Postmodernism is a “blanket” term which takes into account several variations, or expressions, of relativism. Slick broadly divides relativism into three categories: cognitive, moral, and situational,[122] whereas Paul Copan divides relativism into seven categories: epistemological, religious, moral, cultural, historical, scientific, and aesthetic.[123] The following descriptions provide a combined list of these categories of relativism.
Epistemological Relativism
This is the category that Slick refers to as cognitive relativism. Epistemological relativism affirms that all truth is relative; there are no absolutes. In this version of relativism, no system of truth is more valid than another system, as the belief that everyone is correct, and no one is wrong, reigns supreme. Epistemological relativism maintains that particular views are acceptable and even “true” for some people or groups, but not necessarily acceptable and “true” for everyone. Epistemological relativism “challenges the very existence of truth.”[124]
Religious Relativism
Religious relativists are adamant that all religions lead to God. No one religion or belief system is universally, or exclusively, true. Most religious relativists – also commonly referred to as religious pluralists – maintain that one’s religion is determined primarily by the situation that a person is born into. The person born in India will likely be a Hindu, or possibly a Sikh, Jain, or Muslim, depending upon his or her parent’s beliefs, whereas the person born into a family in Saudi Arabia will almost certainly become a Muslim. Likewise, the person born in Cambodia to Buddhist parent’s will certainly gravitate to Buddhist beliefs, and a person born in Salt Lake City to Mormon parent’s will likely be a life-long adherent of Mormonism. Religious relativists believe that people can, and occasionally do, change their religion – after all, most people are familiar with at least one or two people who have “jumped ship” and changed their religious beliefs – but overall most people remain in the religious system into which they were born.
Moral Relativism
All morals are relative to the social group or system of thought from which they are constructed. Moral relativists are convinced that people determine what is right and wrong, not a deity who may or may not exist. Something becomes morally wrong only when someone decides that it is morally wrong, and someone else will view the same situation as being morally acceptable or even morally “correct.”
Cultural Relativism
Cultural relativism states that what is immoral in one culture may, in fact, be considered acceptable or even morally upright in another culture. Therefore, cultural relativists insist that no one can judge another culture’s morals; all one can ever do is accept another culture’s morals at face value.
Historical Relativism
Historical relativists are convinced that historical “truths” may, in fact, be erroneous and therefore are best replaced by subsequent “truths.” Copan provides the example of Christopher Columbus.[125] A generation ago Columbus was praised as a hero of Western civilization, a great explorer who deserved only praise for his heroic achievements. Today, however, Columbus is often cast as a “white, European elitist” who was intent on conquering the peoples of the newly discovered North American continent so as to obtain wealth and power. Historical revisionism, such as the effort by some to deny that the Holocaust ever happened, is an extreme form of historical relativism, although some may be inclined to disagree with the adjective “extreme.”
Scientific Relativism
Scientific relativists maintain that “scientific ‘progress’ is nothing but one theory being replaced by another.”[126] In fact, even in the so-called “hard sciences” (i.e., mathematics and physics) scientific relativists are convinced that there is no such thing as objective truth. Many philosophers of science are certain that if there is one area of epistemology that is grounded in objective truth, it is mathematics, yet scientific relativists deny even this.
Aesthetic Relativism
Aesthetic relativism is based upon the old adage, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” This form of relativism is essentially personal relativism, or personal opinion, and as such is very subjective in nature – perhaps more so than the other forms of relativism discussed. Of the categories of relativism offered by Copan, personal relativism is generally considered to be an acceptable form of relativism, by both relativists and absolutists. It is, after all, very difficult to dispute the fact that we all have personal preferences that are quite subjective in nature. However, preferences and opinions are not in the same category as absolute versus relative truths concerning religious and moral issues.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there are many ways to categorize the philosophical worldviews, but it is the contention of the author that eight basic worldviews exist: theism, naturalism (atheism & agnosticism), pantheism, deism, panentheism, finite godism, polytheism, and postmodernism. Within each of these worldviews may be found two or more sub-categories, or expressions, of that worldview. Although some of the worldviews may actually contain elements of truth, only Christian theism (Trinitarianism) is wholly true. This is based upon non-scriptural as well as scriptural evidences.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ben-David, Joseph. “Seven Elements of Religious Humanism.” The Humanist Foundation: A Division of the Church of Humanism. http://www.churchofhumanism.org/en/...t/section/6/28/
Boa, Kenneth D. & Robert M. Bowman, Jr. Faith Has Its Reasons. Colorado Springs, CO: Paternoster, 2005.
