فصلنامه فلسفه دین
سال بیستم شماره 4 (پیاپی 61، زمستان 1402)

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.

John Gray, who is an English  philosopher and specialist in the history of theories, proposes different types of atheism and tries to define, categorize and criticize them by extracting the presuppositions and logical consequences  of each one. New atheism, atheism based on secular humanism, atheism as making a kind of religion out of science, atheism in the form of antitheism, atheism in the form of modern political schools, atheism without progress, and atheism of silence are types of atheism are the varieties of atheism that John Gray distinguishes from each other. According to John Gray, some types of atheism have gone astray by misunderstanding the definition of religion and considering it as the primary type of science. Some others, by taking presuppositions such as the idea of humanity and the idea of progress, have suffered a kind of logical contradiction in their accepted principles; Because while denying the truth of religions, they have taken these two assumptions from the idea of monotheism and the idea of salvation in religions.The impossibility of establishing moral.

Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, in addition to narrative evidence in proving the embodiment of actions, also points to its rational stabilization. Therefore, this research, using a descriptive-analytical method, examines the intellectual evidences of the embodiment of moral actions from the perspective of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli to reach the rationality of religious data; On the one hand, he does not accept the rational arguments of some thinkers in explaining the embodiment of moral actions based on the transformation of energy into matter, and considers it to be neglect of intention in ethics, He rejects Fakhr Razi's point of view on reject of the embodiment of actions based on to be width of actions and impossibility to Convert width to essence .and considers it a confusion between theoretical and practical wisdom; It seems that the rational explanation of the transformation of energy into matter can also be presented in the intention, Also, since breadth the width has the dignity of substance in the transcendental wisdom, so by explaining the movement of substance, the embodiment of actions can be stabilized from a rational point of view, therefore, the embodiment of actions is still It is acceptable as one of the proofs of moral realism.

Argument of order, with different interpretations and from different perspectives, has been noticed by scientists. Islamic thinkers disagree about the value of this argument. Some philosophers believe that arguments based on order have no Argumentative value and they do not have enough strength to prove and recognize God. In return, a group of theologians have defended this argument and emphasized its special advantages. This research, with a descriptive-analytical and critical method, has evaluated the validity of this argument as the most general way of knowing God from the point of view of these two great thinkers. In this way, it is possible to know God with the reasons that have the highest level of perfection. As a result, Shahid Sadr's interpretation of the proof of order is based on the theory he adopted in epistemology and considering the problems faced by other interpretations of the order argument, including the interpretation based on "rational logic", It seems that the way proposed by Martyr Sadr is the best way to validate the order argument as a precise philosophical argument.

Christianity is based upon the idea of original sin. In other words, Christianity began by establishing a doctrine for the sin which is executed by Adam and Eva. In different eras, Christian theologians and before them, Church’s Fathers, tried to formulate this idea in a justificatory manner and to find a way for human salvation. The summit of these efforts could be seen in Saint Augustin and Luther writings. But, in the renaissance era, their approach converted and lead to another way and the thinkers of this age tried to revise the idea of original sin. One of these thinkers is Giordano Bruno. He disputed with Lutheran tradition and announced that this idea is false. In this article, first we try to sum up Bruno’s arguments and then we analyze phrases from Bible which is deeply related to the idea and by doing this we shall try to enforce Bruno’s thesis and to show in which way he was right. In the conclusion, we make this point evident that the revision Bruno made, lead Renaissance to a new kind of believing in God and by asserting this it will be intelligible that contrary to common beliefs, Renaissance rather than being era of leaving God behind the doors of Church, is the era of deification of every single part of World.

One of the issues that has always been the subject of controversy between Islamic and Western theologians and philosophers is the issue of the relationship between faith and action. In all religions, their followers are asked to adhere to religion in addition to faith in action. Meanwhile, in his works, Kant considers human reason capable of drawing a comprehensive plan for his happiness and believes in a moral ritual itself. Relying on the power of reason to recognize principles and generalities, Motahari believes that human reason is not capable of drawing such a comprehensive road map and has criticized Kant's views on this matter. This article tries to express the damage caused to Kant's foundations regarding faith and religious practice. Among the harms that can be considered from the perspective of Kant to this idea are: reducing religious concepts to rational perceptions, not paying attention to the difference between Actual good and good actor, humanizing divine laws, wandering, being caught in the contradiction of idea and action, neglecting The root and origin of religious and moral actions, lack of separation between purpose and means and lack of separation between types of relationships.