فیض

In Augustine's thought, human nature is sick because of original sin, and this disease has also made humans incapable of achieving salvation and doing good deeds. Hence, it needs an external factor to be strengthened: grace. The result of Augustine's belief is that babies are guilty of physical birth in such a situation. In the meantime, Pelagius believes that Augustine's approach has results that undermine the tenets of Christian doctrinal principles. First, it deprives God of the attributes of justice and power, while the Bible considers God to be just because the Bible considers God to be Just and seeks a conception of man as a just creature. Secondly, It causes an unfair interpretation of Divine Grace that challenges other inner areas of human beings and reduces them to inefficiency. Therefore, to solve this problem, Pelagius first considers the human will to be free, and in the next step, he introduces human nature as pure and explains it with an Arian approach; he first explains grace and then confronts Augustine's interpretation of Paul. He also considers Augustine's evidence from the Bible metaphorical, thus declaring the infants free from any sin. In this study, we intend to investigate this issue descriptively and refer to original sources.

The "Theory of Grace" is one of the innovations of Plotinus and serves as a response to the issue of the emergence of multiplicities from the One. Throughout history, various explanations of grace have been provided by philosophers, but Ibn Arabi's interpretation is notably different. This research aims to examine the issue of the semantic coordinates of the system of grace by balancing the views of Plotinus and Ibn Arabi, utilizing the method of Aristotelian description and analysis, and evaluating it at two levels: components and foundations. The goal of this research is to discover and infer the components of the system of grace within the two epistemological frameworks of Plotinus and Ibn Arabi, in such a way that the relationship between the foundations and views of these two thinkers is demonstrated. The findings of the study indicate that the system of grace in Plotinus and Ibn Arabi has fundamental and structural differences in terms of both foundation and structure. Specifically, Ibn Arabi has been able to present a more precise and comprehensive analysis of grace by situating the theory within the context of the personal unity of existence. The most significant achievement and characteristic of Ibn Arabi's grace can be seen in his transition from the multiplicities of being and his profound explanation of the relationship between the Divine and creation, as well as the degree of presence and activity of the Divine.

The roots and foundations of grace can be recovered and reflected in the works of Kennedy (185-252 AH); Before other Islamic philosophers, he explained the mode of the activity of the God, as the only real agent that gives existence, the agent of the permission of creations, the explanation of the creative verb, the explanation of the formation of the best system in accordance with the previous wisdom of God and the foundation that is suitable for the soul of the exalted of wisdom. Islam has established the theory of grace to explain these issues. Since the prevailing opinion considers Farabi as the first Islamic thinker who discussed the issue of grace, the necessity of the current analytical research is revealed to understand the correct historical development of this issue and to determine the role of Kennedy regarding the issue of grace. So far, no research has been done in this field.

In proposing his doctrine of creation, Avicenna is under the influence of Aristotle and Neoplatonian theory of emanation as well as Islamic theologicians and religious texts. This is why his thought is basically different from previous thinkers. While he defines “the agent” as “emanatory” and “cause of existence”, he believes that the relationship between the beings and the agent is based on an existential relationship. With minor amendments, his theory of “creative foreknowledge” can be proposed as a prominent theory about the origin of emanation of beings. He examines divine knowledge by referring to “knowledge by presence” and “unity of the knower and the known”. Given his comments about knowledge by presence, the divine knowledge about the created beings including mubda'at, mukhtara'at and mukawwanat can be explained based on his theory. Particularly, he explains divine knowledge about the created beings through the divine knowledge of his own essence. Then the emanation theory has not been neglected by later philosophers and has been considered as one of the most rational interpreatations of God as the creator and agent and of the creation of world. In this article. We have tried to explain the relationship between the creator and the created based on the emanation theory of Avicenna. The theory of emanation along with We have tried to explain the relationship between the creator and the created based on the emanation theory of Avicenna. The theory of emanation along with the divine knowledge has been proposed as the basis of “creation out of nothing” (creatio ex nihilo).

