Studies in Early Genesis
Tents of Shem
Professor: Rushdoony Dr. R.J.R.
Lesson: 10 of 11
Dictation Name: RR115E10
[Difficult to hear, there may be errors]
Almighty God our heavenly Father, we thank Thee that into this world of darkness the light of Jesus Christ has come. And we thank Thee that Thou hast called us to walk in the light. Give us grace therefore day by day, never to be fearful of the darkness, to know that Thou art light and that Thou wilt never leave us nor forsake us. That we have been called unto this in Jesus Christ. Make us ever strong in Him, that we may be more than conquerors through Him that loved us. In Jesus name, amen.
Our scripture this afternoon is Genesis 9:20-29. The Tents of Shem.
“20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.
24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
26 And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years.
29 And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.”
This is a text very seldom discussed or preached. It is a text very, very commonly attacked. From the time I began my college education I began to hear ridicule of this particular passage. And the ridicule was (due?) to the fact that this passage, the professors said, was aimed at demonstrating that the enslavement of the Negro was justified. That this text had been used extensively in this country in the days before the Civil war as a proof text for slavery.
Others today also say that this is not a prophecy, and in the face of the plain reading of the text, cursed be Canaan, there are some like Ralph H. Elliot, who have denied that any curse is involved in this passage. But very clearly this passage does speak about a curse.
Very clearly too this passage is given to us as prophetic. So that here at the beginning of history after the flood we have an example of prophecy that has some relationship to the whole future of the human race, and if we are going to understand what God says is going to happen in our time as well as what has happened in times past, we must understand this passage. [5:03]
To understand it first of all let us look at the setting. After the flood, Noah planted a vineyard and having made some wine became drunk. The incident here is the only thing we have in the whole of scripture that is at all derogatory of the character of Noah. The Bible makes it clear that Noah is regarded as one of the great saints of scripture. He was a preacher of righteousness to the generations before the flood, and he was a great man of God in the generations after. The Bible does not spare any man, it tells the truth about all men. But it does not believe that because a man has committed one sin he is therefore to be (described?). We know this about Noah, but we must know what Scripture regards him, as one of the great men of faith. We know the failings of other saints, but we know that David for all his failings, was still called the beloved of God. We have to take Gods evaluation of Noah, of David, and of other men.
But of his three sons, Noah had one, Ham, who clearly had no respect for his Fathers faith. Who belonged to the world before the flood spiritually, and who took savage delight in the fact that his father was drunk. This to him was the high point of his life, to be able to ridicule his father. And so, after this incident, Noah inspired by God pronounces a curse and pronounces a blessing. And these statements of Noah, three simple verses, are important not only with respect to the sons of Noah but to all of history.
First of all, the three verses. Verse 25: “ 25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.”
Canaan is cursed. That much is evident. He shall be a servant, or a slave to his brethren. Verse 26: “26 And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” Or servant to them, it can also read. The blessing is not on Shem, it is on Jehovah or the Lord, the God of Shem. And Shem as we have seen means ‘Name’. It refers to the Messiah, the chosen one.
The blessing therefore is on a messiah, upon God, and the reference is to those who are in Christ, to the people of God. And the curses are to serve those blessed in the Lord.
Verse 27: “27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.”
A physical, geographical enlargement is promised to Japheth, and a dwelling in the tents of Shem, that is in the house of the messiah, in the church.
Now let us analyze the meaning of these three simple verses. First of all it impossible on any grounds to deny the fact that this text declares that God makes a difference between people, that he raises up one and abases another. The Canaanites at the very least were cursed. And we must assert that throughout the whole of Biblical history, we see every indication that God saves one and passes by another, blesses one and curses another. And that this particularism of God extends not only to individuals but to races also. That God has blessed some and that he has not blessed others. [10:22]
And certainly the doctrine of Predestination which is basic to scripture is not an equalitarian doctrine. It declares that God makes a difference. The idea of equality is a modern concept, and it is not Biblically tenable. Equality itself is a mathematical term. Equal means the mark that declares that both sides of an equation are equivalent one to the other. 2+2 = 4. The two sides of the equation are identical, 2 = 2. The Equal marks declares the identity of both sides of an equation. Now, equality is a valid concept when you are dealing as in mathematics, with an abstraction. But the moment you drop abstractions and apply this equation to the richness and variety of life it breaks down. Can you say that two Englishmen are equal to two Negro’s? Perhaps the two Englishmen are Alfred the Great and John Norton, and the two Negro’s are two hoodlums. Or perhaps the two Englishmen are two criminals, and the two Negro’s are George Washington Carver and some other outstanding Negro leader. The equation breaks down. 2 is not equal to 2, the minute you apply it to the concreteness of life.
