Already a subscriber? Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 71-80 of 1583 documents


articles
71. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
Jeff Jordan, The Topography of Divine Love: A Reply to Thomas Talbott
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Does God love every human equally and to the deepest degree possible? In an earlier article I argued that no one could, in principle, love every human equally and to the deepest degree possible. Thomas Talbott has objected and argues that a model of the divine love extended equally to all best captures the idea of God as loving parent. I contend that Talbott’s argument fails, in part, as it implies that the divine love treats the interests of humans as fungible.
72. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
P. Roger Turner, More on Defending Religious Exclusivism: A Reply to Richard Feldman
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In his “Plantinga on Exclusivism,” Richard Feldman argues that Alvin Plantinga, in an earlier paper, has not sufficiently addressed a particular problem for the religious exclusivist. The particular problem that Feldman thinks Plantinga has failed sufficiently to address is the problem of epistemic peer disagreement—that is, disagreement between two (or more) equally competent thinkers who share equally good reasons for, and are in equally good epistemic situations regarding, their contradictory beliefs—in matters of religious belief. To demonstrate that Plantinga has so failed, Feldman introduces a principle, “B,” that purports to show that exclusivism (religious or not) tends to lead to unjustified beliefs. But I think that Feldman has failed successfully to show that B demonstrates exclusivism’s tendency to lead to unjustified beliefs; so, in the paper, I defend Plantinga, and the exclusivist more generally, from Feldman’s criticisms.
73. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
Graham Oppy, “Uncaused Beginnings” Revisited
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
William Lane Craig’s “Reflections on ‘Uncaused Beginnings” is a sustained critique of my “Uncaused Beginnings.” I argue that the central arguments of my essay survive that critique unscathed. When we make a fair and accurate comparison of naturalist and theist claims about global causal reality, we see that considerations about causation and the shape of causal reality do not decide between naturalism and theism. Moreover, the Edwards/Prior/Craig objection does not rule out the view that there is an initial global causal state involving none but contingently existing entities.
reviews
74. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
Chris Dragos, Epistemic Authority: A Theory of Trust, Autonomy, and Authority in Belief, by Linda Trinkaus Zagzebski
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
75. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
John Lippitt, Narrative Identity, Autonomy, and Mortality: From Frankfurt and MacIntyre to Kierkegaard, by John J. Davenport; and Self, Value and Narrative: A Kierkegaardian Approach, by Anthony Rudd
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
76. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
Leigh Vicens, Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life, by Derk Pereboom
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
77. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
Katherin Rogers, Anselm’s Other Argument, by A. D. Smith
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
78. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
William Hasker, Death, Resurrection, and Transporter Beams: An Introduction to Five Christian Views on Life after Death, by Silas N. Langley
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
79. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 2
Mark Manolopoulos, The Insistence of God: A Theology of Perhaps, by John D. Caputo
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
articles
80. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 32 > Issue: 1
Nicholas Wolterstorff, Would You Stomp On a Picture of Your Mother? Would You Kiss an Icon?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
My aim in this essay is to understand why it is that we stomp on images of persons that we hate or dislike and kiss or light candles in front of images of persons that we love, honor, or admire. Far and away the most probing and intense discussion of the nature and significance of such actions was that which took place among the Byzantines in the so-called iconoclast controversy, from early in the eighth century until the middle of the ninth century. The bulk of my essay consists of identifying and analyzing the arguments developed in this period for and against icon veneration. After concluding that the Byzantines did not succeed in developing a plausible account of what goes on in icon veneration, I offer my own account of what is going on when someone kisses an icon or stomps on a picture of her mother.