جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « god » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Anyone who seeks truth and happiness acknowledges the necessity of studying God's existence and his uniqueness. This necessity is even more important considering that human’s innate nature has a tendency towards God. However, one can research this issue in the holy texts of different religions, not with “a priori” approach or seeking their rational reasons, but merely with “a posteriori” and descriptive approach; and can reach to this conclusion that the doctrine of the existence of God and monotheism is not necessary in one religion, but it is necessary in various religions. This result can be worthwhile for religious scholars. This research has tried to analyze the issue of God's existence, especially his uniqueness, in the Old Testament, using a library research method and a descriptive-analytical method. According to this research, there are numerous evidences in the Old Testament that introduce God as the progenitor of being, and several terms indicate the unity of God as well. Although some believe that the two mentioned belief principles are evident based on the Old Testament, but this claim is not acceptable, which is elaborately discussed in the article.

In the thoughts of theologians and philosophers of religion, symbolism and cryptic language are used as a means to convey the immaterial world and express metaphysical truths. This functionality is also employed in certain philosophical texts to describe the relationship between humans and God. The aim of this article is to explore the general concept of symbolism from the perspectives of Suhrawardi and Jaspers. After explaining and analyzing the nature and reasoning behind symbolism, as well as its characteristics and specific use in elucidating the concept of its role in the relationship between humans and God, the article compares the views of these two philosophers, identifying similarities and differences. For instance, Suhrawardi uses cryptic language to conceal meanings, while Jaspers aims to clarify the truth as much as possible through symbolism. According to both philosophers, the main feature of symbolism is its representational nature, and what is intended is an inner meaning, which ultimately cannot be fully deciphered. Suhrawardi believes that the encounter with symbolism occurs in the world of imaginal forms, while for Jaspers, it takes place in this very world. From Suhrawardi's perspective, symbolic language is not the only way to connect with God; God is not the sole creator and source of symbols. However, according to Jaspers, the transcendent manifests solely through symbolism, and the purpose and origin of symbols are solely attributed to God.

Studying the intellectual foundations and the position of philosophy and theology in the conceptualization of God among philosophers and theologians, can clarify their approach regarding the issue of God. How is the issue of God studied in the view of al-Ṭūsī and ʿAllāma Ḥillī- two "Ḥilla" theologians- according to their intellectual and philosophical-theological foundations and the position of philosophy and theology in their conceptualization of God? To what extent is their approach to the issue of God similar or different? In this article, we will study this problem from two aspects of form and method-content. As for the form, we will deal with the arrangement of the contents in their works according to their philosophical and theological foundations and the perception they have of God accordingly, and as for the method and content, we will discuss the method of knowing and proving God and explaining His attributes (both method and content). Al-Ṭūsī believes in a philosophical God and ʿAllāma Ḥillī, with a more inner-religious perspective, speaks of a religious-philosophical God. Regarding the content, in the method of proving the existence of God in the conceptualization of God, their opinions are similar, while in the formal structure and the issue of knowing God, they are different according to their intellectual foundations.

Religious texts, while describing various ways of knowing God, have put before humans a way with the theme of "Knowledge of God"; For example, it has been narrated from Amir al-Mu'minin (peace be upon him): Know Allah by Allah.... which has attracted the opinion of many elders and for this reason, different views have been formed under this honorable narration. Allameh Tabatabai is one of those who elaborated on this hadith and takes it to mean the negation of an intermediary in the knowledge of God, and considers any knowledge other than this to be shirk. He says: This knowledge is a result for every creature with understanding, but because it is neglected, it needs to be removed. Therefore, in my opinion, all proofs of God are punitive proofs.Although he considers the path of acquired knowledge to be blocked for God's knowledge, he considers the path of present knowledge to be open for this purpose and believes that through self-knowledge one can reach the destination. This research aims to analyze and investigate the view of Allameh Tabatabai in the commentary of "Knowledge of God" with analytical-descriptive method. What makes addressing this issue important is that; First, based on the author's search; Allameh's point of view is not mentioned in this detail anywhere else, and secondly, this study makes the place of philosophical and mystical foundations in the explanation and interpretation of religious texts clearer.

