Friday, September 9, 2011

Man is basically good; right?

Why is it in a culture dominated by secular institutions we still have the media referring to destructive events in the natural world as acts of God? If evolution is a fact, how can anything be an act of God?

Quotes and comments;

1. "To condemn anything in the world of nature as evil is, logically, a heresy for humanism." [1.]

- To say that man is basically good, is in effect saying that nature is basically good. (i.e. since man is a product of nature, for him to be good, nature would have to be good.) Why is it then that we still hear Humanists speaking of natural disasters as acts of god? If they wanted to be consistent they would speak of these floods etc. as acts of nature.

They don't like to do this because this presents us with a nature that is not basically good; and if nature isn't basically good, neither can man himself be basically good. Since the basic tenet of Humanism is that man is basically good, you can see how Humanists shy away from speaking of the acts of nature.

All the arguments atheists use that feature showing how god does (or allows) evil things can be turned around and used against the naturalist position. e.g. parasites, viruses and earthquakes (etc.) don't disprove the existence of a good god, they disprove the existence of a good nature.

If nature isn't basically good then it can't be normative; can't provide a basis for ethics. (e.g. how do you get from mutations and disease to objective moral standards?)

M. Johnson

Notes;
1. To be as God - R.J. Rushdoony p.21
- free book online at Chalcedon.edu
2. Writers like de Sade and Max Stirner declared [above p.22] that no natural act (no act that happens in nature) can be evil or should be outlawed. People like Sam Harris who want to reintroduce ethics into the 'post christian' world are hypocrites who can't accept the obvious conclusions of naturalism. i.e. they want to insist that men are just animals, but they want to have the State force them to act like angels. They can't face the reality of their own position, and so must invent legislation to bind the lizard brained populace with. (Their position is as absurd as that of David Icke :=}