Discussion about the divine attributes has a long term history in theology and philosophy. Among all of the divine attributes, “knowledge” has received more attention because of its effectiveness in determining all of the verbal issues related to interpretation of this divine specification. Avicenna and Duns Scotus are representatives of the two main theories about the Gos’d knowledge among the Islamic and Christian philosophers whom I have studies and compared in this research. The main difference between these two philosophers in divine knowledge can be recorded as Scotus’ God is a purposeful actor (fa’el-e bel-qasd), however, Avicenna introduces the God as the wise and single-minded actor (fa’el-e-bel-enayah) justifying the creation based on the grace. While there is this big difference, there are many similarities between these two opinions; such as, both of them consider God as a cause for creation. Both believe in existence of creatures in divine knowledge before their real creation without considering reasonable forms or platonic parables as separated creatures. Both of them believe that God has no other purpose except for his essence for creation of universe or human.

Parmenides and Xenon’s argument for denying motion turned this issue from its obvious form into a theoretical one for the first time. Aristotle showed the possibility of motion with the theory of force and action, but did not offer an argument for the existence of motion. Many philosophers after him, without mentioning the issue of acknowledging the external existence of motion, seem to have taken its externality for granted. Ibn Sina considered the argument for the external objectivity of motion to be metaphysical, yet he made no attempt to prove the external existence of motion. However, we can derive arguments from all of his works and ideas to prove the objectivity of motion. In this article, the theory of grace has been used as an argument for the objectivity of motion. Since grace is the permanence of the divine act, and hindering the series of causes is impossible, the occurrence of time is the same as motion. In other words, the continuity of divine grace is nothing but movement. This movement has manifested itself in material objects. His view of time and its relation to objects is also presented as another argument for proving the externality of motion. Ibn Sina considers the existence of time as a proof of the existence of objects.

The purpose of this article is to examine and answer this fundamental question: Given that the theory of grace in Ibn Sina's thought means grace and the "necessary" overflow of beings from the Almighty, how does this theory conform to the divine will? In other words, how can one combine "necessity" and "will" in the context of the theory of grace, when in appearance these two categories negate each other? Based on the metaphysical foundations of Ibn Sina's theology, the author has reached the following conclusions First, the theory of grace in Ibn Sina's thought is based on certain metaphysical and theological principles and principles that in some respects have the same principles and principles as Ibn Sina's philosophy. Secondly, for this reason, the theory of grace can be understood only on the basis of the same principles. Thirdly, according to Ibn Sina's view of the principles of beings, the structure of the universe, the essence and attributes of transcendence, especially his objective knowledge and will, the necessity of grace is not only not contrary to the divine will; Rather, it arises from his essence, knowledge, will and obligation. That is, the world is an essential requirement of the obligatory essence according to its essential will; Therefore, no possibility other than the Supreme Being can impose a necessity on him. The difficulty of und

In this study, we shall assess the claim concerning the negative effect of sin and positive effect of grace on proper function of reason and cognitive faculties through the lens of the Calvinist tradition and the Reformed Epistemology. Although the noetic effect of sin has already been discussed probably by tracing the role of the non-epistemic factors in acquiring knowledge in general, approaching the issue by focusing on ‘scientific knowledge’ is novel and, to the best of my knowledge, has not been attempted before. This study will be developed by means of an evaluation of Stephen Moroney’s project. Through a critical survey of the views of a number of prominent Christian theologian, he tries to develop a model for the cognitive influence of sin. In our review of his work from the canons of Critical Rationalism, we shall try to show that Moroney's conclusions are inconsistent with his explanation of the effect of sin on the natural sciences. Our main arguments are as follows: what Moroney describes as scientific knowledge from a Christian point of view is more a technological awareness rather than scientific knowledge proper. Furthermore, it is the scientist who is affected by sin and not his scientific claim.

