Way back in my ancient past, I had an older atheist friend who was attending University. Despite our differences we go along well. I enjoyed our amicable discussions and the chess games, which he almost always won.
One day he brought us a quiz which his University had passed out to the students. It was a fictitious case study of a set of characters in a drama involving conflict, sex and decision making. At the end you were asked to rate each character’s moral virtue according to their choices in the conflict.
Now I was never a group follower. In fact I tended to be reclusive, and generally resisted pressure to conform to group trends. But when it came time to assess the characters I knew that the quiz was actually assessing me.
I know I wasn’t honest with my scoring because I didn’t want to be rated as “narrow minded.” I earned myself an artificial “broad minded” score by adjusting my rating, because I wanted to be socially accepted. My capitulation still bothers me.
The quiz was a clever tool to subtly influence impressionable students. The exercise was riding on the wave of the new Zeitgeist, the Spirit of the Age. The virtues of “free sex” and “free speech” were being extolled everywhere – in songs, in schools and in various media.
One Radio Station marketed itself as the most modern. Its ditty rang “3AK Where No Wrinklys (sic) Fly.” The catchy slogan wasn’t all about shunning outdated music. A wrinkly was an “oldie.” Wrinklys were stuck in the past and resisted social progress (read the New Morality). Nobody wanted to be a wrinkly. I certainly didn’t.
Around about that same time the pro-abortion activists managed to garner public sympathy. Abortion pioneer Bertram Wainer was turned into a persecuted saint by the media, and clinics began to flourish. Almost overnight, abortion became socially acceptable. Only Wrinklys opposed it.
Accompanying these new-found sexual freedoms were clinics treating venereal diseases. I had one or two friends who bragged about needing to visit the local V.D. Clinic. Visiting a clinic was like a perverse badge of honor. It allegedly “proved” their success with the girls.
Years later I read C. S. Lewis’ book That Hideous Strength. One of the characters (Mark Studdock) finds himself being courted by the progressive dystopian NICE (National Institute of Coordinated Experiments). Phillip E. Johnson wrote that the NICE: …is empowered to solve all sorts of social and genetic problems without being bothered by “red tape.” Later in the book it emerges that it is empowered by satanic forces.
Studdock is offered a position with the prestigious NICE, but isn’t exactly told what his role will entail. Most of his time is spent worrying about it and trying to impress those who he thinks are the primary decision makers.
In the end his need to fit in turns Mark into a useful stooge. He is tasked to write propaganda-style newspaper articles which will shape public opinion and serve the progressive interests of NICE. Sadly, I can relate to Studdock’s need to be highly thought of.
After I was converted, I found LaHaye’s and Noebel’s book Mind Siege. It is about how Secular Humanism has: “…co-opted the media…subverted traditional values, taken control of many schools, brainwashed our children, muffled our pastors….and succeeded in outlawing our [Christian] faith.”
If you Google Mind Siege, you’ll find the inevitable Secular Humanist criticisms. Mind Siege is branded as alarmist Christian propaganda. Yet at least one secular source (Garret/Galland) draws connections between Marxist philosophy and cultural activism:
The social movements of the 1960s – black power, feminism, gay rights, sexual liberation – gave [Herbert] Marcuse a unique vehicle to release cultural Marxist ideas into the mainstream. Railing against all things “establishment,” The Frankfurt School’s ideals caught on like wildfire across American universities.
David Galland notes that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are “cultural beacons of progressivism” and disciples of Marxist Saul Alinsky. The legacy of the Obama administration appears to support Galland’s claims.
Despite skeptic objections, the fruits of Marxist-Humanism are evident everywhere, if one cares to look. In 2015 John MacArthur’s The Master’s Seminary was threatened with legal action because of a statement about homosexuality on its website. Then there’s the routine activism by atheist organizations to remove all Christian symbols from state owned properties.
The state of many campuses around America reflects years of “progressive” influence. So called free speech is often stifled and bullied into silence. Freedom of speech exists only as long as it is comports with the narratives human beings decide upon. See Matthew Vadum’s article Campus Fascism Rising.
Links between Karl Marx and Secular Humanism have been admitted by its proponents. Both are quick to assert that these ideologies are not without “ethical dimensions.” But how are these ethics determined and what standard are they measured against?
The only constant is science-naturalism (read no God). Religion (faith), especially Christianity, is anathema. Humanism and authentic Christianity are diametrically opposed.
2010 Humanist of the Year Bill Nye isn’t just about science. Answers in Genesis cites Nye’s pseudo concern for kids’ education:
“And I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution… that’s fine, but don’t make your kids do it because we need them.”
Nye was appealing to emotion rather than logic. As AIG rightly noted, (reconstructive) evolution and technology use completely different types of science.
David Klinghoffer suggested that the Nye sponsored March for Science event was an anti-Trump political stunt. A Washington Post writer also observed: “He [Nye] is an activist for science, leading those now-grownups into political battle.”
Nye’s interests transcend politics and science. It isn’t surprising that he promotes certain sexual preferences. A song by Rachel Bloom featured on Bill Nye Saves The World is instructive. Part of the lyrics include: “This world of ours is so full of choice. But must I choose between only John or Joyce?” (Emphasis mine)
If evolution is true and the cosmos was not created, then humans may do whatever they want without eternal consequences. People like Rachel Bloom can freely indulge their unbiblical choices because Humanism enthrones humanity over God. Yet in reality when man sets the standards, what is allowed today may not be tomorrow.
This world is being duped.
Satan’s coordinated experiment began in Eden when he enticed Eve into making the wrong choice (Gen 3:4-5). The experiments didn’t stop there. Remember Babel? Satan is still using the same bait and hook lies, even in the professing church. One apostate minister recently wrote:
….Eve’s simple gesture is the single greatest act of our species – as it demonstrates not only that human beings are truly and completely free-thinking and acting…but also that by choosing to defy God we prove…the fullness of God’s work in us and God’s integrity in giving us wisdom and agency that mirrors their [Adam & Eve’s] own.
The devil is in the details, but God is ultimately sovereign. Death came, and all of creation was marred, because of choices made in the garden. The result of Adam and Eve’s choice required a redeemer (Gen 3:14-15; Col 1:13-14).
Bill Nye can’t “save the world” and neither can science. Moreover, the world doesn’t belong to us. We didn’t make it and we don’t own it.
For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities – all things have been created through Him and for Him. Col 1:16
Finally, don’t believe the devil’s lies.
There are two important choices none of us can avoid. The Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross so as to satisfy God’s perfect justice. We can place our faith in Christ and be saved, or we can reject/ignore the offer of eternal life. The wrong choice will have eternal consequences (John 3:16-18).
The time to make a decision is now, before it’s too late (Heb 9:27).
Sharing is caring!
