“We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.” – 1 Corinthians 2:6,7

When President George H. W. Bush used the phrase “New World Order,” Christians around the nation cringed.  The idea of such a world order based on global governance alarms Christians, who recognize that a world government will eventually find itself under the leadership of the Antichrist.  There are, however, more reasons than Antichrist to fear the establishment of a transnational global government.

Proponents of world governance point to poverty, famine, violence, and disease in underdeveloped nations as the main reasons to establish a global order.  They envision a world in which disparity of wealth will no longer exist.  Swords will be beaten into plowshares, and the excess wealth will be spent to meet the needs of our planet’s poorest citizens.  Measures introduced to protect the environment, foster economically sustainable development, and educate the indigent will have no value without a strong arm to enforce them on a planetary scale.  These are certainly noble goals, and I would venture to say that most Christians would love to see famine, poverty, disease, and war come to an end.  The problem lies with the so-called problem solvers.

By far, the loudest and most active proponents of a global government are the liberal humanists.  Humanism is a legally recognized religion that denies the existence of God, or any supernatural being.  Humanists believe that all life evolved through a natural process, there is no soul, and there is no life after death.  Laws, morals, and ethics are therefore derived not from a spiritual or moral code, but from culture and the vast array of human experience.  Taken to a religious extreme, humanists are represented by the New Age Movement.  The New Age belief recognizes a deity, but believes that deity exists as an energy, of which all living things are a part.  New Age organization such as the Aquarian Age Community, the Lucis Trust (formerly Lucifer Trust), and the endless list of Humanist associations are among the strongest supporters of a global government, and are often aligned with the United Nations as consultative non-governmental organizations.

In 1933, dozens of the nation’s most prominent humanists collaborated on the Humanist Manifesto.  Noted humanist educator John Dewey was among the original signers of this manifesto, which is still regarded by most humanists as the authoritative bible of humanism.  In 1973, Humanist Manifesto II was released as an updated affirmation of its predecessor.  This time, hundreds of humanists signed on.  Isaac Asimov and B.F. Skinner were among the most notable signatories.  Towards the end of 1999, Paul Kurtz released the shorter Manifesto 2000, which is little more than a modernized reaffirmation of its ancestors.  A brief look at these documents reveals the dark side of humanism, and the humanist goal of dominance over religion through the use of a powerful global government. 

If you doubt the veracity of my claims; if you think I’m irrational and paranoid, consider the following excerpt from Humanist Manifesto II:  “We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government.”  Such a world order, to be truly humanist, must also be unwaveringly socialist.  This manifesto goes on to say, “It is the moral obligation of the developed nations to provide…massive technical, agricultural, medical, and economic assistance, including birth control techniques, to the developing portions of the globe….  Hence extreme disproportions in wealth, income, and economic growth should be reduced on a worldwide basis.”  Redistribution of wealth in this system would not be voluntary – it would be compulsory.  Planetary citizens would be subject to a mandatory income tax that makes the current taxation rates in the United States look like a meager request for a pittance.  This revenue would then be applied towards, among other things, “birth control techniques,” (e.g., abortion).  Under the current models of sustainable economic development, birth control planning that includes abortion-on-demand is strongly encouraged.  China’s one-child policy conforms well with this morally bankrupt system of sustainability. 

Humanists are aware that there will be stubborn resistance to this plan – especially from those who hold strong to “obsolete” religious ideas.  The Judeo-Christian ethic is a threat to their New World Order, as our morals are based upon the Word of God.  Humanist Manifesto II recognized and addresses this threat: “Some humanists believe we should reinterpret traditional religions and reinvest them with meanings appropriate to the current situation…. We need, instead, radically new human purposes and goals.”  “Alienating forces should be modified or eradicated…. People are more important than decalogues, rules, proscriptions, or regulations.”  “We urge that parochial loyalties and inflexible moral and religious ideologies be transcended.”

The humanist ideal of a utopian world in which violence, chaos, famine and disease are eradicated is based upon a supremely false premise – the nature of man.  Humanists believe that mankind’s nature is inherently good, and therefore places a lot of trust therein.  The Bible tells us that the nature of man is inherently sinful, deceitful, and untrustworthy.  Humanist Manifesto II came close to acknowledging this problem, then quickly ignored it, “It is forty years since Humanist Manifesto I (1933) appeared. Events since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic. Nazism has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable… Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good.”  A global government, even one of a parliamentary nature, which supercedes national sovereignty, will still require the leadership of an individual.  History has shown us that not only does power corrupt, but mankind’s sinful nature is never more evident than when coupled with power.  Stalin and Hitler are but two examples of this concept. 

A global government will do little, if anything, to cure the ills of this world.  Such an order would be lead by the very people who believe that humans are accountable only to themselves.  Governments and laws built upon the wisdom of man will never succeed.  The evil in this world would be given free rein, and adherents to “inflexible moral and religious ideologies” will need to be “modified or eradicated.”  The appearance of the Antichrist would be the fitting and inevitable culmination of the New World Order. =