世俗世界中存在的上帝——论彼得·贝格尔《天使的传言——现代社会与超自然的再发现》中关于上帝存在的“新五路证明”

关于上帝存在的问题一直是神学界和哲学界争论不休且众说纷纭的一个重要问题。从奥古斯丁到安瑟伦,从阿奎那到康德,这个问题引起了古今无数神学家和哲学家的关注。本文拟介绍当代著名宗教社会学者彼得·贝格尔的《天使的传言》一书中所论述到的关于上帝存在的"新五路证明"的问题。作者首先简单介绍贝格尔的这本书及其价值,其次分析古今哲学与神学思想史上颇有代表性的上帝存在的证明,最后通过阐释贝格尔的具有"现象学和心理学色彩"的"新五路证明",从而彰显其哲学和神学理论价值。     

康德对宗教神学的批判

如果说,十八世纪法国唯物论者和无神论者是从感性实践的基础上对宗教神学进行了毁灭性打击的话,那末,稍后的康德则是从纯粹理性的逻辑批判的基础上,结束了用人类理性证明宗教神学的企图,因此,两者从不同角度的批判具有相辅相成的意义。不过,由于前者是从唯物论的哲学立场出发,因此能够达到唯物主义的战斗无神论的高度,后者则是从唯心主义先验论的哲学立场出发,因此使他对于宗教神学的批判具有很大的局限性,这就是:一方面,康德在《纯粹理性批判》一书中,从“理沦理性”上否定了上帝;另一方面却又在“实践理性”中把上帝又重新请了回来,主张创立一种理性的“道德宗教”。     

传统自然神学与英国自然神论

本文列举了传统自然神学与英国自然神论两种不同的神学流派,以及历史上对英国自然神论做出的反思。传统自然神学并不将上帝的存在视为需要证明的对象,而是隐含的前设;而英国自然神论却要在毫无前设的条件下,从自然界的实存去证明上帝的存在。对此,怀疑论哲学家和视基督教为天启宗教的神学家对其做出了批评,认为上帝存在应当是论证的前提而不是论证的目的,而且在无前设的情况下从自然界去推导上帝的属性是徒劳的,不可能使人仅仅通过自然而理解基督教的上帝。     

康德对宗教合理性基础的批判与建构

康德的三大批判最后都包含着一个问题———宗教批判 ,这一问题究竟在康德批判哲学体系中处于怎样的位置 ?与康德的《单纯理性限度内的宗教》又是一种什么样的关系 ?本文试图从康德的宗教批判角度来揭示这些问题 ,重新审视康德的批判哲学。一、清除旧宗教的知识基础康德在《纯粹理性批判》中对宗教的态度 ,是一个争议较多的问题。在诸多争议中 ,如何看待康德对传统神学的批判是一个焦点问题。解决这个问题 ,有必要弄清这样两个相关的问题 :康德为何要对传统神学进行批判 ?康德对传统神学的批判是否就意味着对神学的批判 ,以至于否定宗教 ?对…     

论谢扶雅对怀特海宗教哲学的吸收和融会——兼与怀特海上帝观之比较

受怀特海宗教哲学的影响,谢扶雅转向个人内在的宗教体验和沉思,逐渐形成自己的宗教思想。谢扶雅的宗教思想,大体可分为"宗教的哲学反省"与"神学思想的综合创新"两个阶段。1926-1946是"由社会倾向而至个独沉思"时期,此即"宗教的哲学反省"阶段,他对宗教的本质、演进及理性化等问题的思考,其中可见怀特海宗教哲学的清晰烙印。1946年之后的阶段是"由沉思而更至综合"时期,此即"综合创新阶段",他把中国传统的"中和思想"与怀特海的"过程上帝观"相互融会而形成"中和神学",这是中国基督教本土化的代表理论之一。就上帝观来说,谢扶雅与怀特海之间有很大的相契性。     

