56) Humanism’s Hubris

Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject the Bible

He damned the whole human race and cursed the entire creation because of the acts of two people (Genesis 3:16-23; Romans 5:18); he drowned pregnant women and innocent children and animals at the time of the Flood (Genesis 7:20-23); he tormented the Egyptians and their animals with hail and disease because pharaoh refused to let the Israelites leave Egypt (Exodus 9:8-11,25); and he killed Egyptian babies at the time of the Passover (Exodus 12:29-30).

After the Exodus he ordered the Israelites to exterminate the men, women, and children of seven nations and steal their land (Deuteronomy 7:1-2); he killed King David’s baby because of David’s adultery with Bathsheba (II Samuel 12:13-18); he required the torture and murder of his own son (e.g., Romans 3:24-25); and he promised to send non-Christians to eternal torture (e.g., Revelation 21:8).

So why don’t the Humanists reject the Romans? Talk about bloodthirsty!

The elite have never stopped identifying themselves with the “glorious” ancient civilizations.

And what are these? Pagan theocracies whose splendor is a tribute to their gods who empowered them to slaughter billions of people in endless wars and amass wealth through pillage, enslavement of the masses, and impoverishment of other peoples through theft of their resources.

Then there’s the fact that this utterly biased propagandist doesn’t share the reasons behind these events. In fact, the people affected were not innocent. They, with forethought, rebelled against the source of life and wreaked havoc on those who were the innocent.

  • Mrs. Adam chose to separate from the infinite source of life thereby bringing about separation on her genetics / all her offspring. Much like the children afflicted with Fetal alcohol syndrome.
  • Corruption of the human genome had reached the point of virtual elimination of the human race other than Noah, his wife and three sons.
  • Pharaoh and the Egyptians had been tormenting not just the Hebrews but slaves and tributaries throughout their empire.

Humanists can’t single out the activities in the Bible and at the same time exonerate every humanist nation that has done the same.

Elitist humanists always overlook the inhumane cruelties of the wealthy nations they idolize (get it?) and associate themselves with.

Such as France.

In the modern American consciousness, the French Revolution might evoke imagery of guillotines, Marie Antoinette…and lots of angry French citizens. For humanists, the French Revolution marks the beginning of a new age of enlightenment, freedom, and rational thought.

France was the first Renaissance nation to grow into Rome’s predator apex civilization.

In 1789 the French Revolution began by denying religion altogether. Accepting only what the senses could experience, it set up the atheistic Cult of Reason. Proclaiming Renaissance humanistic ideals, it replaced the Hebrew 7 day work week with Rome’s 10-day work week, and sacred days of worship with pagan sensual festivals.

Robespierre, one of the most influential leaders of the revolution, detested the amoral culture spawned by atheism. Believing, like Nietzsche did later, that belief in a god was necessary to achieve the virtue essential to a Republican form of government, Robespierre replaced the Cult of Reason by the Cult of the Supreme Being. Within the year Robespierre was executed, and his religious reformation wiped out.

Promising enlightenment through scientific discoveries, freedom from religious dogma, and political democracy for all classes the French Revolution rapidly degenerated into an orgy of blood, not just for France, but for most of continental Europe under the first of two lowly privates catapulted to Supreme Dictator of the reorganized Roman Empire seized from the Church.

Like Charlemagne who kicked off what became retroactively known as the 1st Reich with the “Holy Roman Empire” Napoleon crowned himself Emperor in the presence of the Pope. This enhanced Napoleon’s intended impression, that he was the highest authority in France, more powerful than the Church.

Like August Caesar before him, he already had absolute power through his position of First Consul for ife. Unlike Caesar, by doing this, Napoleon did away with the flimsy illusion of the Republic. Napoleon further undid any democratic reforms of the Revolution by re-establishing the French aristocracy, the French Court, and granting titles and land to those that served him well throughout his campaigns.

The second lowly private was, of course, Hitler with his Third Reich. Again with the Pope’s approval.

In July 1933, Hitler and Pope Pius XI signed a concordat, or treaty. On the face of it, the Vatican had scored a great triumph…

Hitler had even more reason to be satisfied. The concordat was his first international agreement, and it vastly enhanced his respectability in Germany and abroad.

This is the recurring pattern whenever God is eliminated from society. As even atheists like Nietzsche understand that the reality of freedom without an absolute moral foundation inevitably translates into one Principle – Might Makes Right, AKA Survival of the Fittest.

If this phrase alone doesn’t clarify the purpose of Evolution and the future of most of humanity then check out the common thread in good literature.