Are two women equal to two women? It depends on the two women, which side of the equation out-weighs the other. The term equality therefore does not stick to a concrete, a real world. It is valid in economics. It is valid in a world of abstraction. The Biblical idea is one of vocation and calling, and as Scripture makes abundantly clear, that God gives diverse gifts. To some He gives one kind of talent, and to others another. And we have no right to be dissatisfied with what God has given us, either individually or racially. [13:21]
Second, we must say not only that scripture asserts that there are differences between peoples, we must add that natural differences exist and are obvious to all. Different races have different (?). And clearly heredity is important. There is nothing in the Bible that teaches us to despise heredity. Does not the Bible for example make clear that genealogical records are kept? That these records are important? That for example, after the exile, Nehemiah barred from the congregation those who were of mixed blood. Such people could not enter in immediately.
Heredity does make a difference. And we must remember, not in pride but in humility, that we are different by the grace of God because we represent people with 1500-2000 years of Christianity behind us. And the effect, the impact of this is tremendous.
Records have been studied, church records, community records, for centuries back in various Western European countries as well as in the United States as far back as they go, and roughly these records show something of this kind of result. Out of every hundred practicing Christians in any Western European country, or the United States in past centuries up until 1914, these people had approximately 285 children. In other words, they did increase and multiply.
Out of every hundred good character, but not practicing Christian people, there was no real reproduction. They barely reproduced themselves, and the figures would run sometimes slightly more than a hundred to a hundred and 10 or twenty, very commonly as low as 85. In other words, these people were breeding themselves out.
Out of every hundred people who were of the hoodlum and criminal elements, approximately 18 children were born. They were breeding themselves out. What this meant in our western culture, in our Christian heritage, was that Christians were the ones who were reproducing themselves and the other elements were being bred out. And this has left its mark on every one of us, we represent that kind of an inheritance, that kind of character in our background. This does not save us, salvation is of faith; but the Bible over and over again emphasizes the importance of the family, the importance of a good inheritance, the importance of Godly marriage. And these things leave their mark in history. [17:22]
We cannot despise these things.
On the other hand, if you take such a people as the Negro, you find that their background in Africa through countless centuries is one of savagery. No culture was ever produced there. The only kind of life was one of eat, drink, and get all sex you can today because tomorrow you may be dead, you may be in the pot. And so there was no premium on character or on intelligence, but only on physical dexterity in killing or in escaping being killed. Can untold centuries of this type of living do anything but produce a particular heredity? It would be (?) you can imagine.
Now certainly everything that we know from (?) and extensive testing does indicate a greatly inferior intelligence (?) and often a superior physical dexterity on the part of the African peoples. And today certainly the situation is a serious one among the Negros.
But as they are departing from the faith, very few (?) today are in any churches that can be called at all Orthodox, Negro life is taking (?) again. (?) today. There is only one church, a very very small one, where Orthodox Christianity is being taught.
(?) Bible makes clear that God does not permit us to despise heredity and background. That God does not permit immediate integration of all peoples. For example, in Deuteronomy 23:2-3 the Amalekites and the Moabites were banned from the congregation to the tenth generation, because of their background and spiritual and moral degeneracy. The Edomites, verses 7-8 of Deuteronomy 23, were barred till the third generation. And yet at the same time the hatred of an Edomite was declared to be a sin in front of God.
