جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "الاهیات" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

This article, emphasizing Peter Byrne’s thought, one of the most important figures of contemporary religious philosophy, in addition to explaining his views on realism and non-realism as well as theism, religion, and theology, analyzes the philosophical foundations of this issue. Byrne’s critical approach to various dimensions of non-realism contains a fundamental distinction between theism and theology in adopting a realist and non-realist point of view about them; considering the separation of the two fields of theology and theism, he believes in the unrealistic nature of liberal theology as an academic discipline and the realism of religion, God, and theistic discourse; the purpose of the theistic discourse refers to an extra-mental, extra-mundane, transcendent entity. Ultimately, has analyzed the philosophical foundations of this issue; and Peter Byrne’s brief reference in examining the origin of the distinction between realism and non-realism, and also highlighted the modern non-realistic interpretation of religion, and in addition to analyzing the roots of the problem of religious realism and non-realism and by emphasizing the relationship between subject and object-especially in Kant’s philosophy, he has reviewed this philosophical foundation in the opinion of Peter Byrne.

One of the basic needs of human is spirituality. Spirituality is the inner connection of man with God, which affects various aspects of life. One of the dimensions of the subject of spirituality is its relation to other concepts, including religion, ethics, mysticism, and concepts of this kind. One of the concepts that discusses its relation to spirituality is the concept of theology. The meaning of theology is the systematic explanation of God and the relationship of God with the world and the same system of belief. One of the Christian theologians who deals with spirituality and theology, is McGrath, a professor of theology at the University of Oxford. In the field of Islam, Martyr Motahhari also deals with the relationship of spirituality with beliefs. He is an influential scholar of contemporary religious thought in the Muslim world. The purpose of this paper is to examine the views of these two thinkers on the relationship between spirituality and theology with a comparative and descriptive-analytic approach based on their work. Although both thinkers have lived in two religious traditions and periods of time, both of them have been bound up with their religion. Both were concerned with the comprehensive, accurate, and systematic expression of religious doctrines. Both sought to strengthen the religiosity of humans in achieving prosperity and salvation. Both have focused on the issues and concerns of the society of their time. Therefore, their views are comparable. Considering the importance of spirituality in the contemporary world, the necessity of dialogue among religious followers in today's world, the importance and capacity of the topic of spirituality as a common topic for dialogue and the place of comparative studies in order to better understand the topic, the necessity of this research is determined. From McGrath’s point of view, spirituality has a strong link with theology. In his view, spirituality is based on knowledge and, of course, is also a component of feeling, tendency and personal experience. The other component of spirituality is action and behavior based on personal beliefs and experiences of God. In his view, Christian spirituality should not be ignored of social conditions. Spirituality from the perspective of Martyr Motahhari is a comprehensive concept that is the result of all the teachings of Islam. Spirituality is based on true faith that embraces all aspects of human life. Martyr Motahhari believes that faith has two basic components of knowledge and tendency. In other words, he believes in epistemic and emotional aspects of faith. In his view, true faith is meaningful with these two components, and the lack of each one leads to flawed faith. He not only believes in faith based on knowledge, but also believes in knowledge as a necessary part of faith and as its components. From the point of view of both thinkers, spirituality is an important element in religion. Both emphasize religious spirituality based on religious teachings and beliefs. Spirituality should be theocentric and based on the holt text. Both emphasize the comprehensiveness of spirituality. Both believe in the relationship between spirituality and beliefs and the foundation of beliefs for spirituality. They do not regard spirituality and faith, apart from knowledge and belief, as well as action and social life. The existence of similarities indicates the importance of the spirituality and spiritual needs of human, the necessity of religious spirituality and the attention to the theological foundations of spirituality. Despite these similarities, there are some differences. Although McGrath insists beliefs must be firm, some Christian beliefs are not. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus is a belief in the opposite of reason. Also, the revelation and infallibility of the text of the Quran, as the sacred text of the Muslims and the source of spirituality, can be proved on the basis of rational and religious reasons. But this is not true for the Bible and there is no valid rational or historic reason for the heavenly nature of the whole Bible. The New Testament is a collection of records of some of the apostles. In addition, during the Biblical historical critique, it has been proven that some of its books do not belong to their authors. Regarding the Old Testament, in addition to the Quranic reasons, there are several reasons in the Biblical historical critique that shows that the Old Testament, especially Torah, has been altered and distorted. It seems that the differences are due to differences in the worldview of two thinkers, most of which are due to the religious tradition that they belong to.

