Guest Posting by Alex DeSherbinin

I haven't put out a posting of my own for a while, but I welcome this guest posting written by my friend Alex de Sherbinin from Tappan Alliance Church. It is wonderfully thought-provoking and we both welcome any thoughts you, my readers, may have. May Leavenworth

"What Lies Behind Man’s Inhumanity to Man?"
by Alex de Sherbinin

During college I was once in a study group for a course in the humanities. One fellow amused us all by intoning the words, with a thick British accent, “man’s … inhumanity … to man.” While this guy was looking for a laugh, the reality is that man’s inhumanity to man is a great tragedy, as manifested in great brutality throughout history. Yet, even so, it is a symptom of a greater ill rather than the ultimate tragedy that someone would make it out to be.

Europe has recently celebrated the 60th anniversary of V-E day, the day the German’s unconditionally surrendered to the allies. For the past six months I have been trying to fathom the desolation of that war and the nihilism that drove Germans in the Third Reich to create killing machines at Auschwitz, Dachau, Treblinka and countless other camps throughout the lands it occupied. This is a classic instance of man’s inhumanity to man, and historians ever since have grappled with what drove this supposedly enlightened and rational country to commit mass murder and ultimately to self-destruct.

Behind all the usual answers – Germany’s humiliation following World War I, its economic collapse, Hitler’s personal magnetism, German nationalism and its vilification of the Jews as the “enemy within” – lies a starker truth. Over the course of the 18th and 19th centuries a large proportion of Germany’s population, whether professing to be Christian or not, had gradually given up on God. The country that produced Martin Luther and gave birth to the reformation, with its emphasis on a personal relationship with God rather than one mediated by priests, discarded its beliefs in God and the Bible like a worn out garment.

First came the protestant work ethic (with its overtones of outward piety and working for salvation), then came the enlightenment, and finally came the notion that man is the “integration point” (to borrow a term from Francis Schaeffer) – the be all and end all in this world, the highest good. Thus, as in the Fall, the creature sought to be on equal footing with the Creator, elevating himself to Godlike status. (As a natural outgrowth came nihilist and existentialist thinking that proclaimed the futility of existence; if man is the measure of all things, then those who are intellectually honest can only come to the conclusion that life is without ultimate meaning. Nietzsche’s ubermensch or “superman” was the flip side of his nihilism.)

In the rarified intellectual air of Europe during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, man, evolved from the apes, was increasingly master of his own destiny. Technological and societal progress would go hand-in-hand. Paradoxically, this gradual removal of God and replacement with man-centered philosophies made it all the easier to justify the unthinkable – the extermination of a whole people. Jews, political opponents, gypsies, handicapped people and gays could all be eliminated as an obstacle to “progress.” With no absolutes, no codes of conduct other than those imposed by man, each man was left to create for himself a “personal morality” – one that could justify the taking of innocent lives as expedient and necessary in the pursuit of a greater good.

Lest we be too quick to cast judgment, it is important to recognize that none of us is invulnerable to this line of thinking. We are sinful human beings in need of a Savior, nothing more and nothing less. Humanists would do well to closely examine the lessons of history. Any society that removes God and elevates man to the ultimate good will eventually pay the consequences. As God’s absolutes make way to moral relativity, human vices inevitably take hold of society, either under the guise of “father and country” or in a general breakdown of ethical behavior. Progress through education is an illusion. Germany was one of the most educated nations in history – a country that had produced brilliant thinkers – yet for all its education it had neglected the most important thing – the very thing that Martin Luther had recovered after it had been damaged by the corrupt church of the Middle Ages – that sinful man needs a relationship with a personal Savior in order to live a good and moral life. We cannot do it on our own, and when we try we merely inflate our own pride rather than giving God the glory. The Bible says “all our righteous acts are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6).

The biggest tragedy is man’s saying “no” to the God who would be his helper, his comfort, his protector, and the very lover of his soul. We can say “yes” to God or “no” to God, but eventually we as individuals, and then our society as a whole, will pay the consequences. In the words of the Prophet Isaiah (55:6), “Seek the Lord while he may be found.” Any other way and we are on a self-destructive path, for we will dash ourselves on God’s immutable law – a law of love and righteousness. Love first, because God, like any parent, wants the best for us. Then righteousness, because God is Holy and cannot tolerate evil.

