Showing posts with label Intrinsic Value. Show all posts

In the Image of God: The Battle for Human Identity

Introduction

Human origins is a fascinating area of research today. With all the different models for the origins of humanity being proposed, I see an increase in the discussions, both scientific and theological. For everyone reading this post, this area of research should be of utmost interest for you as well. Two critical ideas about humanity are at stake depending on which model (or family of models) is true: intrinsic and equal human dignity and value, and the sinfulness of humanity.

The age-old debate about God's existence has great implications on this area of the debate about human origins. The Judeo-Christian claim that all humans are created in God's Image and that humans possess a sin nature that will cause them to tend toward the immoral. These paradoxical doctrines together explain both the greatness and wretchedness of humanity that we see everyday, throughout history, and expect in the future.

The American Charade

I find it quite interesting that a large portion of the American population has abandoned Martin Luther King's dream but still gives lip service to civil rights every year. What do I mean by that? Take a look at this quote from his speech "I Have A Dream":

"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

Notice that Dr. King appeals to the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson (and the Declaration's signatories) understood that the idea that "all men are created equal" and that all people have intrinsic and equal rights and dignity (black lives matter, and so do all other lives) is completely dependent upon the truth of the claim that all humans are created in the Image of God. If that claim is false, then no humans have intrinsic or equal rights or dignity (black lives do not matter and neither do any other lives). As Americans continue to abandon God, they abandon the only foundation for intrinsic and equal human rights and dignity; they are abandoning the idea that black lives matter but are holding on to the phrase because everyone knows that the phrase conveys a truth about reality despite their philosophical denial of it. These Americans are playing a charade.

Quote from "Magna Carta of Humanity" by Os Guinness- "Where Sinai (and Jesus of Nazareth and his followers down through Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.) stand for love that drives out hate, just as light drives out darkness, the left perpetuates and exploits the hate and the darkness as its instruments of power."

Further, from Dr. King:

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

In today's cultural climate of identity politics, classification by skin color (ala Critical Race Theory [CRT]) is one of the many (illegitimate) ways that people are judged. This is explicitly what Dr. King said his dream was not. All those who support CRT have slapped Dr. King and the civil rights movement in the face. How?

In Critical Race Theory, "oppressed" and "oppressor" are defined by the immutable attribute of skin color. And only the "oppressed" can identify true oppression. If you have the skin color that is categorized as "oppressed," you literally cannot not be oppressed. Even if you don't feel like you're being oppressed and all actions around you and toward you are not oppressive, you are still oppressed. This is a victimhood trap that cannot be escaped. CRT places certain groups of people permanently under oppression with no escape from oppression and no hope of ever not being oppressed.

CRT gives lip service to racial reconciliation and healing, but it not only does not provide a mechanism for such reconciliation and healing, it conducts psychological warfare against every race that ensures that there is no possibility of reconciliation and healing. Critical Race Theory promotes hate and revenge among races. CRT is a trap for all races, not just the "oppressed" ones. It offers no escape, no hope, no healing, and no future.

Quote from "Magna Carta of Humanity" by Os Guinness- "Americans, including many on the progressive left, pay homage to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. but the chasm between Dr. King and the progressive left has grown vaster by the year. His ideal of the 'content of your character' matters little today. The highly racist color of your skin (or the sexist combination of your X and Y chromosomes and the ageist date of your birth) is everything."

The Record of History

History has already demonstrated what happens when a nation rejects such an idea and its foundations in the Holocaust. Unfortunately, it seems that this piece of history may be in preparation of being repeated as anti-Semitism is on the rise today, and CRT certainly has not way to stop it.

History has also demonstrated what happens when individuals say that they believe humans have equal and intrinsic rights then act inconsistently with such beliefs (many of America's founding fathers did have slaves). Once again, Dr. King:

"We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love."

The way of Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement is love and forgiveness not hate and revenge. What identity politics and critical race theory have done for America is pit group against group, race against race. Because it permanently labels people as "oppressed" and "oppressor," there is no path to forgiveness, reconciliation, cooperation, or love. Critical Race Theory offers nothing to achieve Martin Luther King's dream; in fact, it explicitly denies the goodness and rightness of Dr. King's dream and deliberately works against it to ensure that the dream is never realized.

