Knowing the Difference
Between
Good and Evil

   How does one determine right from wrong?
Your answer to this question will determine your
worldview and how you will live your life.   This
question divides the righteous from the wicked,
and the free from the enslaved.
   Humanist Manifesto II, which is the doctrinal
statement of the atheistic religion called
Humanism, answers our question as follows:
We affirm that moral values derive their source from human
experience.   Ethics is autonomous and situational, needing no
theological or ideological sanction.   Ethics stems from human
need and interest.
1

In other words, the Humanist Religion teaches that
the Word of God, the Bible, is not the authority
for differentiating between good and evil, but
rather humans are their own authority.
   Humanism....is the dominant religion of our time, a part of
the lives of nearly everyone in the "developed" world....There
is very little ritual in humanism, and most of its devout fol-
lowers do not seem to be aware that they are humanists.   Ask
them for the name of their religion and they will deny having
one, or, more commonly, name one of the traditional faiths.
On the other hand, people who consider themselves humanists
usually are---frequently, however, for reasons other than the
ones they know and admit.2

   Humanism is now the official religion of this nation.3
   Since Humanism is now the illegally state
enforced religion of most public schools in the
U.S.A., it is needful that parents realize its effects
on their children.
   One very clear example of Humanist situational
ethics can be seen in sex education.   The Bible
very clearly forbids sexual activity outside of the
husband/wife marriage:
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but
whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
  (Heb 13.4)
   Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is
abomination.   Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile
thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast
to lie down thereto: it is confusion.   Defile not ye yourselves
in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled
which I cast out before you: And the land is defiled: therefore
I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself
vomiteth out her inhabitants.
  (Lev 18.22-25)

   If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman,
both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely
be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
  (Lev 20.13)

   However Humanist Manifest II, page 15, very
expressly rejects both God and the Bible as the
basis of morality, stating:
We believe...that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions
that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs

and experience do a disservice to the human species....In the
area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often
cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures,
unduly repress sexual conduct....neither do we wish to
prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between
consenting adults.   The many varieties of sexual exploration
should not be considered "evil" ....individuals should be
permitted to express their sexual proclivities.

   Humanists, in fact, reject the concept of mar-
riage altogether.   Roger Baldwin, founder of the
American Civil Liberties Union, and a Unitarian
[and thus a Humanist] incorporated the following
statement into the service of his wedding to
Madeleine Doty Aug 8, 1919 after his release
from prison for refusal to report for the draft:
To us who passionately cherish the vision of a free human
society, the present institution of marriage among us is a grim
mockery of essential freedom.   Here we have the most
intimate, most sacred, the most creative relationship shackled
in the deadening grip of private property and essentially hold-
ing the woman subservient to the man...We deny without
reservation the moral right of state or church to bind by force
of law a relationship that cannot be maintained by the power of
love alone.   We submit to the form of law only because it
seems a matter of too little importance to resist.
4

   Baldwin's reference to freedom points out
another reason why Humanism is so dangerous.
Humanists wrongly define freedom as the liberty
to do whatever one wants to do, even if one wants
to do things God said are wrong.   Such is not true
liberty, but licentiousness---the very opposite of
freedom.   When wicked people are allowed to rob,
murder, and indulge in immorality without
meaningful punishment, then good people have
lost their fundamental rights to life, liberty and
property.   Therefore a country ruled by Humanism
cannot be free.
   Because Humanism encourages sin, it also en-
slaves the will.   Jesus said: "If ye continue in my
word
[the Bible], then are ye my disciples indeed;
and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall
make you free"
(John 8.31-32).   But Jesus added:
"Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin"
(John 8.34).   Drug abusers, alcoholics,
fornicators, h*m*sexuals, liars, thieves, and even
murderers become addicted to their sins; they can't
quit without outside help.   They are slaves to their
sins, and serve them faithfully they will.
   If men reject God as the moral authority, and
exalt themselves to that authority, anarchy results,
for men are of many contradictory opinions con-
cerning what is right and what is wrong.
Humanist ethical systems, therefore, require a dic-
tator to determine and enforce a system of state
mandated behavior.   Slavery is the direct result.
   Hitler's Nazi Germany is a good example of
what Humanist situational ethics do to freedom.
Nazism was based on Darwin's Theory of Evolu-

tion.   Exterminating Jews will speed up the evolu-
tion of the human race, the Nazi reasoned, so how
could it be wrong?   American Humanists are no
better, demanding "freedom of choice" to murder
1.6 million unborn children every year.
   The following amazing admission that
Humanism is tantamount to Marxist Communism
is found in Humanist Manifesto II page 14:
Many kinds of humanism exist in the contemporary world.
The varieties and emphases of naturalistic humanism include
"scientific," "ethical," "democratic," "religious," and "Mar-
xist" humanism.   Free thought, atheism, agnosticism, skep-
ticism, deism, rationalism, ethical culture, and liberal religion
all claim to be heir to the humanist tradition.

