RELIGIOUS LIBERALS AND THE GOD OF THEIR IMAGINATION

“In the beginning man created God” is a poignant, if now somewhat hackneyed, humanist approach to explaining where the notion of God came from. And it may surprise you to have me say that I believe it’s true. While theirs is not the God Christians worship, liberal humanists have created a god.

Obviously, if a radical liberal believes abortion and same-sex marriage are morally acceptable, that all religions are equal and all truth is relative, and that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God, they are responding to something other than the God presented in the Christian Scriptures. They’ve imagined for themselves a way of being that obligingly serves liberal desires and purposes of all kinds. This god of theirs is really nothing more than a worldview in which man is the center and measure of all things. Man is their god, and humanism is their religion.

The battle that rages in America today between radical liberals and traditional conservatives (between blue state and red state citizens) is a battle between two opposing religious worldviews—Secular Humanism and Christian theism. Sadly, most Americans believe only what they’ve been programmed to think—that humanism is a “neutral” position and belief in God is somehow a skewed perspective. This non-religious mask of humanism is why it is the only religion funded and promoted in America’s public schools. Teaching “non-God” is okay; teaching “God” is not.

Humanist organizations like the ACLU and other liberal groups and individuals file lawsuit upon lawsuit to keep students from praying over their lunches, mentioning God or Jesus Christ in their graduation speeches, singing Christmas carols, having Christmas parties, or observing Thanksgiving as an occasion to show gratitude to a Deity. While liberals fight to remove the religion of Christianity from our schools, colleges, courtrooms, city halls, city seals or from the city square, their “dirty little secret” is that they don’t want a religion-free zone. They simply want to replace the Judeo-Christian faith and acknowledgement of God’s place in our history with their religion of Secular Humanism.

If Americans in large enough numbers would recognize that humanism is a religion, religious liberals would not be allowed to usher Christianity out the back door of our schools while the religion of humanism is ushered in the front. To make sure you understand how “religious” humanism actually is, take note of several telling facts.

In their 2003 New York Times best-seller, Mind Siege, Dr. David Noebel and Dr. Tim LaHaye explain, “The truth is, humanism is unmistakably and demonstrably a religion. One need merely visit the second edition of A World Religions Reader to note the prominence given to Secular Humanism as one of the world’s religions. Indeed, in a list of the world’s religions—Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Sikhism—Secular Humanism is at the top.”

Some argue that humanism, unlike Christianity, does not force a specific set of religious positions and beliefs on people, but Dr. Noebel points out, “Humanists preach a faith every bit as dogmatic as Christianity. Moral relativism is foundational for Secular Humanist ethics; spontaneous generation and evolution are basis to their biology; naturalism is foundational to their philosophy; and atheism is their theological perspective.”

No less a source than the U.S. Supreme Court also validates the claim that humanism is a religion. Again, Noebel explains:

In 1961, the Supreme Court handed down the Torcaso v. Watkins decision regarding a Maryland notary public who was initially disqualified from office because he would not declare a belief in God. But the Court ruled in his favor. It argued that theistic religions [religions that believe in one God] could not be favored by the Court over non-theistic religions. In a footnote it clarified what it meant by non-theistic religions. The footnote to which Dr. Noebel refers was written by Justice Hugo L. Black and elaborates the point: “Among religious in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others.”

You’d think that since the Court itself acknowledges humanism as a religion the groundwork would be laid for multiple lawsuits to stop the federal funding of humanism in our schools, right?

It’s way past time for Christian conservatives to stop playing defense and go on the offense. The next time you hear of Barry Lynn and other high priests of humanism attacking a cross on a city seal, the singing of a Christmas carol in a school program, or a prayer spoken at a graduation ceremony, be prepared to speak out against their true goal. They’re in an all-out campaign to eradicate Christianity for the religion of humanism. We must make sure they don’t win.

Our strongest weapon in this war is to pray fervently for the salvation of their most debauched "gods of the week". I don't think even public opinion polls or outright rebellion would sway these liberals from their odium of public Christianity.

Hello my conservative friend,

I am hearing that your religion apparently does not allow room for me as I am. I am sensing, also, that "being right" is more important to you than other values, such as being kind, being compassionate. I am sensing that the true essence of your god is ultimately reduced to a dispenser of consequences based on being or not being "right." That is, at least if you have successfully created god in your own image.

Your god clearly allows me and everyone else on this planet great latitude of choice. Apparently this god allows me much more freedom than you would allow me. Would you create laws that take away the very ability to choose that has been given to us by your god? Is your wisdom therefore greater than your god's wisdom?

I'm sure I don't have the it "right." I am too limited to understand very much about gods and end times and beyond end times. It's a good thing that the law of love is higher than the law of truth; your truths and mine would otherwise condemn us both.

So what next? Continue trying to win the arguments that are never-ending? Or try to live with one another, noting our differences but still recognizing each other as neighbors? I wonder if you've read the parable of the good liberal lately? I wonder who it is that keeps robbing and beating her?

Best to you

CH

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.