Americans' Role in Stopping the Charade

It is time for Americans to take a stand against and a stand for. Against the ideas that will destroy any foundation for objective human rights, dignity, and intrinsic value (including atheism, identity politics, and all forms of critical theory). Against the ideas that promote hate and revenge. And for the truth of the reality that humans are created in God's Image, thus the reality that all humans have intrinsic value and equal rights and dignity. For the truth that love and forgiveness are the best way forward. For the fact that these are not merely opinions that are only as fashionable as those in power but are backed up by their reflection of reality.

The Church's Role in Stopping the Charade

While truth is true even if no one believes it, and falsehood is false even if everyone believes it, it is time that the Church takes the defenders of truth seriously (apologists). If Martin Luther King and the legacy of the Civil Rights movement is to be properly honored and maintained (and not just the terms used with different notions), the Church needs to present its case for the Truth to the world. Americans need to have confidence in the knowledge that all humans are created in God's Image, that it is not just a nice ideology that is as tenuous as the culture of the day (or minute with social media).

Conclusion- Martin Luther King's Legacy Is In Danger

If there is not a change in the heart of America, might will make right, not truth and not reality. Americans will become slaves to the power of culture's existential fancies. As long as Martin Luther King is useful to turn group against group, lip service will continue to be given in order to mask the "divide and conquer" strategy to maintain power and control against those who those in power despise. But once that pretense is no longer fashionable, Martin Luther King will be erased from the history books, and America will become the next perpetrator of human rights violations (again) against whichever groups of people are unpopular, hated, or despised at that moment.

For more on this I highly recommend these resources:

Atheists sound the alarm: Removing God from culture is dangerous!

Warnings To A Godless Society

Earlier this year I highlighted the warnings of rejecting God, coming from the mouth of an atheist. Richard Dawkins saw the moral degradation of world society and couldn't help to understand that the world's rejection of God's existence (that he, no doubt, helped catalyze) has led us here. He warned that it would continue, and in recent months, America has certainly seen Dawkins' warnings come true.

With the rejection of God comes the rejection of two important concepts that keep civilized society together: the existence of objective moral obligations and duties, and the existence of intrinsic human value that is grounded in our being created in the Image of God.

With the rejection of the first, there is no objective "right" or "wrong," all thoughts, actions, and behaviors just are- they have no moral value whatsoever, and none can be correctly judged as "evil" or "good." Every evil act, from the "eugenics" promoted by Planned Parenthood's founder Margaret Sanger to domestic and international child sex trafficking, have become common in our world. Politicians, the media, and even everyday citizens often turn a blind eye to these acts because "who is to say that these acts are 'evil'?"

With the rejection of the second, there is no reason to think that humans have intrinsic value and should not be used however we wish towards our goals. A human's value is wholly constituted in their ability to contribute to an arbitrary purpose set by someone in power over them. In the event that a person has a goal of achieving career development or sexual pleasure, that means that if a child must be murdered or raped in order to achieve that goal, the rape and murder are not wrong because that child possesses no intrinsic value and, of course, the rape and murder are not evil because there is no objective "right" or "wrong," "good" or "evil" by which to properly categorize the rape or murder (or torture, or theft, etc.).

Introduction

A while back, I saw an intriguing question on social media from a person who is in the middle of a worldview transition. This person is concerned about why so many Christians follow conservative economic theories and not more liberal ones. As I have thought about the question more and more, I have noticed not just a viable answer but also an apologetic opportunity in addressing this concern. Here is the question in the questioner's own words and how I would respond:

Brandt Jean (brother of Botham Jean) offers forgiveness to Amber Guyger

An Amazing Scene

October 3rd 2019 saw an incredible event take place in the state of Texas. As the sentencing of former police officer, Amber Guyger for the murder of Botham Jean took place, the brother of Botham, Brandt, extended forgiveness to the convicted murderer. He explained that he loved her and wanted the best for her. He invited her to seek forgiveness from God and, to the surprise of everyone in the courtroom, he asked the judge if he could give her a hug. To say that the scene was "powerful to witness" would be an understatement. You can read more and see the touching video here:

Young Man Stuns Courtroom By Forgiving Brother's Murderer, Urging Her To Seek Christ

This event and trial have been plagued with charges of racism, hatred, and division. But Brandt decided to break through all that to show Amber the love and forgiveness of Christ offered to everyone who will seek it. I am reminded tonight of the words of one of my favorite songs growing up on the 90s:

"We're colored people and we live in a tainted place...We've got a history so full of mistakes. And we are colored people who depend upon a holy grace."

