Reason Vs. Revelation
One comment states:
“Are you aware that there are atheists and agnostics who have strong moral convictions and are in no way relativistic?”Yes, I am aware of this. It is a world view which draws from Immanuel Kant’s philosophy, which states that you can arrive at morality by use of pure reason and that reason alone can show you the basis for right and wrong and by knowing what is right, you can will to do what is right. You do not need God to reveal to you what is right or wrong. You can arrive at it from common sense alone.
Dr. Ravi Zacharias responded to a question like this on one of his campus visits (Georgia Tech), and I credit Dr. Zacharias for the following insights on Kant. Dr. Zacharias stated,
“I think it is very important to know what Kant said beyond that, and if we don’t understand that we run into problems…People in the Western World are very quick to tell us what Immanuel Kant said about right and wrong, that we could arrive at it unaided by reason without any revelation; they forget the second qualifier that he put. Kant said, 'my choice of right and wrong should not be determined by what makes me happy either…It has nothing to do with personal happiness…' But Kant himself, in the preface to his second volume ends up admitting this: he said, 'ultimately my ethical theory is best (formulated) after we have determined the purpose of human existence,' which means he has linked inextricably, purpose and morality. Purpose ultimately defines Morality.”Do you think that an atheist is in the best position to determine the purpose of human existence, and thus determine morality using his reason alone? If there is no God, then the purpose of man is to live a narcissistic, hedonistic existence. Is this the basis for morality then? And if there is no God, then Darwinism is the key to providing purpose for humanity. Good luck with that!
Dr. Ravi Zacharias wrote a book called "Can Man Live Without God." I highly recommend it.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home