Thursday, 4 December 2008

Modern man is not a rebel

I heard Ravi Zacharias say the following quote from a talk to some students at Seattle Pacific University called Is There Not A Correspondence? (it's on iTunes U if you want to look it up) and I thought it sounded like something G.K Chesterton would say. It comes from the third chapter of his book Orthodoxy, and I thought it was quite a good quote:

But the new rebel is a Skeptic, and will not entirely trust anything. He has no loyalty; therefore he can never be really a revolutionist. And the fact that he doubts everything really gets in his way when he wants to denounce anything. For all denunciation implies a moral doctrine of some kind; and the modern revolutionist doubts not only the institution he denounces, but the doctrine by which he denounces it. Thus he writes one book complaining that imperial oppression insults the purity of women, and then he writes another book (about the sex problem) in which he insults it himself. He curses the Sultan because Christian girls lose their virginity, and then curses Mrs. Grundy because they keep it. As a politician, he will cry out that war is a waste of life, and then, as a philosopher, that all life is waste of time. A Russian pessimist will denounce a policeman for killing a peasant, and then prove by the highest philosophical principles that the peasant ought to have killed himself. A man denounces marriage as a lie, and then denounces aristocratic profligates for treating it as a lie. He calls a flag a bauble, and then blames the oppressors of Poland or Ireland because they take away that bauble. The man of this school goes first to a political meeting, where he complains that savages are treated as if they were beasts; then he takes his hat and umbrella and goes on to a scientific meeting, where he proves that they practically are beasts. In short, the modern revolutionist, being an infinite sceptic, is always engaged in undermining his own mines. In his book on politics he attacks men for trampling on morality; in his book on ethics he attacks morality for trampling on men. Therefore the modern man in revolt has become practically useless for all purposes of revolt. By rebelling against everything he has lost his right to rebel against anything.

(Possibly) Related Posts:

  • 'Supposed Cases' are keeping us from beliefJ.C. Ryle said this 200 years ago when talking about Matthew 22:23-33: It must never surprise us, if we meet with like objections against the doctrines of Scripture, and especially against those doctrines which concern anot… Read More
  • Jesus is in the way to God For some people, it seems that Jesus is not the way to God, but rather he is in the way to God, as if he is saying, "No, you don't! You can't come to God unless you get by me first!" Again, Jesus is here to help people find … Read More
  • Which God & what about Jesus?I have just started reading God is not Great by the late Christopher Hitchens (we'll see if I finished it and write a review of it). The second chapter in this book opens with: Imagine that you can perform a feat o… Read More
  • More and More New Years DesiresI just read this this morning and was thinking about the new year and resolutions and all that: I believe it ought to be our continual aim and desire to go forward, and our watchword on every returning birthday and at the be… Read More
  • Astonishing New Additions in the Bible I have been reading some more of Hitchens' God is Not Great and I am surprised by the surprise that Bart Ehrman has on the New Testament and Hitchens use of this. When talking about John 7:53-8:11 Hitchens says: … Read More

0 comments:

Post a Comment