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 most important sociological, psychological, and theological issues in the contemporary world is "lifestyle". The significant point here is the role of worldviews in forming, dividing, and explaining the lifestyle. The divine and material worldviews divide the lifestyle into two important types. The subject matter of this article is the role of monotheism, as the most important foundation and infrastructure of Islam, in the lifestyle. This paper has answered these questions using a descriptive-analytical method What is the role of belief in God in people's lifestyles? What are the main characteristics of a monotheistic lifestyle? Is there only one type of monotheistic lifestyle or one can believe in different types of it? The results of this article show that monotheism completely changes the lifestyle and a believer's lifestyle is completely different from a non-believer’s lifestyle. Moreover, a monotheistic lifestyle leads to an optimistic view of the world and life, a profound and comprehensive understanding of the human being and the world, balance in life choices, deep pleasures, a coherent system in life, superior knowledge and values, rational action in life, making the immeasurable aspects of affairs measurable, creating the capacity of having superior choices, and directing the choices. Finally, the monotheistic lifestyle has different levels, so we are not faced with only one type of monotheistic lifestyle.

This article reports the first part of extensive research on the ‎nature of God's agency. The two main questions of this research are:‎‎(1) Is God a moral agent?‎‎(2) If so, is divine morality the same as human morality or does it differ from human morality, either wholly or ‎partially?‎Regarding the first question, the author examines three rival theories: ‎‎"God as an autocratic‎ agent", "God as a pragmatic agent" and "God as ‎a moral agent". In this research, the idea of God as a moral agent will ‎be argued for, and the other two conceptions of the nature of divine ‎agency will be argued against. Regarding the second question, the ‎author defends the theory that divine morality and human morality ‎have no difference in terms of their “normative content”, although ‎they have considerable differences in other respects.‎The first part of this research, presented in this article, after stating ‎the preliminaries, deals with the theory of “God as an autocratic ‎agent” and critically examines some of the arguments made or that ‎could be made in favor of this conception of the nature of God. The ‎second and third parts of this research, which will be published as ‎separate articles in forthcoming issues of this journal, will elaborate ‎on the other two conceptions of the nature of divine agency.

The problem of God's silence is an  problem that happens to many believers. Many believers think that they have lost their support and doubt their faith to such an extent that when they call upon God with all their being and do not feel any presence of God during their sufferings. It is as if you can no longer live with this God. No theodicy or defense can answer this problem because this issue is an emotional problem that harms the hearts of believers and not just their reason. Marilyn Adams has also taken a new approach to this issue by relying on existential theology. Adams believes that the answer to suffering is only possible depending on belief in God, because everyone leaves us, but God is always by our side, and we should feel God's comforting presence by our side with spiritual care. Adams explains the three stages of overcoming sufferings to solve this problem. These three stages are: 1. Creating a unifying relationship between the two aspects of fear of the terrible evil and intimacy with God. 2. Improving the capacities of meaning making for the person involved in suffering. 3. Rebuilding the relationship of the suffering person with the material world in such a way that he is no longer vulnerable to the sufferings of this world.