Boland, Tommy. “Faith and the Functional Atheist.” Good News Florida. http://goodnewsfl.org/christian-new...tional_atheist/
Byrnes, Sholto. “Britain’s Hidden Religion.” New Statesman (April 9, 2009). http://www.newstatesman.com/religio...m-world-atheist
Carlson, Richard & Tremper Longman III. Science, Creation, and the Bible. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010.
Carter, Joe. “Deists Who Love Jesus (and Talk Like Freud).” The Gospel Coalition. http:thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/03/20/deists-who-love-jesus-and-talk-like-freud/
Clark, Tom. “The Specter of Scientism.” http://www.naturalism.org/scientism.htm
Cline, Austin. “What is Religious Humanism?” http://www.atheism.about.com/od/abo...igioushuman.htm
Copan, Paul. True for You, But Not for Me. Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1998.
Driscoll, Mark. On Who is God? Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008.
Eidsmoe, John. Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1987.
Erickson, Millard J. The Word Became Flesh. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1991.
“Existentialism Theory” (author unknown). All About Philosophy. http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/e...-theory-faq.htm
Fincke, Daniel. “Against Atheistic Existentialism.” http://www.patheos.com/blogs/camels...existentialism/
Geisler, Norman L. Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1976.
Halverson, Dean. “Secularism.” The Compact Guide to World Religions. Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1996.
Harper, Douglas. “Kathenotheism.” Online Etymology Dictionary. dictionary.reference.com/browse/kathenotheism
Harrison, Paul. The Elements of Pantheism: Understanding the Divinity in Nature and the Universe. Boston, MA: Element Books, Inc., 1999.
__________. “Naturalistic (Scientific) Pantheism: Reverence of Nature and Cosmos.” World Pantheist Movement. http://www.pantheism.net/paul/index.htm
__________. “The WPM Statement of Principles.” World Pantheist Movement. http://www.pantheism.net/manifest.htm
McFarland, Alex. Worldviews Comparison. Torrance, CA: Rose Publishing, 2007.
Meister, Chad V. Building Belief: Constructing Faith from the Ground Up. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2006.
Nash, Ronald. Faith & Reason: Searching for a Rational Faith. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1988.
Noebel, David. “Understanding Six Worldviews that Rule the World.” Worldview Weekend. http://www.worldviewweekend.com/wor...?articleid=5324
Olds, Mason. “Religious Humanism.” Humanists of Utah. http://www.humanistsofutah.org/1996/artapril96.htm
Pratt, Alan. “Nihilism.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/
Rhodes, Ron. Answering the Objections of Atheists, Agnostics, & Skeptics. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2006.
Ryder, Martin. “Scientism.” http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~mryder/scientism_este.html
Sire, James. The Universe Next Door (3rd edition). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997.
Slick, Matt. “The Emerging Church and Postmodernism.” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/emerging-church-postmodernism
__________. “Refuting Relativism.” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/refuting-relativism
__________. “What is Open Theism?” Christian Apologetics & Research Society. http://carm.org/what_is_open_theism
__________. “What is Panentheism?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/panentheism
__________. “What is Process Theology?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/questions-process-theology
__________. “What is Relativism?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/what-relativism
Smith, David L. A Handbook of Contemporary Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1992.
Stevens, Fritz, et al. “What is Secular Humanism?” Council for Secular Humanism. http://www.secularhumanism.org/inde...at§ion=main
Sullivan, Andrew. “The Forgotten Jesus.” Newsweek (April 9, 2012).