The solution to “man’s inhumanity to man” lies not in a political and economic integration that relies on enlightened self interest to remove the threat of war, as European Union leaders seem to think, but in a restored relationship with the Creator. Political systems come and go, and economies can collapse, but God is from everlasting to everlasting. As the relationship with the Creator is restored, this leads naturally to restored relationships among men and women – one in which we acknowledge that we are all equal before the God of the universe and treat each other accordingly.

Faith and Science

The author of Hebrews tells us that “faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (Heb11:1). Many “Enlightenment” philosophers attempted to achieve this certainty by giving ironclad “proofs” of the existence of God, comparable to the deductive proofs found in mathematics. The perceived failure of their arguments, together with Darwinism’s claim that the divine attributes people have always “seen” in nature is only an “appearance,” left religious believers with no rational basis for their faith. Many believers were not troubled by these developments, concluding that we don’t need evidence anyway. All we need is faith. After all, Paul tells us that “it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God.” Galileo’s saying that, “Science tells you how the heavens go, and the Bible tells you how to go to heaven,” gave a neat summary of the separation between science and faith. The late Stephen Jay Gould carried the disconnect further, saying that science and faith are two distinct domains of inquiry that should be kept separate. He called his philosophy NOMA, which means ”non-overlapping magisteria.” Science gives us facts, and religion gives us morality and values. However, Bible believers cannot maintain this separation of fact and value because our worldview intersects with the scientist’s worldview. The two perspectives cannot be kept separate because the Bible makes many factual claims about the same world as that studied by science – claims such as the fact that the universe had a beginning, that God created it, and that Jesus Christ was an actual historical person. Our faith hinges on the fact that Jesus was actually God clothed in human flesh, he was crucified dead and buried, and he arose bodily from the grave. The only way you can maintain a separation between science and Biblical faith is if you agree with certain mainline denominations that have given in to the NOMA philosophy of Gould and go along with the naturalistic bias of academia today – a bias that is depicted dramatically in the recent Ben Stein movie, “Expelled.” A far better alternative is to recognize the fact that the most recent developments in science point to God, giving compelling evidence (even if not mathematical proofs), for the Biblical worldview. It is true that faith is a gift of God, but God himself will enable the believer to whom he has given this gift to be free of the Satanic lies that hold the unbeliever in bondage to the philosophy of naturalism.

God's Two Books

Francis Bacon, considered by many to be the father of modern science, said that God has given us two books. One is the Bible. What do you think the other one is? Not the Koran or Upanishads! It is the book of Nature, and according to Francis Bacon and many other great scientists back then, such as Johannes Kepler, the task of science is to correctly interpret the book of Nature. Kepler said the purpose of his investigations of Nature was to discover the rational order that has been imposed on it by God. In his discoveries he believed he was “thinking God’s thoughts after him.” He expected to find universal laws in nature because he believed in a divine Lawgiver. Only in 17th century western civilization, where human minds had been prepared by faith in such a Lawgiver, could modern science have been born. The western mind had been conditioned by thoughts such as those of the apostle Paul writing more than 1600 years earlier, saying such things as: “…since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” Kepler knew he was only “thinking God’s thoughts after him.” As his understanding of what has been made grew he gave God the glory that he alone deserves. Kepler’s understanding of the book of nature conformed to his understanding of that other book given by the Creator – the Bible. In fact Bacon believed that to be properly educated one must give ones mind to the study of both books. How reasonable! Since God is the author of both and he does not contradict himself, science could not possibly contradict the Bible.
But what has happened as history moved from the 16th century to the 21st? With such a grand beginning how could modern science have fallen into the scientism of today, which says that science has buried God? The decline seems to have been given its greatest impetus around the middle of the 19th century when a book was published called “The Origin of Species.” According to zoologist and “new atheist” Richard Dawkins, the “scientific discoveries” presented in that book “made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” If the origin and development of life can be explained solely through natural processes then God is out of a job! Dawkins and the other “new atheists” rejoice in the so-called “freedom” this gives them. According to them, man is free to make up his own rules for living. Whoopee! But scientific developments of the last two or three decades are showing more and more that Darwin misinterpreted the book of Nature. There really is design, and where there is design there must be a Designer. So the “new atheists” are just inebriated and self-deceived. Having swallowed Satan’s lies, they are without excuse. "The fool has said in his heart 'There is no God'.” Ps.14:1.