哈贝马斯宗教哲学思想研究述评

哈贝马斯(Jürgen Habermas,1929~2004)是当代西方著名的哲学家、社会理论家,他的研究领域十分广泛,涉及哲学、社会学、政治学、伦理学、宗教神学等,他的思想在世界范围内产生了广泛的影响。一哈贝马斯虽然涉猎广泛,但他主要提出的是一种哲学思想。虽然在他的哲学思想中包含着丰富的宗教神学思想,但却一直没有得到哲学界和宗教学界应有的重视和研究。之所以出现这种情况,有以下几个方面的原因。首先,从哈贝马斯整个哲学的主流旨趣上看,哈贝马斯不仅不把宗教神学作为哲学研究的对象,他本人也没有写过一部真正的宗教神学方面的著作。即使哈贝…     

论马丁·布伯的宗教哲学

马丁·布伯从哲学人类学的立场去理解宗教,揭示了人的“对话的存在”。 对布伯来讲,人类宗教的历史就是人与上帝对话的历史,人与上帝的对话关系就是一种“我—你”关系。正是在对话中,我们就达到了“之间”的领域,哲学人类学就是关于“之间”的人类学。人的对话的存在充分地体现在“原始距离”和“关系性”之中。人建立其“关系性”的能力也就是一种“神性”,因此,哲学人类学必然蕴涵着一种“神学”。他认为,宗教信仰的基础乃是人与上帝、与永恒的“你”之间存在的那个对话关系。有关宗教信仰的所有陈述的基础是那些具有信赖性质的对话关系,而不是对教义内容的信仰。布伯反对任何对宗教所做的抽象研究,因此他鄙视基督教神学。布伯还以犹太教为例,分析了宗教的精神实质。他认为,犹太教是一种精神过程,它包含着对三个观念的追求,即“统一的观念”,“行动的观念”和“未来的观念”。     

宗教伦理化的若干思考

宗教伦理化是当代世界宗教的一种趋势,也是中国宗教面临的一个重要课题。本文试就宗教伦理化的问题谈几点粗浅的看法。一、 伦理化是当代世界宗教的一种趋势宗教伦理化现象并非自今日始,而是早已有之。自19世纪下半叶以来,随着科学技术的发展和人类自我意识的觉醒,对上帝的信仰一次次地受到冲击。人们普遍把目光从追求未来的天堂转向现实的尘世。然而,在世俗化、现代化的浪潮中,西方一批知识界的著名人士为保持基督教信仰的活力,试图用现代哲学、科学和各种社会思想重新解释对上帝的信仰。于是,20世纪形形色色的基督教新神学、新哲学应运而…     

伊斯兰传统学术关于真主存在的理性论证

西方宗教哲学关于上帝存在的传统论证主要有三种:目的论论证、宇宙论论证和本体论论证。伊斯兰传统学术关于真主存在的理性论证也可归为三类:目的论论证、"凯俩目"宇宙论论证和"或然性"论证。现当代学术研究日渐显示,中世纪基督教关于上帝存在的证明大多源自中世纪伊斯兰教义学和哲学。本文从宗教比较角度介绍了伊斯兰传统学术关于真主存在的理性论证并分析了其各思想流派对信仰-理性关系问题的理解后指出:当前,伊斯兰教内部应进行更为深刻的批判反思,加强阐扬自身深厚的理性传统,积极高效地迎接现代性挑战;世界各大文明需秉持美美与共之理念加强对话合作,协力构建人类命运共同体,创造更加美好的"地球村"未来。     

爱留根纳的神学美学

作为西方极其重要的哲学家和基督教思想家,爱留根纳的独特之处,在于他从“无”或“不存在”的概念对上帝的理解和思考,这种空前深刻的考量集中体现为一种辩证关系:上帝既是绝对的隐匿,又是通过自我显现的创世!如何在绝对的分裂中保证上帝的独一和完善?如何使上帝在绝对超然的隐匿之无中自我显现和创世?这既是最重要的基督教神学问题,也是形而上学关切的根本。爱留根纳通过他的神学美学给出了天才的回答。     

