My accuser pontificated, “You understand that we inhabit a nation that claims to be 70-80% Christian and that God is dead. Can you successfully reconcile this disjointed reality?” I do not know that it is the same 70-80% of people that make both claims but I assume from his statement that he believes this to be the case. Speaking from my own experience, I certainly do not make both claims simultaneously.
He went on to say, “I’ve reconciled this maddening reality within the framework of ‘radical autonomy’ and the desire thereof. God is dead BECAUSE the masses REJECT objective Supremacy.” Again I run into the logical quagmire that I do not nor does anyone I know reject “Objective Supremacy” because neither I nor anyone I know (to my knowledge) knows what my accuser means by the use of this term. I certainly do not know what he means. The electrician Davis County that came to my house to rewire my man cave does not know what he means either. I asked him.
What I cannot reconcile is why he refuses to define this term. When I ask him what Objective Supremacy means he tells me that it means God. When I ask him why he does not just use the term God he accuses me of not believing in Objective Supremacy. This does not make sense to me. Nor does it make sense to the electrician Davis County that came to my house to rewire my man cave. I know this is true because I asked him. In other words, this is a verifiable fact. The definition of Objective Supremacy is not verifiable. It could be verifiable if my accuser chose to divulge the definition but he will not and the fact that he will not suggests to me that it is in reality a meaningless term.