Humanism is thus revealed to be the core of every
Satanic political system, philosophy and religion.
It underlies every dictatorship and police state.
   True freedom is having opportunity to do all that
God said is right to do.   True freedom implies
having government protection from those who
would deny us this fundamental human right.   No
man has authority to deny others their right to live
by the laws and precepts of God: "We ought to
obey God rather than men"
(Acts 5.29).   The
Bible explains true freedom in Romans 6.6-23:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the
body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not
serve sin.   For he that is dead is freed from sin.   Now if we be
dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more;
death hath no more dominion over him.   For in that he died,
he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin,
but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.   Let not sin
therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in
the lusts thereof.   Neither yield ye your members as instru-
ments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto
God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members
as instruments of righteousness unto God.   For sin shall not
have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but
under grace.   What then? shall we sin, because we are not
under the law, but under grace?   God forbid.   Know ye not,
that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants
ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of
obedience unto righteousness?   But God be thanked, that ye
were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart
that form of doctrine which was delivered you.   Being then
made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of
your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to
uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield
your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.   For
when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteous-
ness.   What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are
now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.   But now
being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye
have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.   For
the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life
through Jesus Christ our Lord.

   A concrete example of Religious Humanism
being taught in the Oklahoma City public schools

will show just how extreme Humanism is.   On
October the 10th 1991 I heard that a female
teacher held a full-sized plastic model of a male
sex organ in one hand, pointing to it and touching
it with the other, as she taught a co-ed class at
N.W. Classen High.   Needless to say this was the
talk of the school.   The next day, Oct 11, I visited
N.W. Classen High to see and hear for myself
what teachings my tax dollars are funding.   The
school principal said content of this course was
determined by central administration for all
Oklahoma City schools.   I was allowed to sit in on
the first hour "life skills" (sex-ed) class, taught by
a male teacher.   A student asked if it was better to
have sex before or after marriage.   Teacher: "The
best time to have sex is after you have experienced
life a little more.   But if you do have sex use a
condom."
  Another student asked, "Shouldn't you
wait until after marriage to have sex?"
  Teacher:
"That is ok if you believe that."   Anal intercourse
was discussed at length---how to do it without get-
ting AIDS; never was it suggested to be wrong.   A
color film was shown of a young woman's
unshaved pelvic area as she gave birth.   Later a
portion of this film flashed on the screen perhaps
20 times, "AIDS is hard to get, AIDS is hard to
get, AIDS is hard to get."
  After class the teacher
showed me the soft, life-like models of male and
female sex organs used in teaching the class.   The
above mentioned teacher was from Planned
Parenthood
, a Humanist controlled organization.
Alan F. Guttmacher, former president of Planned
Parenthood Federation of America
, was a signer of
Humanist Manifesto II.   SIECUS is another
Humanist organization whose sex education films
and books are used in the Oklahoma City (and
most other) public schools.
Humanists who control SIECUS [Sex Information and Educa-
tion Council of the United States] and Planned Parenthood
(organizations that frequently provide lecturers for schools)
and a large percentage of the curriculum designers are
evolutionists.   Many are also atheists.   Why is that important?
Because an atheistic evolutionist considers man an animal that
does not possess an innate conscience and is not responsible to
God for his behavior.   He rejects moral absolutes, insisting
that each generation establish his own judgments of right and
wrong.   In fact, modern education repeatedly affirms that
"there are no rights and wrongs."   Nowhere is that false notion
more harmful than in the classroom...Teaching sex education
in mixed classes to hot-blooded teenagers without benefit of
moral values is like pouring gasoline on emotional fires.   An
explosion is inevitable....Sex education in the schools was pro-
moted to parents as a means of solving social problems.
However, the obsession with sex created by such classes has
more than doubled the problems they promised to solve---
which is typical of godless humanism's solutions to anything.
It solves nothing but instead compounds the dilemma.
   Children are born with two parents who are responsible to
teach them about sex.   The parents should never delegate that

responsibility to a stranger, particularly one who teaches in an
environment hostile to religion and moral values.
5

