Sayyeda Saida Mirsadri; Mansour Nasiri
Volume 7, Issue 2 , February 2018, , Pages 129-149
Abstract
Open theism is a theological movement rising out of the evangelical tradition at the end of the century. Seeking to resolve the incompatibility existing between the divine infallible foreknowledge and the human free-will, they sought to devise a theology that could be able to uphold human freedom and ...
Read More
Open theism is a theological movement rising out of the evangelical tradition at the end of the century. Seeking to resolve the incompatibility existing between the divine infallible foreknowledge and the human free-will, they sought to devise a theology that could be able to uphold human freedom and free will while keeping God at the centre of its system. According to their focal idea both God and the future are open, that is nothing is predetermined and set beforehand about future and since it has not yet taken place, God has no knowledge of it. The critique raised against them is that in their attempt to defend human free will and to resolve the challenge of incompatibility, they reduce the divine knowledge, hence distorting the image of the traditional God. In this contribution we seek to present a Shi’a theological model that while seeking to resolve the problem, remains loyal to the traditional image of God, hence being immune of the critiques raised against open theism.
Amir Sadeghi; Mansour Nasiri
Volume 7, Issue 1 , January 2018, , Pages 23-44
Abstract
In this paper, I tried to elucidate Weber's view on the relationship between knowledge and religion as one of his most important views from the point of view of his "Sociology of Religion" and show how Weber's vision results in a conflict between knowledge in the general sense of it (including empirical ...
Read More
In this paper, I tried to elucidate Weber's view on the relationship between knowledge and religion as one of his most important views from the point of view of his "Sociology of Religion" and show how Weber's vision results in a conflict between knowledge in the general sense of it (including empirical sciences and Human) and religion. For this purpose, five main sections are considered. In the first section, the title introduces the map of the possible relationships between knowledge and religion, then in the second section, the coordinates of Weber's position in that map as one of the factors for the conflict between knowledge and religion is explained. In the third part of the article, criticisms of Weber's vision has been drawn up by considering Wolterstorff's views, and finally, in the fourth section, with a critical study on Weber's position, I come up to a solution for the issue, named "conflict between knowledge and religion". This solution which includes a path that is presented to the religious scholars and scientists to discuss with each other so that both the domains of human thought, knowledge and religion, can be used methodically and philosophically in a well-known sociological structure. The final part of this article also focuses on the conclusion of the discussion.
Sayyeda Saida Mirsadri; Mansour Nasiri
Volume 6, Issue 1 , January 2017, , Pages 19-44
Abstract
In discussions on religious language, meaningfulness of the religious statements is one of the challenges the philosophers of religion are faced with. Among the responses given, Paul Tillich’s religious symbolism is of special importance. Based on this theory all the religious statements except ...
Read More
In discussions on religious language, meaningfulness of the religious statements is one of the challenges the philosophers of religion are faced with. Among the responses given, Paul Tillich’s religious symbolism is of special importance. Based on this theory all the religious statements except for ‘God exists’ are symbols. Distinguishing between ‘sign’ and ‘symbol’ and regarding the religious statements as non-literal and hence symbolic, he deems religious language as ‘meaningful’ and thus responds to the challenges raised by positivists against all religions in speaking of God. Religious symbolism tries to show how the religious language could be of cognitive nature. But the problem is that by accepting his pan-symbolic view about religious statements and religious language, it becomes impossible to actually and literally talk about God. Thus any way to comprehend and to communicate with God would be blocked out, and this turns his symbolic interpretation to be more of a philosophical nature and preoccupation than a theological tenor and application – to the extent of rendering Christianity devoid of its genuine content. Comprehending this complicated theory is only possible when one would understand it within the framework of his whole theologico-philosophical system of thought.
Mansour Nasiri
Volume 3, Issue 1 , February 2015, , Pages 127-141
Abstract
Anthony Kenny holds that religious experiences have not epistemic validity. His argument is based on an analysis of the nature of religious experience. According to him, religious experience cannot be regarded as sensory perception; so it must be regarded as a non-sensory perception. However, if it is ...
Read More
Anthony Kenny holds that religious experiences have not epistemic validity. His argument is based on an analysis of the nature of religious experience. According to him, religious experience cannot be regarded as sensory perception; so it must be regarded as a non-sensory perception. However, if it is regarded as a non-sensory perception, then it is a mode of revelation, but since revelation requires that exists a revealer before religious experience, i.e. a God, we are encountered to a vicious circle. Jeff Jordan holds that Kenny’s argument is not successful. In this paper, I, following Jordan’s structure, examine arguments of both thinkers. I finally, disagree with Jordan in most of his arguments and will show that they are unsuccessful.