If these lyrics do not sound familiar, or you are recalling them for the first time in a while and want to hear the song again, here is the original music video from dc Talk:

It is only in the Christian worldview that we find unity in this amazing colorful diversity. We are all created in the Image of God with equal and intrinsic value. We all make mistakes, mistakes with some of the most devastating and fatal impacts and consequences on our fellow human beings, but there is no mistake that is beyond the forgiveness of a loving God for those who genuinely seek His forgiveness. It is my prayer that Guyger seeks this forgiveness.

Follow Faithful Thinkers On Social Media

For more on this unique features of the Christian worldview, I encourage you to check out these additional posts:

Alfie Evans, Humanism, and Christ

Introduction

Those who have followed the Faithful Thinkers blog for a year or more know that I followed the case of Charlie Gard last summer. Gard was born with a rare disease that the medical facility that was treating him was ill-equipped to deal with. He died at the hand of the British courts and doctors because these ill-equipped doctors refused to recognize other possible solutions. Instead of seeking outside help to save the life of a defenseless child, they sought to legally kill him instead. Other nations and medical facilities offered to transport and treat Gard at their expense, but all volunteered help was rejected and condemned by the doctors, and courts were eventually appealed to by the British doctors to order that Gard be left in their knowingly-incapable hands. The courts granted that request much to the horror of the parents and the rest of the civilized world. And now in 2018, it is happening again; this time to a child by the name of Alfie Evans. LifeSiteNews has been following the story carefully, so for the details, please click the link. The suffering that is being endured by Alfie and his parents is unnecessary, gratuitous, and atrocious.

The Image of God, Intrinsic Human Value , Free Will (the ability to choose other than what we do choose), Moral Responsibility (objective obligations and duties), and the ability to reason (possess knowledge). #Anthropology #Psychology #HumanOrigins

Introduction

Those who follow this blog are aware that I not only defend "mere" Christianity, but I also defend specifics in the Christian worldview. As I have written before, I believe that if a Christian is defending an incorrect detail of their worldview to a skeptic, that skeptic can easily use that incorrect detail as an excuse to reject the entire worldview (even though this is not logically reasonable). Over the last few years of interacting with fellow Christians regarding the details of our worldview, one of the doctrines that are not discussed explicitly very often, but other debates directly affect, is the doctrine of the Image of God. I have noticed that some positions in the other debates imply different views of the Image of God, and these different views of the Image of God can be used to test the positions in the other debates. But before I get into those debates, we need to know why this Judeo-Christian doctrine is so important in the first place.

Introduction

The name "Colin Kaepernick" has flooded my Facebook feed this week. Until the last few days, I did not even know his name. From what I could tell, he is a quarterback for the National Football League (NFL)'s team The San Francisco 49r's. The fact that I do not follow any sports means that this sudden appearance in my feed is quite out of the ordinary. So I decided to investigate. It turns out that Kaepernick caused a stir and a great deal of outrage the other day, when he refused to stand for the National Anthem before a preseason game. This is a highly disrespectful decision that he has made clear that he plans to continue. This decision has sparked much outrage on the internet and much praise in the media. While I do believe that what he did was highly disrespectful and should never be encouraged, if we look past his actions to his reasons, we see profound insights (profound for our society, anyway) highlighted by the longings of his heart. These observations and desires that he has expressed provide powerful evidence for the truth of the Christian worldview and a door wide open for him to accept the call of Christ on his life.

However, before you read on, please familiarize yourself with Kaepernick's comments on his decision here.

Two things that he said immediately caught my attention. The first was that he was protesting racial inequality and mistreatment of African-American people. The second what that he said that that "is bigger than football" and even accepted the possible fate of being removed from the NFL and losing endorsements over his decision.

