Involuntary belief and the command to have faith

Article
  • 157 Downloads

Abstract

Richard Swinburne argues that belief is a necessary but not sufficient condition for faith, and he also argues that, while faith is voluntary, belief is involuntary. This essay is concerned with the tension arising from the involuntary aspect of faith, the Christian doctrine that human beings have an obligation to exercise faith, and the moral claim that people are only responsible for actions where they have the ability to do otherwise. Put more concisely, the problem concerns the coherence of the following claims: (1) one cannot have faith, (2) one has an obligation to have faith, and (3) ought implies can. To solve this dilemma, I offer three solutions that I believe have the philosophical resources to demonstrate the consistency of these claims. Thus, I defend the claim that it is logically possible for a person to be culpable for an involuntary failure to have faith in God.

Keywords

Faith Trust Involuntary belief Richard Swinburne 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams R. M. (1987) The virtue of faith. In: Adams R. M. (eds) The virtue of faith: And other essays in philosophical theology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 9–24Google Scholar
  2. Alston W. (1989) The deontological concept of epistemic justification. In: Alston W. (eds) Epistemic justification: Essays in the theory of knowledge. Cornell University Press, New York, pp 115–152Google Scholar
  3. Craig W. L. (2000) No other name: A middle knowledge perspective on the exclusivity of salvation through Christ. In: Quinn P. L., Meeker K. (eds) The philosophical challenge of religious diversity. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 38–53Google Scholar
  4. Craig W. L. (2001) Middle knowledge, truth makers, and the ‘grounding objection’. Faith and Philosophy 18: 337–352Google Scholar
  5. Craig W. L. (2006) Ducking friendly fire: Davidson on the grounding objection. Philosophia Christi 8: 161–166Google Scholar
  6. Engel P. (2000) Introduction: The varieties of belief and acceptance. In: Engel P. (eds) Believing and accepting. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 1–19Google Scholar
  7. Erickson M. J. (2001) Christian theology, 2nd edn. Baker Books, Grand RapidsGoogle Scholar
  8. Helm P. (2000) Faith with reason. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Hick J. (2004) An interpretation of religion: Human responses to the transcendent, 2nd edn. Yale University Press, New HeavenGoogle Scholar
  10. James, W. (1956). The will to believe. In The will to believe: And other essays in popular philosophy. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Kinghorn K. (2005) The decision of faith: Can Christian beliefs be freely chosen?. T & T Clark International, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. MacDonald S. (1993) Christian faith. In: Stump E. (eds) Reasoned faith: Essays in philosophical theology in honor of Norman Kretzmann. Cornell University Press, New York, pp 42–69Google Scholar
  13. Moser P. K. (2002) Cognitive idolatry. In: Howard-Snyder D., Moser P. K. (eds) Divine hiddenness: New essays. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 120–148Google Scholar
  14. Moser P. K. (2008) The elusive god: Reorienting religious epistemology. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pascal, B. (1996). Penées (A. J. Krailsheimer, Trans.). New York: Penguin Putnam.Google Scholar
  16. Plantinga A. (1974) The nature of necessity. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Russell B. (2004) The problems of philosophy. Barnes and Noble Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Swinburne R. (1989) Responsibility and atonement. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Swinburne R. (2005) Faith and reason, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Van Inwagen P. (1983) An essay on free will. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Yandell K. (1993) The epistemology of religious experience. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentSt. Louis UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations