The only thing self-evident about rights is that they are not self-evident.
SPEAKER_00Fake a human being? Cut him open? Look inside? You won't find any rights.
SPEAKER_01And the whole world seemed to go. It seems like we really believe in these things called human rights.
SPEAKER_03If I tell you this is the glass that Elton John brings from his left, it's not value intrinsic to the glass.
SPEAKER_01What if you apply that same argument to the human person? When you look in the face of someone who is not economically valuable, and as you feel that they have this near infinite value and worth and dignity, you are thinking very Jesus-shaped thoughts.
SPEAKER_00Recently, a video of Yval Noah Harari surfaced on Twitter where he said Human rights, just like God in heaven, are just a story that we've invented. They are not an objective reality. They are not some biological fact about Homo sapiens. Take a human being, cut him open, look inside, you will find the heart, the kidneys, neurons, hormones, DNA, but you won't find any rights.
SPEAKER_01And the whole world seemed to go, oh no. It seems like we really believe in these things called human rights. And that's interesting because I meet people all the time who tell me that they are not a believer. They'll look at me and they'll say, Oh, you're a Christian, you're a person of faith, but I'm not a person of faith. And sometimes they look at me and they think I've hit the jackpot, and sometimes they look at me and they think they've dodged a bullet. But many of my friends think that they are constitutionally unable to believe. Maybe that's how you think. But you do believe, don't you? You believe in, for instance, human rights. You believe that people have a right to protection in society, no matter who they are, whether rich or poor, strong or weak, young or old, man or woman, whatever your nationality or ethnicity or sexuality or class, we are all equal, and we all deserve equal protection under the law. The strong do not have the right to take away your life or your liberty or your property or your freedom of speech or freedom of conscience or freedom of religion or freedom of assembly. You believe, don't you? And maybe you say, well, that's not a belief, that's just obvious. But at that point, I'm going to play Yoval Noah Harari to you again.
SPEAKER_00Just as jellyfish and woodpeckers and ostriches have no rights, Homo sapiens have no rights also. Take a human, cut him open, look inside, you find their blood, and you find the heart and lungs and kidneys, but you don't find their any rights.
SPEAKER_01He really seems to like this thought experiment about cutting people open, doesn't he? Keep an eye on that one. But actually he is right to this degree. There is no scientific experiment to be conducted under laboratory conditions where the finding is humans have worth and dignity far above their economic value. It's something we believe strongly, but we can't prove it. Now sometimes people say, well, we've learnt as societies that if you treat people as though they have human rights, then such societies perform better than other societies. But perform better according to what standard? If you've gotten rid of that moral category of human rights, how are you performing better? Economically, your GDP, the self-reported happiness of your citizens? Okay, let's go with that. But imagine you're being thoroughly scientific about it. You'd have to then put that hypothesis to the test, wouldn't you? You'd have to design an experiment in which you treated one population in which every member has human rights and dignity, including the depressed and the weak and the poor and the physically disabled, the mentally disabled. In that population, you have to look after all those groups and make sure that you are the kind of society that treats its weakest members best. And at the end of the day, you have to measure your GDP and the self-reported happiness of each member. But then with the other population, you would just tell them, maximize your GDP and maximize the self-reported happiness of everyone whose happiness you think counts. Nobody has a right to life or liberty, protection or provision. Just try to outperform the other population. Would you be able to run such an experiment? Of course not. And rightly so. I'm not making any claims for which population would do better. I'm simply saying that the experiment itself is wicked and ought not to be done, but I can't scientifically prove that it ought not to be done, and neither can you. I believe strongly that it can't be done. And if you believe in human rights, you're saying, Yay and Amen, Brother Glenn. But that's because you're a believer. We are all believers at that level. And the question is, where does that come from? In this video, I want to show you what it takes to actually believe in human rights. And here's where I'm heading. It takes theological beliefs, and it takes very particular theological beliefs, biblical beliefs, Christian beliefs. And if you try to remove Christian beliefs from the human rights picture, you are not left with secular humanism. You are left with secular subhumanism. As the poet T. S. Eliot has said, if you remove from the word human all that the belief in the supernatural has given to man, you can view him finally as no more than an extremely clever, adaptable, and mischievous little animal. Now, before I continue, here's what I'm not saying. I'm not saying that without Christianity you can't be moral. You can be very moral without Christianity. I'm not saying that without Christianity you can't have objective moral standards. There are lots of non-Christian philosophies that believe in objective moral values. But they are not beliefs in human rights specifically. Human rights are a profoundly biblical thing. Thirdly, I'm not just saying that human rights are an argument for some kind of God. I'm saying they point you very specifically to the God man, Jesus Christ. To begin our discussion of human rights, I want to take you back to an analogy that Sam Harris made in his debate with Jordan Peterson back in 2018. Do you remember those four debates held between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson six years ago now? I think this analogy of the glass is a fascinating example of where we find value and how we derive that value, how we name that value, how we protect value in human societies. Here is the analogy as Sam sets it up.
