I have been re-reading David Horowitz’s ‘Radical Son’ – about his experience of growing up in a Communist home and having that the entire worldview of the first part of his life. A worldview he eventually repudiated.
I hope to write more on this but let make just a few comments today.
What information are we given at creation about human nature? A lot, really. We are told that:
We are made in the image of God.
We are made male and female.
We are to be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth.
We are to have dominion over the earth, subduing it.
We are to obey God.
Post-fall, we can’t obey God.
Do you see how much content there is there? The parameters of humanness are outlined – both our nature and horizontal obligations. And our fundamental vertical purpose – to know and to obey God – which we can no longer do.
Radicals, of course, deny all or the above theses. Just quickly go down the list and verify that for yourself.
But on what basis? As Christians, of course, we know more about them than they know about themselves. We understand the deepest motivation of the human heart is sheer defiance of God.
But, still, that is usually put in some sort of rationalizing intellectual framework. What is it for the radical?
It is that human nature is almost infinitely adaptable. There are no ‘givens’. The above list does not exist. (Nor does God Himself as list-giver, of course) Society is the sole vehicle influencing and producing ‘humanness’.
So what do radicals want?
To alter imperfect society. Radically. Why? To alter imperfect human nature. Radically. And so on, in circular fashion.
To attain wonderful humans in a wonderful world.
But often blood sacrifice has to come first. The sacrifice of those who stand in the way of this historical progression.
Great imperfection. Blood sacrifice. Then ‘heaven on earth’.
As Schaeffer said, Marxism, for instance, (the particular type of radicalism he was critiquing) is just a twisted Christian knock-off.
But more about all this as I continue to read through Horowitz’s unique book.