Sunshine, Glenn S. Why You Think the Way You Do. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009.
Suttle, Gary. “A Response to Scientific Pantheism.” Universal Pantheist Society. http://www.pantheist.net/members/ga...an_suttle1.html
Swoyer, Chris. “Relativism.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (editor). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/#4
Waldman, Steven. “Deism: It’s Back!” http://blogbeliefnet.com/stevenwald...m-its-back.html
Yungen, Ray. A Time of Departing (2nd edition). Silverton, OR: Lighthouse Trails Publishing Company, 2006.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] James Sire, The Universe Next Door, 3rd edition (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 16.
[2] Chad V. Meister, Building Belief: Constructing Faith from the Ground Up (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2006), 39.
[3] Ibid, 39-40.
[4] Pandeism is an example of two worldviews being combined (pantheism and deism).
[5] James Sire, The Universe Next Door, 5th edition (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009), Table of Contents.
[6] As opposed to Christian existentialism, attributed to the Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard in the first half of the nineteenth century, and held – at least in part – by some of the influential neo-orthodox theologians of the past century.
[7] The author readily acknowledges that not all New Age adherents believe in the pantheistic version of God, since some New Agers are polytheistic, panentheistic, or even atheistic in their metaphysical orientation. However, in general, the “god of pantheism” is the most commonly accepted version of God within New Age thinking.
[8] David Noebel, “Understanding Six Worldviews that Rule the World.” Worldview Weekend. http://www.worldviewweekend.com/wor...?articleid=5324 (accessed November 22, 2012).
[9] Kenneth D. Boa & Robert M. Bowman, Jr., Faith Has Its Reasons (Colorado Springs, CO: Paternoster, 2005), 93.
[10] Ibid.
[11] However, panentheism fails to totally distinguish God from the universe, which is where the major difference between these two worldviews lies. In panentheism, God and the universe are intimately connected – if God ceases to exist, so does the universe, and vice versa.
[12] Boa & Bowman, 92.
[13] Alex McFarland, Worldviews Comparison (Torrance, CA: Rose Publishing, 2007), chart.
[14] Other sub-categories of theism would include Judaism, Sikhism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarian Christianity, and essentially any religion which adheres to the belief in one supreme Creator-God. However, Christianity (Trinitarianism) and Islam compose the vast majority of theists.
[15] Theism distinguishes itself from deism in that the God of theism is viewed as being active in his creation, or at least interested in the affairs of his creation – particularly in the affairs of humanity. Deists, on the other hand, also proclaim a Creator who is distinct from the creation, unlike the impersonal god of pantheism who is synonymous with the creation, but deists generally reject the belief that God intervenes in his creation. Instead, deists view God as the “Grand Watchmaker” who first constructs the watch, and then winds it up, but then leaves it to its own accord.
[16] Sire (3rd edition), 54-64.
[17] It must be acknowledged that agnosticism is not an “official” worldview category, however.
[18] Andrew Sullivan, “The Forgotten Jesus” (Newsweek, April 9, 2012), 29.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Austin Cline, “What is Religious Humanism?” http://www.atheism.about.com/od/abo...igioushuman.htm (accessed December 9, 2012).
[21] Ibid.
[22] Joseph Ben-David, “Seven Elements of Religious Humanism.” The Humanist Foundation: A Division of the Church of Humanism. http://www.churchofhumanism.org/en/...t/section/6/28/ (accessed December 9, 2012).
[23] Ibid.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid.
[29] Fritz Stevens (et al), “What is Secular Humanism?” Council for Secular Humanism. http://www.secularhumanism.org/inde...at§ion=main (accessed December 5, 2012).
[30] Ibid.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Martin Ryder, “Scientism.” http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~mryder/scientism_este.html (accessed December 9, 2012).
[33] Tom Clark, “The Specter of Scientism.” http://www.naturalism.org/scientism.htm (accessed December 9, 2012).