Abstract In the first half of the nineteenth century the dispute over the compatibility of the Christian faith with the new scientific discoveries was one of the hottest debates in the Western theologians' thoughts, especially in Germany. Most of the Protestant theologians, who were known as "liberal", believed that in the light of the new scientific discoveries, the Christian faith and theology alike needed reconstruction. These theologians came to this conclusion that religion and culture were, in practice, one and the same. Tillich's work, in between, was a continuation of such a view about religion and culture. One can say that, indeed, all his endeavors are to show a kind of coherent and logical compatibility between Christianity and the new culture. He does this in his most important book Systematic Theology.  In this article, along presenting and analyzing his work in this book, his success in this regard is evaluated. He believes the relation between theology and situation, which is the relation between religion and culture, is in fact the relation between "asking" and "answering". Religion and culture always constitute a unified whole, the form of which is culture and the content and essence of which is religion. The book Systematic Theology is, indeed, based on this very fact. The work consists of five parts: In the first part, he correlates the religious symbol of Logos with this question of modern culture as how one can reach to the important human truth. In the second part, the religious symbol of the creator God is correlated with this modern culture's question of the infinite as how one can resist the destructive powers that threaten one's life. In the third part, he correlates the religious symbol of Jesus Christ with this question of the modern culture as how we can cure the disease of estrangement in us and in our neighbors. In the fourth part, the religious symbol of the Holy Spirit is correlated with this modern culture's question as how one can possess the genuine life, while the ethics, religious experiences and the new culture are all obscure. And finally, in the fifth part, the religious symbol of the Kingdom of God is correlated with this question as whether the history has any sense. In order to answer the first question, Tillich seeks to analyze the structure of human reason. Therefore, Tillich, in the first part of his theological system, comes to the conclusion that the major reason for doubt and skepticism in the modern time is, in fact, the finitude of the human reason. In the second part of his book, Tillich talks about the religious symbol of God and wants to answer this question of the modern culture as what threatens our being by non-being, and what the way is to avoid it. This topic is ontological – as the previous topic was epistemological. In this part he discusses about many detailed issues on the structure of existence. According to him, being and nonbeing are interrelated. In the third part of his book, Tillich deals with one of the major issues of the modern culture, that is the estrangement and the reasons leading to it, and analyzes its relationship to Christianity's most significant symbol, i.e. Jesus Christ. In order to achieve this goal he first analyzes existence. According to him, each reality, including man's reality, has two levels: the essential level – or the essential being – and the existential level. The essential being is the potential being and the existential being is “to stand out of potentiality” (Tillich,1975, vol. 2, p. 22). Therefore, ʻexistenceʼ is the transition from potentiality to actuality which, according to Tillich, is in fact “falling away from what man essentially is” (Ibid). In the fourth part of the book, Tillich seek to find a response to this modern question: While the new culture rendered the meaning of life ambiguous, how can one recognize the genuine life? Based on that, he first studies the ambiguities of the meaning of life in the modern age and tries to look for the unambiguous life. Based on his view, life is the actualization of being and unites the two characteristics of being, i.e. the essential and the existential dimensions (Tillich,1975, vol. 3, p. 12). Thus, the concept of life gets an ontological dimension and is not just exclusively applicable to animate beings. Different beings have different levels and dimensions, but amongst them all, only man possesses ʻspiritʼ.And finally by resorting to the symbol of the Kingdome of God, he deals with this principle question of the modern age that “Is history meaningful?” Through the three processes of life – which were mentioned earlier – namely: self-integration, self-creativity and self-transcendence, history moves towards the ultimate, which is in fact its fulfilment. But history, like life in general, is under the ambiguities in all the three existential dimensions; the ambiguities “which have always been felt and powerfully expressed in myth, religious and secular literature, and art” (Ibid, p. 332). The ambiguity of history in the dimension of self-integration is expressed through the terms ʻempireʼ and ʻcentralizationʼ. This ambiguity is present in all phases of the church history and in all the secular movements. In the end we have some points about his principles and conclude  that his views about relation between Religion and culture in modern time  dose not resolve problems of  our age. The readers must see our point in detail.

