They Never Forgive and They Never Forget
Rousas John Rushdoony from a 1973 lecture
called "The Sabbath" from his series on The
Doctrine of Salvation.
------------------------begin here--------------------
"When man denies God, however, he denies the
transcendental, supernatural power of God, but
he doesn't deny an ultimate power in the universe.
Every philosophy has a concept of ultimate power.
So, when he denies the ultimate power is in God
because he says, 'There is no God,' he must then
locate power somewhere in the world. When he
says it is Man, it ultimately devolves on the
collective Man and of the State and increasingly
on the instruments of man - the Machine. It is
very interesting on how man who made the
machine now sees it as a threat to himself. There
was a prophetic novel written on that subject
about 175/80 years ago entitled Frankenstein.
And the author saw the threat of the Machine.
Man without God making his own creation -
the Machine - and the Machine proving to be
greater than man. Why this threat? Some of
the top men in cybernetics have actually said
that machines - computerized machines - may
take over civilization and govern Man in the
future and make Man their slaves. This is not
only stated by science fiction writers, but by
professors at Harvard and elsewhere. It's
ridiculous, but they seriously believe this. Why?
When God made His creation, He gave it a
sabbath, a rest. Man needs that rest. When
Man made his creation, the Machine, his creation
needs no rest. It can work around the clock. It
is a continuous power. It works automatically.
And, it begins to terrify Man. It is continual
power. And, Man feels that somehow it is a
threat to him. It is power that somehow is greater
than himself because he no longer sees himself
as in the image of God. As God's lord over the earth.
A very interesting statement not too long ago
in a major publication commented on the world
of machines and Man's fear of machines and
computers and especially of these computerized
data banks. And the writer, Arthur R. Miller
comments, 'Some people feel emasculated
when private information about them is
disclosed or exchanged even though the data
are accurate and they do not suffer any career
or social damage, correctly or incorrectly.
They think in terms of having been embarrassed
or demeaned by having been denuded of
something that hitherto was theirs alone.
This concern for the record will be reinforced
by the popular conception of the computer
as the unforgetting and unforgiving watchdog
of society's information managers. As one
observer has remarked, "The possibility of a
fresh start is becoming increasingly difficult.
The Christian concept of redemption is
incomprehensible to the computer."'
Very interesting point is it not? If man has no
God, there is no forgiveness of sins from God
for him. And if he has created the Machine
and is fearful of the Machine and now the
Machine becomes a data bank which stores
all his sins, every fact about him, where is
the forgiveness of sin?
In some cases known to me, some veterans
have found that everything that they ever
did while in the Armed Forces is now part
of the record. That every time they went
to the doctor for any kind of shot, any kind
of ailment, and some things they never
wanted to be any part of any record are now
part of a government data bank. And there
is no forgiveness of sins with a data bank.
And for the humanist, this is a terrifying
thing. And this is why it is the humanists
are so afraid themselves of the data banks
they are creating. Because they want to
wipe out their past so often and cannot do it.
Having no God above to give them forgiveness
of sins, they want to destroy the past and it
accumulates there constantly, unceasingly,
every time there is any written record.
You recall in Huxley's Brave New World
he had his Predestinators. Much worse
now for people the predestinators are
computers. The sabbath is gone for the
humanist and he cannot find rest, despite
leisure - more leisure time than ever
before. But because salvation and rest
and work are inseparable intertwined,
when one goes, the other[s] go. "
called "The Sabbath" from his series on The
Doctrine of Salvation.
------------------------begin here--------------------
"When man denies God, however, he denies the
transcendental, supernatural power of God, but
he doesn't deny an ultimate power in the universe.
Every philosophy has a concept of ultimate power.
So, when he denies the ultimate power is in God
because he says, 'There is no God,' he must then
locate power somewhere in the world. When he
says it is Man, it ultimately devolves on the
collective Man and of the State and increasingly
on the instruments of man - the Machine. It is
very interesting on how man who made the
machine now sees it as a threat to himself. There
was a prophetic novel written on that subject
about 175/80 years ago entitled Frankenstein.
And the author saw the threat of the Machine.
Man without God making his own creation -
the Machine - and the Machine proving to be
greater than man. Why this threat? Some of
the top men in cybernetics have actually said
that machines - computerized machines - may
take over civilization and govern Man in the
future and make Man their slaves. This is not
only stated by science fiction writers, but by
professors at Harvard and elsewhere. It's
ridiculous, but they seriously believe this. Why?
When God made His creation, He gave it a
sabbath, a rest. Man needs that rest. When
Man made his creation, the Machine, his creation
needs no rest. It can work around the clock. It
is a continuous power. It works automatically.
And, it begins to terrify Man. It is continual
power. And, Man feels that somehow it is a
threat to him. It is power that somehow is greater
than himself because he no longer sees himself
as in the image of God. As God's lord over the earth.
A very interesting statement not too long ago
in a major publication commented on the world
of machines and Man's fear of machines and
computers and especially of these computerized
data banks. And the writer, Arthur R. Miller
comments, 'Some people feel emasculated
when private information about them is
disclosed or exchanged even though the data
are accurate and they do not suffer any career
or social damage, correctly or incorrectly.
They think in terms of having been embarrassed
or demeaned by having been denuded of
something that hitherto was theirs alone.
This concern for the record will be reinforced
by the popular conception of the computer
as the unforgetting and unforgiving watchdog
of society's information managers. As one
observer has remarked, "The possibility of a
fresh start is becoming increasingly difficult.
The Christian concept of redemption is
incomprehensible to the computer."'
Very interesting point is it not? If man has no
God, there is no forgiveness of sins from God
for him. And if he has created the Machine
and is fearful of the Machine and now the
Machine becomes a data bank which stores
all his sins, every fact about him, where is
the forgiveness of sin?
In some cases known to me, some veterans
have found that everything that they ever
did while in the Armed Forces is now part
of the record. That every time they went
to the doctor for any kind of shot, any kind
of ailment, and some things they never
wanted to be any part of any record are now
part of a government data bank. And there
is no forgiveness of sins with a data bank.
And for the humanist, this is a terrifying
thing. And this is why it is the humanists
are so afraid themselves of the data banks
they are creating. Because they want to
wipe out their past so often and cannot do it.
Having no God above to give them forgiveness
of sins, they want to destroy the past and it
accumulates there constantly, unceasingly,
every time there is any written record.
You recall in Huxley's Brave New World
he had his Predestinators. Much worse
now for people the predestinators are
computers. The sabbath is gone for the
humanist and he cannot find rest, despite
leisure - more leisure time than ever
before. But because salvation and rest
and work are inseparable intertwined,
when one goes, the other[s] go. "
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home