In the contemporary world, the concept of religion is more specialized and diverse among varied religious affiliation. Therefore, various forums for philosophical discussion have come up with dissimilar ideas centered on religion. The intent of this thesis is to respond to a series of questions concerning religion.
- What is the doctrine of divine simplicity?
The doctrine of divine simplicity God is simply outlined as a supreme being that lacks distinct metaphysical parts, constituents, or properties. Rather, God is given special attributes such as holiness, goodness, merciful, etc. Therefore, God is divine hence can only be attributed to his greatness, power, and wisdom.
- Can we make sense of the idea that perfect goodness is identical to perfect power?
God is actually a definition of the most perfect being; this perfection can be attributed to greater attributes or properties. The extent of these attributes varies among different people in varied religion ranging from perfect power, perfect knowledge, perfect goodness, self-sufficiency, and immateriality. Therefore, God is perfect in all ways and being perfect can mean having power. All Christians, therefore; attribute God to some power because his of perfect goodness, perfect wisdom, and perfect knowledge in all ways.
- What is the Euthyphro dilemma?
The Euthyphro dilemma originates from Plato’s dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphros. The basic interest of the dialogue is the relationship between God and morality in monotheistic religion tradition where the perception of God is taken to be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent. God is viewed as the basis for all or at least a crucial part of morality. Principally, all significant parts of morality are centered on God’s commands. This instills some kind of fear of possible punishment in case people don’t adhere to Gods commands. However, the issue of punishment of immorality raises a lot of controversies such as punishing a child to death because of failing to follow a set of morals. Therefore, the extent of the punishment is not well defined among different Christians.
- Can an unchanging God have knowledge of free human actions?
Referring to God as all knowing gives him extensive knowledge about the universe he created. Since human beings are a special part of God’s creation, then he is due to have knowledge of all human actions. God outlines various obligations to be followed human being actions. Moreover, God knowledge can’t be compatible with free human actions. Some philosophers argue that God is a contingent being, therefore; he has knowledge of present human actions but lacks foreknowledge of future human free actions.
- Does Boethius really suppose that God has foreknowledge of free human actions?
According to Boethius God in essence doesn’t have foreknowledge about human actions that might offend actions outlined for human beings to follow. He proceeds to argue that if God would have foreknowledge of human free actions he would use his wisdom and strength to prevent the occurrence of the same actions.
- What is Hick's religious pluralism?
Religious pluralism is a modern theory by John Hick which establishes the credibility by appropriating a wide range of theological and philosophical resources to address the empirical phenomenology of religion and accommodates modern sensibilities. In his theory, John outlines that though there are varying religious traditions all around the world; each tradition constitutes dissimilar but closely related perception of experiencing, responding, or conceiving in life to ultimate reality, which is, or can be transcendent, ineffable, transcategorical, and infinite.
- Why does Hick endorse the traditional doctrine of divine ineffability?
John uses the traditional doctrine of divine ineffability as an instrument of social cohesion, maintains the unity of all tribes or nations by providing communal rituals and shared identities that define the originality of religion among different generations. Therefore, religion is beyond human perception and reality.
- Does Hick provide a good reason for not dismissing the realm of religious experience and belief as illusory?
Hick’s theory leans on a scientific analogy to explain modern sensibilities, which refers to, the authoritative role attributed to science and the critical disciplines that qualify religious confessions as either true or false. Therefore, his theory is not an illusion since it draws a conclusion from appropriate sources. Moreover, his evidence is drawn from the world greatest religious traditions hence outline religion as real rather than an illusion.
- Are religious exclusivists necessarily arrogant?
Religious exclusivists mostly are viewed as arrogant and naive since their argument seems so distant from the normal conviction and belief people has in religion. However, genuine religious exclusivists are viewed as people who can be resourceful in creating peaceful and non-confrontational religious views that allow interreligious dialogues. Moreover, the most arrogant people are referred to religious extremist or conservatives since they refuse to understand religion from different perspectives hence end up giving biased or inappropriate religious perspective.
- Why might one think that religious exclusivism is immoral?
The assumptions made by religious exclusivist make assumptions that might be necessary declared as immoral in comparison to Christian principles. This is so because exclusivists rely on discrete beliefs and discard other religious groups as secular.
The religion of philosophy, therefore; as evidence in the above context there is the existence of a supreme being in all varied religions and beliefs. Also, it’s true that human beings are answerable to God in some way and also in good faith God will in turn reward people in, various ways.
References
Clack, B., & Clack, B. R. (2008). The Philosophy of Religion. Andhra Pradesh: Polity.
Hick, J. (1990). Philosophy of religion. London: Prentice Hall.