In its capacity to warn about such extremes, fantastic fiction has the edge over what is called realism. ‘Realism’ has a knee-jerk tendency to avoid extremes as implausible, but ‘Fantasy’ actively embraces them.”


the Bible has other violent tales that are opposed to civilized standards of morality.

Seriously? Seriously?! The most civilized nation in the world was Germany, a humanist nation if ever there was one, and it was guilty of the greatest immorality against humanity.

The German 19th-century artists and intellectuals were greatly inspired by the humanist ideas of the French Revolution

One of the great legal innovations of the post-[WWII] world is the concept of crimes against humanity. Aimed at the protection of civilian populations during both peacetime and wartime, even from civilian populations’ own governments, it remains a major pillar of international law to this day. The revolutionary concept was developed on the eve of the Trial of the Major War Criminals at Nuremberg (1945-1946), and then sharpened in subsequent US trials in occupied Germany between 1946 and 1949.

The world had been disturbed by mass crimes against civilians throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth century, ranging from atrocities during the Greek war of independence to pogroms against Jews in the Russian empire…the Ottoman Turkish government’s mass killing of its Armenian population in eastern Anatolia…

The unprecedented nature of Nazi Germany’s crimes against Jews and other civilian populations in Europe were clear…that Nazi crimes against civilian populations were distinct from German military operations, that crimes on a large scale had begun before the war against Jews and others who were actually German citizens, and that these crimes were systematic in nature, carried out at the behest of the government and not by a few rogue military or police officers without official approval.

We all have an idea of what a civilized society looks like. We like classical music, we go to the theatre, we play the piano, we like to read nice novels, we like to hear poetry and we take our children for walks in the countryside. We think all those things make us civilized.

But look at Reinhard Heydrich: he had a piano in his office and would play Mozart at lunchtime. Then, in the afternoon, he would organise countless deaths in the concentration camps. He would sign away the lives of millions of people with the sweep of a pen.

It’s important to understand that civilisation is more than just culture. Civilisation is about morality and behaving correctly…

It’s easy to say that Hitler was a deranged lunatic assisted by a gang of criminals, and that the people of Germany were either a bit awful or they were intimidated by the Gestapo. But the truth is more nuanced, and it should force us to think about ourselves.

Not many of us would be among those brave and individual thinkers who would stand up and say, “This is wrong”.

Gradually, by continually compromising, people can end up in that position.

In 1938, when Austria was being invaded, [Franz Stengl] was a police detective in the Austrian police force. Somebody told him that the Nazis were coming in one Monday morning, so he broke into his personnel file and put in a falsified Nazi Party membership card.

Stangl forged the card; he wasn’t a member of the Nazi party.

When the Nazis occupied, they immediately went through the files of all the policemen and identified Stangl as a party member. It was a tremendous lie, but enabled him to keep his job.

Consequently, he ended up in the T-4 programme, because he was seen as a reliable person. T-4 was a euthanasia programme that aimed to kill off the physically and mentally handicapped.

Stangl then got the job of a commandant at Treblinka, which was a pure and simple death camp. He ended up being the master of death, responsible in one year for nearly a million Jewish deaths.

This should help explain why complete separation from corrupting influences is required to maintain a safe environment.

Among the most shocking Bible passages are those that portray God as ordering or approving the extermination of various people, including children and the elderly. Here are examples:

  • At I Samuel 15:3, the prophet Samuel gives King Saul this commandment from the Lord: “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
  • Ezekiel 9:4-7 has this harrowing account: “And the Lord said unto him, Go through . . . the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark. . . .”
  • Deuteronomy 32:23-25 says that after the Israelites incited God’s jealousy by worshiping other gods, he vowed: “I will spend mine arrows upon them. . . . The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs.”
  • In Numbers chapter 31, the Lord approves of these instructions that Moses gave to the Israelite soldiers about how to treat certain women and children captured in war: “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”

These verses expose the biblical God as having the morals of a sociopathic mass murderer.

Au contraire! These verses expose the morals of all the nations of the world, not only in the ancient civilizations but in modern times, from whom God was protecting his people.

Exactly like the Allies against the Axis powers.

An estimated 40 to 50 million people died during World War II. Among the Allied powers, the U.S.S.R. suffered the greatest total number of dead: perhaps 18 million. An estimated 6 million Poles died, which was 20 percent of Poland’s prewar population. About 300,000 Americans died. Among the Axis powers, there were about 4,200,000 German deaths and about 1,972,000 Japanese deaths.

The combined Axis body count for civilians far exceeds that for the Allies…say 12 -14 million as a conservative estimate.The Japanese killed between 3 and 10 million ( figures are still argued about) with most agreeing 10 million as the closest estimate. The western Allies were guilty of far fewer civilian deaths and did not practice any form of genocide or mass murder.

