I recently discovered a fabulous blog! Cowan Chronicles by Steve Cowan. Steve is a Christian philosopher who exemplifies what it means to be a Christian intellectual without being guilty of intellectualism.
He has an article on his site entitled Religion without Absolutes? This article discusses a so-called new religion. They call themselves Universists
The Universist webpage states:
A person's perception of reason is relative. Each mind is a unique combination of the myriad forces of biological evolution, the physical laws of nature, unique personal experiences and environment. Thus, there is no uniform belief about the ultimate nature of existence. There is no set creed, no dogma, and there are no religious authorities who dictate beliefs or behavior in Universism. Each Universist explores these questions within their mind, and also through discussion and debate with others.
[I think my head just exploded.]
Consider the first sentence: A person's perception of reason is relative.
First, how does the Universist define "reason"? Second, while "perception" might be relative that does not mean that "reason" (valid logical construction) is relative. Third, if the Universist does not define "reason" as a logical premise / conclusion construction, then they should use a different word or at the least disclose how they define it. Forth, isn't this statement offering up unquestionable "Truths" for which they condemn faith-based religion ? Fifth, isn’t that statement itself a set creed, indeed a dogma?
It is interesting (actually it’s humorous) that the Universist uses two creedal / dogmatic statements to conclude that there is no set creed, no dogma for the organization. Furthermore, if the premise statements are not creedal, then there is no definite definition of what is means to be an Universist. Therefore, what in the definition of Universist would exclude a person who believes opposite its (Universism) own premises from being a Universist?
[Adsum places tongue firmly in cheek and voice drips with sarcasm…]
I think that my perception of reason tells me that that the unreasonably reasonable definition of Universism must include certainly uncertain non-creedal creedal statements offering up the questionally unquestionable truths of evangelical Christianity generally… and Calvinism, Amillenialism, and Classical Apologetics specifically.
Since my perception of reason is equally valid as Ford Vox’s perception of reason, I hereby declare that I am the new Pope of Universism. Henceforth, all Universists shall check by http://deathrowbodine.blogspot.com regularly to find out what you believe.
[Deathrow Bodine, the new Universist Pope, wanders away mumbling rationally irrational profanities and begins to wipe his own splattered brain matter from the walls. He wonders if he has enough duct tape and super glue to get his head back together again.]