   Planned Parenthood and SIECUS obviously can-
not be trusted to teach sex education without doing
so from the Humanist viewpoint.   We can only
guess how much sexual activity these Planned
Parenthood
taught sex-ed classes have stimulated.
One thing for sure: one male student at Northwest
Classen High School was recently so stirred up
sexually that he couldn't even wait to get off the
school grounds to rape a female student.   By so
doing he robbed this girl of her fundamental
human right to keep her own body pure.   Of
course, the logical conclusion of Humanism is that
in some situations rape isn't sin either.   But some
of us very much disagree with such a stupid con-
clusion, and we are working to assure that Planned
Parenthood
, SIECUS, and other Humanist organi-
zations never teach another class in any U.S.A.
public school.   (If you would like to assist us in
this effort please phone or write us immediately).
   Another example of Humanist situational ethics
at work is in the field of discipline.   The Word of
God, the Bible, clearly states that spanking is a
right and necessary form of disciplining children:
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him
chasteneth him betimes"
(Prov 13.24).   Foolishness is bound
in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it
far from him
(Prov 22.15).   Withhold not correction from the
child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.
Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul
from hell
(Prov 23.13-14).   The rod and reproof give wisdom:
but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame
(Prov
29.15).

   Humanism says that God's Word is wrong con-
cerning spanking.   Spanking, Humanists say, is
child abuse.   In reality, however, it is the
Humanist methods of discipline that are child
abuse, for their methods produce children with no
self-control, and who therefore beat, murder, rob,
and rape, brutally abusing others.
   Dr. John Dewey, a signer of Humanist
Manifesto I
who established extremely influencial
schools at the University of Chicago and Columbia
University, was the major architect of the so-called
"progressive education" which has dominated pub-
lic education for decades.   Dewey developed an
educational philosophy based totally and
unashamedly on Charles Darwin's atheistic Theory
of Evolution
, therefore totally rejecting God and
God's plan of disciplining children.
It was only natural that Dewey's philosophy would be attacked
by those committed to the traditional approach in education.
Perhaps the most frequent criticism of progressive education
has been that it placed too much emphasis upon freedom and
self-expression and failed to provide the discipline necessary
for the development of mind and character.   The graduates of
progressive schools have been widely pictured as thoroughly

undisciplined and uninhibited individuals who not only do not
know how to read, spell, or do mathematics, but who also do
not know how to behave themselves.   The children of parents
who believed in Dewey's philosophy of education have been
protrayed as not only a social nuisance but a real liability
because of their tendency to destroy anything within reach.6

   The Humanist systems of discipline provide no
sane way to correct children for their sins against
others.   A thug can physically beat another child
to a pulp, smashing his face and leaving him
bloody and bruised, yet no physical punishment
whatsoever may be administered to the thug, not
even a few stinging swats on the rear.   At most he
will be expelled from school (which will probably
make him most happy), and he will then prey on
children on their way to and from school.   There-
fore good children are left without adult protection
against the violence of wicked children.   And since
the wicked children are not punished they are
encouraged to be even more wicked.   Thus our
children feel forced to join gangs for their own
protection.   Some children bring guns to school
for protection.   Our schools have turned into
places of terror and tyranny.   All true freedom is
crushed.   The Humanist way is a stupid and insane
path of rebellion against God.
   That spanking works is easily seen by going
back in history to the time when spanking was the
principle method of disciple.   Rape and murder
were virtually unheard of in the schools of that
time.   About the worse crimes committed were
dipping girls pig-tails in the ink wells, or throwing
spit-wads.   God's method is a historicly proven
method.   God's method works.
   Humanists believe that children belong to the
state, not to the parents.   It is for this reason that
the school hours get longer and longer, and even
summer vacations are planned to be eliminated so
that parents will have no time whatsoever with
their children during which they can teach their
children their own values.   Do you realize that the
Oklahoma School of Science and Mathematics,
which is located close to the capital building, and
which was founded in 1990 for gifted students,
requires that they live on campus?   When I asked
if my children could live at home since we live so
close, the admissions office of this school said that
even if we lived across the street from the school
our children would still have to live in the school's
dormitory.   This policy directly attacks the family.
It is an attempt to prevent parents from instilling
their values---specifically, belief in God and in the
Bible---into their own children.   This is why all
schools must be locally controlled.   You should
phone your state representative and senator
immediately to demand that this school be closed.
   Humanism is not new.   As admitted in the

preface to Humanist Manifesto I and II,
"Humanism is a philosophical, religious, and
moral point of view as old as human civilization
itself."
  In fact, it originated with Satan in the Gar-
den of Eden.   God had clearly told Adam and Eve
what was not sin and what was sin:
The LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of
the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowl-
edge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day
that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
  (Gen 2.16- 18)