For Paul Tillich, "symbolic language" is the only appropriate means of expressing, analyzing, and examining religious subjects that transcends the ability and limitation of conventional worldly terms, as well as the conceptual language of philosophy. The purpose of the present study is to demonstrate the feasibility of analyzing issues such as "divine grace", "inductive virtues" and "delightful vision" in the philosophical theology of Thomas Aquinas with a symbolic language approach. The theory of "symbolic language", because of its contradictory and polar features, provides an understanding of the divine bliss, divine grace and inductive virtues in its context. It also views these issues as symbols that are appropriate answers to the fundamental and existential issues of human. On this basis, it can be said that God's grace is a response to the issue of "inherent sin" and the defects of human nature. Induced virtues are a response to insufficient acquired virtues to achieve supernatural happiness. The delightful vision is a response to one's desire to know the beginning and the origin of the existence. And true happiness in heaven is a response to man's natural desire for eternity with peace and goodness.

The status of caliphate (viceroy) is one of the positions which belong to a complete person. Among all creatures, God has chosen human being for this status. But are all humans equal in the achievement of this position? What are the differences between real and conventional and minor and major caliphate? I will explain Molla-Sadra's view as a philosopher and Nasafi's view as a mystic. Using a comparative method in this article, I will try to answer this question: are the theories of Molla- Sadra and Nasafi on Caliphate in accordance with each other or they have differences? Although it seems, at the beginning, that their theories are in accordance, but speculating on their words makes it clear that their views are different.

Plotinus thinking as applied in the grounds and infinity Ahad, lack of acceptance of solutions and alliances, despite being super-interpretation of causality to overflow, God is something totally different,
In such a way that one can not put a name to him and he can not be described by any language Ahad Plotinus above that for all non-recognition of acquired knowledge and intellect and intuition knows . The only way to get him to go beyond intuition that show obvious dichotomy defines control.
Farabi, according to the Platonic theory of grace, gives a sense of Necessary Despite some accounts, with the One Plotinus under the Effect of Islamic teachings and theories metaphysical distinction of being and nature The unit also has many differences with the concept of Plotinus. Necessary knows of that nature, necessitates existence and the assumption of non-existence, is impossible. There's not arise due to non-existence to another, and he does not need, but it is because of all objects.
So there he is simple and non-composite. And because it is simple, it is not definable, since God is simple nature, his attributes he is one with nature and the universe's creation was invented.

How to obtain human knowledge of God is always a concern of philosophers and scientists, and there are different views about it; Islamic traditions for the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) in the knowledge of God have placed a very high status key so that the knowledge of God exclusively in some traditions through inmate has been introduced. By the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH) who, in a sense, existential mood and on the other hand due to unique features and their own place in the universe are connected to God can help us in the pursuit of knowledge and the quality of and the seeking to lead it. In this article clarifies the role of intermediary Ahl al-Bayt (as) in the knowledge of God and the need for such intermediaries have confirmed that support the rational and traditional Furthermore, their developmental role and legislation in different kinds of knowledge creation in the image. Explaining the rational and intuitive knowledge of God in the form of legislative Besides being captured, and his love for developmental role of provinces and their role in the knowledge of God. Based on how to obtain the knowledge of God by Ahlbyt based on Islamic sources such narratives can be Tbyyyn and analyzed.

One of the Islamic theological doctrines is related to the mediums of [divine] grace mentioned in the Quran and traditions – mediums such as the Pen, the Heaven, the Throne, the Preserved Tablet, the Tablet of Effacement and Affirmation, and the Angels. Cosmological explanation of these facts and specifying their status in the system of creation are among important discussions in Islamic theology. Mullā Sadrā (or Sadr al-Muta’allihīn) who attempts to present philosophical explanations for religious doctrines has sought to explain – based on his own philosophical system – the mode of existence of those mediums and their role in transferring divine grace. The present study seeks to investigate his explanation of those mediums and their status in existence to present a correct picture of them, while stating their mode of existence and the existential features of each. Mullā Sadrā refers to the levels of divine knowledge and regards those realities as various levels of divine knowledge, belonging to the realm of intellects or spirits, based on their existential order.