Thus these people could not be detested, or despised or hated, but they could not be brought immediately into the congregation, they had to worship separately in some cases to the tenth generation, and others to the third generation. So that they have a background of segregated worship and of character for so many generation before they could be integrated with the Congregation of Israel. And this is a part of Gods law. [20:59]
And it declares emphatically that God believes that inheritance, heredity, is important. Exceptions were made in the Bible, in cases of exceptional faith and character. But normally the law said (?). The Bible does not give us any grounds for despising them or setting them aside.
Third, it is imperative however for us to realize that to be backward or to be lesser in ability does not mean that God cannot bless them and use them mightily, or that if they are saved He loves them any the less. All of us are parents (?) but it is not ability which necessarily commands great love. There can be differences of considerable measure amongst your children, one can be outstanding intellectually, and another of very mediocre ability. But you will not say: “I love them in the order of their ability.” Because love does not move only in terms of one aspect of a person’s being, but in terms of the totality of a person.
Moreover, God declares emphatically through Paul in 1st Corinthians 1:26 following, that God has chosen what the world calls foolish to confound the wise. He has chosen what the world calls weak to shame the strong, He has chosen things (?) which have no real existence, to explosively (puncture?) the things that are, that no man may boast in the presence of God.
The Lord there emphatically declares that He can use and does use in a great and mighty way the humblest people of the earth. He has done so repeatedly. [23:38]
Now, let us examine the prophecy in the light of all of this. Clearly there has been some physical fulfillment. In some sense, this prophecy of Noah has had a physical fulfillment. Canaan has been cursed, there is no getting around that. Canaan was cursed and destroyed. Moreover, the Talmudic peoples have been made first, and their history predominately has been one of (?). But to face an inescapable historical fact, (?) can do away with the fact that God has pronounced a curse (?) at the beginning of history after the flood and it has been fulfilled. It is ungodly to (?) with the plain meaning of scripture.
Next, the physical fulfillment however is subordinate to the religious meaning and fulfillment. The blessing that we saw is one Jehovah, on the Lord God of Shem, on faith in the name, in the Messiah, on the people of God. And the curse is pronounced upon disbelief as it manifests itself as contempt of authority. The whole point at issue with regard to Ham was that Ham hated his Fathers faith. He hated his Fathers Godly authority, and the highpoint in the life of Ham, his greatest delight, was to belittle (?). It was defiance of authority and his contempt of it.
And the curse upon Ham was that he was cursed in (his sons?). And he was given an inheritance of slavery and (?). His curse was to have Canaan as his son.
Now this curse was not fulfilled, nor was it (?) when Canaan was destroyed and Israel possessed the land. If we take it in that literal sense we say it was only the Canaanite peoples, therefore it cannot be fulfilled, because Canaan never served Jacob, …?... how then could it be fulfilled?
But the plain word goes far beyond it, and the prophecy declares that after Japheth was enlarged and dwelt in the tents of Shem, that is in the household of faith, Canaan shall be their servant, that is the servant of the enlarged, the faithful people of God. Therefore Japheth was enlarged when he believed, and dwelt in the tent of Shem. And it is then that Canaan becomes his servant. There is no enlarging of Japheth until he believes. This is the ground of his enlargement. And when he is enlarged then he is served by the sons of Canaan. [27:37]
Thus Japheth comprises the Godly people of the earth who dwelt in the tents of Shem. And Canaan therefore applies to those who refuse to dwell in the tents of Shem, who refuse their obedience to God and to man, to those who despise and defy all Godly authority.
Thus in every age, the Canaanites are those according to the plain meaning of this text, who despise Godly authority even as Ham did. And (?) people are those who dwell in the tents of Shem, who live in the house of God, who walk by faith. And those who dwell in the tents of Shem shall be enlarged. In every age those who are the Canaanites will become the slaves.
