So, I think there's ground for a dialogue about morality with everybody except Muslims. I except Muslims because Muslims specifically reject the natural law, so with Muslims one could only reason based on Sharia, and since Sharia is closed and in any event subject to the rule of the established Sharia law authorities (the "ulema"), there's no talking to Muslims from the get-go.
But we Christians really can talk with anybody who accepts that morality is discernible from the facts of creation.
I would add that so long as a person is committed to the Truth and the Natural Law, then that person is in a very real sense committed to Christ, even though he or she may be unaware of that fact, or maybe even vehemently rejects any affiliation with Christ. That's because Christ is the Way (the Natural Law) and the Truth. I believe that Solzhenitsyn was committed to the Truth to the point he was willing to suffer the GULAG for it before he realized the Truth has a name - Jesus Christ. He was a Christian but didn't know it." With such people I will speak humbly. The Pope is right about this. So long as a person believes that things like basic human rights are "self-evident", then let them in good faith believe in Nature, and let Nature's God reveal Himself to them in His time.
Muslims deal in strange memories and fantasies that would be merely in he subconscious of life. There is a flipping of what should be conscious unconscious and vice versa.
The Jewish people love history and that ties in with repent to Christ God of innocence. Bad memories become good when they give examples towards righting oneself and realizing the greatness of God to heal us anew. Once anew the bad memories are of no concern and irrelevant. It is the stubborness in denial which makes them all the more teasing from the so called unconsciousness of Freud.
Things like sex to a Muslim is part of the daily conscious. It’s like driving a car. First manipulation of the steerig wheel is conscious, then the driving and ride an living the journey becomes priority to the conscious whereas the controls are pretty much ignored and left for the “spine” to enjoy on it own without interfering with the enjoyment of the ride itself.
This is why stating that marriage is subservient to sexual orientation shows how confused and dangerous our society has become.
that’s a beautiful point about Solzhenitsyn.
Yes, he did thank God for the gulag.
A person who believes in natural law, or the existence of objective truth, is or should be on our side.
Thank you.
I too think atheists who, as you say, believe in natural law, discernible through reason, is or should be on our side. But, I wonder why they object to using the G-word. Are they unforgiving of Christians and other religious people? What we, as Christians uniquely have to offer the world is Christ and the assurance of salvation. One thing I suspect is that evangelical atheists are unforgiving, do not know God’s mercy, and fear for their own condemnation.
Another thing I think is that evangelical atheists doubt God’s design of the universe. Now, we all doubt. If we didn’t, why was Jesus always saying “Do not fear.” If we didn’t doubt, why are faith and hope needed in this life. Einstein once said a scientist searches for an answer, believing that there is an answer. He said this is an essentially religious belief. I don’t know why some people believe there is an answer and others do not. The Bible describes it as a gift. But, here’s what I do know. Without belief, their is fear, and fear is the vanguard of nihilism.
As to the inclination of Islam to a rejection of reason, it wasn’t always so. Indeed, there are ways to interpret Ibn Taymiyyah as teaching that you had to read the Koran in context and with reason. But, I agree with you, there was a closing of the Islamic mind and an escape into a false pride based on having a monopoly on the truth.