فصلنامه فلسفه دین
سال دهم شماره 1 (پیاپی 18، بهار 1392)

This paper has studied Motahari''s point of view on the divine revelation as a methodological problem. In Islamic philosophers'' point of view، divine revelation is result of union of prophet and active intellect. They consider the divine revelation as knowledge and emphasize its cognitive identity. On the other hand، some scholars reduce the divine revelation to tendencies and emphasize its attitude and non-cognitive identity. Both views suffer from reductionism. But for Motahari، divine revelation is considered as both tendency and knowledge. Far away from reductionism، he presents a comprehensive view and explains a complete definition of divine revelation. The relation of divine revelation to faith and fitrah (nature) is another issue discussed here. Motahari''s conceptualization of faith is based upon his view on divine revelation. So faith also is considered as to have both cognitive and non-cognitive identity. This conceptualization of faith and divine revelation is coherent with the way he understands fitrah. Thus، the analysis of faith، fitrah، and divine revelation، as Motahari describe them، are coherent with each other.

Richard Swinburne is a one of those contemporary philosophers who refers to inductive reasoning to provide explanation for theism. Utilizing the principle of credulity and simplicity، and by distinguishing the temporal orders from spatial orders، he attempts to strengthen the probability of the God existence. Swinburne tries to answer to the limit-question by the hypothesis of theistic theology. Using concepts such as probability، simplicity، credulity، predictability، and temporal orders to support this hypothesis، his arguments face challenges. This article tries to evaluate those arguments from a critical point of view.

The proofs of God''s existence are among the main questions of philosophers. This question has a special importance in Spinoza''s works، because it constitutes the basis of his philosophy. In his main work، Ethics، he initiates the discussion with the definition of God and ends it up with man''s noblest happiness، namely love of God. He deals with the issue in his different works and proved God''s existence in two ways: a priori and a posteriori. He develops a new concept of God and considers Him as Unique Substance and Nature which contains everything and is consisting of infinity of attributes، including extension and thought. Spinoza''s different proofs are similar to those of Descartes. Although Spinoza develops a new conception of God''s existence، his proofs are in line with those of Descartes. In this paper، the writer attempts to explore different versions of a priori and a posteriori proofs in Spinoza''s works and compare them with those represented by Descartes.

Theistic philosophers have special view on human nature. They define it in terms of rational faculty and thus regard human final perfection and ultimate felicity dependent on the activity of this faculty and actualization of it. There are philosophers، such as Plato، Plotinus، and Zakariya al-Razi (Rhazes)، who maintain explicitly that human felicity is based on his becoming philosopher. Other philosophers، including Farabi، Ibn Sina (Avicenna)، Suhrawardi، and Mulla Sadra، who define human felicity in terms of acts of theoretical reason and activity in accordance with it، attempt to describe the felicity of those who fail to attain the status of traditional philosopher in following and believing in holy Prophets - the true “Philosophers” par excellence in the strict sense of the term. According to these analyses، if philosophy is taken in its broad meaning which includes both conceptual and intuitive knowledge، one can say that human felicity lies partly in philosophy. Human felicity، however، is not restricted in it، since existential dimensions of human being is not confined to reason. Nor is this stage of felicity attainable for the masses at large. So these analyses are not completely acceptable. The bodily resurrection and physical pleasures and pains، which are clearly understood from holy Quranic verses and hadiths، show the shortcomings of philosophers’ analysis of final felicity of human being.

Tertullian''s point of view on the relationship of faith and Rationality can be examined from two perspectives. By citing to some of sentences that he has said in opposition to philosophy، he is known the pioneer of radical fideism. In those famous quotes، he takes philosophy to be the source and origin of heretic، and the philosopher''s teachings as identical with teachings of devils and fallen angels. In those sentences، Tertullian emphasizes on efficacy of Believers faith and that faith is independent from reason. He holds that those believers who are interested in philosophy، in fact are not true believers or pretending to believe. On the other hand، we find many evidences in his works that he had tried to provide rational defense for Christian beliefs. In this regard، he has benefited even from Epicurean thinkers، who (according to many commentators of New Testament) are the target of St. Paul when he attacks philosophy. Having these in mind، we can find a way to understand Tertullian''s sentences against philosophy in another manner; So that he himself is a rationalist، or at least is not the extreme defender of radical fideism، as usually is attributed to him.

During the first centuries of Hijra، the concept of faith and its relevant issues were among the major topics in Islamic thought. One the schools on the topic were Murji''ah، introduced by Hasan Ibn Muhammad al-Hanafiyyah in Kufa within the second half of Hijra. The Murjites held that pure faith can be achieved either through heart belief or confession; there is no need of action for salvation; it is possible to combine being faithful and committing deadly sins; the retribution for a man committing deadly sins ought to be postponed up to the day of Resurrection with the hope for being forgiven; and it is permissible to obey caliphs، even when they are wicked، and to perform prayer service with their leading in spite of their deadly sins. During times، these thoughts were spread attracting some adherents. Although there is no living school named Murji''ah anymore، some of their ideas، those could be a sort of ethical nihilism، still exist and are propagated. This paper is concerned with such Irja´ thoughts and ethical nihilism which have been continued until now.

Modern scientific cosmology، having grounded itself in materialism، rebuts any theocentric explanation of the world as unnecessary and irrational. Stephan Hawking، being a prominent figure in this field، seeks to demonstrate that the world has come to existence by chance or necessity through an antitheistic argument based on Big Bang Theory. Regarding the metaphysical dimensions of the discourse، this essay is an effort to redemonstrate the tenability of the idea of a divine existence by the refutation of Hawking’s argument upon the philosophical principles of Avicenna، Mulla Sadra، and Keith Ward. In this regard، the ontology of transcendent theosophy based on such principles as the principality of existence، existential gradation، relative existence، and illuminative attribution not only does not find the existence of God inconsistent with such scientific theories as big Bang، but it also proves dynamic relationship between God and world. Thus it becomes clear that Avicenna''s philosophical system and transcendent theosophy can confront the new challenges of theism. The purpose of this study is to address the new challenges in cosmology and theism according to philosophical systems of Avicenna and especially Mulla sadra and their dynamicity، and comparing them with Keith Ward’s philosophy.