,
pages 1-14
In defence of natural religion
1
Department of Philosophy, Marian University, Indianapolis, IN, USA
|
Publication type: Journal Article
Publication date: 2024-11-21
scimago Q1
SJR: 0.475
CiteScore: 1.4
Impact factor: 0.7
ISSN: 00344125, 1469901X
Abstract
The dominance of the Abrahamic tradition in contemporary analytic philosophy of religion has led some to call for greater exploration of alternatives to the traditional conception of God, such as Pantheism, Ultimism, and Axiarchism. While we think this call for alternatives is important, we go in a different direction. Rather than explore and defend alternative conceptions of God, we defend a range of fairly traditional but non-religious conceptions of God. This range of views, from deism to philosophical theism, enjoys a variety of benefits over its religious competitors and deserves greater attention.
Found
Nothing found, try to update filter.
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
0
Total citations:
0
Cite this
GOST |
RIS |
BibTex
Cite this
RIS
Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1017/s0034412524000684
UR - https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0034412524000684/type/journal_article
TI - In defence of natural religion
T2 - Religious Studies
AU - Renz, Graham
AU - Bell, William L.
PY - 2024
DA - 2024/11/21
PB - Cambridge University Press
SP - 1-14
SN - 0034-4125
SN - 1469-901X
ER -
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors)
Copy
@article{2024_Renz,
author = {Graham Renz and William L. Bell},
title = {In defence of natural religion},
journal = {Religious Studies},
year = {2024},
publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
month = {nov},
url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0034412524000684/type/journal_article},
pages = {1--14},
doi = {10.1017/s0034412524000684}
}