Thiselton - A Concise Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Religion

London: Oneworld Publications, 2014. – 344 p.

ISBN 978–1–85168–301–7

ISBN 978-1-78074-478-0 (ebook)

 

The following selection of subject entries has been shaped in the light of many years of feedback from my own students. I have asked them what themes, thinkers and problems in philosophy of religion they have found most stimulating or rewarding, and also where they have needed most help, clarification and explanation. Their answers have been both formal and anonymous, and informal and personal.

 

In addition to the criterion of ‘professional competency’ in philosophy of religion, I have explored issues where pressing problems arise from arguments for or against belief in God, and from differences between diverse religious traditions. For many, this subject combines academic rigour with personal and practical issues about religious belief. I have aimed to set out the arguments of major religious traditions and the counter-arguments of their critics with fairness and integrity, even if I myself find nothing irrational about belief in God, to express this as a bare minimum.

 

It is my hope, therefore, that this volume will not only fill a needed gap as a student textbook, but that it will also provide a ready work of reference and explanation for those readers who wish to explore issues of belief for their own sake. To this extent, I admit to writing for the general enquirer as well as for students who seek a clear, useful textbook for essays and examinations.

 

At what level is this aimed? Most of my own classes in philosophy of religion have been for second-year degree students. However, they have included also first years and final years. Most have been honours students in theology and/or in philosophy, but many have majored in other subjects. I have been sufficiently impressed by the standards of incoming students who have taken philosophy of religion at ‘A’ level to have no doubt that the following pages will also provide them with a readable textbook. I point out below that the regular use of cross-references will explain virtually every unfamiliar technical term, and will introduce unfamiliar thinkers.

 

* * *

 

immanence

 

In philosophy of religion this term is most characteristically applied to GOD in contrast to divine TRANSCENDENCE. More strictly, in THEISM (especially in Judaism, Christianity and Islam) it complements divine transcendence. It moves in the direction of PANTHEISM, or more accurately PANENTHEISM, but is not to be identified with pantheism. It denotes God’s presence and action within the world and in the world order, in contrast to notions of divine action ‘from beyond’ or ‘without’.

 

In a secondary sense immanence may be used more narrowly as a term in Kantian philosophy to denote what lies entirely within the limits of possible experience. Here ‘immanent’ stands in contrast not with transcendent but with transcendental. Also in SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY ‘immanent action’ denotes that action the effects of which do not reach ‘beyond’ the subject or agent of the action.

 

Normally, however, immanence refers to divine presence and agency within the world, and often, but not always, goes hand-in-hand with a mystical, pietist, or modified pantheist approach to God. Fundamentally it denotes the nearness or indwelling of God, especially as animating an organic universe in OMNIPRESENCE.

 

Theism holds together divine transcendence and divine immanence. For God is ‘beyond’ the world and any CONTINGENT network of causes within the world, yet God is also ‘within’ the world working through such causal networks. Expressed most sharply, a truly transcendent God remains free to choose to be immanent within God’s world, whereas a wholly immanent God would be caught up in determined patterns imposed by the world. (See also DEISM; GOD, CONCEPTS AND ‘ATTRIBUTES’ OF; MYSTICISM; PIETISM; TRANSCENDENTAL PHILOSOPHY.)