There is Law

“… The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law” Gala 5:22,23. I used to wonder why, after listing these beautiful virtues Paul tacked on that last phrase. Why are you stating the obvious Paul? All cultures do have some system of law and sometimes the systems conflict in part, but there has never been one that outlawed love, joy, peace, etc…then it dawned on me. Paul is saying there really is such a thing as transcendent law – law that is not man-made and is not relative to any particular culture. There is law that is true for all people at all times, in all places. And Jesus Christ manifested that law – those universal virtues, with sinless perfection. How could he do that? Because he is the ultimate Law-giver. Just as the existence of design in nature shows there must be a Designer, the existence of transcendent law shows there must be a Divine Law-giver who has written his law on every heart created in his image.

But that raises another question. Why do these virtues against which there is no law seem to be so scarce – so hard to find. Isaiah gave the answer, “We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way…” Isai 53:6. We have a sin nature, which runs from God and follows other wayward men, but we rationalize our waywardness, piling up lies to try to justify ourselves. Paul writes, “… since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” Roma 1:20. God’s divine nature has been clearly seen, so the one who denies transcendent law and its source is like the drunk who can no longer see clearly. In the case of the atheist it’s lies such as Darwinism that cause his blurry vision. As my pastor, Thomas Coughlin has said, there are no clear-headed atheists. They are all inebriated and self-deceived. “The fool says in his heart ‘There is no God’” Ps 14:1.

There is Design

Last week I argued that, since science has confirmed that "nature" or "the cosmos" had a beginning, which they call "The Big Bang Theory," science in this area is actually more supportive of the Christian doctrine of creation than it is of atheism. This week I will apply similar logic to the question of the origin of life. Recent developments in the science of microbiology show that every living cell manifests "irreducible complexity." That means its many parts have to be in place and working together in order for the cell to function. There never was such a thing as a "simple" cell. This scientific developmant, known as the "Intelligent design" movement, shows there was design right from the start. The Darwinian theory of "natural selection" working on chance variations in a mindless movement from simple to complex is hopelessly flawed. Believers in God have always "seen" design in nature. Scientists have now found a way of making such observation scientific. But just as the "big bang" scientists don't try to identify the "Big Banger," the intelligent design scientists don't try to identify the "Intelligent Designer." That would take them beyond their chosen area of study. What they are showing though, is that those who have faith in God, who is beyond nature, are not blind and unreasonable. Instead, those whose eyes are closed to the possibility of anything beyond nature are the unreasonable ones. "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. Rom 1:20.

In the Beginning - God!

Yes, there was a beginning. There have been people here and there, from time to time throughout history, who believed there was no beginning. But in our day science has confirmed it! There was a beginning. They call it "the Big Bang Theory." Of course science doesn't attribute the Big Bang to God. The scientific method, as currently understood by most scientists, seeks only naturalistic explanations. To say there is a spiritual being, God, who in some way caused the big bang would be to go beyond the scientific enterprise. Alright, so be it! Scientists are simply confining their area of study to nature. However, some spokesmen for science today, the so-called "new atheists," go farther. They say that only nature exists. There is nothing beyond "nature" or, to use the term of atheist Carl Sagan, "the cosmos." But notice such a conclusion does not follow from the fact that science chooses to study nature. And the fact that science has been very successful in finding naturalistic explanations of natural events says nothing about whether or not there is anything beyond nature. Science has not buried God! The new atheists are simply declaring they have great faith that science will eventually find naturalistic explanations for everything - not in our lifetime of course but eventually, because only nature exists But isn't this just blind faith? I've come to the conclusion that it takes more blind faith to believe there is no God than to believe there is a God! In fact, king David of Israel said, "The fool says in his heart, "there is no God." Ps 14:1.

What is the Christian Worldview?

In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth. Everything was exquisitely designed right from the start. The one who was there in the beginning says it was “very good.” Gen.1: 31.

Anyone who evaluates his handiwork and says it is “very good” has a purpose in mind. God’s purpose in creation was to declare his glory. David king of Israel writes, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands.” Ps.19: 1.

But mankind has chosen not to give God the glory he alone deserves. Man fails to live the way God intended the creature created in his own image to live. “We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way” Is. 53: 6.

The result is the carnage and death we see all around us. But God loved the world he created, so he started to draw us back to himself. In his own time he sent his Son Jesus Christ to save his people from their sin. When one embraces that Savior as his Lord he receives the gift of eternal life. He can look forward to his Savior's return as the Lion of Judah – the one to whom the scepter and ruler's staff belong. Everyone will then call him “Lord”... far better to do that now, when doing so will gain one eternal life and joy unspeakable, than to be forced to do so later, after the King has come to judge all mankind.