SPEAKER_03Right. So if I if I tell you, well, this glass, this isn't just an ordinary glass, I know it looks just like that one, but this is the glass that uh Elton John drank from his last concert here. Right? Right, right. Um, you know, what do you want to pay me for it, right? Right. It it could be that you know you're just the biggest Elton John fan ever, and you it's worth quite a lot to you. Now that is it's a kind of it's not value intrinsic to the glass, but it is it is it is a where's the value located? Well, it's a it's a measure in in the change this provokes in your experience.
SPEAKER_01I think this is a great example of how we value things because we don't always value things according to their material structure. We don't just value things according to how they are economically valued. So, a glass of water, what are you gonna pay me for it? Well, if it's just any old glass of water, like a a few pennies really is all I will give you for a glass of water, unless it's in like a crystal glass or something like that, unless it's the most amazing kind of Perrier. Really, even so, I'm only gonna pay a pound or three, maybe, for the most amazing glass of water. What is gonna make me pay thousands and thousands of pounds above the market value of a glass of water is if it is connected to an Elton John type figure. If there's an Elton John figure, now if I really value Elton John and if Elton John is really connected to this glass, then suddenly this glass takes on a value that far surpasses any economic value. Now consider the human person. The human person, if you just consider them economically, if you just consider them like Yuval Noah Harari considers them as something to be cut open, um, then the the bag of protoplasm, the the organs that are inside, um, what are they worth? Well, maybe maybe you could harvest the organs and sell them on the black market and you could get maybe a few thousand pounds for organs. Is that what I'm worth? Or maybe you could strap me to like an exercise machine and I'm powering up some kind of battery, and if I cycle for long enough, I kind of generate enough kilowatts of electricity. Is that what my worth is? Is is it just my labor? Am I just useful according to my parts? Like, how am I valued? If I'm only valued for my minerals, then I'm worth about 20 bucks. Okay? So here's hoping there's some kind of cosmic Elton John that's outside the system that is connected to me somehow and that can bestow value upon me. Otherwise, I'm just going to be valued according to my my economic value, according to my material properties. Here's hoping there's a cosmic Elton John. But that's not the way that Sam Harris develops the analogy. For him, the glass is an analogy of that strip of land at the end of the Mediterranean. Here's how the analogy goes on.
SPEAKER_03The reason why Israel and uh the Israelis and the Palestinians can't negotiate pu as though their problems could be solved by a real estate transaction is because they have irrational and irreconcilable claims upon land and building the people.
SPEAKER_00Do you think they're any more Do you think they're any more irrational than the claim that that class is worth something with the other thing? No, it's just No, no, it's it's like that.
SPEAKER_01It's like that, says Harris. And so, like, instead of thinking about the human person, let's let's think of that strip of land. And he's saying, isn't it silly to attribute value to something that really is just, you know, it just has material properties. And the great thorny issue of that part of the Middle East is how do we negotiate between people who are putting massive value on land? And Sam Harris is saying, isn't that unfortunate that we are so silly as to attribute value to things that are just factual, right? And really, this goes back to that whole enlightenment break between facts and values. And we've been living with the nightmare of that kind of divorce between facts and values ever since the 1700s. And Sam Harris is very much an heir of that enlightenment way of thinking where you can divorce the facts of reality from the values that you attribute to things. And we'll see how actually, yes, there's a proper way of distinguishing facts and values. Maybe we can live in a world in which people don't value land anymore. It seems like a bit of a pipe dream, Sam Harris, but um imagine a world in which we don't value land anymore. Sam Harris says it's religion that is giving people that added value and is making a real estate transaction impossible because of the inflated value that people are bringing because of the stories they're telling, that are religiously motivated. And Sam Harris is wishing for a day when we can just get rid of religion and value land for land. Um, that is a pipe dream because you can't divorce facts from values at the end of the day like that.