Certainly therefore we can say, as was said a hundred years ago and earlier, that the African peoples and American Negros were Canaanites. But for the past century as we (?) were steadily Christianized and have built their own churches, they began although a backward and handicapped people to move slowly and steadily out of the house of Canaan into the tents of Shem. And the result was a steady and progressive blessing of Negro life. And they came to enjoy a better life than most peoples of the area. And the life of the average Negro in the United States far surpassed, even the slum dwellers, those of the people in the USSR. But today as the Negro has (Rejected the faith?) he has moved out of the tents of Shem into the (?) of Canaan again. He has moved away from the blessing to the curse. Because he has moved away from obedience to all Godly authority, into a defiance and a contempt of authority. [30:22]
And third the Negro today shall inherit again the curse of Canaan. But we cannot stop there. We must say that today the Supreme Court and others in high places in the United States, and millions of Americans and many, many clergy men are trying to lead us as a people into the curse of Canaan. They are defying God. They are working to subvert and to destroy all Godly law and order. …?... their contempt of the word of God. And they are moving these United States out of the tent of Shem into the fold of Canaan, and the result will only be the curse of Canaan. It is only that simple.
Those who obey Godly authority shall be blessed. Those who despise and defy and set aside Godly law and order, authority, are under the curse of Canaan in every generation till the end of time. And the curse of Canaan shall fall upon all those who leave the tent of Shem. They shall be enslaved. Those who move into the tent of Shem shall be free. …?...
Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. Let us pray.
Almighty God our heavenly Father, we thank Thee that through Thy grace Thou hast manifested to us in Jesus Christ, we have been called out of the fold of Canaan into the Tent of Shem. Out of slavery into the glorious liberty of the Sons of God. Make us confident therefore our Father to the freedom unto which we have been called, establish, strengthen and bless us therein. And grant us Father that we be strengthened in this liberty, that we might build for the future in terms of it. establishing in Thy name churches, schools and institutions, dedicated to Thy liberty. Grant our Father that in this strength we prevail, and according to Thy word we prosper in thy service. Unto the end that Thy name will be magnified and thy saving truth proclaimed unto the ends of the earth. In Jesus name, amen. [34:31]
Are there any questions at this time?
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Yes, very good point, I saw this article (?) last week, …?... November 22. Is (?) population declining? And the answer very definitely is yes. I cited earlier the figures up to World War 1 concerning the U.S. population. Since then of course, (?) become increasingly a part of Western life in America, (?) because the burden of taxation falls upon the Godly people in the community, and the other people are the ones who are being supported by us, and the illegitimacy rate because of this subsidy through welfare is conclusive. Some of you (?) 62% of all Negro children are on aid to dependent children. 62%. And the percentage is growing regularly every year. This is true not only in this country but abroad. But the welfare population (?) and so the statement made in this interview by a Nobel Prize winning scientist, who is definitely not Conservative, anything but, is very true. He is afraid of the future, and he says very clearly that we are increasing our population in the worst possible areas. And so the prospects are rather unhappy (?).
And he walked gingerly around the racial issues, but he does point out that there is far more here to be alarmed about than we are ready to consider normally. Yes?
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Not entirely, because this is the fact that prevailed up until World War 1, but the Christian family, (1oving?) children wanted to have more; the non-Christian family is not as interested in children, and avoids having them, whereas the hoodlum element since there is no subsidy in it simply was not interested in having children. So that the birthrate was lower, and of course with the worst element the death rate was higher, but this was (?). So that there was a total different psychology. Now of course we have placed as it were a bounty on illegitimacy, and it makes a good source of income for many women, they still have illegitimate children for that reason. And in Louisiana for the fourth child you get a bounty, and because there is more when you get four, so they race there to get the number four because their grant increases. So we have (despoiled?) what naturally prevailed.
Now, in terms of this natural breeding out of the lower element, scholars said that the Negro who was declining in his rate of the general population percentage wise from the end of the Civil war to 1943, would in a couple of centuries virtually disappear in American life. Because the lower element was progressively dropping to the bottom and breeding out, the higher element was going to get smaller and smaller and more and more superior, and eventually mold into the general population, and there would no longer be a Negro population. [40:05]
Now this is what population experts predicted. But we have now overturned that whole possibility and for the last generation the one real population explosion we have had is in this area, through subsidy. Yes?
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] A very good question. They have created the problem by interference, their answer is to solve it by further interference, so that their answer tends to be total control. Yes?