   God knew that man could not know the danger
of this one particular tree unless God told him.   So
God did tell him, and God never lies.   This one
tree would, and did, cause death.   To eat of this
one tree was therefore sin.   Modern man likewise
cannot know the difference between good and evil,
except he accept the morality God reveals in the
Bible.   Of course, a Humanist may even claim to
believe the Bible while actually rejecting it.   Satan
did so when he used God's Word to persuaded Eve
to accept Humanism in the Garden of Eden:
Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field
which the LORD God had made.   And he said unto the
woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of
the garden?....Ye shall not surely die...your eyes shall be
opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil
(Gen
3.1-5).

   It was a question of interpretation: What does the
term "knowledge of good and evil" mean?   The
Bible tells us that "No prophesy of the Scripture is
of any private interpretation"
(1 Pet 1.20); it is
always important to let the Bible interpret itself---
interpretation must be in accordance with the con-
text.   God had already explained in Gen 2.16-18
that "the knowledge of good and evil" was not
desirable, but rather meant something bad.   It
meant that if they ate of the fruit of the forbidden
tree they would learn the sorrow, suffering, and
agony of death.   And if God says something it is
absolute truth, whither we believe it or not.
   The allegorical method of interpreting the Bible
which underlies liberal theology is simply veiled
Humanism.   The allegorical method simply creates
a new, different meaning to replace the obviously
intended meaning.   The proper interpretation of
the term "the knowledge of good and evil", Satan
lied, is that by eating of the forbidden fruit one
would "not die" but rather become "wise" as a
god---able to decide for ones self what will be
right and what will be wrong, in spite of what God
had clearly said about the matter.   This was a false
interpretation, and when Eve and Adam ate of the
forbidden fruit they did not become wise at all, but
rather became fools---even less able to determine
right from wrong than before.
   There is only one way to know right from
wrong, and that is by studying the Bible in faith.

If God's Word says something is wrong, it is, no
matter how persuasively men may argue other-
wise.   And if God's Word says something is right,
it is, and men who argue otherwise are wrong
every time.   There are no errors in the Bible, and
in points where men say there are errors in the
Bible those men are themselves in those points in
error.   Unlike men, God makes no mistakes.
   In conclusion, even in public schools it is neces-
sary to determine right from wrong.   Therefore it
is impossible to separate religion from education.
Humanism, presently taught in public schools, is
an oppressive, pagan, atheistic religion, ruled by
Darwinian fundamentalists.   Either we adults will-
ingly accept and defend God's perfect morality, or
else an evil Humanist dictator will force upon us
his perverted morality, as is already happening to
our children in public schools.   When God was
kicked out of our classrooms, our schools became
Humanist brainwashing camps.   Therefore it is
vital that all government officials and school board
members which espouse Humanist principles be
removed, and God-fearing members elected to
replace them.   In this time of moral crisis, it is
immoral not to vote.   Have you registered to vote
yet?   If not, please do so immediately!

   Reprinting of this article permitted with inclusion of
this paragraph; please distribute it widely.   Copyright
1992 by Louis A. Turk, 1216 N. Blackwelder Avenue,
Oklahoma City, OK 73106; Phone: 405.524.7172.

   For a free home Bible study, and/or a free list of pub-
lications or information, write to International Baptist
Church in care of Louis A. Turk at the above address.

   1Humanist Manifesto I and II, Paul Kurtz, ed., (Buffalo,
New York: Prometheus Books, 1981), 16.
   2David W. Ehrenfeld, The Arrogance of Humanism
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), 3.
   3Charles E. Rice, Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law
School, as quoted by Chambers, Claire, The SIECUS
Circle: a
Humanist Revolution (Belmont, Massachusetts:
Western Islands, 1977), inside front cover.
   4Peggy Lamson, Roger Baldwin: Founder of the Civil
Liberties Union
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company,
1976), 116.
   5Tim LaHaye [neo-Baptist], "Sex Education Belongs in the Home",
Teenage Sexuality: Opposing Viewpoints, Bender, David
L., ed.; Leone, Bruno, ed.; Bernards, Neal, ed.; Hall, Lynn,
ed., Opposing viewpoints series, (St. Paul, Minnesota:
Greenhaven Press, 1988) 58-60.
   6Robert F. Davidson, Philosopies Men Live By (New
York: Dryden Press, 1953), 282.

[Chr. Helps Ministry (USA)] [Chr. Home Bible Course]