[34] Richard Carlson & Tremper Longman III, Science, Creation, and the Bible (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010), 27. Carlson and Longman point out that science should be viewed as being methodologically naturalistic by nature, not metaphysically naturalistic by nature. In order to properly engage the scientific method, we must assume that the laws of nature are fixed (methodologically naturalistic), but this in no way precludes the existence of the Creator (metaphysically naturalistic).
[35] “Existentialism Theory” (author unknown). All About Philosophy. http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/e...-theory-faq.htm (accessed December 10, 2012).
[36] Daniel Fincke, “Against Atheistic Existentialism.” http://www.patheos.com/blogs/camels...existentialism/ (accessed December 10, 2012).
[37] Alan Pratt, “Nihilism.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/ (accessed December 10, 2012).
[38] Sire (3rd edition), 75.
[39] Ibid.
[40] Dean Halverson, “Secularism.” The Compact Guide to World Religions (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), 182.
[41] Tommy Boland, “Faith and the Functional Atheist.” Good News Florida. http://goodnewsfl.org/christian-new...tional_atheist/
[42] Ron Rhodes, Answering the Objections of Atheists, Agnostics, & Skeptics (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2006), 24.
[43] Ibid.
[44] Paul Harrison, “The WPM Statement of Principles.” World Pantheist Movement. http://www.pantheism.net/manifest.htm (accessed November 17, 2012).
[45] The “pagans” of Paul’s day were actually a combination of pantheists, panentheists, and polytheists.
[46] Harrison, “The WPM Statement of Principles” (accessed November 17, 2012).
[47] The “testimony of human history” concerns the commonly held belief that people possess a soul or soul-spirit that is immortal and lives on even after physical death. This belief seems to transcend time and culture, with people from throughout history, and in many diverse cultures, adhering to this belief. The thinking person should ask him or herself, “Where did this idea come from, and why does it persist?” Perhaps God has hard-wired this knowledge into each of us. Maybe that is what Ecclesiastes 3:11 is saying to us: “He [God] has also set eternity in the hearts of men…”
[48] Rational fideism, a reasonable approach to fideism which is espoused by C. Stephen Evans, holds some weight in the area of religious epistemology. This concept combines the rationalism of natural theology and biblical evidences with the “faith-ism” (fideism) of Blaise Pascal, Soren Kierkegaard, and similar theologian-apologists.
[49] Harrison, “The WPM Statement of Faith” (accessed June 11, 2012).
[50] Although I am first and foremost a Christian, and only secondarily a Baptist.
[51] Norman L. Geisler, Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1976), 184-185.
[52] Ibid, 185.
[53] Ibid.
[54] Ibid, 189.
[55] Ibid, 190.
[56] Paul Harrison, “Naturalistic (Scientific) Pantheism: Reverence of Nature and Cosmos.” World Pantheist Movement. http://pantheism.net/paul/index.htm (accessed November 16, 2012).
[57] Mason Olds, “Religious Humanism.” Humanists of Utah. http://www.humanistsofutah.org/1996/artapril96.htm (accessed November 14, 2012).
[58] 1 Timothy 6:20, KJV.
[59] Paul Harrison, The Elements of Pantheism: Understanding the Divinity in Nature and the Universe (Boston, MA: Element Books, Inc., 1999), 97 (emphasis mine).
[60] Ibid.
[61] Gary Suttle, “A Response to Scientific Pantheism.” Universal Pantheist Society. http://www.pantheist.net/members/ga...an_suttle1.html (accessed December 13, 2012). Interestingly, at the conclusion of the article is a link to Paul Harrison’s response to Suttle’s viewpoint. This demonstrates that pantheists, like Christians, are in disagreement on certain issues and are not a monolithic body united on every point of doctrine.
[62] Harrison, The Elements of Pantheism: Understanding the Divinity in Nature and the Universe, 97.
[63] Ibid.
[64] Ibid, 100.
[65] Ibid, 100-101.
[66] Ibid, 100.
[67] Ibid.
[68] Ibid, 101.
[69] Sire (3rd edition), 53.