PHENOMENOLOGY OF DIVINE REVELATION: THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY IN DIALOGUE

Although the relationship between theology and philosophy is a perennial issue in the history of thought, recent debates surrounding the so-called theological turn of continental phenomenology have created a new space in which it can be explored from a fresh perspective. In this vein, I propose three theses concerning the relationship between theology and philosophy of religion, with particular focus on the phenomenon of divine revelation. First, a philosophy of religion that ignores theology's claim about divine self-revelation will remain incomplete and unsatisfactory, at least from the perspective of a Christian theology which begins with the faith in God's self-revelation in one particular human person. Second, a theology that does not acknowledge the possibility of philosophical reflections on the human aspect of divine revelation will not be able to escape blind dogmatism, but rather will isolate itself from the academic community. Third, and finally, despite the concerns of both parties, a dialogue between theology and philosophy centred on the phenomena of revelation can develop into mutually critical and mutually constructive interactions.     

THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION AND MODERN SCIENCE

Abstract. In contrast to Christian theology that has ignored science, this essay suggests that a credible doctrine of God as creator must take into account scientific understandings of the world. The introduction of the principle of inertia into seventeenth-century science and philosophy helped change the traditional idea of God as creator (which included divine conservation and governance) into a deist concept of God. To recapture the idea that God continually creates, it is important to affirm the contingency of the world as a whole and of all events in the world. Reflecting on the interrelationship of contingency and natural law provides a framework for relating scientific theories of a universal field, the concept of emergent evolution, and the theological concept of eternal divine spirit active in all creation.     

Creation and the Symbiosis of Science and Judaism

It seems to me that the critical questions that science and natural philosophy raise for Jewish theology are the following: Does God evolve? Does the universe have or even need an interpretation, specifically with reference to the fact that most of the universe most of the time is uninhabitable, and there may be many more than one universe? Does the universe need a beginning? What is distinctive about human consciousness, intelligence, and ethics in the light of evidence for evolution from all of the life sciences? Finally, will both life and the universe end? These questions are not only modern. They contain all the primary issues that have dominated rabbinic thought. That agenda can be summarized in six topics: How should we model what we believe about (1) God, (2) the world, and (3) the human being; and how should we understand the relations between them, that is, between (4) God and the world (or, creation), (5) God and the human (or, revelation), and (6) the human and the world (or, redemption)? In this paper I focus on the fourth issue, creation. My answer is presented in detail in my Judaism and the Doctrine of Creation(Samuelson 1994). Here I shall summarize my conclusions there concerning science, Jewish texts, and the correlation between them.     

A Parsimonious Model of Divine Simplicity

Many recent treatments of divine simplicity have been highly critical of traditional accounts of the doctrine. Critics have challenged whether the doctrine is coherent and whether it can be squared with a robust theology of the triune God. Yet the theological tradition is largely persuaded that the doctrine of divine simplicity is not only coherent and true, but also that the doctrine of divine simplicity is needed for an account of the Trinity that does not fall into the trap of tritheism. In addition, both Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions include conciliar and confessional support for the doctrine, and allow for more than one way of accounting for the doctrine. This essay offers a constructive account that seeks to avoid some of the most significant concerns raised in the recent theological and philosophical literature. It depends in important respects upon work being done in analytic theology on the use of models in theology, adopted (with suitable amendments) from the philosophy of science. After giving some dogmatic context, three versions of divine simplicity are laid out. Then, a parsimonious version of the doctrine is set forth and considered as a potentially fruitful model, which may have theological utility. The essay ends with some remarks about the way in which this new model of the doctrine may have value in ecumenical theology.     

A Jewish Modified Divine Command Theory

We claim that divine command metaethicists have not thought through the nature of the expression of divine love with sufficient rigor. We argue, against prior divine command theories, that the radical difference between God and the natural world means that grounding divine command in divine love can only ground a formal claim of the divine on the human; recipients of revelation must construct particular commands out of this formal claim. While some metaethicists might respond to us by claiming that this account leads to an inability to judge between better and worse constructions of the commanded life, we propose that an analysis of the human response to divine love—theological eros—can be the basis for an articulation of a philosophical theology (in our case, negative theology) that can guide the religious believer toward generating particular principles for ethical action that are grounded in an account of divine action. By linking divine command to imitatio Dei, the believer can have confidence that her imitative acts of God are not inaccurate constructions of the commanded life.     

