On the Unimportance of Theistic Belief

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-207
Author(s):  
Jason L Megill ◽  
Daniel Linford
Keyword(s):  
Theistic Belief

The Return of the God Hypothesis

1999 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Meyer ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Belief In God ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
Theistic Belief

Historian of science Frederic Bumham has stated that the "God hypothesis" is now more respectable hypothesis than at any time in the last one hundred years. This essay explores recent evidence from cosmology, physics, and biology, which provides epistemoiogical support, though not proof, for belief in God as conceived by a theistic worldview. It develops a notion of epistemoiogical support based upon explanatory power, rather than just deductive entailment. It also evaluates the explanatory power of theism and its main metaphysical competitors with respect to several classes of scientific evidence. The cmclusion follows that theism explains a wide ensemble of metaphysically-significant evidences more adequately and comprehensively than other major worldviews or metaphysical systems. Thus, unlike much recent scholarship that characterizes science as either conflicting with theistic belief or entirely neutral with respect to it, this essay concludes that scientific evidence actually supports such.

The Problem with the ‘Problem of Evil’

1994 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-97
Author(s):  
David ◽  
Randall Basinger
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Exact Nature ◽  
Logical Consistency ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Theistic Belief

Current discussions of the ‘problem of evil’ vary greatly in atleast two ways. First, those involved in such discussions often differ on the exact nature of the problem. Some see it as primarily logical (deductive), some as primarily evidential (inductive), and still others as primarily psychological (personal, pastoral).1 Second, those involved in such discussions differ radically on what is required of the theist in response. Some claim that unless the theist can offer an explanation for evil (a theodicy) that is satisfying to rational individuals in general, theistic belief is rendered unjustified.2 Others agree that the theist must offer a theodicy, but deny that such an explanation must be found convincing by most if theistic belief is to remain justified.3 And still others deny that the theist is required to offer any sort of explanation (theodicy), arguing instead that the theist need only defend the logical consistency of simultaneous belief in the existence of evil and God.4

What can God Explain?

2011 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 51-65
Author(s):  
Gerard J. Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Traditional View ◽  
Theistic Belief ◽  
The Universe

In this paper, I shall be arguing for what I hope is a modern version of a very traditional view, which is that God can explain two very basic phenomena: the first is the existence of the universe as we know it: the second is the particular way in which the universe is organised. I shall also, though briefly, try to counter the view that the totally unwelcome features of our universe make it impossible to reconcile the universe as it is with anything like traditional theistic belief. This project, however, is quite a daunting one. So I would wish to make it clear right at the start that, while I would claim that my views are reasonable, and indeed more reasonable than belief in the denial of these views would be, I still do not hold that it is unreasonable for someone to reject each of the conclusions for which I shall argue. For plainly anyone, whether myself or any opponent, can be both reasonable and mistaken.

Religious fictionalism and the problem of evil

2015 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 353-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
JON ROBSON
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
General Application ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Theistic Belief

AbstractThe problem of evil is typically presented as a problem – sometimes the problem – facing theistic realists. This article takes no stance on what effect (if any) the existence of evil has on the rationality of theistic belief. Instead, it explores the possibility of using the problem of evil to generate worries for some of those who reject theistic realism. Although this article focuses on the consequences for a particular kind of religious fictionalist, the lessons adduced are intended to have more general application.

Does the Analysis of Religious Language Rest on a Mistake?

1974 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-478
Author(s):  
Margaret Chatterjee
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Religious Language ◽  
The West ◽  
Concept Of God ◽  
Recent Interest ◽  
Romantic Movement ◽  
Analogia Entis ◽  
Dominant Period ◽  
Theistic Belief

The rival claims of religion, philosophy and science as dispensers of light have come to the fore in successive periods of history. Betwixt and between them all is the discipline known as theology, a rational study of the concept of God and attendant concepts connected with theistic belief. The dominant period of the connection between religion and philosophy in the west extends from Neo-Platonic thought to the seventeenth century. Before that for the most part philosophy tried to steer clear of ‘mysteries’, and after that philosophy made strenuous efforts to free itself from religion, and even more, from theology. Secular influences on religious language are legion. I mention only a few: governmental analogies (King, government, etc.), agricultural analogies (Shepherd, flock, sower and the seed), analogies from art (Design and Designer), historical approaches of the early Romantic movement (used by Renan and others), and influences from science (Paley's ‘watch’ metaphor, the idea of evolution as shown in the concept of ‘progressive revelation’, the ‘new theology’ of the twentieth century and so on). Recent interest in religious language is part of the last of these influences (influences from science) in so far as the desire to find some empirical moorings for various types of discourse is one of the early springs of the analytical movement. This interest is symptomatic of the trend to rethink ontological matters in terms of epistemology, a trend for which Galileo and Kepler bear a considerable responsibility. Earlier interest in religious language, it must be remembered, was deeply rooted in ontological concern. I refer to the skilled use by Catholic theologians of the method of analogia entis. The basis of this method, and it was a method of argument, was specific beliefs concerning the distinction between finite and infinite being and the relation between them.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document