“What does the meaningless, value-absent creed of humanism have to offer? It might surprise you. Part of a series on truth.
One of the reasons I’m enormously disenchanted with humanism is due to it’s inevitable, blissful slide into subjectivity.
I mean blissful in two senses:
1. It changes without much fuss or notice.
2. And it changes on man’s will.
What a Humanist Can Say
Recently I heard someone assert that he has the same morals as another person, although he was an atheist and the other was a Christian.
I don’t dispute that can be true. In fact, you don’t need to believe in God to be moral.
However, what a humanist can’t say is that they have an objective standard for their morality. Let me explain.
What a Humanist Can’t Say
Humanists can’t claim objectivity, because you can manufacture all the morals you want, but at the end of the day you have no mechanism to declare why we should choose one over the other.
If we are nothing more than naked apes who will decompose in the ground…why not lie, cheat and steal till your heart is content? Why not murder, gang rape and pillage just like apes, sharks and baboons?
Naturally, we won’t slip into that behavior overnight. But over time, yes.
An Honest Humanist
That’s because a humanist’s moral base is built on what’s appropriate for our culture or situation, which, as we all know, can change.
The Puritans departed England to reject religious oppression and bring to America core objective moral standards. And as any one who is breathing can attest…we’ve shed much of their vision on family, sex, possessions and government.
Why is that? The lawless, content-less creed of humanism is prevailing.
One reason I like Peter Singer is because he’s honest. He understands materialism cannot support morals. Or even the rights to morals.
See, any true materialist would say that we are nothing more than chemicals firing. And if that’s the case, then my parents love for me is really not “love” any more than two dragonflies “making love” or a soda machine “obeying” me cause I put money in the slot.
In the end, what’s important or not important comes down to power. Like Daniel H. Benson said, “Truth is the majority vote of that nation that could lick all others.”
What I Mean by “Plastic”
A humanist has no real boundary for what he should do. He is left with only what he can do. That’s why Allen Dershowitz can tell young lawyers that a pliable sense of morals is necessary to successfully practice law.
What this means is that anything a humanist suggests is subjective to change.
That’s what I mean by “plastic.” Morals can be melted down and moved. They shift with our decadence. And our decadence always follows one path: please the self versus please the Creator.
Too often, humanists want to throw off the moral base for moral duty and accountability by claiming we are nothing but machines…yet in the same breath declare themselves aware enough to be worthy of respect, honor and love.
What they need to demonstrate is why we should accept their claim and not someone elses.
An Alternative to Humanism
What does Christianity have to offer in place of humanism? A 2,000 year old book founded on the timeless wisdom of an infinite, holy and unchanging God.
And like Tullian Tchividjian wrote in Unfashionable, “Trying to follow God’s lead without God’s light guarantees a life of stumbling.”
The questions is: Why stumble when it’s unnecessary?