The money cost to governments involved has been estimated at more than $1,000,000,000,000but this figure cannot represent the human misery, deprivation, and suffering, the dislocation of peoples and of economic life, or the sheer physical destruction of property that the war involved.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Examples of God’s Other Cruel Methods

The God of the Bible displayed his sadistic tendencies by employing a variety of other means to torment and kill people.

Besides applying the same arguments that the God of the Bible has the responsibility to defend his people, the Humanists are blatantly biased against the statistically rare occurrences reported about God in contrast to the millennias-long hundreds of not thousands of occurrences by their idolized ancient emperors from the earliest macabre accounts on Sumerian stone tablets to the gruesome spectacles lavished on the public by the Caesars.

  • One time God caused the earth to open and swallow entire families (Numbers 16:37-32);
  • he used fire to devour people (e.g., Leviticus 10:1-2; Numbers 11:1-2);
  • and he punished the Israelites with wars, famines, and pestilences (e.g., Ezekiel 5:11-17) – actually those were consequences, not punishments
  • He sent wild animals such as bears (II Kings 2:23-24), lions (II Kings 17:24-25), and serpents (Numbers 21:6) to attack people;
  • he sanctioned slavery (e.g., Leviticus 25:44-46) – UNLIKE ALL THE REST OF THE WORLD? It was a way of life for which the only alternative was destitute homelessness after being defeated in a war.
  • he ordered religious persecution (e.g., Deuteronomy 13:12-16); UNLIKE ALL THE REST OF THE WORLD when religion WAS politics?
  • and he caused cannibalism (Jeremiah 19:9). Read into that situation whatever you want. Desperation maybe? Like the Donner party, maybe? 

Disproportionate Punishments by the Lord

The biblical God is also guilty of inflicting punishments that are grossly disproportionate to the acts committed. In the American legal system, such disproportion violates the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishments.

Oh, wow. And the Humanists are holding to the American legal system by holding only the God of the Bible, not any of the other ancient nations AND THEIR GODS, to the standards of the modern American judicial system?

God’s Violence Incites Human Violence

A serious problem with the violence and injustice in the Bible is that, all too often, the teachings and example of the biblical God have incited cruel acts by his followers…

led the American patriot Thomas Paine to say, “The belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man.”[11]

Joseph McCabe’s treatise The History of Torture illustrates the reasoning process. McCabe reports that during the Middle Ages, there was more torture used in Christian Europe than in any society in history.[12]

Oh now that’s just libelous. There is no way that Mr. McCabe is able to accurately collect that data on all the other societies in history. And there is no statistically fair comparison between “Christian Europe in the Middle Ages” comprising an historic population explosion in a large geopolitical sphere to far smaller societies in ancient times.

Some people are too proud to admit they are lacking adequate knowledge, or good sense, or consideration for others in their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. They experience constant disruption in their circumstances. If they won’t take personal responsibility for resolving their problems, they spread their chaos, frustration, anger to the people around them who are helplessly caught up in their circumstances.

The Humanist writer has unwittingly nailed his own theses on his own front door. Based on the history of the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, and World War II just to name a sample, the Humanists are the real culprits in perpetual social and personal destruction.

As detailed in the post The Law of Melchizedek, God’s rules for society bring social stability and the greatest opportunity for personal development instead of exploitation by the elite class and narcissistic individuals. Not to mention sociopathic mass murders from an individual to an international scale of slaughter. This was true not only in the days of the ancient nation of Israel but also our own.

The Protestant Reformation is a vivid example of how religious transformation could set in
motion institutional changes, leading to profound consequences for economic and political
development.Max Weber was the first to identify the significant role that the Reformation played in
socio-economic development of Western Europe…

Notice how none of these elements were present in the French Revolution.

Economists have long recognized that monopolies are more likely to engage in unproductive and often illegal activities, resulting in economic losses…eight of the ten most corrupt countries are also among the countries with the highest governmental restrictions on religious liberty…Second, religious freedom reduces conflict within a society, encouraging tolerance and respect for different beliefs…with the decrease in social hostilities. Third, religious freedom promotes the protection of civil and human rights, such as freedom of speech, press and assembly (Grim and Finke, 2011). These rights are essential for the exchange of ideas – a very important component of an innovative economy…

Why was education important for Protestants? Martin Luther wanted all Christians to read the Bible. One of the five foundational solae of the Protestant Reformation was Sola Scripture (Latin: “Scripture alone”) – the teaching that the Christian Scriptures are the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice. However, for Christians to be able to read the Bible, it was necessary to increase their literacy rate…

