I Believe in TRUTH!
Introduction
I believe that there is truth, absolute truth. Reading, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, by Yuval Noah Harari is a love/hate relationship with scholarship and the gross error of manipulating the idea of absolute truth. The title implies the word “brief” and Harari claims to go back 13.5 billion years to the beginning. Even some of the scholarly editorials that I read about this book, disagreed with some of his broad stroke approach to humankind.
Yet Harari, as much as I did not want to, lured me in with a few choice nuggets (with emphasis on few). One nugget was, “…despite the astonishing things that humans are capable of doing, we remain unsure of our goals and we seem to be discontented as ever. We have advanced from canoes to galleys to steamships to space shuttles – but nobody knows where we’re going. We are more powerful than ever before, but have very little idea what to do with all that power. Worse still, humans seem to be more irresponsible that ever. Self-made gods with only the laws of physics to keep us company, we are accountable to no one.”[1]
I agree with Harari on the degradation and discontentedness of humanity that can be prevalent, but I do not believe that it is the masterplan of the creator God that I embrace. If one embraces evolution and the course of natural selection then hopelessness would be the prevailing wind that would drive you. When speaking of giraffes, Harari said the, “…beauty of Darwin’s theory is that it does not need to assume an intelligent designer to explain how giraffes ended up with long necks.”
Following the line of thought that Darwin’s theory “does not need to assume an intelligent designer”, then the outcome would naturally be a flawed, hopeless world. This is where my monotheistic view of my Creator God and the redemption of His only Son, Jesus, kicked in. I cannot embrace a fatalistic Creator nor creation. “Even before he made the world, God loved us and chose us in Christ to be holy and without fault in his eyes.” Ephesians 1:4 (NLT)
Summary
Harari premises his work with the following statements:
- “About 13.5 billion years ago, matter, energy, time and space came into being in what is known as the Big Bang.
- Three important revolutions shaped the course of history: the Cognitive Revolution kick-started history about 70,000 years ago. The Agricultural Revolution sped it up about 12,000 years ago. The Scientific Revolution, which got under way only 500 years ago, may well end history and start something completely different.
- This book tells the story of how these three revolutions have affected humans and their fellow organisms.”[2]
The book is a dance between attempting to understand humans, organisms, and organizations. It seems to embrace a fairy tale or science fiction movie than a scholarly work grounded in undeniable and proven truths. Harari seems to embrace “the Fall” more than the “Redeemer” who came into the world to be the propitiation and appeasement of our mess.
Harari’s “cheap shot” at our Declaration of Independence seems to run as a common theme throughout the book with many of the subjects that he addresses. He likens the Declaration of Independence to Hammurabi’s Code. “The Americans would, of course, say that they are right, and that Hammurabi is wrong…In fact, they are both wrong.”[3]
Analysis
Harari uses the analogy of Peugeot automaker to insight his concept that an organization or tangible object can be in existence a “figment of our collective imagination”.[4] It would seem that Harari do.es not believe in the existence of anything for any long period of time. Every “season” and “thing” have their existence; but it is short lived in Harari’s mind.
Couple Harari’s “figment of collective imagination” with the myth of Christianity and you have utter chaos for all sapiens. I went over the edge when Harari stated, “Any large-scale human cooperation – whether a modern state, a medieval church, an ancient city or an archaic tribe – is rooted in common myths that exist only in people’s collective imagination. Churches are rooted in common religious myths.”[5]
At what point does Harari cross over the line with his educated imaginations? Is it sacrilegious? Who gives him the right to purport what is proper guidelines for sexuality, truth, and the dignity of the human race? What allows Harari to play “god” and prophecy that “Mother nature dos not mind if men are sexually attracted to one another. It’s only human mothers and fathers steeped in particular cultures who make a scene if their son has a fling with the boy next door.”[6]
Last, I did not embrace or enjoy the majority of this book. It was not because of my narrow mindset of God that I came to that conclusion. It was more from the perspective that I would rather have something that is “truth” than believe that everything is a figment of collective imaginations and myths. I was finished with Harari when he said that, “Religion can thus be defined as a system of human norms and values that is founded on a belief in a superhuman order.”[7]
I believe in a totally different “brief history of mankind” than Harari. I embrace an eternal God that consummates in eternal truths that are settled and sure. I believe that humans will inherit eternal life in one of two places based upon their acceptance or denial of this God! That is the TRUTH!
[1] Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, (New York: HarperCollins Publisher, 2015), 415-416.
[2] Ibid., 3.
[3] Ibid., 108
[4] Ibid., 29.
[5] Ibid., 27.
[6] Ibid., 146.
[7] Ibid., 210.
17 responses to “I Believe in TRUTH!”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Phil,
Thanks for your blog today. The truth was what every opinion the author happened to have that day as he was writing his novel. A novel of anti creation and anti God proportion makes me question what the purpose of the book was. Did you find any purpose in this book? Was there a back in high school sense to this writing? The anti American and anti Christian sentiment shut me down quickly especially this week. Any thoughts?
