This post may be shortened because it's cold out in the garage...
Anyway, I was reading the Chicago Tribune today and came upon an article about a newly created religion (only a couple years old) called Universism. I have done no more research on it than reading the article, but from what I gathered from that, it is a religion based on doubt. It assumes nothing. Its one belief is that we know nothing. Nothing is certain. Yes, I know I have been raised in a strong, traditional Christian family and though I try to learn about other religions, I know very little about them. True for my knowledge of Christianity, too. But, that aside, I had some questions and concerns about this new "religion." I understand the human need for doubt. I too have doubted my beliefs, though never the existance of "a god" of some sort. Doubt is healthy and leads to more learning and understanding about one's beliefs and faith. But, is a religion based on doubt really a religion? At least in my head, a religion has to have some belief, something to stand on. Isn't religion created so that we don't have to doubt? Isn't it there to give us an answer to all of our questions about why we are here and how we got here and what we are to do here? I bet there are many people who are with me in saying that we know next to nothing about our own religions, but we do know that we have religion and have a god(s) of some sort. To believe in nothing and that we know nothing is to lack faith, therefore to lack a religion of any sort.
As stated before, I still know very little about this (rather large) group of people. I am interested in learning more, just because the concept is intriguing and mind boggling and so very backwards to me... Maybe I just don't get it because while I have doubted Christianity, I have never doubted God's existance and role as the creator of this world...
18.11.05
Inscription à :
Publier les commentaires (Atom)
5 commentaires:
Greetings.
My name is Bill Baker. I am a member of the Universist Movement.
Regarding calling the movement a "religion"; religion simply means a way of life or thinking or belief. Religion is distict from "faith" and Visa versa, though they can and often do overlap. But many people mistake the two for beeing one and the same thing.
So, Universists also often call our movement a "religious philosophy" because philosophising is done religiously by us. We don't just decide that we are atheist,gnostic,deist,etc, and then stop thinking much about it, we love to constsntly think about it, philosophize, and it is also a "religion" in the sense of "community fellowship", and "community fellowship" based around metaphysical or spiritual philosophizing concepts-but done in accordance w/science and evidences.
You mention that you have doubted Christianity, but never have doubted Gods existence not role as Creator; many Universists would share that opinionw /you.
Deists for example.
Universism aims to unite faithless freethinkers whom don't hold to a collectively held "truth" but rather mix philosophies or hold to a particular philosophy-but do so w/out 100% certainty{in ither words, there is no fear of questioning ones own beleifs and in changing them in accordance w/evidences; wehere as in faith based religions there is fear of such and archaic faiths are adhered to and apologized for ad absurdum}. So it unites these people whom have their personal,subjective,relativistic beleifs about the ultimate nature of things/divinity/deity/spirituality/great questions that have beset humanity for ages.
Universism aims to unite Atheists{don't believe in god/spirituality/design/etc}, Agnostics{there may or may not be a god/spirituality/design/etc, the evidence does'nt prove or disprove and I choose to be unsure},Deists{there is a Creator, and I can give evidence for this absed on reason and on natural laws/evidence/Reason},Pantheists{the universe and "god" are one and the same thing; some may hold that there is a intelligence to it-others are just semi-spiritual atheists}, and Trancendentalists{god is an imminent force of this reality and a ultimate reality outside of this reality; or something along these lines anyhow}, PanenDeists, and other secular humanistic faithless freethought philosophies and their thinkers.
The last line of your artcile mentioning that at times you have doubted the christian faith but never the existence of a Creator/Designer would indicate that you are more reason-based than faith-based and like to contemplate evidences. it also indicates that you may like to look into the philosophy of Deism.
www.deism.org , www.deism.com , www.deistnet.com Deism is the philosophy that alot of the U.S.'s founding fathers beleived in, most founding fathers were Deists or agnostics, or liberal christians/universalists{few were fundamentalist/orthodox christians}-which is why they advocated so strongly for the church/state seperation thing.
Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Madison, amongst others were Deistic.
I myself am Universist. and my personal views bounced back and forth or mix together ideas from Pantheism,Deism,Panendeism, and Agnosticism.