Plato's theology as part of his intellectual system, Influenced by factors that formed and has been affected the entire of this epistemic world.As the field of ontology and epistemology- take effect from (or receptivity to) dual heritage of Parmenides and Heraclitus-He attach to rational and emotional spheres. In theology is also committed to this dualistic attitude.Plato, on the one hand to keep the element of unchangeable and stability that is the familiar features of main theological streams, turned to realm of the transcendent and pure material features. On the other hand, to thinking about affairs and presence of divine agents in the material world, he has to formation a kind of immanent realm.Consequently speaks about two kinds of theology such as transcendental and immanence in Plato's system of thinking is reasonable

Avicenna may be regarded as the first Muslim philosopher who has perceived a deep connection between Aristotelian concept of ousia and being and، analyzing the concept ontologically، he tried to correct the failures of Aristotle’s thought in this field. In this way، the ambiguity of the subject-matter of first philosophy has been omitted and the capability of Aristotle’s philosophical teachings is used for establishing a religious philosophy. As is explained، in spite of considerable changes made in contemporary studies on Aristotle`s philosophy، Avicenna can be regarded as a perfect authority in this field.

The present study explains and reviews one of the nonrealistic and very new views on the nature of religious propositions. The "post liberal theology" is a new theological approach emerged with the purpose of creating religious unity and epistemological justification of religious pluralism. The main question of this study is the following: "what analysis on religious proposition does the post liberal theology present and how does it apply this analysis in religious unity and pluralism?" The writer has firstly tried to focus on the views of George Lindbeck, the most important figure in this theological approach, to explain the nonrealistic post liberal linguistic-cultural attitude and its role in unity. It then uses an analytical method to investigate and criticize this new method.

The religious sphere in Heidegger's thought is one of the persistent questions that consider the relation of religion, theology, philosophy in his life and his idea. His argument about ideas, religious characters and also his own points about the significance of the ideas and characters in the formation of his philosophic project, illuminates the role of religion in general and Christian theology in particular in his life and his thoughts. Although his thoughts have several sources, but Christian theology and Gnosticism have had a permanent influence on them. Heidegger's bases in existence analysis have common aspects with Augustine, Eckhart, Luther, and Kierkegaard. Heidegger has used phenomenology to analyze original life and believes that this life can be touched in a religious approach and such an experience can be found in primary Christianity. Although religious experience is not his only favorite subject he considers religion as a possible form of life, completely different from philosophy. Although Heidegger does not comment on the existence of God and does not take the same religious and metaphysical attitude about God, he gives some attributes about existence that is usually used for God. Lots of statements Heidegger has uttered about existence remind one of negative theology. His viewpoint can be considered as an attempt for forming a faith in contemporary world beyond its traditional forms.

Generally speaking, Islamic philosophy is the legacy of Greece and is modeled on Aristotle’s works in particular. Like the collection of his philosophical works, it consists of logic, general metaphysics, physics, theology, and practical wisdom. Concerning the definition and subject of philosophy, following the Aristotelian tradition, Islamic philosophy has referred to “existent qua existent” and “separate substances” and posed the discussion of whether each is separately the subject of philosophy, and whether they are the same as each other or one includes the other. Moreover, it asks how, if the former is true, this sameness is justified, and if the latter is true, which is general and which is particular.In all the philosophical systems of the East and the West, these two issues, that is, the accidents of existent qua existent and separate substances are mixed with each other and cannot sometimes be separated from each other. However, in Islamic philosophy, particularly after Mulla Sadra, they were separated from each other under the titles general theology and particular theology or theodicy. However, both are subcategorized under the all-inclusive title “prime philosophy” or theology. There have also been debate concerning the scientific borderlines between the two issues; nevertheless, they have not led to any conclusions in practice. This paper deals with a methodological demarcation between them.

