Ten Points of Humanism

bob_2 · 03-25-09 3:33 am

1. Humanism believes in a naturalistic metaphysics or attitude toward the universe that considers all forms of the supernatural as myth; and that regards Nature as the totality of being and as a constantly changing system of matter and energy which exists independently of any mind or consciousness. 2. Humanism, drawing especially upon the laws and facts of science, believes that we human beings are an evolutionary product of the Nature of which we are a part; that the mind is indivisibly conjoined with the functioning of the brain; and that as an inseparable unity of body and personality we can have no conscious survival after death. 3. Humanism, having its ultimate faith in humankind, believes that human beings possess the power or potentiality of solving their own problems, through reliance primarily upon reason and scientific method applied with courage and vision. 4. Humanism, in opposition to all theories of universal determinism, fatalism, or predestination, believes that human beings, while conditioned by the past, possess genuine freedom of creative choice and action, and are, within certain objective limits, the shapers of their own destiny. 5. Humanism believes in an ethics or morality that grounds all human values in this-earthly experiences and relationships and that holds as its highest goal the this-worldly happiness, freedom, and progress—economic, cultural, and ethical—of all humankind, irrespective of nation, race, or religion. 6. Humanism believes that the individual attains the good life by harmoniously combining personal satisfactions and continuous self-development with significant work and other activities that contribute to the welfare of the community. 7. Humanism believes in the widest possible development of art and the awareness of beauty, including the appreciation of Nature’s loveliness and splendor, so that the aesthetic experience may become a pervasive reality in the lives of all people. 8. Humanism believes in a far-reaching social program that stands for the establishment throughout the world of democracy, peace, and a high standard of living on the foundations of a flourishing economic order, both national and international. 9. Humanism believes in the complete social implementation of reason and scientific method; and thereby in democratic procedures, and parliamentary government, with full freedom of expression and civil liberties, throughout all areas of economic, political, and cultural life. 10. Humanism, in accordance with scientific method, believes in the unending questioning of basic assumptions and convictions, including its own. Humanism is not a new dogma, but is a developing philosophy ever open to experimental testing, newly discovered facts, and more rigorous reasoning. Humanism is known by these names: a)scientific Humanism, b)secular Humanism, c)naturalistic Humanism, d)democratic Humanism, depending on the emphasis that one wishes to give. It is an influence against the Christian Church, and emphasizes this life and no afterlife. <a href="http://www.corliss-lamont.org/philos8.pdf" target=_top>http://www.corliss-lamont.org/philos8.pdf</a>

john8verse32 · 03-25-09 1:08 pm

...and the problem is? other than your claim that humanism is is an influence against the Christian Church.... it certainly is in favor of humans..... which I thought was part of the churches mission....

bob_2 · 03-25-09 2:28 pm

God created man. Therefore there should at some point be a turning to God for answers or assistance, or SALVATION and ETERNAL LIFE. Humanism is very clear it has nothing to do with the afterlife.

elaine · 03-25-09 9:56 pm

Would you live any differently if there were no afterlife? That is the real test. If one lives for a future reward, it'a a quid pro quo: I will do what is asked, if you promise to reward me in the end by living forever. In effect, it's a deal you make with a god you trust. Humanists believe that man is the highest creation and all our actions should be driven by the respect we give our fellow humans, whether there will be a prize at the end or not.

george · 03-25-09 10:33 pm

Humanists believe that man is the highest creation and all our actions should be driven by the respect we give our fellow humans, whether there will be a prize at the end or not. I would go further and say that, that is the only "good works" that count for anything. To live morally and do good works for reward has the same motive behind it as did the original "sin," which is, "I'll do what is good for me" - and if that includes helping others then that is what I'll do. With that kind of motivation we make ourselves believe we're actually becoming good people and deserve the payback of immortality.

bob_2 · 03-25-09 10:45 pm

Salvation, Elaine, involves belief, John 3:16. Humanists do not believe that, but in themselves. The Holy Spirit living within man empowers him to be more like Christ, who is our Savior. Humanists do not believe in Chirst as Savior but in living a good life, until they die. They have no hope of eternal life.

elaine · 03-26-09 10:43 pm

So, one who believes very strongly that the earth is flat, is correct? Does one's belief change facts? If you believe the sun revolves around the earth, does that make it so? Would the Holy Spirit lead men to believe such anti-scientific knowledge? Evidently it did as the OT writers believed such stuff. If you need hope in eternal life, so be it. Your belief does not convince me to believe the same. You have no evidence that there is eternal life. If so, present it? Otherwise, it is merely hope. Like hope that you will win the lottery, or have all you 401K untouched by the economy. Good luck.

george · 03-27-09 9:23 pm

Speaking of humanism, Elaine, have your heard of Greta Vosper and her book With or Without God? She was interviewed on the radio here this week and I had to get her book, which has a forward by Spong.

