick Answers with Sean McDowell: Volume 4 - Questions About Ethics, “Can we know anything at all?”-- https://app.rightnowmedia.org/en/player/video/327252?session=327255
Quick Answers with Sean McDowell : Volume 3 - Questions About the Bible, “What are the best archaeological finds that support the New Testament?” https://app.rightnowmedia.org/en/player/video/327224?session=327240
Quick Answers with Sean McDowell : Volume 3 - Questions About the Bible, “What are the best archaeological finds that support the Old Testament?” https://app.rightnowmedia.org/en/player/video/327224?session=327242