SPEAKER_03The the true analogy here, the complete analogy, is rather like we're about to fight over Elton John's glass, and Elton John was never here. Right.
SPEAKER_01And everybody applauds, um, but everybody applauds when they think that the glass refers to that land at the end of the Mediterranean. What if you apply that same argument to the human person? Okay. Imagine that you say there is no such thing as an ultimate Elton John, and all those religious stories in which value is given to the human, all that is bunk, and we just deal with people as people, and we deal with them according to their economic value. At that point, you have imagined some kind of dystopian hellscape, okay? You would not be applauding if you realized that Sam Harris removing those religious stories doesn't just remove certain stories about the value of land, it removes stories that we've been telling for thousands of years about the value of you and me. The story that is being told in particular is the story in which God makes humanity and sets them over the world as king and queen of all creation. There are Adam and Eve. They can go anywhere, do anything, they can rule and have dominion over all things. It's the most astonishing royalty that is ascribed to them. In other ancient Near Eastern myths, the king might have been said to be in the image of gods, because given the kinds of gods that there are in those Near Eastern mythologies, then uh a despot is a pretty good approximation of what the gods are like. But in this picture of reality, there is a single God who sets humanity over his world and says, You take charge of it, you rule, you will be my images on planet Earth. And so male and female equally together are in the image of God, and we have dominion over his world. And you think, why has he accorded humanity with such dignity? Well, the story goes that God the Son, in the fullness of time, takes that place at the center stage of this cosmic drama, and he assumes the place of royal dignity. He is the Son of Man. It's the number one way that Jesus describes himself, the very essence of humanity. And it's like as he comes into our humanity, he is taking the cockpit of planet Earth, and he is pressing home on the sat nav to take us back into the kind of glory that we were made for. And Jesus Christ becomes human for all humans, he adopts humanity as such. It's not just an Elton John figure who happened to have drunk out of a glass. God the Son became our brother for all time, giving an unlosable dignity to humanity. And through cross and resurrection, he raises us up to the right hand of the Father and gives us a dignity that is unlosable, that is irreversible, that is eternal. Jesus Christ has given dignity to the human person far above anything that we could earn. He is the cosmic Elton John, and far more than an Elton John. He hasn't just prized or honored or dignified humanity, he has assumed humanity and said that humanity has a future, God's future. You could not give to humanity a higher value than that which Jesus Christ has given to humanity. And you could not give to humanity a more universal dignity. Because here he comes and he assumes in his incarnation the nature of humanity in which male and female participate, in which Jew and Gentile participate, in which slave and free participate. All distinctions are gone in the person of Jesus, but he has become a human for all humans. Which means apparently there is a single human nature. And anyone who has that human nature is already dignified in the incarnation of Jesus. Man, woman, Jew, Gentile, slave-free. We are all one in Christ Jesus, as Galatians chapter 3, verse 29 says. And so this is the foundation for human rights and human value and human dignity. This is the story that has been told. And without that story, we are these clever, adaptable little apes. With the story, we have a dignity that goes far beyond anything that we could earn in ourselves.
SPEAKER_02Hi folks, it's Thomas Thorogood here, media producer at Speak Life. You might recognise my voice as the guy who does the filler bits on the podcast. It's part of my job to think of how we can include you more in the work of Speak Life and bring you behind the scenes, if you will. And so we have a very exciting thing called the Speak Life Discord Server. It's an online platform where you can interact with other Speak Life supporters and the Speak Life team. We have bonus content, creative theological discussion, and lots of fun along the way. So if you want to join that, you can just go to speaklife.org.uk forward slash give. Okay, back to the podcast.