elaine · 03-27-09 9:34 pm

Sirje, no I have not heard of that book. I'll check it out and maybe add it to the two I ordered today from Amazon: "Jesus Interrupted" by Ehrman and another on the problem of evil, can't remember the exact title but sounded interesting on theodicy.

george · 03-28-09 5:58 am

Elaine, I checked Amazon and they have the book only in hard cover. It just came out in soft cover here so maybe if you just wait or find it in a local book store. Honestly, I'm a little reticent to read it but read it I must. Here is Spong's comment on the back of the book, A powerful book...I enormously admire this rising voice of new Christian possibilities, and I commend her penetrating insights into the new generation of spiritually aware and spiritually open people. When interviewed, she didn't recommend that just anybody read her book. She said if you're a literalist and your faith is strong in your present ideology, this book might not be for you at this time; but if you find yourself marginalized by the traditional religious set up, this book will open up new possibilities. Personally, I have found that the church does not meet spiritual needs. It lays out ceremony that's supposed to satisfy human spiritual needs but is merely series of mind-numbing activities. Maybe not so much in SDA churches, but even there, who is ever surprised at what happens in a church service? It's as though a whole group of people function as if in a pre-programmed hypnotic trance - they file into church and do A,B,C and they file out. I used to sit there in the pew and hope against hope that something would be said or done to make me think again and be challenged but that didn't ever happen. As Spong says in his intro to the book, "Christianity will die of boredom before it dies of controversy." I'm sure the services in the mega churches with decor fashioned by somebody or other, put on a good show every week, but that's another problem and not my experience.

george · 03-28-09 6:15 am

On a not-so-different track - Jesus revolutionized the Jewish system of belief and worship; and the establishment fought it "tooth and nail". There's so much fear about any changes brought to religion. Perhaps it's because people are hanging on to it by just a thread and if anything should come along to blow some fresh air in, the thread will break and they're left with nothing. That is a valid fear, I think. We do form our ideologies over a life-time, and new ways of looking at religious issues are down right scary - but that is exactly what Jesus did, - and he paid for it. I'm anxious to re-think the whole thing by removing the ritual and getting down to the nuts and bolts of Christianity. When Jesus said "this do in remembrance of me", I don't think he meant - bake a bunch of salt free wafers four times a year (or every week) and eat them in church with grape juice or even wine. There just has to be more to it.

george · 03-28-09 6:45 am

CORRECTION! Spong's quote in my post @ 5:58 should read: ORGANIZED RELIGION will die of boredom before it dies of controversy. So sorry.

bob_2 · 03-28-09 9:29 am

Sirje, save your money: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:To save your precious time, let me summarize the gospel of Vosper. Hear the good news: there is no God but the one you make, no sin to hamper your self-actualization, no sacred texts to impede your enlightenment. Salvation, Vosper claims, is "new life through removing the causes of suffering in the world." To quote her publisher's website, "God does not answer our prayers. Jesus is not the saviour who saved the world by dying for our sins. Simply put, Christianity is “love one another.” Thanks for the sudden revelation, "Rev." Vosper. ... Vosper will have her fifteen minutes and even attract the like-minded, but we need not worry that her gospel so-called will overcome the good news of new creation in Jesus Christ. <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://irregularchristian.blogspot.com/2008/03/christ-less-christianity.html" target=_top>http://irregularchristian.blogspot.com/2008/03/chr ist-less-christianity.html</a> Read the whole review, if you can. What ever happenned to "This do in remembrance of me." ??? (Message edited by Bob_2 on March 28, 2009)

bob_2 · 03-28-09 9:53 am

Try this live discussion, video, between William Lane Craig and Bart Ehrman. To eliminate Jesus resurrection by Ehrman, essentially eliminates salvation, and leads us all to death. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjOSNj97_gk&feature=related" target=_top>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjOSNj97_gk&feature =related</a>

george · 03-28-09 12:51 pm

Bob, I appreciate your position. You have no idea how much. But, the church is suffering from irrelevancy, and those who do attend, imagine themselevs as belonging to an exclusive club that leads straight to heaven, the rest of the world, "be damned" literally. Something wrong with that picture.

bob_2 · 03-28-09 7:32 pm

Sirje, it has been a while since I have heard such a broad brush of SDAs but when a kid I do remember being taught that SDAs were the remnant. I have to admit they do not have a view of the bigger church, some do, some don't, to be fair.

george · 03-28-09 9:57 pm

Bob, it has been a while since I have heard such a broad brush of SDAs I never refer to beliefs and attitudes held by individual SDAs. These are personal matters and I can't go there since I haven't walked in their shoes. I think my reference to "those who do attend" was a little harsh and broad. I know individual SDAs who are very involved in community work etc. but they are a very small minority. Most SDAs stay clear of their community projects etc. except for an occasional cooking school or stop smoking campaign. Even those are held with the idea that they would bring in interest in the church, not to necessarily promote health without that catch. I'm talking about the CHURCH as it sits there as an office complex, compiling camp meeting schedules and mandates for those never ending "evangelistic" campaigns, all in the attempt to bolster membership that is rapidly dying out. The irrelevancy is mind boggling. Here, in your old stomping grounds, I don't imagine much has changed. This is ground zero for the remnants of the 1950s SDA church, the last time I checked. I could be out of date, but I don't think so.

