Part three explores tensions Religion and Morality addresses central issues arising from religion's relation to morality. Part three explores tensions between human morality, as ordinarily understood, and religious requirements by discussing such issues as the conflict between Buddhist and Christian pacifism and requirements of justice, whether 'virtue' without a love of God is really a vice, whether the God of the Abrahamic religions could require us to do something that seems clearly immoral, and the ambiguous relations between religious mysticism and moral behavior.
Covering a broad range of topics, this book draws on both historical and contemporary literature, and explores afresh central issues of morality and religion offering new insights for students, academics and the general reader interested in philosophy and religion. Get A Copy. Kindle Edition , pages. More Details Other Editions 3. Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Religion and Morality , please sign up.
Be the first to ask a question about Religion and Morality. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Community Reviews. And when claiming that the whole as such is hebel , Qohelet pronounces a universal value judgment on the entirety of divine creation. This is unrivalled in biblical-theistic chutzpah. The relation between religion and morality in Qohelet. From the beginning of Western thought, religion and morality have been closely intertwined. Some appeal to morality to argue for the reality of God, whilst others appeal to morality to argue the opposite.
There is the question of whether morality can stand without religious foundation; a variety of theories on the relation between religion and morality has been proposed, including versions of so-called divine-command ethics, theological voluntarism, moral realism, et cetera. A popular problem is the Euthyphro dilemma, which revolves around the relation between deity and the moral order.
Other discussions concern the ontological status of moral claims and moral epistemology see Wainright For Qohelet, morality in relation to religion can be summed up with the idea of the fear of God, although here we come close to literal terror as opposed to pious conformity to religious customs Crenshaw Why the deity wants to be feared is not clear. Perhaps Qohelet could take this for granted as an inheritance from the history of religion.
Recommend to librarian
What is clear, is that for Qohelet the distinction between religion and morality is also artificial, because in his theology they overlap almost completely contra Scott On other occasions the deity seems bothered by small things e. As for divine morality itself, although at times the god appears almost indifferent, it is never assumed to be amoral or uninterested in morality.
Hence the logic of the relation between religion and morality is many-valued and complex. The problematic relation between religion and morality in the book contributes to the difficulty of knowing what is meant by references to future judgment.
Looking at the verses related to this topic, they seem quite out of place in their surroundings even though there seems to be a definite link between morality and divine interests. These texts have often been considered the words of a redactor or quotations by Qohelet himself, which he puts forward only to refute them. This view only holds if we assume Qohelet was coherent in his thinking or that his religious language was consistently univocal. Because he does not believe in heaven or hell there is only Sheol, see —10 , and because life is unfair, Qohelet does not see the value of morality and religion in terms of justice.
Philosophy of Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
For Qohelet there is no justice, even if there is judgment, morality and a sense of what is fair. Qohelet and religious pluralism. The current discussion, however, will concern itself primarily with those key issues surrounding religious diversity with which philosophers, especially analytic philosophers of religion, are most concerned at present.
Qohelet is silent on his own overt beliefs about religious diversity. However, the concept of deity as monotheistic suggests that he must have had some opinion on divine identity and claims of theological truth amidst the religious pluralism of his day. It might be that his use of the generic designation for the deity suggests some sort of parallelism contra Bartholomew Whilst Qohelet wrote in Hebrew and obviously has a Jewish audience, he does not seem to strike the reader as presupposing exclusivism.
Qohelet also does not seem to be interested in interreligious polemics, as some of the prophets are, or in dialogue. His participation in the wisdom traditions means that he ascribed to the international and cosmopolitan character of the theological stance Crenshaw Hence Qohelet might have taken it for granted that all humanity relates to the same divine Real.
Qohelet refers to all humans who act in relation to the deity under the sun, that is, everywhere. Qohelet also speaks of divine actions in international contexts, despite the appearance of the temple in chapter 5 cf. The generic references to general cultic locations, officials and practices in the section on the temple do not warrant the conclusion that Qohelet only ascribes to the legitimacy of the Jerusalem temple not mentioned in or is even referring to it in particular contra Bartholomew Qohelet definitely utilised non-Israelite sources for his wisdom theology e.
Whilst Qohelet therefore taught what he believed to be a correct perspective of the divine, his polemics are directed not so much against other religions as against other sages and fools. It was shown that the concept of the divine does not readily conform to the metatheistic assumptions of Christian philosophical theology so often taken for granted by biblical interpreters, including commentators on Qohelet. In summary, Qohelet has no distinct concept of religion and his religious language is not metaphorical in any significant way.
- suggokukaradanoEkochan chisa syasinsyuu 1 suggokukaradanoEkotyan syasinsyuu (Japanese Edition)!
- The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion by William J. Wainwright.
- Philosophy of Religion!
The attributes of the deity are a strange mixture of primitive great-making and dystheistic properties, whilst the existence of the divine seems to be taken as a given. There is technically no philosophical-theological problem of evil in the book and no theodicy, whilst the question of the relation between religion and morality presupposes a false dichotomy yet invites a complex answer.
All this being the case, from a comparative philosophical perspective the theology of Qohelet seems immensely at odds with popular beliefs commonly associated with the stereotypical analytic Christian philosophy of religion. As such it is problematic for any biblically-based philosophical theology. However, it simultaneously opens up strange new ways of thinking about the divine that, although less comforting are far less vulnerable to many of the atheological critiques on related to objections concerning logic, morality and suffering today.
Anderson, W. Aquino, R. Bartholomew, C. Basinger, D.
Schopenhauer, Religion, and Morality: The Humble Path to Ethics
Zalta ed. Brueggemann, W. Caneday, A. Crenshaw, J.
Overtures to biblical theology , Fortress Press, Philadelphia. Crenshsaw, J. Moser ed. Cupitt, D. Davidson, R. De Jong, S. Estes, H. Fitzgerald, T. Fox, M. Geivett, D. Gericke, J. Forrest, P. Harris, J. Hessler, B. Hick, J. PMid Kolak , D. PMid Kreeft, P. Job: Life as suffering. Lacan, J.
Larrimore, M. Limburg, J W.
- 1 Timothy 3 (Daily Bible Study – 1 Timothy)?
- Philosophy of religion and the scientific turn?
- La tentatrice (French Edition);
- Una Ciudad Flotante (Spanish Edition)?
Throntveit eds. Fretheim, pp. Loader, J. Lobdell, B. PMid Lohfink, N. Long, E. Longman III, T.
Related Religion and Morality (Ashgate Philosophy of Religion Series)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved