Always be discerning and look to God's Word as THE source of truth!
God Bless,
Stanley
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Amazon Reviews Spark Debate!
As I was shopping for books online, I ran across the book "Eugenics and Other Evils" by G.K. Chesterton. Naturally, I scrolled down and read the reviews for the book. A very interesting review soon popped out at me. This reviewer was calling the book a typical example of how people against eugenics think and he then goes on to spell out his own arguments for eugenics. Reading through the review and seeing what this man had to say disturbed me very much. However, I was delighted to see ten comments. It appears that someone is standing up for orthodoxy. The reviewer had apparently respond to the objections multiple times. As I read his last post which was exceedingly long, I finally realized where he main flaw was. This reviewer simply did not understand the concept of sin. According to the reviewer,"Morality is seeing what needs to be done for the long-term benefit and viability of humanity towards the higher destiny in us against here-and-now selfish pursuits. In other words, truth over animal passions." They begin to explain a statement they made earlier which is "The only true evil is ignorance." by saying that, "To find out who is good and who is evil, all you need to do is find out who is not primarily motivated by truth -- because truth is life." I agree with this. However, they also fail to understand the true nature of truth. God's Word or His revelation is nowhere mentioned as the source of truth. Instead, "30 years of thinking hard and seeing other view points" is laid out as this man's source of truth. However, to critique his entire philosophy would take a book, which, clearly, G.K. Chesterton has written. Click this link to go take a look at the discussion surrounding this post: http://www.amazon.com/review/R30IY6FNWWDVL7/ref=cm_cr_pr_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1587420023&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=#wasThisHelpful
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One of this man's errors is that he has chosen a standard of truth, beauty, and goodness that ultimately leads to holocausts, which can hardly be described as shining examples of truth beauty or goodness. He sets up his standard of morality as a form of utilitarianism "The long term benefit for society" covered in the veneer of objectivity. But who is to decide what constitutes a "benefit." Why should we accept his standard, especially if we are in fact the ones who suddenly find ourselves on the wrong side of the guns and shovels?
ReplyDeleteIn the end, a Biblical worldview makes it clear that the long run good of a society and all of the people who constitute it, is faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, and obedience to God's law. Apart from that the long run is characterized by weeping and gnashing.
But, when truth is found in Christ, and yet we reject the source of truth, all we are left with are the ugly consequences of autonomy.
"There is a way which seems right to a man but in the end it leads to death."
I think you've hit the nail on the head. This man does not have a moral absolute and thus must derive one from himself. Ultimately, this cannot work because he only has collective ideals and finite guarantees. They simply cannot stand firm.
ReplyDelete