Although Freud is not the originator of the theory that "God is a creation and projection of the human mind" (as this idea has been discussed before him), he is the founder of the psychoanalytic interpretation of this concept. Relying on his psychoanalytic findings, Freud establishes the foundation of psychological atheism, asserting that God is the product of human childish illusion. Humans always need security. This need is fulfilled through the father during childhood. But as individuals mature, this is done through a psychological process that substitutes the father figure with God. Freud attempts to support this notion by applying his psychoanalytic findings to primitive societies and subsequently to monotheistic religions. For this, he employs frameworks such as scientific worldview, Darwinism, and physicalism into his argument. In this paper, written with an analytical-descriptive approach, we demonstrate that Freud’s perspective as well as its foundation encounter significant weaknesses and challenges. One of the important challenges that this perspective face is that despite accepting scientism as a principle and considering the scientific method as the only valid means to reach the truth, Freud appears to neglect this method when expressing his own views. His perspective also lacks the conditions of a scientific viewpoint because scientific viewpoints require testability, a criterion that his perspective lacks. Furthermore, even if his perspective is assumed to be correct, it does not necessitate the denial of God.

The Oneness of Being (wahdat al-wujûd), which has a mystical root, has been proposed in the views of mystics and some philosophers. Ibn Arabî and Hegel have made this topic the focus of their discussions with different approaches. Ibn Arabî’s Oneness of Being is not the conceptual unity of being, but rather the unity of the external existence of beings that the mystics have achieved through intuition. According to this theory, there is no more than one true Being, and that is God, and everything that appears to exist other than God is only the determinations, attributes, and manifestations of the same Being. Hegel designs his philosophical system with the concern of finite and infinite connection. In his philosophical system, it is through this finite matter that one can speak concretely about the realization and realization of the absolute and infinite, and in a dialectical development, the unity of the real and the reasonable can be reached. Despite the similarities between the ideas of these two thinkers, their views in this field have a fundamental difference.

The exploration of the meaning of life remains a central concern for contemporary humans. While Heidegger did not explicitly address this matter, his opinions can be discerned from his writings. He posited that modern humanity grapples with a form of nihilism, and the remedy lies in a return to authentic existence. In the later part of his life, Heidegger emphasized the importance of preventing dominance over nature and promoting respect for it as the criterion for the meaning of life. One significant limitation of Heidegger's perspective is the neglect of the role of goals and purpose in imparting meaning to life. In contrast, religious views provide a framework depicting a perfect, transcendent, and eternal goal for human life. This divine goal can guide individuals toward the pinnacle of meaning in life.

In their understanding of the God of the Qur'an, Those who agree with the appearance of the text, consider Him to be a superman who resides in the sky and sits on the throne. He breathed his soul into the body of Adam, and He appeared to Moses in the middle of the fire, He will come on the cloud with the angels on the Day of Judgment, and for the people of faith, it will be possible to see him on that day.
However, the opponents of appearanceism do not believe these types of propositions and suggest more distant meanings for the verses expressing them. In this situation, the present research aims to use the image of God in the Bible to understand the God of the Qur’an and seek help from that historical background in the judgment between the apparentists and the interpretationists. The hypothesis is that the Holy Bible supports the humanistic conceptions of God in the Qur'an and weakens the approach of opponents of the appearance of the text. Based on this, the human-like understanding of God in the Qur’an is the only correct understanding. Of course, in the end, it can be concluded that what the Qur’an says about God is a picture of Him for humans and is in accordance with their human understanding of God.

Among the important issues in the philosophy of religion is the investigation of the existence of God and the assessment of its rationality based on various criteria. Philosophers who do not believe in God and criticize the rationality of faith always insist on different reasons. In today's age, thinkers like Schellenberg rely on the idea of divine hiddenness and try to present an argument against the existence of God. The essence of his argument is based on a kind of theistic attitude based on which God is a benevolent and merciful creator who is infinite in knowledge and power. Relying on this attitude towards God, Schellenberg's argument states that if God exists, then he must reveal himself to us because he is both kind enough and powerful enough to do so. The purpose of this article is to examine and evaluate Schellenberg's argument. In the present study, the authors, while presenting a modus tollens version of Schellenberg's argument, have challenged the logical insufficiency and the existence of a necessary relationship between the antecedent and the consequent. As a result, the lack of visual and non-visual manifestation of God cannot be considered as proof against the existence of God. To explain the lack of logical connection between the premises of Schellenberg's argument, the authors rely on the voluntarism view of faith. The present research method is descriptive-analytical with a critical approach. The result of the research showed that the hiddenness of God cannot justify atheism.

