The Great Philosophical Question

I hear stories all the time from friends who have taken at least one philosophy class in college. After months of studying different philosophies and different religions, the exam comes around. Of course, everyone stays up ridiculously late studying, and then the day comes and they go into class to take the test. In their heads they are going over the material again and again, knowing that this will be a written exam. The teacher enters the room, goes straight to the board, and writes...

Why?

The teacher then sits down, opens a book, and starts to read.

Panic sets in, the students look around helplessly at one another. They wonder if this is some kind of joke. But its' not. The teacher continues to read, and the students begin to write everything they know about everything they've studied, all except for one. This student looks thoughtfully at the board for a few moments, writes a few words down on paper, then turns his test in, leaving. The professor continues to read.
The students all look at the door as closes with an ominous thud. "Well, guess he really didn't care," they think. They go back to writing.

Grades come in a month later. The majority of the students get D's of C's on their exam, all except for one, he received an A. Not to hard to guess which student that one was.

That student's answer was...

Why not?

Was this a sarcastic ansewer that the professor found amusing? No
This is the actual answer to a philosophy teacher's question. Why not? Seems simple enough, right?
In the mind of a philosophy professor, this answer is packed with so much infrormation that hundreds of books have been written about them and the things they relate too, modern music relates to them, all of humanity seems to be caught up in the "why not" without even knowing it. And I say it is perhaps the greatest danger to society today.

"Philosophy, being nothing but the study of wisdom and TRUTH..."
—George Berkeley, A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, Introduction, §1, emphasis added

Truth. What is truth? Philosopher's have been asking this question for centuries, and they've finally come up with their answer in the past few decades.
Their answer: there is no truth.
Well, that sucks for humanity I guess, at least if they are right. Before I continue though, I would like to make a quick point. Saying that there is no truth, that is a truth in itself. And considering there is no truth, at least in the philosopher's mind, that's seems sketchy. And if what they say is true, which it can't be because "truth" doesn't exist to them, then humanity has a huge problem, one that we can not fix.

This new philosophical theory is known as Post-modernism, and related to post-modernism is Existentialism, Pluralism, Nihilism, Reletivism and any other of the -ism's for the most part. While all of them have their differences, they all have one thing in common, no single supreme being, no God. And all of this packed into two little words.
I won't bore you with the details of each of these -ism's, but I would like to mention a few things about them.
1. Post-modernism- of, relating to, or being a theory that involves a radical reappraisal of modern assumptions about culture, identity, history, or language. In other words, a complete overhaul of society needs to be done, religion must be executed, and Christianity might be the only thing that stands in its' path. Problem: post-modernism claims that there is very little wrong in the world. Take a look around and tell me if that is true, because it isn't. Post-modernism also says there is no truth, which means there is no God, which means man is God. And if man is God, then we in deep trouble. Does that mean all decisions that man makes is bad? Of course not. But many are, and those are more easily noticed than the good ones.
2. Existentialism- a chiefly 20th century philosophical movement embracing diverse doctrines but centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual who must assume ultimate responsibility for acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad. In other words, we must take the consequences of our actions, and if their is an eternity, we are judged by those actions. Problem: if we are to be judged by our actions, then we should all burn in hell.
3. Pluralism- the theory that all paths lead to where they say they end. In other words, the Christian gets to Heaven, the Muslim gets to paradise, etc, the only rule is, however, that you cannot say your beleif is better than mine. The problem with this theory is that why would the "gods" of so many religions all agree to let everyone reach the endpoint of where that religion aims? And if the "gods" of these religions are all powerful, as many of them claim to be, then why would they allow a powerless being who would be beneath them be a "god"? Doesn't make sense.

Of course, many of these philosophies do carry truth in them, whether they say they do or not. One examlpe being pluralism. This philosophy mentions that Christianity is a truth. I beleive that it is "The Truth", but hey, at least a pluralist has a grain of truth in what they beleive.

So, what are some of the ending possibilities of these philosphies? What are the consequences? All actions and beleifs have consequences, even an existentialist would agree with that. We are even seeing some of the consequences now: the decay of morals in society, the loss of some religous freedoms worldwide, an increasing number of wars, the church taking less of a stand in the world, etc. If man is God, as the post-modernist says, we are doing a pretty crappy job, and here's why: We let our actions be affected by the actions of others around us. In other words, we let outside forces control what we do, and that's not the definition of the word god, in any culture. Thankfully for us, there is a God who doesn't let our actions affect his decisions.

All of this from two simple words that have become so dangerous to the world: Why not? And all of this I have written only scratches the surface.

In my opinion these two questions, the one the professor asked and the one the student ansewered with, should be reversed. Why? That seems like a better question to ask humanity. Why are we here? Why is the world the way it is? Why? Why? Why?

Why did a man have to die on cross? Why? Because we are not God. We couldn't get ourselves out of the pit we were born into, and God did something to start fixing it. Why? Because He is all-powerful and because He WANTED to, not because He had too, our descions don't affect HIs.

Why not?....................

Why?..............

Which of those questions are you willing to serve? Its' a choice we must all make. Underneath those two questions are the depths of depravity and the great heights of God's love. Which will you serve?

I await replies.

In Christ,
Hackett