Do Humanists Practice What They Preach?
I am going to take a break from looking at humanist accusations against the Bible to take a rational and logical look at the trustworthiness of what the humanists claim. Do they actually practice what they preach? The answer is no. Here are some quotes from their web site:
What I take this to mean is that, the teaching in schools and the “facts” on which we base how we live, should both be based on scientific truths.
To be certain we have it right, let us take a further look at what hu-manists say they believe. Let us start with what should be an easy one, murder. From what I can tell, they are against it. I was able to find four statements on their web site similar to the following:
I assume that, because they are outraged when a humanist faces threats of being murdered, they are against the premeditated taking of a human life. In addition, their accusations against God for sup-posedly taking the lives of babies (volume one) leads me to assume they are against the premeditated murder of babies. Now let us read their official position on murdering babies.
We condemn all forms of gender-based violence, restrictions on women’s reproductive choices.
The AHA supports every woman’s unequivocal moral and legal right to autonomy over her own body and reproductive choices. Women’s access to family planning, contraception, birth control, emergency contraception, and healthcare services and resources should be un-restricted by the government or religious preferences of private third parties. Local, state, or federal initiatives designed to undermine the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade violate the individu-al’s human right to pursue all reproductive options.
The AHA will continue to advocate for every woman’s full exercise of her right to decide if and when to safely become a mother. Broader access to sex education (not limited to abstinence-only programs), all safe forms of contraception, and full-service healthcare options are essential policies to realizing that right…. Scientific advances provide significant choices for reproductive health, including abortion, and re-ligious pressure must never impede full access to those resources.
It is clear that humanists not only support abortion, they claim it is a woman’s right, and they credit scientific advances for the wide range of choices a woman has for getting an abortion. Based on these quotes, I assume this support for abortion is based a rational philosophy informed by science and motivated by compassion.
What does science say about a baby in the womb? The experts (embryologists) overwhelming say that a baby is a unique human being from the moment of conception. That is an established scientific fact. Let us go to the Princeton University web site and the “International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy” (February 1999, 19:3/4:22-36). This journal includes a paper, written by Dr. Dianne N. Irving, titled “When Do Human Beings Begin?” It examines 14 myths about when a human being begins. The following quote covers just three of those:
To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization, the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte, usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.
Myth: 2 "The product of fertilization is simply a “blob,” a “bunch of cells”, a “piece of the mother’s tissues”.
Fact 2: As demonstrated above, the human embryonic organism formed at fertilization is a whole human being, and therefore it is not just a "blob" or a "bunch of cells." This new human individual also has a mixture of both the mother’s and the father’s chromosomes, and therefore it is not just a "piece of the mother’s tissues". Quoting Carlson:
"[T]hrough the mingling of maternal and paternal chromosomes, the zygote is a genetically unique product of chromosomal reassortment, which is important for the viability of any species."
Myth 3: "The immediate product of fertilization is just a “potential” or a “possible” human being, not a real existing human being."
Fact 3: As demonstrated above, scientifically there is absolutely no question whatsoever that the immediate product of fertilization is a newly existing human being. A human zygote is a human being. It is not a "potential" or a "possible" human being. It’s an actual human being, with the potential to grow bigger and develop its capacities.
Myth 4: "A single-cell human zygote, or embryo, or fetus are not human beings, because they do not look like human beings."
Fact 4: As all human embryologists know, a single-cell human zygote, or a more developed human embryo, or human fetus is a human being, and that that’s the way they are supposed to look at those particular periods of development.
In a March 2010 article Randy Alcorn reported on a U.S. Senate hearing:
Some of the world’s most prominent scientists and physicians testified to a U.S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception... The Official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:
“Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being—a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.” https://tinyurl.com/y9vywtuj
The scientific facts are that a baby is a unique person and is fully human from the moment of conception. This makes intentionally aborting a baby an act of murder. While the mother may have a right to do what she wants with her body (and that is debatable), she does not have the right to intentionally, and with premeditation, kill another human being.
In the humanist quote at the beginning of this chapter, notice that humanists claim to be motivated by compassion. I whole-heartedly agree we need to be compassionate. When a woman chooses to do certain things with her body, she must then deal appropriately and compassionately with the consequences. Those consequences may be minimal, or the consequences may be substantial and include other people, such as her husband and the wife of the man with whom she had a sexual relationship. However, if the consequences include a baby (human from the moment of conception), the compassionate thing to do is to properly care for the baby, seeking to do things that benefit the new human she is now carrying. That is true compassion. That is what the Bible calls love.
Bottom line, humanism is not scientific nor compassionate. It is self-centered.
How Do Humanists Feel About Torture?