Kevin
Kevin:
My takeaway purpose was that we live in a world that is embracing a narrative that is so far removed from Truth. It was staggering reading the extent of exposure and publication that “Sapiens” received. It made my heart break but my mind was challenged.
Phil
Your writing reminded me of one of my favorite verses where Jesus says that He is the way, the life, and the truth. I believe that and live my life around that belief. As pastors, how do we act like Jesus with the Hararis of the world?
Aaron:
Great question. I never viewed Jesus as a pacifist or an anarchist….He was Truth! To act like Jesus we need to embrace Truth and be willing to perpetuate and permeate the other “sapiens” around us. The anti-God is very aggressive and appealing….we need to be also.
Phil
Hi Phil,
I’ll pose to you the same question that I posted to Pablo (http://dminlgp.com/the-power-of-shared-stories/#comment-41231) – what strategy you might suggest for helping the Christian story make sense as true or even coherent to someone inhabiting Harari’s universe? This story in broad strokes reflects the dominant paradigm / myth of the global elite – science, academia, technologists, etc.
Loren:
Strategy – Part of the narrative of truth is how is it told and with what accuracy. It seems that academia is articulate and filled with “information” that they purport as factual and unquestionable.
For people that lean/follow Harari-ness environments, we need to be sure of what we know and present it with preciseness and character that is reflective of Christ.
Phil
Phil,
Several (most) of us were pretty offended by this book and, in my opinion, his arrogant attitude. Having said that, I have heard that the word “myth” originally may not have carried the negative “fictitious” connotation that we assign it. If “myth” could mean simply the stories collected by any given culture or religion, would that make any difference in your interpretation of Harari, and your response to his book?
(I have no agenda in this question.)
Marc:
If the word “myth” was a collective group of stories it would clear my thought on the “Christian” story. BUT, in regards to the narrative on Darwinism, the dignity of the Creator, and the original design of man/woman those are the cause of my detest of the book.
The one sliver of “myth” is not enough for me to embrace the content of the book.
Phil
Yes sir, I agree. The overriding assumption of the “science” (not) of evolution demonstrates the huge cracks in his foundations.
Nor I
Phil,
Great blog. If you are like me, my first response to reading this work is anger, frustration and sadness. How do you remain composed when dealing with people with such radical opposite views?
Jason
Jason:
“Composed” – I am not sure that I have to be composed…..depends on what you mean by “composed”. That may be why books, like Harari’s, are accepted and flourish.
We should react and act with a “Christ-like” demeanor in all cases. But, that doesn’t mean that we cower in a sense of false humility.
Now after saying all that….the way we should respond is with clarity of our position that has the same fervency and accuracy that our opponents have.
Phil
Phil,
This is so true as you stated, “If one embraces evolution and the course of natural selection then hopelessness would be the prevailing wind that would drive you.” As a pastor do you see this ideology being embraced by the college youth in the local church? Is there any tension between their Christian theology and the evolutionary sciences dominating academia?
Claire:
I do believe that there is a strong tension between academia’s evolutionary teachings and the Christian story. This has been ongoing and seems to be escalating.
With our college age, it depends on their worldview and what they embrace. Many of them are strong believers that hold their weight in what they believe and are willing to defend. Those that come with no Biblical background struggle to the concept of absolute truth. We as believers need to present and re-present Christ. The challenge is that many times we do not present a compelling defense of who our Creator is.
Phil
Phil,
I share your struggle with Harari’s assertions and his arrogant tone. The one element that kept me reading with attentive ears was the realization that his worldview is becoming more prevalent today. If God does not exist, if we are evolving into superior beings through natural selection, then ethics is arbitrary and not objective. The ultimate issue is not that there are no ethics in a Darwinian worldview, but that those ethics are determined arbitrarily by somebody who is not God. This is exactly what you pointed out in Harari’s book. He ends up determining what is right from what is wrong, because he knows better what reality is about. Unavoidably, the outcome of Darwinian thought, if pursued consistently, leads to moral relativism and to hopelessness. After all, we came from nowhere and we are going nowhere.
Thank God that the truth has set us free from this deception. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life. We have eternal purpose in him, because He made us, redeemed us, and called us to life eternal. He knows the end from the beginning, and has entrusted to us the message of reconciliation. Reading Harari reminds us that the audience we face today is surrounded by a deceptive message, and we have to develop intelligent ways to break through the barriers of pseudo-intellectual scholarship.
Thank you for a great blog.
Pablo
Pablo:
Thank you for your response. I am with you that our audience is influenced with great deception. We must become “competitive” and full of accuracy in the story of our Creator that we tell.
You are one of those “story tellers”.
Phil
Phil,
I was surprised of the timing of this book because we were on a great leadership trend. However, I realize that our next guest is Loren, who I’m sure will challenge us from a different angle. There’s nothing I liked about this book except for the fact that it challenged me in becoming an expert in the area I’m researching (Cultural Intelligence). At some point we’ll subscribe to a conviction from our research that we’ll be forced to defend. This author’s work and conviction is now on trial because of its offensive tone towards Christianity. While this author’s approach is both contradictory and inconsistent, reading this book like a novel made it a little easier to read…but not accepted.
Garfield