Sunday Sermons

Humanism

Mark Dunagan
10/15/06 - Sunday Morning

Humanism

The term “Humanism” is not to be confused with such words as “humanitarian” or “humane”, rather as James Curry, former president of the American Humanist Association said, “Humanism is a polite term for atheism”. “Many Humanists claim the words of Protagoras, a fifth century B.C. Greek philosopher, as the foundation of their creed: ‘Man is the measure of all things’” (Gospel Journal, July 2004, pp. 2-3).

Doctrines

Even though many humanists deny that Humanism is a religion, they do have definite beliefs: The websitewww.infidels.org contains a copy of the Humanist Manifesto, and among their beliefs are the following assertions:

· The universe is self-existing and not created and man is a product of evolution.

· The rejection of the concept of a personal God yet regarding humans as supreme. “We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural. As non-theists, we begin with humans not God, nature not deity. We can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves” (Humanist Manifestos I&2, Prometheus Books, pp. 13,16). It is noteworthy that what they claim they can’t discover, God says is clear to all (Romans 1:20; Psalms 19:1-2).

· A rejection of divinely inspired ethical and moral codes in favor of codes derived by reason from the human condition.

· They feel that religious groups' "promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful."

The Deification of Man

When the second Humanist Manifesto, written in 1973 declared, “No deity will save us”, and “we must save ourselves”, they were echoing only what Satan told Eve in the Garden, “You will be like God” (Genesis 3:5). One writer called Eve the first humanist, and noted that Satan used a religious argument to persuade Eve. “She could be like God, having knowledge and power. She could be wise apart from God. The physical attraction of the fruit clearly was intended to be ancillary. What was to be fed was her pride, and what would grow was her appetite for self-worship” (Idols for Destruction, Herbert Schlossberg, pp. 39-40). The same desire for self-worship is behind a number of Biblical passages that are aimed at human pride. The builders of the Tower of Babel desired to “make a name for themselves” (Genesis 11:4), Habakkuk wrote of guilty men whose “own might is their god” (Habakkuk 1:11), and the king of Tyre was judged, because his heart was proud, and he said, ‘I am god’” (Ezekiel 28:2). In fact, Arnold Toynbee concluded that self-worship was the paramount religion of mankind, although its disguises are numerous (Reconsiderations, vol. 12 of A Study of History, p. 488). Schlossberg rightly observes that we do not hear people saying “I am God”, rather what we hear is people ascribing the attributes of deity to man, such as sovereignty (or autonomy), complete rationality, and moral perfection. Thus in 1973, here is what the Humanists looked for in the future:

“The next century can and should be the humanistic century. We have virtually conquered the planet; overcome the natural limits of travel and communication. Using technology wisely, we can control our environment, conquer poverty, markedly reduce disease, extend our lifespan, significantly modify our behavior, alter the course of human evolution, unlock vast new powers” (Humanist Manifesto II, p. 5). New York painter Willem de Kooning went so far as to say, “The past does not influence me; I influence it” (Silence, John Cage, p. 67).

The Ethics of Humanism

Humanists are hostile to any notion of law that is external to man. This is one reason why they are so antagonistic to Christianity. The website religioustolerance.org proclaims that humanists believe that an excellent code of ethics can be created through reason. Of course the ethics that they have created include:

· Abortion on demand and euthanasia.

· Homosexuality and Homosexual marriage.

· The sexual revolution of the 1960s that produced the “Era of No-shame”.

· The presence of “political correctness”.

· The attack on personal responsibility and accountability for one’s behavior, treating even the worst criminals as victims.

· In fact, it would be accurate to say that the moral decay that has taken place in this nation is the direct result of man attempting to create his own values apart from God. Yet our society is not the first to try and fail at this experiment (Romans 1:20ff).