They are definitely against torture, as you have read in some of the other chapters. They firmly believe torture of another human being is evil. That is good.
Have you ever seen those machines used to grind up tree branches? They throw in one end of a branch, and the machine sucks it in and grinds it to little pieces. How would you feel if your feet were stuck into that machine and it sucked you in and tore you to a red pulp? That is what a suction abortion is like, and it is the type of abortion method used during the first eight weeks of a baby’s life.
Now imagine there is a very large, very sharp hook-shaped knife that a machine swings through the air. You are tied to a post and cannot get away. The machine comes closer, and closer, and starts slicing into you at random places… sometimes nicking you, sometimes carving out a big chunk. That is called dilation and curettage, and it is similar to the way babies from eight to 12 weeks old are aborted.
The following is a description of an abortion by Abby Johnson, the former director of a Texas Planned Parenthood branch.
“For whatever reason I was called in to help. My job was to hold the ultrasound probe on the abdomen,” she said. “When I looked at the screen, I saw a baby on the screen. She was about 13 weeks pregnant at the time. I saw a full side profile. I saw face to feet on the ultrasound.
“I saw the probe going into the woman’s uterus. At that moment I saw the baby moving, trying to get away from the probe,” she continued.
“I thought, ‘It’s fighting for its life.’ I thought, ‘It’s life. It’s alive.’
“I dropped the ultrasound probe. I scrambled and put [the probe] back in place. So many things were going through my mind. I was thinking about my daughter, who’s three,” she said.
“I was just thinking, ‘What am I doing here? What am I doing here? There was life in here and now there’s not.'”
Yes, babies in the womb are alive. They are people who feel pain and want to live.
Once again, use your imagination. You are in a medieval dungeon, tied to a rack. A man with a hood over his face ties one arm to a pulley mechanism, turns a large wheel, and tears your arm off. He does the same for a leg. Then he gets just your remaining hand, and then with a second try the rest of your arm. Then part of your other leg. On and on it goes. You are still alive as you are pulled apart piece-by-piece. There is no question. This is a means of torture... I mean dilation and evacuation. It is used to abort babies up to 18 weeks old. Babies who are alive and can feel pain.
On the other hand, imagine you restrained and lowered into a bath of poison. You skin is slowly burned off by the chemical poison, which you are also forced to drink. This is a salt poisoning abortion.
This is not compassion. This is torture… and this is what humanists support. Humanists claim science and compassion out of one side of their mouths, and preach murder and torture out of the other side. That is evil.
CONCLUSION: Humanists claim to base their beliefs and actions on science and compassion. However, humanism ultimately is about self-centeredness. They are hypocrites who reject science… and reject compassion when science and compassion interfere with their self-centered desires.
But there is no lack of scientific consensus on the issue of when life begins. You simply cannot find a credible embryology textbook that disputes the fact that life begins at conception. ...In the end, the pro-abortion choice advocate must decide whether he will choose science or remain committed to anti-science [humanistic] fundamentalism.- Mike Adams
Christianity is different. The Bible teachers us to love God, love our neighbors, and even love our enemies. Biblical love is sacrificially helping others with their most pressing needs. So yes, having a baby may be inconvenient… it may mean making career and financial sacrifices… but that is love. Sacrificing (loving) another person (a baby in the womb) so that a new human being will have life.
NEXT ACCUSATIONS: The Bible has stories about a talking snake (Genesis 3:4-5); a tree bearing fruit which, when eaten, gives knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17; 3:5-7); another tree whose fruit bestows immortality (Genesis 3:22); a voice coming from a burning bush (Exodus 3:4); a talking donkey (Numbers 22:28); rods turning into serpents (Exodus 7:10-12); water changing into blood (Exodus 7:19-22); water coming from a rock (Numbers 20:11); a dead man reviving when his corpse touched the bones of a prophet (II Kings 13:21); and other people rising from the dead (e.g., I Kings 17:21-22; II Kings 4:32-35; Acts 9:37-40).
The humanist go on to add more examples: There are also accounts of the sun standing still (Joshua 10:13); the parting of a sea (Exodus 14:21-22); iron floating (II Kings 6:5-6); the suns shadow going back ten degrees (II Kings 20:9-11); a witch bringing the ghost of Samuel back from the dead (I Samuel 28:3-15); disembodied fingers writing on a wall (Daniel 5:5); a man living for three days and nights in the belly of a fish (Jonah 1:17); people walking on water (Matthew 14:26-29); a virgin impregnated by God (Matthew 1:20); a pool of water that can cure ailments of those who dip in it (John 5:2-4); and angels and demons influencing earthly affairs (e.g., Acts 5:19; Luke 11:24-26).
We'll look at these next. Click here...