Some particular statements in the “Humanist Manifesto III” important for Christians be aware of are:
Atheistic: “No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.”
Evolution only: “Rather, science affirms that the human species is an emergence from natural evolutionary forces.”
These doctrines made for an interesting dialogue I had with a Humanist Counselor:
Christian (me): “We are on opposite sides of the question of whether there is a God. I believe there is, and you don’t. On the question of origins, you affirm the only possibility is Atheistic Evolution. Christians have at least three different ways to explain the origin of life on earth: Young Earth Creation, Old Earth Creation, and God Assisted Theistic Evolution. You are limited to only one: Atheistic Evolution. That makes Christians much more open-minded than atheists. We have three; you have only one! Are we three times more open-minded than you are?”
At this point, some Humanists explode in anger because they reckon us narrow-minded and themselves broad, free, and open-minded. You have just shown them how narrow they are, and they won’t like it. Next week: “How removing absolutes from education is fatal to learning.” http://wp.me/p6OUE6-6s
I'm open to discussing the Alternate Christian views - and we might add the Gap Theories, and the Young Biological Earth view, and also the View that says only the earth is young, but the rest of the universe is billions of years old.
While I'm open to discussing the other views, there is only ONE VIEW that fits with a reasonable and sound view of biblical authority. BIBLICAL CREATIONISM.
Six Day ~6K of all things. . .
Thank you Carolyn. That's info Christian parents need to understand about how their children are taught science.
Carolyn Reeves said:
The National Science Teachers Association crafted a position paper on the nature of science several years ago. It includes this statement: "Science, by definition, is limited to naturalistic methods and explanations and, as such, is precluded from using supernatural elements in the production of scientific knowledge." This is the foundation for the philosophy of naturalism, and it means that God is either false or irrelevant when explaining our origins. I can agree with the NSTA definition when it is applied to present day operational sciences, but this definition should have no place in determining boundaries for origins. It clearly teaches that the universe, the earth, living things, and humans were not planned and designed, but rather came to exist as a result of random natural processes and natural selection. It is the height of arrogance to say there is no room for the possibility that God could have supernaturally created everything. The saddest thing is that the NSTA definition of science is taught exclusively in public schools to our children.