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Deuteronomy 23:2. “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.” Now this barred the illegitimate child because his heredity was not known. He could not be a member of the congregation; he could be a believer, he could be in a segregated congregation, but he could not join the congregation because they did not know what his heredity was, he might’ve been an Ammonite or a Moabite, because they were living near and around these peoples. Therefore he had the same stigma.
Now this proves of course that the Bible is not a sentimental book. It is a realistic book. It doesn’t say that this person cannot be a good person, a respected person in the community, but as far as worshipping in the same sanctuary, no. He had to be a segregated person in that respect.
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Today we would have to say we have some grounds to make a distinction yes, but not to the same extent as then, because they were surrounded by the Canaanite people of a radically lower stock. It would be comparable to say a mixed marriage racially, you see. And naturally there would be a tremendous gap if the child were half white and half colored; and you couldn’t bring him in and integrate him. And this was what was taken care of here, because at that time normally this was the kind of illegitimacy you would get. [43:17]
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] [Difficult to hear, there may be errors] The Biblical solution would be to deal with the second curse. It is one thing to deal in a Christian community with (?) of those who would not normally be surviving, because there we are already living in terms of a higher characteristic; you are saying that in effect that not always are the physical characteristics most important. So the child might be kept alive who normally would have died without modern medicine. But that child may have very superior qualities, otherwise.
In other words a Christian perspective is of the totality of the person is important. But our Christian value of moving into an area that is not Christian with the fruits of our Christian culture such as modern medicine. Because immediately you destroy a great deal of that culture. And when you do, you can only go in with total control. So that we go into for example an area of Africa with modern medicine, and we immediately start saving the lives of countless numbers of people who would have otherwise died. But these people may live, say a handful of them on a thousand acres, where a vast number of American could be fed; but they don’t have capacity to feed there more than a handful, so they begin to starve. They don’t have the skill to match the medical knowledge that has been handed to them. And the whole life begins to break down. So what happens? Suddenly these colonial officers who introduced (these?) lives, food to provide for them; in other words we have destroyed the whole fabric of native life.
If we can take them and Christianize them first, so their standards now are changed, and they can of themselves move forward and clean up their own communities, and bring about the possibility of the introduction of our material advantages such as medicine, then they are capable of dealing with these things. But when we introduce the material blessings that a Christian civilization has produced without having them converted to Christianity what we do is to destroy them, and to create conditions where we have to go in and control and direct their lives.
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Well, as far as …?... because the trouble with most of the men in (?) is that they went there to make money, and the faith was very, very weak among them. And as far as we can see Biblically they didn’t have any more right to survive in the sight of God than the blacks around them, they are superior, but they have lost the principle of their superiority. Now, in (?) South Africa they are clearly Christian in their perspective, although there are signs of a weakening in that respect. But God does not have respect to our superiority, if we leave the principle of that superiority. So while we as a nation have a very superior inheritance, if we depart from the faith that superior inheritance instead of being something to commend us in Gods sight, it is going to be all the more grounds for judgement. So God declared: “To whom much is given, much shall be required.” And because of the very fact that racially and geographically America has been blessed above all other nations, God requires more of us than (?). [48:39]
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Humanism. Basically humanism. And humanism says that man is the center of the world, whereas Christianity says that God must be the center of our lives and of all things. When our perspective is humanistic we cannot bear that any man should suffer, because then it opens up for us the possibility of us suffering.
(?) years ago, during the Korean war my wife Dorothy had quite a discussion with a young man whom she knew quite well at that time, who had come back from Korea and was very upset at the utter poverty of the Koreans, the horrible conditions under which they existed. And he talked very bitterly about these things, and he said if there is a God he is a monster, how could he let people live like that, and so on and so forth. And then Dorothy asked him very specifically about what he saw. Well, where he had been stationed there were these families roundabout, and this was their life and so on, and she pressed him. And he finally said “Yes, (?)” And what was the other (fellows that were there with him?) doing to ease their neighbors in this village? Not a thing. Well, you as (?) group of men could have taken care of the whole community. Why didn’t you do it? He had no answer. And she said (you didn’t care for them, you pitied yourself?) because you had to live in a world where God could do that sort of thing to any man, which meant that He could do it to you. And you don’t want that kind of a world.