Introduction

As the entire world is probably aware by now, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled in late June 2015 that "marriage" does include same-sex couples. The majority opinion (written and presented by Justice Kennedy) includes the recognition that historically "marriage" has been defined as being a union between two individuals of the opposite sex. The opinion describes three cases that the SCOTUS heard and its reasoning for its conclusion that it was time to redefine "marriage."

As a defender of the Christian worldview, which includes objective value and objective morality, I feel that it is necessary to comment on this highly emotional and political issue. I have read and heard several opinion pieces from various sources (my favorites on linked at the end of this article), and I hope to not be redundant with this article's more philosophical approach to critiquing the ruling. I also hope to provide a reasoned and gracious response that, I pray, will speak to the hearts and minds of those caught in the middle of this battle. I want to start with two important recognitions:

Buying a New Car
For anyone who has been in the US market for a new car, you are likely familiar with the term "lemon". Anytime that a new car is purchased, the dealer must allow the buyer a "grace period" of so many days (depending on the state) that allows them to test out everything on the vehicle. If anything is not as the manufacturer says it is supposed to be, the car may be returned as a "lemon" for a full refund without questions or obligations. I'm not sure exactly what happens to the car from this point, except that what is wrong is repaired, and it is then sold again (hopefully not with a "New" sticker).

Compelled to Fix Deformities?
The fact that the car can be returned and repaired requires the initial concept that the vehicle had a design, before it was produced. The vehicle is compared to that design and any deviance must be repaired before sell. This leads to an interesting observation about a behavior of the human species. If someone is born with physical "abnormalities" or psychological "issues", we try to "fix" them, so they reflect a prior standard. But if naturalism is true, they are already in the original state (there is nothing to repair, no need for therapy or surgery to "repair"), they are their own standard...unless we admit that there is a standard by which to compare and repair towards. Since, according to naturalism, evolution is constantly changing the original state, there is no unchanging, objective state. Yet, we treat mental disorders and operate on cleft palates. Why do we do so if there is nothing to repair? The answer to that question can be one of three options (or all), and all three of them are founded in God: design, human intrinsic worth, and beauty.

Christianity requires the laying down of pride. Many interpret this to be a sacrifice of confidence. It is sacrificing confidence, but sacrificing confidence in something not worthy of it, and building confidence in Someone that is worthy of it. When you recognize that your confidence is in an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent, perfectly just, and perfectly merciful God, you will have a renewed confidence in yourself. But, if your confidence in God goes below the confidence in yourself (pride) again, you will have to make the sacrifice again. The Christian must never over-estimate his capabilities, or under-estimate God's. There is a delicate balance of self-confidence versus trust in God in the Christian's life. Sacrificing our own pride has to be done constantly, because we are still sinful and always default to making God less in our lives and ourselves more. To be a Christian requires the humble desire and duty to make God more and ourselves less.

Last week, I explained how the naturalistic evolutionary paradigm cannot explain the existence of equal human value. This week, I will build upon last week and show why it cannot explain intrinsic value either. If you have not read last week's post, you will probably be lost.

The fact that we do survive is a product of the Imago Dei. We possess a mind that is capable of simple and complex thought- both of which can be and are used for survival. Unfortunately, man is fallen. One of the results of this fallen nature is the fact that man is self-focused (prideful and narcissistic). This causes man to focus acutely on his survival (survival is not wrong in itself, but the desire for it causes many to make choices based on a certain level of paranoia). Man will use this mind to come up with "ways of survival" that violate the intrinsic, equal value of other human beings (typically the illogical conclusion is one that violates another human life. They "reason" that it is the only option when it really is not). Murder is an example. In Christianity, murder is a sin because it is a direct insult to God, Himself ("I think so little of God and so highly of myself, that I will destroy a reflection of His value and His nature to further my own existence.").

I find it extremely interesting that many naturalists promote human equality. Human equality is a Judeo-Christian concept that is foreign to any worldview that must rely upon naturalistic evolution to explain the existence of the human race. Here's what I mean:

One of the major pillars of naturalistic, evolution is "survival of the fittest". This simply means that the lifeforms most fit for a certain environment will propagate their offspring into the next generation; lifeforms that possess any feature that inhibits their survival, will eventually die off. Value is assigned based on this survivability.