[70] Steven Waldman, “Deism: It’s Back!” http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwal...-its-back.html (accessed November 12, 2012).
[71] Sholto Byrnes, “Britain’s Hidden Religion” (New Statesman, April 9, 2009). http://www.newstatesman.com/religio...m-world-atheist (accessed November 12, 2012).
[72] Glenn S. Sunshine, Why You Think the Way You Do (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 140.
[73] Geisler, 169.
[74] Ibid, 169-170.
[75] Colossians 1:16-17, NIV (emphasis mine).
[76] John Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1987), 41.
[77] Sunshine, 139-140.
[78] Joe Carter, “Deists Who Love Jesus (and Talk Like Freud).” The Gospel Coalition. http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs...alk-like-freud/ (accessed December 13, 2012).
[79] Ibid.
[80] Ibid.
[81] Ibid.
[82] McFarland, chart.
[83] Ray Yungen, A Time of Departing, 2nd edition (Silverton, OR: Lighthouse Trails Publishing Company, 2006), 29.
[84] Ibid, 53.
[85] Millard J. Erickson, The Word Became Flesh (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1991), 244-245.
[86] David L. Smith, A Handbook of Contemporary Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1992), 150-151.
[87] Matt Slick, “What is Panentheism?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/panentheism (accessed November 20, 2012).
[88] Yungen, 204.
[89] Ibid, 32.
[90] Ibid, 29.
[91] Smith, 150.
[92] Matt Slick, “What is Process Theology?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/questions-process-theology (accessed December 13, 2012).
[93] Ibid.
[94] Matthew 5:18, NIV.
[95] John 17:17, NIV.
[96] Ronald Nash, Faith & Reason: Searching for a Rational Faith (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1988), 35 (emphasis mine).
[97] Mark Driscoll, On Who is God? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008), 26.
[98] Matt Slick. “What is Open Theism?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/what_is_open_theism (accessed December 14, 2012).
[99] Slick, “What is Process Theology?” (accessed December 14, 2012).
[100] Douglas Harper, “Kathenotheism.” Online Etymology Dictionary. dictionary.reference.com/browse/kathenotheism (accessed November 24, 2012).
[101] Ibid.
[102] Matt Slick, “The Emerging Church and Postmodernism.” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/emerging-church-postmodernism (accessed November 22, 2012).
[103] Ibid.
[104] Ibid.
[105] Ibid.
[106] Ibid.
[107] Ibid.
[108] Sire (3rd edition), 174.
[109] Slick, “The Emerging Church and Postmodernism” (accessed November 22, 2012).
[110] Ibid.
[111] Matt Slick, “What is Relativism?” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/what-relativism (accessed November 22, 2012).
[112] Ibid.
[113] Chris Swoyer, “Relativism.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (editor). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/#4 (accessed November 23, 2012).
[114] Slick, “What is Relativism?” (accessed November 23, 2012).
[115] Ibid.
[116] Ibid.
[117] Matt Slick, “Refuting Relativism.” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry. http://carm.org/refuting-relativism (accessed November 24, 2012).
[118] Paul Copan, True for You, But Not for Me (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1998), 31.
[119] John 14
, NIV (emphasis mine).[120] Some may never have had a chance to hear the gospel message while alive on Earth at all, whereas others may have heard a false version of the gospel message. Needless to say, this is a contentious topic within Christian theology, one in which the author “suffered a verbal beating” at the hands of his ordination “Inquisitors” for rejecting soteriological exclusivism, instead contending that inclusivism and accessibilism may have much merit.
[121] 2 Timothy 3:16-17, NIV.
[122] Slick, “What is Relativism?” (accessed November 22, 2012).
[123] Copan, 19-20.
[124] Ibid, 19.
[125] Ibid, 20.
[126] Ibid.
Search
This section will allow you to search through the entire website.
Search Keyword:
Shopping Cart
Your shopping cart is empty
Visit the shop
EFC Newsletter
sending...
Fill in your information below to be subscribed to the monthly newsletter:
Name
driven by RightTurn