A discussion of science and religion in the contemporary period could justifiably present a historical narrative of the major scientific advancements and theological movements in the twentieth century along with the key developments in the rapidly growing specialization of religion and science. This approach would illumine the origins of the specialization as well as the events that have shaped it. Another approach is to examine the relationship between the contemporary study of science and religion, and its Western cultural environment. Historical narrative is less important in this approach, while interpretation and argument are more prominent. However, such an analysis promises desirable insights into the potential importance of the specialization of religion and science. This is the approach taken in this essay. Accordingly, the first part of this paper offers a sweeping glance at those features ofcontemporary Western culture that are most pertinent to the emergence and modification of what can be called its "critical spirit." The second part aims to relate science, religion, and the study of their interaction to this cultural analysis, in a bidirectional way.

This paper is firstly concerned with schleiermacher's scientific biography in brief. Then by reviewing his most important book On Religion, his view about religion and being religious will be discussed in detail. It will also be discussed that by the term religion he means feeling of dependence to the Infinite and by the term religions he intends the individualized forms of the Religion. So, these two terms will be central for this paper. At the end we will have some criticism about his views concerning religion.

For any viable present discussion of the relations between theology and the sciences, it is essential to understand the profound changes in the theological scene that have occurred since the beginning of the nineteenth century. All too often in the contemporary discussion, both by scientists and by theologians, attention is focused sharply on the impact of new scientific views; the equally dramatic theological changes have been ignored or misunderstood. The author's concern here is, therefore, to direct attention to aspects of the nineteenth century story, though with a few suggestions of implications for the present.

New logic, because of its great growth and development, can be counted as a powerful instrument to explicate philosophical and theological demonstrations. The fact that new logic systems are postulates is a great help to find out the consistency or inconsistency of philosophical and theological proofs. In addition, the importance of making philosophical and theological systems as postulates is known for the expert and using the new logical advanced systems can be helpful for achieving this important purpose.In this article by mentioning some examples, I will show the methods of applying the new logical systems and their importance and the method of postulate in solving some of the most important theological questions. One of the important and underlying subjects of theology is the issue of proving God's existence. It's not a long time that some of the great new logicians are engaged to find strong demonstrations for proving God's existence based on the new logic systems. Thus to be familiar with some different examples of these efforts, the most important ones are mentioned in this research and taking into account the extent of an article, one of these proofs which is based on the new modal logic has been analytically investigated.

Philosophy of theology is one of the attributed philosophies that has come to the attention of scholars in the present century. Although western scholars have previously worked on this subject and have paid more attention to it, but recently Muslim scholars have studied this subject as well and have not neglected it. Philosophy of theology looks externally at theology's discussions and themes and offers a descriptive- analytic report of them. This article is a summary of the author's notes in this topic. I have tried to briefly report some of the related discussions in which the correlation between theology and other sciences is more elaborated.

Among various sciences, especially in the realm of religious studies, some have close relations from the aspects of subject- matter, method and domain, to the extent that some think of them as one science, although they each have a distinct and independent title. In the realm of religious studies, sciences such as theology, philosophy of religion and first philosophy are among these sciences and their topics are sometimes confused during researches. Therefore, in the present research I am trying to show the boundaries between these sciences, and their differences and similarities.To determine the domain of each of these sciences, first I discuss theology and its related problems. Then I explain the similarities and differences between this science, first philosophy and philosophy of religion. Moreover, in each of these sciences, we will present the differences between them and their subsets.