28 resultados para fold of religion
Resumo:
Richard Hooker and John Locke were important sources for the thought and public lives of Anglican leaders in the North American colonies. A conviction about religious freedom of conscience during the first half of the eighteenth century constitutes a range of thinking about toleration that contributed to the birth of the republic.
Resumo:
Featured Speaker
Resumo:
Commentator: Bruce Ballard (Lincoln University)
Resumo:
The innocent Job suffers, friends are no help, and then Job screams at Yahweh, demanding justice. The first surprise is that Yehweh responds to Job, does not criticize him but tells him he is ignorant, and then gives him a science lesson. The content of that lesson is the second surprise.
Resumo:
How is it that one of the most famous Christian thinkers - Soren Kierkegaard -- and one of the most famous contemporary secular thinkers -- Jurgen Habermas - both agree: the religious has nothing to say in the public realm of social, ethical discourse.
Resumo:
Contemporary pluralism is best represented as a set of rival worldviews. Secularism and religion represent the dominant worldviews in our society. But moves to exclude religious views because they are based on faith are misguided since political philosophies also, and unavoidably, depend on "faith".
Resumo:
Keynote Speaker
Resumo:
Most theodicy responses to the problem of evil have in common the claim that God legitimately allows some evil such that greater good may come. This response is puzzling because the seemingly overwhelming consensus (at least amongst Christian apologists) is that 1) morality is deontological in nature (e.g. our duty of obedience to God’s commands, or acting in accordance with God’s purpose), and 2) relatedly, that humans are made in God’s image (i. e. are rational beings) and thus are worthy of respect. I shall argue that theodicy defenses that claim that God allows some evil such that greater good may come are untenable because they either unnecessarily bifurcate Christian morality in an ad hoc manner, or entail that God cannot have respect for persons.
Resumo:
Commentator: Laurence Rohrer (Lincoln University)
Resumo:
It is sometimes thought that the choice between Molinism and open theism involves a trade-off in values: Molinism asserts that God has providential power but allows God indirectly to manipulate that in virtue of which human beings are to be judged; while open theism grants human beings more power over that in virtue of which they are tp be judged, but at the price of giving up providence. I argue here that this picture is misconstrued---that Molinism gives human agents more power over that in virtue of which they may be judged than does open theism. Since open theism confines the possible avenues for evaluating agents to their behavior in the actual world, open theism is incompatible with any solution to the problem of moral luck which appeals to counterfactual behavior, and so (I argue) is impugned by the problem,. Molinists, by contrast, have a promising solution to that problem.