The higher educational attainments by Protestants also had significant positive spillovers…First, education increases labor productivity…[and] fosters technological innovation and new knowledge creation…

more educated individuals make better decisions about health, marriage, and parenting…Education also affects individual preferences, making people more patient, more goal-oriented, and less likely to engage in risky behavior. All of these behaviors could be linked with better economic outcomes…

For Protestants, beginning with Martin Luther, diligent work was seen as a response to the grace of God, as well as a God given duty which benefits both the individual and society as a whole…

Protestant entrepreneurs are more likely to have a view that their duty is to add value to society through their work and that “their work is a calling from God…”

Protestants have higher levels of trust and are less willing to break the law… \they are also more likely to honestly report misbehaviors of others…countries that were significantly influenced by Protestant missionaries have a significantly lower level of corruption…Yuyu Chen and co-authors (2014) attribute part of China’s recent economic success to disseminations of Protestant social values by western missionaries…

In civil society, citizens voluntarily organize activities and services for themselves and other people. A good example of a country with a strong civil society is the United State of America…the United States is the most charitable country in the world, with Americans donating approximately 2 percent of gross domestic product.

The main principles of the American civil society were laid out in the 1776 Declaration of Independence and the 1789 Constitution of the United States of America…out of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants…

“in every society” there is strong evidence that “Protestant groups are more active than other religious groups in forming and supporting non-profit organizations…”Protestant missionaries played an important role in fostering the growth of organizational civil society…tried to reform what they viewed as abuses in other societies…

greater civil engagement leads to closer monitoring of the government…and lower corruption… therefore, civil society has been linked to economic growth..

Politics was one area where the Reformation had an immediate and obvious impact…Where the Reformation took hold, the ruling elite evicted the Catholic Church from power, thus fundamentally altering the governance system of Europe…when the ruling religious elite lost its power during the Reformation, the role of democratic parliaments has increased…Robert Woodberry (2012) highlighted the role Protestant missionaries played in influencing the rise and spread of stable democracy around the world…

the Protestant Reformation made a “revolution” in legal thinking and institutions…Protestant legal innovations, such as protecting private property rights and contracts, were most effective in the economic sphere.

The difference between Humanism Renaissance and Bible Reformation is encapsulated in the terms “elite” for Humanists, and its antonyms for for Bible believers:

What do you expect from elitist Humanists? They don’t want equality, they want to be at the top of a social pyramid. Of course they reject any higher authority than themselves, not just the Bible, but the law of the land interfering with their personal agenda.

Julian Huxley and the Continuity of Eugenics in Twentieth-century Britain

[Julian] Huxley was a chameleon like figure, adept at fitting in with current social rhetoric while pursuing a social agenda defined by long-held evolutionary convictions. Huxley always qualified humanism with the terms “scientific” or “evolutionary”…his public role was an apostle for evolutionary eugenics…He was an outstanding advocate of the advance of…“the scientific intelligentsia” and seeking to shape…the rise of professional society

  • He advocated eugenics as a social science, addressing the issue of a “social problem group”.
  • He was Life Fellow of the Eugenics Society from 1925, active on its Council from 1931, its Vice-President 1937-44, and President from 1959-62.
  • He supported the campaigns…for negative eugenic measures against persons carrying the scientific stigma of “mental defect”.
  • He saw biology as a means to solve social welfare problems…seeking to establish eugenics…to shape the emergent welfare state on biological lines.

Huxley sought to reconfigure public opinion…making a eugenically informed biological ethics acceptable to a wide public…Huxley espoused new media for communicating the biological gospel of a healthy society. Film represented a novel means…He extolled the idea that exceptional characters were inherited, and delivered the cruel verdict that a family, whom he labelled as “mental defective”, should never have been born…he was one of a select group of celebrated academic luminaries who pontificated on public affairs. Here the expert was in a position of authority, directing and dictating opinion.

During the 1930s Huxley took a public stance…that his ethical ideas had a basis in evolutionary theory…He linked his evolutionary ethics to the social agenda of eugenics…approval for [monetary] allowances to encourage professional middle classes to have children of (hopefully) good eugenic quality, and the elimination of mental defect by reproductive controls…The economic and social system had to be altered to advance the reproduction of “the most successful stocks” particularly of the professional classes. Huxley advocated the ideas of eugenics as a sacred ideal and of “racial hope”, so that religion would advance his ideals of social evolution…

In 1941 Huxley published a tract Religion without Revelation…Huxley argued for a humanist religion which would be life sustaining on the basis that mankind had outgrown old superstitions…“conscious evolution” should be the primary focus of ethical endeavours…

