11. Philosophy of Religion

Question 1

What are the three projects for philosophy of religion?

Answer 1

1. The Metaphysical Project: Does God exist?
2. The Epistemological Project: “What can be known or what can we rationally believe about God and His relationship to the world?”
3. The Moral Project: Is the existence of (gratuitous) evil compatible with the existence of the omni God?

Question 2

The Ontological Argument (metaphysical project)

Answer 2

Platonic argument. If we think clearly enough about God, we must conclude that He is the greatest being, and if one truly understands the concept of God, one cannot conceive of God’s non-existence.

Question 3

Cosmological Arguments (metaphysical project) (3)

Answer 3

(1) Proof motion - the cosmos is in motion and if you believe the natural state of affairs is rest, this argument is compelling.

(2) Proof efficient causation – the universe is dependent on a prime mover (agent causation)

(3) Proof from possibility – some things didn’t have to be this way. Observation is contingency, similar to ontological but from observation.

Question 4

Teleological Arguments (the metaphysical project) (2)

Answer 4

(4) Proof from perfection
(5) Proof from Governance

(since we supposedly cannot explain the apparent design found in nature by purely natural means, it must be due to God.)

Question 5

Difference between cosmological and teleological arguments.

Answer 5

Cosmological: an attempt to prove God’s existence which claims that all things in nature depend on something else for their existence

Teleological: an attempt to prove the existence of God that begins with the observation of the purposiveness (functions) of nature.
It is the study of ends or purposes

Question 6

A Euthyphro type objection to cosmological/teleological arguments

Answer 6

Did God have to get the ‘dials’ just right or could any arrangement he willed have been reality/life-sustaining? (You’re affirming independent laws of nature that are outside of, greater than God)

Question 7

Logical objection to cosmological/teleological arguments

Answer 7

Can you prove a negative? Can you prove that God does not exist? – that is a logical impossibility. It’s like asking “can you prove Santa doesn’t exist?”

Question 8

Is it more illogical to believe in the big bang than to believe God created the world?

Answer 8

Either you must believe in a perpetual (material) motion machine or a perpetual (conscious) ‘emotion’ machine. Both are beyond the human capacity to comprehend! Not one is more logical than the other.

Question 9

Pascal’s Wager (Epistemological Project)

Answer 9

(1) Belief + Existence = Infinite gain
(2) Belief + Non-existence = Finite loss
(3) Non-belief + Non-existence = Finite gain
(4) Non-belief + Existence = Infinite loss

Any Rational person should believe!

Question 10

Objection to the Pascalian-style wagering? (2)

Answer 10

1. Many gods objection
2. The doxastic condition (the idea that human beings will be judged on what they believed. Pascal’s wager is only powerful IF there is a God who will judge you for the wrong beliefs)

Question 11

Alvin Plantinga (Epistemological Project)

Answer 11

Theistic belief is “properly basic.” God created humans to have a cognitive capacity to detect God, so when we believe in God, we’re doing what God has created us to do. Why should humans have reasons for their beliefs? People don’t convert to Christianity for reasons. People don’t remain Christians for reasons.

Question 12

David Hume: Epicurus’ riddle (Moral Project) (4)

Answer 12

1. Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? – then he is impotent
2. Is God able, but not willing? – then he is malevolent
3. Is God both able and willing? – whence then is evil?
4. Is God not able and not willing? – then why call Him God?

Question 13

St. Augustine’s Answer to the Moral Project

Answer 13

On free choice of the will – the problem of evil is the abuse of freedom

Question 14

2. J.L. Mackie faulty solutions to the Moral Project (4)

Answer 14

1. Good cannot exist without evil – interdependence of opposites.
2. Evil is necessary as a means to good – violates omnipotence
3. Some evil is preferable to no evil
4. Evil is due to human free will

Question 15

Alvin Plantinga answer to the Moral Project (3)

Answer 15

1. Free worship/belief is more preferable to God than unfree worship/belief.
2. Bad actions/unbelief are preferable to “good machines”
3. God and his creation must absorb 2nd order evil (cruelty, deceit) to achieve 3rd order good (freely chosen actions).

Conclusion: God created a world where evil could exist because He gave people free will, and He is prepared to combat any evil humans choose to do.

Question 16

1st order Evil/1st order good

Answer 16

1st order evil – obvious evil (stubbing your toe)
1st order good – obvious good (stepping in the shower)

Question 17

2nd order evil/2nd order good

Answer 17

2nd order evil – causing 1st order evil with intent
2nd order good – mental status (generosity, sympathy) to reduce evil.

Question 18

3rd order good

Answer 18

having free will – freely chosen actions

Question 19

Skeptical Theism

Answer 19

Skeptical theism is the view that believes in God’s existence but is skeptical of our ability to discern God’s reasons for acting/refraining in particular instances

Question 20

4. John Hick’s answer to the Moral Project

Answer 20

Hick’s theodicy (An Irenean Theodicy)

1. Humans are created in God’s image
2. Humans are being transformed into God’s likeness

Question 21

Divine Hiddenness

Answer 21

God intentionally hides himself/creates epistemic distance so as not to coerce our beliefs. God wants to preserve our free will and He does so by maintaining a kind of voluntary “hiddenness”