bob_2 · 03-28-09 10:29 pm

Oh, you forgot the sunset tables. Love em. How would you like that job? Especially if you believed this statement: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:The Christian Sabbath is life in Jesus Christ, in whom every believer finds true rest. The weekly seventh-day Sabbath, which was enjoined upon Israel in the Ten Commandments, was a shadow that prefigured the true Reality to whom it pointed - our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (Hebrews 4:3, 8-10; Matthew 11:28-30; Exodus 2:8-11; Colossians 2:16,17<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Ooopsy, there goes your job! (Message edited by Bob_2 on March 28, 2009)

bob_2 · 03-28-09 10:34 pm

Sirje said: <a href="http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=120&post=3404#POST3404" target=_top>http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?t pc=120&post=3404#POST3404</a> As I said to Devon, sometimes you don't realize if anyone appreciates your effort on this forum, I appreciate the kind words.

elaine · 03-28-09 11:08 pm

As Loren Seibold, SDA pastor at Worthington, OH wrote recently on the Spectrum blog: "Why do we take some OT texts seriously, but not others? "95% of what we SDAs believe we share with most other Protestant Christians. What makes up that differing 5%? The Sabbath, of course; the state of the dead. Clean and unclean meats. The 2300-day prophecy. "I then oepn the Bible to texts that support these beliefs: Ex. 20:8-11, Eccl. 9:5, Lev. 11, Dan. 8:14. "Notice something interesting about these key Adventist proof texts? They're all from the Old Testament. "That may be a reason some other Christians are confused about who Adventists are and question whether we are really Christians at all."

bob_2 · 03-29-09 1:50 am

Elaine, I wouldn't know about Spectrum, I've been banned by the likes of Bonnie Dwyer and Alex Carpenter and Chuck Scriven. Who cares what someone like Loren Seibold who supports the likes of these types has to say.

elaine · 03-29-09 8:52 pm

Bob, you make a common mistake: judging by names, rather than their remarks. Loren asked some serious questions (see another thread here). Is there a logical explanation, or do you uphold all SDA beliefs that were developed from the OT?

bob_2 · 03-29-09 11:32 pm

I don't think you can make a hard and fast rule. You have to study and discern what is being taught. 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

elaine · 03-30-09 10:26 pm

How does someone determine those that are valid and should be obeyed today and those that only applied to the Jews before Christ? As shown elsewhere, the major unique doctrines of Adventism are all taken straight from the OT. Isn't that a little strange for a Christian church?

pilgrim99 · 03-30-09 11:12 pm

Elaine, this article offers a perspective that might be helpful in answering your question, <a href="http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=880" target=_top>The Mosaic Law: Its Function and Purpose in the New Testament</a> Here's an extract:<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:There are Christian teachers of repute who consider the Mosaic law to be the present-day rule of life for the Christian.1 A view not infrequently found among earnest, orthodox believers is that although we are not saved by the law, once we have been justified by faith, then the Mosaic law becomes our rule of life. Those holding such a view generally make a sharp division of the Mosaic law into two parts, which they distinguish as the moral and the ceremonial. The ceremonial portion they consider as having found its fulfillment in Christ at His first advent, and thus as having now passed away. But the moral portion of the Mosaic law, say they, is still in force as the believer’s rule of life. The treatment given to Christian ethics by some highly respected authors is indeed but little more than an exposition of the Decalogue. It seems exceedingly strange that Bible-believing Christians should advocate such a view, when the New Testament makes it abundantly clear that the believer in Christ is not any longer under the Mosaic law in its entirety… Indeed after having been delivered from the law, to deliberately place ourselves once again under its [control] is said to be “falling from grace.”<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#1 03-25-09 3:33 am

Ten Points of Humanism

#2 03-25-09 1:08 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#3 03-25-09 2:28 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#4 03-25-09 9:56 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#5 03-25-09 10:33 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#6 03-25-09 10:45 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#7 03-26-09 10:43 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#8 03-27-09 9:23 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#9 03-27-09 9:34 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#10 03-28-09 5:58 am

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#11 03-28-09 6:15 am

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#12 03-28-09 6:45 am

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#13 03-28-09 9:29 am

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#14 03-28-09 9:53 am

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#15 03-28-09 12:51 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#16 03-28-09 7:32 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#17 03-28-09 9:57 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#18 03-28-09 10:29 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#19 03-28-09 10:34 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#20 03-28-09 11:08 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#21 03-29-09 1:50 am

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#22 03-29-09 8:52 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#23 03-29-09 11:32 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#24 03-30-09 10:26 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

#25 03-30-09 11:12 pm

Re: Ten Points of Humanism

Board footer