Summary
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is based on an atheistic value system exemplified during the French Revolution. It does not guarantee inalienable rights based in a Biblical worldview and referred to in the United States Declaration of Independence. The rights supposedly guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights can be revoked if governing authorities deem their free exercise to be in opposition to the values and principles of the United Nations.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948. Its thirty articles propose to guarantee human rights on a universal basis, and it has been used as the foundation for more than seventy subsequent human rights treaties, all of which contain references to it in their preambles.1
The UDHR covers a wide range of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. There is much in it that Bible-believing Christians can readily agree with. However, the three provisions outlined in Article 29 containing concerning language in regards to the actual application of the rights presumably protected in the UDHR.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 29.1 “Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.”
Article 29.2 “In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.”
Article 29.3 “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”2
Article 29.1 states that the “free and full development of [someone’s] personality” is possible only within the “community.” This anthrocentric view of human development is directly contrary to the Holy Bible’s explanation of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as the source of human development and potential:
“Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:4).
As a universal human rights document written to appeal to all races, cultures, and religions, the UDHR necessarily rejects foundational Biblical doctrines such as God’s creation of mankind in His image (Genesis 1:26, 27) and the restoration of that image within humanity (2 Corinthians 5:17; Revelation 14:1; 22:4) as the goal of the plan of savlation. It also rejects the personal and theocentric aspect of God’s love for humanity (Matthew 18:12, 13) in favor of a communal and anthrocentric model.
Article 29.2 places the actual freedom to exercise every right mentioned in the UDHR within the confines of “law” that is deemed as “meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.” Again, the focus on the “general welfare” of the community predominates over claims of individual liberties if and when those claims be contrary to what is deemed best for the larger society. While Christians will strive to live in “peace with all men” (Hebrews 12:14) and to obey the civil government (Romans 13:1-4), their hightest duty remains to God as their Creator and Savior. When conflict arises between the claims of God’s law and the claims of human law, Christians are called to choose allegiance to their Creator and reply as Peter and the apostles did when placed in a similar situation:
“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29)
Article 29.3 states, “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” This article elevates the United Nations and its various conventions, documents, and treaties, to a position of hightest authority on an individual and society-wide basis. In short, the rights guaranteed in the previous twenty-eight articles can be overidden, revoked, or ignored if they are deemed to be contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. This effectively strips both human and religious rights away from anyone whose conscience leads them to disagree with agendas or provisions set forth by the United Nations.
Far from being a universal guarantor of personal human and religious rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights actually limits those rights to those who accept the principles and purposes of the United Nations, and strips those rights from all others.
The UDHR and GC Religious Liberty Statements
Numerous official statements released by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists dealing with religious liberty topics invoke or make direct reference to the United Nations, the UDHR, and related conventions. The section below deals with several of these statements and demonstrates the potential consequences of their connection to UN statements and instruments.
"Tolerance" (1995)
“Seventh-day Adventists support the United Nations proclamation of 1995 as the Year of Tolerance. This proclamation comes at an opportune time when intolerance is abounding on all continents–bigoted religious extremism, racism, tribalism, ethnic cleansing, linguistic enmity, and other forms of terrorism and violence. Christians carry their share of the blame for prejudice and inhumanity toward humans.”3
This statement aligned the church with the United Nations proclamation of 1995 as the “Year of Tolerance,” and indicated that the church is prepared to follow the terms of the UN declarations made in relation to the “Year of Tolerance.” Some of these declarations present considerable potential challenges for the free exercise of religious liberty.
For example, the “Declaration of Principles on Tolerance”4 (1995) cited numerous earlier UN documents, statements, and conventions upon which it was based. One of these, the “Declaration on Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief,” included the following statement that prohibits the use of religion or belief for ends inconsistent with the goals and principles of the United Nations.
“Considering that it is essential to promote understanding, tolerance and respect in matters relating to freedom of religion or belief and to ensure that the use of religion or belief for ends inconsistent with the Charter, other relevant instruments of the United Nations and the purposes and principles of the present Declaration is inadmissible…”5
This same document also included the following statement (Article 1.3) that places the free exercise of religion and belief within the confines of any law that is deemed to be in the interest of the common good.
“Freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”6
Summary
The “Declaration on Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief” limits the free exercise of religion and belief to those thoughts and actions that comply with the purposes and principles of the UN charter. Furthermore, it limits the manifestation (actions) of belief and religion to the requirements of whatever laws may be deemed to be necessary to protect the common good. By endorsing the 1995 “Year of Tolerance,” the GC has committed the church and its members to comply with the terms of this document and the other documents connected with the Year of Tolerance.
"Religious Freedom" (1995)
This statement, also released in 1995, links the church’s concept and protection of religious liberty to the United Nations.
“For more than a century Seventh-day Adventists have been active promoters of religious freedom. We recognize the need to champion freedom of conscience and religion as a fundamental human right, in harmony with the instruments of the United Nations.”7
Summary
This statement ties the church’s understanding and exercise of religious liberty to the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other related documents. As discussed above, the UDHR limits the protection of human rights to those who exercise them in harmony with the principles of the United Nations, and strips those rights from all others. By linking its understanding and practice of religious liberty to the United Nations, the church has bound itself to comply with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
"50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights" (1998)
This statement, released in 1998, commemorates the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The statement includes the following sentiments regarding the UDHR:
“The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written and adopted by individuals who had emerged from the unprecedented destruction, disorientation and distress of World War II. This harrowing experience gave them a vision of and desire for a future world of peace and freedom. Coming from the best and highest part of the human heart, the Universal Declaration is a fundamental document standing firmly for human dignity, liberty, equality, and non-discrimination of minorities.”8
This paragraph contains a strange and surprising statement for a Bible-believing church to make in regards to the human heart. The Bible states in Jeremiah 17:9, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Describing the UDHR as “coming from the best and highest part of the human heart” is perhaps unintentionally truthful. Because the UDHR actually strips human rights away from anyone who does not exercise them in harmony and compliance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, it is a deceitful document, and therefore is a fitting product of the sinful human heart.
“The Seventh-day Adventist Church urges the United Nations, government authorities, religious leaders and believers, and non-government organizations to consistently work for the implementation of this Declaration. …In this way, the Universal Declaration will grow in practical importance and luster, and never risk becoming an irrelevant document.”9
Summary
This statement ties the church’s understanding and exercise of religious liberty to the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other related documents. As discussed above, the UDHR limits the protection of human rights to those who exercise them in harmony with the principles of the United Nations, and strips those rights from all others. By linking its understanding and practice of religious liberty to the United Nations, the church has bound itself to comply with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
"Religious Minorities and Religious Freedom" (1999)
This statement links the church’s definition and practice of religious liberty to the United Nations and the International Bill of Human Rights.
“Throughout history religious minorities have often been subject to discrimination and outright persecution. Today religious intolerance and prejudice are again on the rise. Notwithstanding the affirmation of the freedom of everyone to hold and disseminate religious views and to change one’s religion–an affirmation sustained in the United Nations instruments and documents comprising an “International Bill of Rights”–many countries deny this right to their citizens.”10
“In support of Article 18 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international instruments, …we will continue to cooperate with the United Nations Human Rights Commission and other international agencies and religious organizations to encourage every nation to implement the fundamental right of religious freedom.”11
The International Bill of Human Rights was created in 1966 and comprises three documents–the UDHR, the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).12
Summary
This
"Religious Liberty, Evangelism, and Proselytism" (2000)
While this statement does not explicitly mention the United Nations or the UDHR, it contains language that echoes the principles of tolerance, equality, and non-offensive language found throughout United Nations documents.
“Evangelistic and missionary activity needs to respect the dignity of all human beings. Individuals need to be truthful and transparent when dealing with other religious groups. Terminology should be used which avoids offending other religious communities. Statements which are false or ridicule other religions should not be made.”13
Bible-believing Christians can find much to agree with in this paragraph, and they will naturaly wish to avoid offending other people. However, Christians are at the same time directed by Jesus Christ to share the truth of the gospel with the world.
“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19, 20).
The decision to be offended or not to be offended ultimately resides with the person receiving the communication, not the person that is speaking. Therefore, obligating individuals or an entire church to not use offensive language is virtually paramount to prohibiting the sharing of truth.
On one occassion, after Jesus had shared some difficult-to-hear truths, many people became offended. A short time later, He talked with the disciples about their response to His message.
“Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard [this], said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?” (John 6:60, 61).