The Real “Value” in Humanist Ethics

While Humanists talk about a lot “facts” and “reason”, the real foundation of their moral code is neither. Joseph Fletcher, the father of situation ethics, claimed, “Nothing is inherently good or evil, except love” (Moral Responsibility: Situation Ethics at Work, p. 38). Yet Fletcher did not mean “love” as defined in Scripture, which is always operating within the framework of divine truth (1 Corinthians 13:6). Once a person rejects any absolute truth or final standard, then “love” becomes nothing more than “sentiment”, “feelings” or how you feel at the moment. “Humanism raises sentiment to a level of command, it stresses feeling rather than thought. That is what makes sentimentality so vicious. People can get good feelings from almost anything” (Schlossberg p. 46). The American Humanist Association wrote, “We base our ethical decisions and ideals upon human needs and concerns” (The Humanist 44:1 (January-February 1984): 18-19). Yet without any objective standard of truth, and each man being his own moral lawgiver, a human “need” could be murder, adultery, genocide, and so on. Thus, Fletcher came to the conclusion that, “In some situations unmarried love could be infinitely more moral than married love. Lying could be more Christian than telling the truth. Stealing could be better than respecting private property” (Situation Ethics, p. 34). Of course one glaring contradiction here is, “What about the concern and needs of the person to whom you lied, or cheated?”

“J. Allen Smith of the University of Washington, one of the many crusaders against the old morality, used to worry about where it would all lead. ‘The real trouble with us reformers’, he said, ‘is that we made reform a crusade against standards. Well, we smashed them all now neither we nor anybody else have anything left’” (Quoted in Eric Goldman, Rendezvous with Destiny: A History of Modern American Reform, p. 240).

Conclusion: Once a person had removed all external laws and the idea of absolute truth, then love without law is nothing more than human sentiment and it is always self-serving. When a person really wants to do something, “There will be no action so evil that it cannot and will not be said to be motivated by love”. Thus Humanism is the classic example of “lawlessness” (1 John 3:4; Matthew 7:22-23; 2 Timothy 3:2-5).

Contradictions

· Humanism starts out by claiming that man is the measure of things, but in the end, it pours hatred and contempt upon the human race. The reason for this is that the creature cannot act like the Creator, and people who expect men not to act like a sinner (Romans 3:23), end up disillusioned. Humanists have a hard time reconciling their faith in the absolute goodness of man and at the same time their fear, distrust and contempt for the common man. “The better educated he is, the more likely the humanist is to believe that people are like machines and need to be programmed, and the more likely he is to believe that he should be one of the programmers” (Schlossberg p. 87). Humanists, who do not believe in any divine rules, end up believing that “autonomous man’ needs a lot of rules, which are given by a powerful elite.

· They claim to believe in the dignity of man, yet there is not proof of human dignity if one rejects the teachings of Scripture. Where is the proof of human dignity outside of divine revelation? And does not the practice of abortion contradict the claim of human dignity and value?

· The faith that is willing to exalt human beings to a divine status is nevertheless the willing to kill them for personal gain. “While stressing the special worth of human beings, it says they must not be kept alive if that would cost too much (or be an inconvenience for someone else)” (Schlossberg p. 84).

· They claim to only believe what they can observe and see, and yet humanism has spawned pop psychologies that encourage sentimental introspection. “Therapy, is the attempt to manipulate a sense of well-being rather than seeking it in convictions about truth and reality” (p. 84).

· Humanism claims to be able to bring a higher morality, yet what it brings is just more of the old immorality. Who would have ever thought that people would one day claim that it is both rational and moral to be a homosexual? (Romans 1:25ff) See Isaiah 5:20.

Hanging in Midair

To this day many people still believe in marriage, genuine love, respect for other people, respect for the law, the work ethic, and other virtues rooted in Biblical revelation. Many of these values still remain, but increasingly in our culture they are now cut off from the biblical foundation, and gradually these values are seen as hanging in midair. Many people still believe in such things, but they no longer know why, and they no longer believe in anything that would prohibit the complete opposite. So let us not only remain people of the “why” but equally demonstrate by our example how joyfully abundant life can be when divine virtues are embraced and understood.

Mark Dunagan/Beaverton Church of Christ/503-644-9017