The purpose of this article is to examine and criticize the famous theory "Evil is one of the essentials of the existence of good in the world" in response to the lasting doubt of the problem of evil. This point of view seeks to prove that there is no other way to achieve and realize good things in the world than to endure evil and pain and suffering, and this is how God made the world. One of the most important critics of this point of view is David Hume, who believes that God, who is omnipotent and purely benevolent and is the creator of the system and laws of nature, why did he not make it in such a way that good can be realized without evil or at least without great evil. According to this critique, God has not faced the work done so to speak. In other words, why does God use the means and purpose system that is specific to humans. It seems that David Hume did not consider the purity of God's benevolence and expediency.

Feminist theology, mainly, is committed to dealing with theology to empower and liberate women. The theologian feminists have taken three approaches to traditional Christianity: revolutionary, reformist, and reconstructionist. Mary Daly, as a revolutionary feminist theologian, strongly criticizes traditional Christianity which, she believes, is based on unreformable sexism. She, using the method called transcendence, transcends the central Christian concepts and teachings such as God the Father, Christology, the Fall, and the Church, and expresses her main ideas in the form of post-Christian theology. In this article, by the method of text-oriented analytical interpretation, Daly's major ideas are explained and analyzed, including the concepts of goal, faith, freedom, ethics, and sisterhood, all of which can be actualized via ‘becoming of woman.’ To understand ‘becoming of woman’ from Daily's point of view, it must be understood in correspondence with God as Verb (the Verb of Verbs). God as Verb, as the ultimate reality, is Be-ing and is always dynamic. Similarly, women also have a type of be-ing that has the ability for existential participation and dynamic intuition in/of Be-ing, the result of which will be the actualization of the feminine Metabeing. The main reason for becoming of woman is women's inner aspiration for self-transcendence, which ends in a new unfolding of God called second appearance by Daly.

One of the most important attributes that Pinnock ascribes to God is "love". According to him, traditional Christian theologians - influenced by Greek thought - put the love attribute under "God's moral attributes" and pushed it to the sidelines. However, based on the Bible, "love" is one of God's inherent attributes and he is basically the lover (and, also, the beloved). Therefore, paying attention to this issue is very important in Christianity. From the point of view of Imami theologians, although Pinnock's belief in the love relationship between God and human has advantages over traditional theology, there are criticisms on the requirements he considers for this relationship. They believe that firstly, those aspects of the relationship that indicate weakness and influence cannot be ascribed to God, and secondly, although love is an important aspect of the relation between God and human, this relation is servitude-focused and not love-centered.In this research, Pinnock's view is studied from the perspective of Imami theologians using a descriptive-analytical method.

Comparing the intuitions and thoughts of Muslim mystics and Suhrawardī regarding the existence of God and the Light of lights and extracting the differences and commonalities of their views provide the ground for promoting their thoughts and also the optimal use of their works. This article, with a descriptive-analytical method, tries to prove the states of inclusive unity (wāḥidiyya) and exclusive unity (aḥadiyya) in the essence of the Light of lights and argue for the ontological primacy of existence in the Illuminationist philosophy of Suhrawardī. Two questions are dealt with in this article. The first is whether, despite his lack of explication, the intuitive divine states of inclusive and exclusive unity of mystics' God can be ascribed to Suhrawardī's Light of lights, too. The second issue is whether according to Suhrawardī's implicit endorsement of the primacy of existence, the existence of Suhrawardī's God is the same as the existence of mystics' God, and according to his endorsement of the primacy of quiddity, they are not the same. The result is that Suhrawardī has implicitly accepts the mystic states of inclusive and exclusive unity of God and renders the existence of God and the Light of lights identical, not their quiddities.