The infamous atheist Richard Dawkins has recently become a hot topic With his comment He is a cultural Christian.
This means that Dawkins wants to live in a culture that is not based on Christian religion. He feels “relaxing” in such a culture. He is fascinated by the cultural customs that Christianity, including Christian holidays, are part of the cultural heritage given to us.
Christianity is true and good for the world.
But Dawkins immediately reminds me that I don't believe Christianity is true. It is nonsense to believe in the resurrection of virgins and dead, and it is clear that it is impossible, and it is unknown. Miracle is impossible. In other words, we have a kind of religious atheism. Richard Dawkins wants Christian benefits without believing in Christianity itself.
What should we think about this claim?
Such comments show at least one good point and one bad point. Let's take a closer look at this.
First, there are two basic opposition to Christianity.
Some claim that Christianity is irrational. Some claim that Christianity is not desirable. Some claim that Christianity is irrational and unwanted. I believed that Dawkins belonged to the third category, especially in consideration of what I mentioned in the 2006 book “God's Delusion”, that Christianity is irrational and unreasonable. He argued that religion was irrational and harmful, and Christianity seemed to be done with all other religions.
By the way, at least in terms of Christianity, Dawkins seems to have a different idea. Christianity is good even if it is unreasonable! I think this is progress. He believes that Christianity is good and beautiful, but that is not true.
Remember the famous prescription of Blaz Pascal about how to assert Christianity. He wrote in Panse.
Men despise religion. They hate it and fear that it is true. To cure this, the first is to indicate that religion is not against reason, but worthy of respect and respect. Next, it makes it attractive, want good people to be truth, and indicate that it is true.
Pascal suggests that Christianity first indicates that Christianity is reasonable and then desires and truth.
Especially in the era of the needs, emotions, desires, and the aesthetic dimensions of life, the strict order of Pascal should be loosened and should be loosened. We need to show that Christianity is reasonable and desirable. But for many people, knowing the goodness and beauty of Christianity may be the entrance that seriously accepts Christian religion.
In this way, I see that Richard Dawkins, especially Christian nemesis, states that Christianity is good and beautiful. If he understood the good points of Christianity, he would probably try to reconsider Jesus and Gospel claims, including many people who read his religion.
Second, it is important to remember that good and truth cannot be distinguished.
After all, good and truth are closely linked. Dawkins believes that Christianity is good and good for the world. At one point, we may expect him to ask himself that it is possible for the world to think that he is so wrong to be so wrong for the world. Maybe. The good thing about a religion and the worldview is that it is objectively valuable.
If we eliminate Christianity from our world, something valuable will be lost (according to Dawkins). However, as others have pointed out, this way of thinking, that is, the idea of objective value is inconsistent with Dawkins's naturalism. He recorded that in many places, he said that there was no objective good in consideration of naturalism (his special version of naturalism is a reduction materialism). I am.
Therefore, there is a contradiction in Dawkins's position. It is unstable. He wants Christianity and the truth of naturalism. However, it is not possible to consistently maintain that position.
This is, of course, a problem, but also a chance.
We need to put pressure on Dawkins and others who think that cultural Christianity is a “destination” that can be executed. it's not. CS Lewis reminds you that you need to keep the true problem in front of others.
[1945年に英国国教会の司祭と信徒指導者のグループに向かって、ルイスは次のように主張した。
大きな困難の 1 つは、真実についての問いを聴衆の心の前に留めておくことです。彼らはいつもあなたがキリスト教を勧めていると思っていますが、それはキリスト教がそうであるからではありません 真実 でもそうだから 良い。そして議論の中で、彼らは常に「正しいか間違っているか」という問題から、善良な社会、道徳、司教の収入、スペインの異端審問所、フランス、ポーランド、その他何でも問題に逃げようとするでしょう。 。彼らを本当のポイントに何度も何度も強制的に引き戻さなければなりません。そうすることでのみ、あなたは弱体化することができます [their] The belief that some “religion” is desirable, but should not go too far. Christianity must continue to point out that even if it is an error, it is the following claim: no It is important, and if it is true, it has infinite importance. The only thing you can't do is moderately important.
Of course Lewis is right.
It is not enough to believe in Christianity and what is desirable. We need to return to others over and over again to rationality and the true problem. Christianity is true and good for the world.
If it is not true, it is not good for everyone. This is because the fact that they are exactly related to the reality, that is, the truth, and the good thing are closely linked.
Therefore, when a cultural Christian is regarded as a kind of destination or stop point for a journey of discovery, it indicates a dead end. This is also a false curse.
However, from the viewpoint of the possibility of “Roadside Station”, which is a place where many people in the middle of the religion temporarily stop by the religion, it is considered a positive development. Masu.
Like many things in culture, there are good and bad points in cultural Christian thinking. It's bad for someone to receive this as a consistent position. Of course, it's a good thing if it triggers other people about the relationship between Christianity and its truth. You can only pray that the latter is a fact.
I hope you can double your efforts to show both the desire and rationality of the Christian religion to others.
This article is edited based on the following posts. Originally appeared in World World Envice Substack。
