Naturalism, classical theism, and first causes

Enric F. Gel has recently argued that classical theism enjoys a significant advantage over Graham Oppy's naturalism. According to Gel, classical theism - unlike Oppy's naturalism - satisfactorily answers two questions: first, how many first causes are there, and second, why is it that numb...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Schmid, Joseph C. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press 2023
In: Religious studies
Year: 2023, Volume: 59, Issue: 1, Pages: 63-77
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Theism / Naturalism (Philosophy) / Cosmological proof of God's existence
IxTheo Classification:AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism
NBC Doctrine of God
Further subjects:B first cause
B Naturalism
B Classical Theism
B God
B gap problem
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Summary:Enric F. Gel has recently argued that classical theism enjoys a significant advantage over Graham Oppy's naturalism. According to Gel, classical theism - unlike Oppy's naturalism - satisfactorily answers two questions: first, how many first causes are there, and second, why is it that number rather than another? In this article, I reply to Gel's argument for classical theism's advantage over Oppy's naturalism. I also draw out wider implications of my investigation for the gap problem and Christian doctrine along the way.
ISSN:1469-901X
Contains:Enthalten in: Religious studies
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1017/S0034412522000051