Religious Realism vs. Anti-realism: Revisiting Don Cupitt, Paul Badham and D. Z. Phillips

Realism/anti-realism controversy has always been crucial in the history of philosophy, so that it has affected all philosophical areas, including religious belief, in which admitting realistic/anti-realistic approach has a wide range of influences in all religious concepts. After shedding some lights on preliminary issues concerning the nature and kinds of formulation of realism/anti-realism controversy, the present study is aimed at analyzing and comparing two kinds of Anti-realism: Don Cupitt’s one which relies on his reading of modern philosophy (especially Nietzsche’s), and D. Z. Phillips’s one which uses Wittgenstein’s later philosophy of language. Based on these foundations, they end with elimination of metaphysics and lead to one kind of relativism. So, application of these views on religious belief leads their attention to practical aspects rather than conceptual and theoretical ones. At this very point, Paul Badham, on the contrary, believes as a realist that performing rituals and prayers, in the absence of religious notions would be impossible, and having a realistic approach to the one who is worshiped (namely God), is an inherent part of religious practices. Finally, we show that these kinds of Anti-realism face with the problems which are insurmountable. Also, we will show that Badham’s Realism is not strong enough to cope with Ani-realism