Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/8707
Title: | In Defence of Anthropomorphic Theism |
---|---|
Contributor(s): | Forrest, Peter (author) |
Publication Date: | 2011 |
Handle Link: | https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/8707 |
Abstract: | I reply to seven objections to anthropomorphic theism: (1) That anthropomorphic theism is idolatrous. In reply I rely on the concept/conception distinction. (2) That faith requires certainty. In reply I argue that full belief may be based on probable inference. (3) That the truly infinite is incomprehensible. In reply I distinguish two senses of knowing what you mean. (4) 'You Kant say that!' In reply I distinguish shallow from deep Kantianism. (5) 'Shall Old Aquinas be forgot?' In reply I discuss the simplicity of God. (6) What those garrulous mystics say about the ineffable. In reply I argue that mystics should be anthropomorphites. (7) Anti-theodicy. In reply I distinguish the community of all agents from the community of finite frail agents. |
Publication Type: | Journal Article |
Source of Publication: | European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 3(1), p. 105-122 |
Publisher: | Metropolitan University Prague |
Place of Publication: | Czech Republic |
ISSN: | 1689-8311 |
Fields of Research (FoR) 2008: | 220315 Philosophy of Religion |
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2008: | 970122 Expanding Knowledge in Philosophy and Religious Studies |
Peer Reviewed: | Yes |
HERDC Category Description: | C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal |
Publisher/associated links: | http://philosophy-of-religion.eu/contents.html |
Appears in Collections: | Journal Article |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format |
---|
Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.