LIBERAL THEISM, WITH ROMANTICIST LEANINGS

Liberal Theism, with Romanticist Leaning

Liberal Theism, with Romanticist Leaning

Theologically derived symbolism and imagery does not lend itself to simple definition or easy explantion, as our foregoing discussion has already illustrated. If a philosophically literate friend asks with their friends whether they believe in God or not, people will have little problem in answering candidly that they do not. (We can leave aside for the present whether they are an atheist or an agnostic, or possibly some other variant of disbeliever.) In the context of our discussion, it is clear enough, in general terms, what philosopher friend is interested in knowing about my belief system when he inquires about my God belief

Humanists in the tradition and organizational orbit of the Humanist Manifesto of 1933, and of its 1973 sequal, Humanist Manifesto II, include both those who define themselves as"religious Humanists" and those who are nonreligious. But it is a mistake to suppose, as the religious press often presumes, that this difference among Humanists hinges upon an argument about theism - about belief in the existence of God defined as a supernatural personal power who created and sustains the Universe. As the editor the the American Humanist Association's newsletter observed after surveying members on their beliefs: "There are no theists out there." Her observation includes those who describe themselves as religious Humanists as well as those who take a strictly secularist (nonreligious) position.

Humanists in our venue then, including religious Humanists, are not at ease with God-speak. The few who do, at least occasionally, resort to "God language" employ it for restricted application and only after explicitly qualifying their terms. Once it is understood that the common ground of nonbelief in the God of theism is shared by all Humanists of the naturalistic stamp, we recognize that we confront a common situation: We are dissenters in a culture devoutly - often aggressively -committed to God-speak. No Humanist could have endured the candidates' debates of the 1988 presidential campaign without facing the ubiquitous assumption that all right-thinking, flag-loving Americans are prepared to snap to attention to declare fealty to "one nation under God." A Humanist cannot enter a courtroom as a witness without being confronted with an oath administered with the obligatory expostulation, "So help me God." The alternative affirmation is often awkward and sometimes costly to secure; even a quarter century after the Torcaso versus ...