ENERGY AND THE GENERATION OF THE WORLD

Abstract. Energy concepts in theology and natural science are studied to see how they may aid the science-theology dialogue. Relationships between divine and human energies in classical Christology and energy ideas in process theology are significant. In physics, energy has related roles as something conserved and as the generator of temporal development. We explore ways in which God and the world may interact to produce evolution of the universe. Possible connections between the double role of physical energy and the bipolar character of God in process theology are noted. Energy helps to describe God's relationship with the world in both theological viewpoints and, thus, may bridge them.     

Models of God

This essay compares and contrasts nine different conceptual models of God: atheism, agnosticism, deism, theism, pantheism, polytheism, henotheism, panentheism, and eschatological panentheism. This essay justifies employment of the model method in theology based on commitments within philosophical hermeneutics, philosophy of science, and the theological understanding of divine transcendence. The result is an array of conceptual models of the divine which have reference, but which make indirect rather than literal claims. Of the analyzed models, this essay defends “eschatological panentheism” as the most satisfying model for Christian constructive theology. This paper was delivered during the APA Pacific 2007 Mini-Conference on Models of God.     

Theological Shamelessness? A Response to Arthur Peacocke and David A. Pailin

This is a theological response to two programmatic essays, “Science and the Future of Theology: Critical Issues,” by Arthur Peacocke and “What Game is Being Played? The Need for Clarity about theRelationship between Scientific and Theological Understanding,” by David A. Pailin. It argues that the two authors, well informed by the recent developments in science, are reduplicating some methodological and epistemological trends common to nineteenth‐century theology. The feasibility of their project should, therefore, be examined on whether they succeed in answering the questions posed to the liberal project that dominated theological and philosophical scholarship in the last century. They are found to be wanting in their inadequate response to three considerations: (1) the persistence of particular manifestations of religion and theology's enduring refusal to accept thoroughly scientific “enlightened” criteria, (2) the epistemological implications of the eschatological character of the Christianmessage, and (3) the trinitarian paradigm for Christian theology and the life of faith.     

Divine simplicity

According to a doctrine widely held by most medieval philosophers and theologians, whether in the Muslim or Christian world, there are no metaphysical distinctions in God whatsoever. As a result of the compendious theorizing that has been done on this issue, the doctrine, usually called the doctrine of divine simplicity, has been bestowed a prominent status in both Islamic and Christian philosophical theology. In Islamic philosophy some well-known philosophers, such as Ibn Sina (980–1037) and Mulla Sadra (1571–1640), developed this doctrine through a metaphysical approach. In this paper, considering the historical order, I shall first concentrate on Ibn Sina’s view. Then I shall turn to the theory of divine simplicity of Thomas Aquinas (1225?–1274), as the most developed and comprehensive version of the medieval theories in Christian world. Finally, I will return to Islamic philosophy and explore the more complicated and mature account of the doctrine as it was introduced by Mulla Sadra according to his own philosophical principles.     

The Problem of Ontotheology: Complicating the Divide Between Philosophy and Theology

This paper examines the problem of ontotheology as it was defined by Martin Heidegger, and how it has subsequently been approached by those philosophers and theologians who have followed in his wake. It argues that Heidegger's initial analysis of the onto-theological condition was mistaken by its presumption of a radical divide between philosophy and theology. Furthermore, many of the key thinkers who have followed after Heidegger have merely reinscribed this supposed divide between thought and faith, rather than genuinely questioning the terms Heidegger thought self-evident. The result, even among some of the most radical and influential contemporary thinkers such as Emmanuel Levinas, John Caputo, and Jean-Luc Marion, has been a contemporary philosophy deprived of questions of faith and a theology unaccountable to its place in the world. In response to this shortcoming of contemporary philosophical and theological thought, Jacques Derrida has approached the problem of ontotheology from the dual perspective of both thought and faith, and thereby, has provided a new path of thought beyond the problem of ontotheology and towards a renewed appreciation for the possibilities for a genuine philosophical theology.