The relationship of favour and grace with duty is one of the considerable debates in Imamiyah school of thought and Catholic Christianity. Although the two principles of Lutf (favour) in Imamiyah and fayd(grace) in Catholic Christianity are intended to achieve welfare and salvation, they have different effects and take different ways in relation to duty. The present paper shows through a comparative method and documental approach that, according to Imamiyah theology, fulfilling the duty and following Sharia contribute to realizing the principle of Lutf. In Catholic theology, the principle of fayd is pivotal, but Divine Law receives little attention in practice. In reality, the intended permanent principle in the rule of favour(lutf) is duty and the aim of realizing divine favour leads to duty, but the intended cornerstone of grace is the very grace of Jesus whose appearance leads to the revocation of prophets’ duty and Divine Law. The acts and moral precepts and faiths taught by Jesus and Catholic Church are intended to achieve divine grace.

This article has adressed the concepts of determinism and free will, predestination, original sin, grace and their application in Christian theology. Furthermore discussion Augustine's views in determinism and priest Pelagius's opinions who opposed him, have been studied. The researcher has obtained their opinions by translating Augustine's writings against Pelagius and his followers. In following the discussion also reviews Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari's thoughts in determinism and freewill, and theory of acquisition written by him. His opponent's views; the sect Mutazilah, is discussed and explained in comparison in the viewpoints of the two factions in the Islamic theology and Augustine's view of determinism and free will. Augustine's doctrine of grace is the way out of the quagmire of determinism in Catholic theology. In the same vein Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari has opened the way with the idea of designing complete determinism and acquisition's theory is protected him from accusation of determinism. His critics, however, believe that these theories are do not protect the both renowned theologians from determinism. In addition to the aforementioned issues common or other distinguishing features of these two thinkers of the Islamic Christian theology have been investigated.

Faith and practice are most important factors for salvation in Islam and Christianity. More over the concepts of redemption in Christianity and the intercession in Shia have also been counted as elements of salvation. There are some similarities between them, which may be led to the misunderstanding that redemption and intercession are the same; whereas the definition and function of these two doctrines are different in the religious traditions of both religions. The doctrine of redemption is the essential part of Christian theology, especially in soteriology. If this doctrine is put under question, the whole structure of Christian theology will be disintegrated. But doctrine of intercession is complementary part in Shia. In this article at first, the doctrine of redemption is explained. Considering that the understanding of the concept of redemption is based on other doctrines, including anthropology, soteriology and Christology in Christian theology, at first the relationship between redemption and these concepts will be discussed. It will be declared that Christians believe that Adam's sin had grave consequences for humanity, in a way that it becomes the source of human sinfulness. In Christian point of view God was incarnated in Jesus and was crucified in order to be redemptive of Adam's sin and in order to save men. Everyone who believes in the death and resurrection of Jesus will be delivered. In the second part of the article, the question of intercession according to Shia will be discussed. It will be suggested that the nature of man is pure in Islam and man himself can reach salvation by faith and good practice. In addition, mercy of God and the intercession of Imams will help sinful persons. But in the third part of the article, some similarities and differences between these doctrines will be pointed out. I will insist mostly on their conceptual and functional differences. Their similarities include: Both doctrines need an intermediate; both of them are considered as act of God and are accomplished by permission of God; both of them are based on grace and mercy of God; both of them are ordained to save men; both of them prerequisite some conditions. The differences between these doctrines include: The doctrine of redemption in Christianity is the main factor for salvation and that is initiative act of God; but in the doctrine of intercession, man himself has the main role for salvation and intercession has a complementary role; redemption changes human nature, but according to Islam nature of human isnt sinful so that it require sanctification; redemption is almost related to Original sin and establishes reconciliation between God and man, but intercession is related to daily sins. Eventually redemption is the essential doctrine in Christianity, but intercession is the secondary doctrine in Shia. Indeed the story of Cross and redemption is the base of Christian theology and other issues are based on it. Consequently if the doctrine of redemption is put under question, the whole Christian theology will be disintegrated. However because there is religious Law in Shia, the concept of intercession has secondary aspect and if there are different views about intercession, it will not make any problem for other theological doctrines in Shia.