Julian Huxley’s brother, the novelist Aldous, as the author of the prescient novel Brave New World (1931) portrayed both the possibilities of an ordered rationalised society based on cloning, and its defects. By 1958 when Aldous wrote “Brave New World Revisited”, he felt, “The prophecies made in 1931 are coming true much sooner than I thought they would…” Aldous Huxley’s main fear by then was brain washing and mind control:

Lacking the ability to impose genetic uniformity upon embryos, the rulers of tomorrow’s over-populated and over-organized world will try to impose social and cultural uniformity upon adults and their children. To achieve this end, they will (unless prevented) make use of all the mind-manipulating techniques at their disposal and will not hesitate to reinforce these methods of non-rational persuasion by economic coercion and threats of physical violence.

For all Huxley’s achievements, his temperament had a manic quality. Ironically for someone who demanded sterilisation for those with mental defects and illnesses, he suffered periodic bouts of depression, and underwent electro shock therapy. All this was part of a pattern of holding a series of senior appointments, involving a period of manic activity, followed by resignation or dismissal…

Yet in the 1950s and 60s, we find Huxley seeking the mantle of high priest of a new creed of scientific humanism, making prophetic statements on the future of mankind. He now took some very generalised positions, giving his views a sort of sovereign authority. He outlined a philosophy of education…

Huxley tried to get population problems onto the agendas of the United Nations as well as onto those of its specialised agencies, not least UNESCO, FAO, WHO as well as supporting the UN Population Commission…He was aligned with the Rockefeller Foundation…

On leaving Unesco, Huxley continued his efforts to promote biological values. He took the position that mankind had a unique responsibility – and capacity – for further evolution….This meant that conclaves of experts – as opposed to government representatives – had both a cultural and biological importance….Huxley organised a study group “to study the problem of a possible new “ideology” appropriate to the present situation”. Huxley wanted this to be an interdisciplinary, and yet also a secret and anonymous group, linking high powered thinkers with practical activities. This was Huxley in elitist mode.

By 1951…Huxley coined the term “transhumanism”…

  • funded scientific committees and…“think tanks”…
    • funded experts and academics…
      • to influence non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on national and international policy on the need to institute population control.

There continued to be associations – not least the Eugenics Society – and lobbying groups, as for family planning, notably the International Planned Parenthood Federation, and for abortion law reform…Most of the involved experts in the various family planning organisations were committed to eugenics…

The decriminalisation of homosexuality with the Sexual Offences Act of 1967, the Abortion Act of 1967, and the abolition of theatre censorship in 1968 indicate a greater public tolerance of liberalised sexual values. He was in line with the tide of opinion against the death penalty, repealed for murder in 1965…

The radical libertarianism and counter-culture of the mid-1960s initiated a radical critique of scientific expertise that went with libertarian sexual morals. Until then Huxley and fellow biological reformers enjoyed immense status and prestige. The eugenic modernisers remained a highly active elite, bidding for the opportunities of power and influence over public policy and opinion…How far an older generation of moral reformers like Huxley paved the way for the 1960s loosening of moral strictures is open to question. Eugenicists were never in favour of free love and freely available contraception and abortion but saw these as ways of managing a population’s eugenic qualities. Eugenicists adopted an elitist stance of engineering a society…selective education favoured by eugenically minded psychologists was weakened by advocates of…comprehensive schooling…eugenics empowered women’s activism. Margaret Sanger in the United States provided…classic eugenic aims. As regards abortion and birth control, eugenicists gained in influence through such organisations as the International Planned Parenthood Federation and the Family Planning Association…

Yet for all Huxley’s eminence and ability to command the media of the 1960s, the actual influence of eugenicists on public opinion and reproductive behaviour is open to question: sexual behaviour, and demands for reproductive medicine appear to have had their own autonomous dynamic…

Reproductive technologies were taken up, while the intellectual framework of eugenics devised and disseminated by Huxley was perceived as…a grim authoritarian spectre that had to be exorcised…Science was no longer a source of value-neutral authority…the civil rights movement and allied movements of social protest during the later 1960s and early 1970s gave rise to a libertarian and critical attitude to Social Darwinism and eugenics…Civil rights protests, the critique of professional authority and feminism at the close of the 1960s marked the…point for libertarian and socio-political critiques of science as value-laden and itself constituting vested social interests and structures of biopolitical power. The critique…would deconstruct the public attitudes and authoritarian structures that Huxley had endeavoured to create.

The attitude by the Humanist elitists towards humanity is the exact opposite of the God of the Bible.

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:” (Philippians 2:5-7)

“Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men…ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:” (I Corinthians 1:25-28)

For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak. But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him? Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:” (Hebrews 2:5-7)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s