How did Jesus respond when many disciples became offended at His words? Did He modify or soften His presentation of truth? No! Instead, Jesus drove His point home by saying,
“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (John 6:63).
Summary
By linking the church’s religious liberty, evangelism, and proselytism to United Nations standards that include the suppression of any potentially offensive speech, the GC has effectively agreed that its Biblical mandate to share the everlasting gospel and the Three Angels’ Messages can legitimately be silenced by any person or state that deems it to be offensive.
"Freedom of Speech and Defamation of Religion" (2010)
This statement, like many before it, links the church’s definition of religiously liberty and freedom of speech to the United Nations.
“The Seventh-day Adventist Church strongly supports freedom of speech in general, and freedom of religious speech in particular. Although freedom of speech is guaranteed in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, efforts continue to limit speech at both the national level and at the United Nations.”14
By adopting the definitions of freedom of speech found in Article 19 of the UDHR, the GC has also implicitly accepted the provision of Article 20, which state that the actual exercise of the rights contained in the UDHR can only be done for actions and speech that conforms to the aims and principles of the United Nations charter. Since the everlasting gospel and the Three Angels’ Messages naturally fall outside the scope these aims and principles, the GC has acknowledged the right of governments around the world to remove the protection of freedom of speech from Seventh-day Adventists that share the these Biblical messages.
Rather than seek to protect its members from such government infringement on free speech, however, the statement goes on to confirm and validate the right of the state to restrict free speech.
…Our opposition to the restriction of speech is not without exceptions. The Church recognizes that in limited circumstances, speech can result in significant, tangible harm to the right to physical safety, the enjoyment of one’s property and other similarly compelling rights. In such very limited instances, we recognize the responsibility of the state to act to protect its population. When such limits are necessary, the Church expects governments to target restrictions narrowly to address only the dangerous speech in question.”15
What would the “similarly compelling rights” include? The definition is inprecise, open-ended, and up to the state to determine. Based on the 2000 statement “Religious Freedom, Evangelism, and Proselytism” discussed above, those “similarly compelling rights” could also include the right to silence language and speech that is deemed offensive–that is, Bible truth.
Summary
In this statement, the GC confirms the right of civil governments to restrict the free speech of church members sharing the everlasting gospel and the Three Angels’ Message if the state determines that their speech is offensive or dangerous to the common good of society, or otherwise falls outside the aims and principles of the United Nations charter. Rather than protect free speech, this statement acknowledges the right of the state to silence speech that it does not like.
The GC’s numberous official statements on religious liberty and freedom of speech fail to protect the church and its members in their Great Commission mandate to share the Everlasting Gospel and the Three Angels’ Message with the world. Instead, these statements link the church’s definition of religious liberty and freedom of speech to the United Nations and the UDHR, and acknowledge the right of the state to limit the free speech of church members if their speech is deemed offensive, dangerous, or otherwise out of harmony with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Footnotes
- https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
- https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/217(III)
A PDF of the UDHR is available at https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights - https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/tolerance/
- UNESCO Declaration of Principles on Tolerance: https://www.ohchr.org/en/resources/educators/human-rights-education-training/13-declaration-principles-tolerance-1995
- “Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief” https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/declaration-elimination-all-forms-intolerance-and-discrimination
- See footnote 5.
- https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/religious-freedom/
- https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/50th-anniversary-of-the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/
- See footnote 8.
- https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/religious-minorities-and-religious-freedom/
- See footnote 10.
- https://www.ohchr.org/en/what-are-human-rights/international-bill-human-rights
- https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/religious-liberty-evangelism-and-proselytism/
- https://gc.adventist.org/official-statements/freedom-of-speech-and-defamation-of-religion/
- See footnote 14.
Related Documents & Links
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Webpage link.
Official Statement: "Tolerance" (1995)
Link to webpage.
Declaration of Principles on Tolerance (1995)
Link to webpage.
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief
Link to webpage.
Official Statement: "Religious Freedom" (1995)
Link to webpage.
Official Statement: "50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights" (1998)
Link to webpage.
Official Statement: "Religious Minorities and Religious Freedom" (1999)
Link to webpage.
International Bill of Human Rights
Link to webpage.
Official Statement: "Religious Liberty, Evangelism, and Proselytism" (2000)
Link to webpage.
Official Statement: "Freedom of Speech and Defamation of Religion" (2010)
Link to webpage.