Well, this was the issue undergirding (?). “We don’t want a world where anyone can suffer.” And so they say they are going to eliminate all suffering, we are going to be God, the kind of God we believe in. A God who doesn’t let anybody suffer, who will let anybody do anything they want. And so, when we have welfare, every time you have it in history, every time, we find something out. Children are spoiled rotten. And what does that say? Well, “I went without things when I was young, and I am going to make sure that my children don’t grow without anything.”
In other words, the (?) and this is the basic welfarism and humanism, self-pity. And (?) not only today but again and again in history, self pity is the most dangerous and insidious of all cancers. It is destructive, totally destructive of man. Any other questions?
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Yes, yes. The humanists again and again speak and express their hatred of the Biblical passage oft repeated that the sins of the Fathers will be visited on the children even unto the tenth generation. Well now, are they saying that the second generation or the third of the Spanish-American war, of World War 1, how long ago was it from World War 2? In England they are paying for the Napoleonic war. Sins are being visited there as far as they are concerned. And when you destroy something in a country, the sins are visited on the generations to come.
For example, Greece. We don’t realize this, but in Hellenic Greece the (mountains?) are heavily rooted. Very heavily rooted. But by (?) they (?) and what happens now? The land was …?... collect it and bring it back, because sometimes before long …?... the sins are being visited in Greece for more than ten generations. [54:34]
We can’t wipe out the consequences forever. For example most of you have probably (?). Did you know that when the first white man came across the plains, the (wooded?) all the way across? (?) was very short. Some years in the northern half of Nevada you can have thirty frost-free days and that is your summer. Often 60, 90 is the maximum. …?... cut timber… plowed… possibilities… for mile after mile, hundreds… and it has never been the same. And after this it was overgrazed. There were more cattle in Nevada in the 70’s and 80’s of the last century than have ever been on the hills of Nevada since then. They stripped the country side, every blade of grass, the trees, everything. So that nothing grew under (?) we are living with the consequences.
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] That would be hard to do, there are so many, (?) organized… Philosophy is humanistic, I am not trying to list them, I am just giving you some of them that come to mind very clearly. Certainly Free Masonry is thoroughly humanistic, and you could go on and name a number of others. But virtually every country today is becoming a humanistic country, we are in process today of destroying all our laws in so far as they are Christian, and making them humanistic, so that the whole world is shifting from a Christian basis into a humanistic basis. And because of this philosophy… all of them are involved in this (?). ...under God. And because that under God is there, 50,000 people are being freed (?) retried. And sensibly, a man cannot give an honest decision if he is a Christian.
Now, when the whole world is turning humanistic it is almost academic to single out certain organizations, they are all involved in this, and all are equally responsible in the sight of God. No one can say ‘The woman gave it to me and I did eat.’ Because God won’t accept that. (?)
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] Yes, humanism is a general …?... but this has become a part of the very air we breathe now, it surrounds us so thoroughly. With the enlightenment it became the foundation of Western Culture, we are now at the end of the age of Humanism, this is what we must remember. We are at the end. We are seeing the worst of it coming to the forefront…?... In our time, I believe. So that I don’t feel that we do well to concentrate too much on an analysis of these things, because if the Bible means anything it is finished, and we must begin the task of reconstruction, and to content ourselves with tracing out the roots. You can trace back to the Tower of Babel. Very clearly. …?... Manichaeism. There again…?...
Let the dead bury the dead, that has to be our approach. Yes?
[Audience Member] …?...
[Rushdoony] …?... true Orthodox Christianity. And I believe that when we begin to live in terms of that we will have it. …?... every age a time of turmoil, there is also a time of tremendous renewal and growth. One reason why I believe this to be true is that, first, humanism is destroying itself. At the end of an age, the culminating figure in the …?... Marx and Freud. Stalin also in a very real sense …?... Because he is destroying the very concept of man that is basic to humanism. Now…