Creation, science and definition

What is sometimes referred to as the cultural wars can be seen as a struggle over definition; over who gets to define what. This is perhaps the most important issue of our day, and too many people are asleep at that wheel when they should be paying attention.

Quotes and comments;

A. Defining life:
'With the stroke of a pen, South Korea decided that frozen human embryos are not life forms. PhysOrg reported that “The ruling means that human embryos that are in their early stage and are not implanted into a mother’s womb cannot be seen as human life forms,” even though they have a full complement of human DNA from a father and a mother. [1.]

- While the pretense is that this decision (and definition) is scientific, it's simply political expediency. No methodology (e.g. scientific naturalism) can provide us with definitions. This can only be done by persons, on the basis of a worldview. If politicians can define who is or is not human none of us has a foundation for human rights.

We read that the human embryo cannot be seen as human life; but cannot be seen as human life by whom? By corrupt politicians and lawless judges? By greedy businessmen and amoral investors?
This is covenant breaking man playing at being God. The South Korean elite are desperate to make some kind of mark in the international community... and I guess they see this as their best hope.

Under Humanist ideology no one apparently bothers to ask what God thinks. (Not even in the 'christian' community do our so called wise ask this question.) No; we must rely on human reason they tell us. In other words we must decide on the basis of our sinful and wicked hearts. These are the same people who declared God's law is also not a 'life form' if you will. No; it's a dead thing, fit only to be tossed in the waste bin with human embryos.

It's hardly surprising that people who sanction abortion would deny human embryos are human beings. (Nothing that gets in the way of their plans to play god will be called human... we can be sure of that.) This is another example of what happens when concepts are defined by man in terms of man. Our society is becoming Humanist dictionary writ large.

It's not surprising that a political elite that has the courts define science will then turn around and have them define human life. The one follows the other like night follows day. If you take definition away from scripture and hand it to politicians you can expect them to define all things in terms favorable to their own desires and plans. (All things are now being defined in terms that involve the worship of man.) The source of definition in a society plays the role of God in that society.

For the biblical creationist all definition belongs to god and is found in god's word (i.e. the Bible) Biblical c. is the only defense we have against the new idolatry of man. To get a quick and easy look at how far we've gone down the road to Humanist idolatry compare the 1828 dictionary of Noah Webster with the latest edition of Webster's (or any current edition of another dictionary). To get an even better picture of what's happening compare biblical definitions with modern humanist definitions. These new works are actually books of theology; religious documents. (We might call them the 'holy books' of the new atheism.)

- M. Johnson

Notes;
1. Stem Cells: Hope, Politics, Charity, and Clarity Creation/Evolution Headlines 05/30/2010
2. Humanism can be seen as a project that tries to define all of life in terms of man; but fails utterly in the attempt to find coherence and agreement in the process. The only way Humanist definitions gain traction is by having them imposed by the State.