Th egreat thing about this religious movement is the freedom of thought, to be able to be so diverse in ones views.
Anyways, I encourage you to check out the FAQ [age at the Universist site { www.universist.org } and it's siter site "The faithless community" to get a better understanding of this religious philosophy/philosophical movement of Universism.
Thanks for taking an interest in the article on the movement.
I encourage you to keep thinking and contemplating,researching and exploring.
Good luck on your journey.
also, feel free to visit my personl blogs:
"The Iconoclast Project" http://project-iconoclast.blogspot.com/
"Day of Reason" http://day-of-reason.blogspot.com/
"Raving Madman" http://raving-madman.blogspot.com/
Peace.
In Reason:
Bill Baker
"There is no greater weapon against errors of any kind than reason, I have never used any other and I trust I never shall"-Thomas Paine.
"It's not WHAT you believe, it's HOW you believe it"-Universist Movement.
www.universist.org www.faithless.org
jane,
i've only skimmed what you wrote on universists, but i read mr baker's comment, and it simply makes me ... sad... very very sad, that so many people who are lost and have no thrue faith or knowledge of God and His love and grace, now have universism to give them a reiglion and fellowship that is but a pale immitation of/ subbstitute for the true faith/religion and fellowship that is to be found in Christianity and dedicating one's life to the one true God.
they are in my prayers, and my prayer for them is this: that their "metaphysical or spiritual philosophizing concepts-but done in accordance w/science and evidences" brings them to the Truth so that they may come to know faith in God (the One True God...not simply the 'god' of the deists).
and while I don't know enough about universists to comment on much of what mr. baker said (infact i had never heard of them until i read your blog today) i can tell you that his comment "Deism is the philosophy that alot of the U.S.'s founding fathers beleived in, most founding fathers were Deists or agnostics, or liberal christians/universalists{few were fundamentalist/orthodox christians}-which is why they advocated so strongly for the church/state seperation thing." while correct in the understandng of the founders as diests and not the conservitave christians they are sometimes described as, the fact that they were diests had very little to do with their desire for seperation of church and state.
Actually, the wording "separation of church and state" isn't found in the Constitution--the closest it gets is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The wording comes from a statement Jefferson (who was not one of the drafters of the Constitution, as he was in France at the time) wrote to the Danbury Baptists, trying to dispel their fears that the new government would prevent them from practicing their religion in any way. The idea was to keep the government from interfering with religion, not necessarily the other way around. That said, I don't agree with the way the Religious Right goes around expecting everyone to conform to their standards of morality--if you're not a Christian, you can't be expected to act like one, and we are not to be the moral police. Jesus' harshest words were for the religious people; he never turned away even the worst of "sinners."
Interestingly, I have personally doubted the whole shabang, God's existence, Christianity, everything. I'm a little scared of people who never have doubted in a somewhat profound way--it seems to indicate to me a lack of critical awareness. But we doubt so we search for answers, and after much searching come to a more thorough knowledge of what we believe and why.
Hey Dawn;
Good stuff.
As far as Jefferson, he was one of many founding fathers who was not an orthodox Christian. Jefferson was a Deist, as was Paine, and a few others. Still others were Unitarians, and those that were Christians were liberal/moderate Christians for the most part, few of them were orthodox, and even the few orthodox ones were with the "infidels" in keeping church/state seperate.
It was both to keep Church out of the state affairs AND visa versa.
I'm with what you say in the rets of your post, and the founding fathers of the U.S. would be too. They'd be disgusted w/the way the current U.S. gov't is run, not JUST in terms of favoring particular forms of faith and in including 'God" in national presidential addressments and national documents or on money,etc{pretty much all of which was added during the 40's out of the U.S. paraonoia of what they percieved as a godless/athiest Communist Russia}; but also because of the imperialism and excess greed and illegal wars and propping up of despots to serve U.S. elites agendas,etc.
The first few presidents and most of founding fathers would roll over in their graves.
Anyways, good post Dawn, keep up the critical thought.
In Reason:
The very irreverand Bill Baker
Enregistrer un commentaire