Escaping hell but not heaven
Benjamin Matheson (Int J Philos Relig 75:197-206, ) has recently critiqued the escapist account of hell that we have defended. In this paper we respond to Matheson. Building on some of our work in defense of escapism that Matheson does not discuss (in particular, Buckareff and Plug, The problem of h...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| 出版: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
2015
|
| In: |
International journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2015, 卷: 77, 發布: 3, Pages: 247-253 |
| Further subjects: | B
Retribution
Religious aspects
B Heaven B Afterlife B Future Life B God Omniscience B MATHESON, Benjamin B Hell |
| 在線閱讀: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| 總結: | Benjamin Matheson (Int J Philos Relig 75:197-206, ) has recently critiqued the escapist account of hell that we have defended. In this paper we respond to Matheson. Building on some of our work in defense of escapism that Matheson does not discuss (in particular, Buckareff and Plug, The problem of hell: a philosophical anthology, Ashgate, Burlington, ) we show that the threat posed by Matheson's critique is chimerical. We begin by summarizing our escapist theory of hell. Next, we summarize both Matheson's central thesis and the main arguments offered in its defense. We then respond to those arguments. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8684 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: International journal for philosophy of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s11153-014-9490-1 |