SPEAKER_01It's a story that has been so successful in framing our view of the human that we started to think it was the self-evident way of seeing humans. Let's go back to 1776, and perhaps the most famous place where human rights are discussed. Here is the Declaration of Independence. The most famous part of the Declaration begins. We hold these truths to be self-evident. Actually, Thomas Jefferson wrote, We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, but Benjamin Franklin did not like the word sacred, and so edited that to say we hold these truths to be self-evident. It was a momentous move. Locating the grounds for human rights in human reason rather than divine revelation. I did a whole podcast series with Andrew Wilson on that very question. Check out post-Christianity. But in brief, the only thing self-evident about rights is that they are not self-evident. Billions have lived and died without the slightest awareness that there is such a thing as human rights. And even within cultures, with a tradition of human rights, people have called them nonsense on stilts. But let's go with Benjamin Franklin's edit. After all, Western civilization has tried to make it work for the last quarter of a millennium. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, and so forth. Notice that we are created equal, and we are endowed by our Creator with these rights, and that governments do not bestow our rights, they secure them. They secure them against powers that might infringe on them. Governments can only secure the rights that humans already have. It's very important that humans do not grant other humans human rights. Why? Well, because if we grant rights, we can withhold them too. And who is we anyway? It starts to be a power play. And some have the power to bestow rights. And if you're powerless, then you are at the mercy of the powerful. And the circle of human value just shrinks and shrinks and it shrinks at the command of the powerful. But it's the powerless who actually need their rights secured. The little people need rights as a protection from the powerful doing what the powerful do. So putting the possession of rights in the hands of the powerful is the last thing you want to do, right? Governments can only recognize rights. Rights that are already there. It's a discovery and a recognition. It's not an invention or a bestowal. Isaac Newton discovered gravity, right? And he discovered that kind of language that we are now familiar with to describe something that was already there. He did not invent gravity. It's very important that we say that Isaac Newton did not invent gravity. Things were not floating off into space before Isaac Newton. He discovered something that was already there. And there has been this language about human rights, but it is not an invention. It is a discovery, it is something that is already there. And humans do not have the power to invent such things or bestow such things. Human rights are intrinsic to humans as humans, or else they are nothing. Or else they are just a power play, right? If you believe in human rights, you need to believe that they are already there. They are not something that is bestowed or invented by the powers that be. The powers that be are tasked with protecting that which is already true of the human. But why is it already true of the human? On what basis? Where's your Elton John? Where's your source of value that gives dignity to the human as such? So the Declaration of Independence is very clear that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that governments do not bestow those rights. They can only recognize and protect them. That theme comes across again and again in the other most famous Declaration of Human Rights, and that's the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Here is some of the preamble. Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world. Later on it says human rights should be protected by the rule of law. And then all this is about the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights. We strive to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance. Do you get the idea? Rights are inherent, and we recognize, we observe, we protect them, we do not invent them or grant them or bestow them. If you believe that, if you believe that the human as such already has such dignity and value, you really ought to be a Christian. Because you are already a believer. And the things you believe make no sense without Jesus. And you say, Really? Yeah, really. If you think that humans have rights that cannot be trampled on by the powerful, you think that humans as such have this moral value that cannot be traded away against anything. But those rights, they need to have two characteristics. They should be global and they should be given. They need to be global, that is, they need to be universal. It needs to be all humans, without exception, simply by being humans, have this value. Humans as such have these rights. Rights are global and rights are given. They are not bestowed by other humans, or else other humans can also withhold them too. They're a given. There needs to be the Elton John figure who so values the glass. There needs to be God who so values the human. So for rights to work, you need a source of value that is not in the gift of any government or ruler or power. They simply must be a given, but they must be a given from beyond the human. So you tell me if you've come across a story in which there is someone from beyond the human who has adopted the human and raised the human into that kind of inviolable worth and dignity. You will search in vain. There is no other story. The incarnation is this really unique thing that's happened in the in the history of religions. Here comes Jesus claiming to be our maker, but also claiming to be the Son of Man and raising humanity up to the highest heights. Do you believe in the human? Actually, that might be a really interesting way for you to start believing in God. Not in an abstract deity, but in the God who actually took flesh for all flesh, the God who became the little guy in order to protect and provide for all the little people of the world. When you look in the face of someone who is not economically valuable, someone who is weak, someone who is poor, someone who is marginalized, the the mentally disabled, the physically disabled, look into the face of another human, and as you feel that they have this near infinite value and worth and dignity, you are thinking very Jesus-shaped thoughts. And I would just urge you to keep on pulling at the thread of that. You are far more of a believer than you think, and your beliefs are far more Christian than you might imagine. If you want to discover more, we've got a great course called 321. Go to 321course.com and you can discover life according to Jesus. You'll see his vision for God, his vision for the world and humanity, and his vision for you. It's absolutely free, and you can start it right now at 321course.com. And why don't you hit subscribe if you're not subscribed already? And we'll catch you on the next one. Thanks so much.