Advertisement

The Agreed Background

  • A. Richard Kingston

Abstract

Unlike the controversial claim in the last chapter concerning the very limited choice in Christology it is arguable that the present chapter is superfluous, in that everyone accepts that the debate about Jesus being God incarnate presupposes belief in the existence and unity of God. Of course it is recognized that the concept of incarnation is also found in some polytheistic faiths, notably within Hinduism, but this wider context is not strictly relevant to the issue before us. It is for rather different reasons that it seems insufficient at this stage merely to assume that ‘there is one God’, and that there is no need whatever to justify that conviction. In the first place, a book positively recommending unitarian Christianity hardly fulfils that intention if it is nothing or little more than a negative critique of trinitarian Christianity, especially in an age when it is the basic belief in God, not just in God as ‘Three-in-One’, which is widely questioned or rejected. Hence, despite the fact that the book is predominantly an attempted repudiation of the doctrine of God incarnate, it is appropriate, if not imperative, to preface this with a relatively short statement of the grounds for a positive theistic faith.

Keywords

Religious Experience Basic Belief Brute Fact Moral Evil Natural Evil 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Brian Hebblethwaite, The Incarnation, p. 104.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Michael Goulder and John Hick, Why Believe in God? (SCM Press 1983) pp. 26f.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    John Baillie, Our Knowledge of God (Oxford Paperbacks 1963) p. 132.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    See Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God (Clarendon Press 1979) pp. 130, 283 or 289.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ninian Smart, Philosophers and Religious Truth (SCM Press 1969) p. 87.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacques Monod, Chance and Necessity (Collins 1972) p. 110.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    D. J. Bartholomew, God of Chance (SCM Press 1984) p. 101.Google Scholar
  8. See also Paul Davies, God and the New Physics (Penguin Books (1983) 1986), Chapter 12.Google Scholar
  9. 12.
    Hugh Montefiore, The Probability of God (SCM Press 1985) p. 169.Google Scholar
  10. 14.
    John Hick, An Interpretation of Religion (Macmillan 1989) p. 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 16.
    See for example the extract from F. R. Tennant’s Philosophical Theology, Vol. II, 1930, in John Hick (ed.), The Existence of God (Macmillan (1964) 1973) pp. 120–136.Google Scholar
  12. 18.
    John Hick, Evil and the God of Love (Macmillan 1966) especially’ Part IV.Google Scholar
  13. 19.
    F. A. Iremonger, William Temple Archbishop of Canterbury (Oxford University Press 1948) p. 85.Google Scholar
  14. 22.
    See Basil Mitchell, The Justification of Religious Belief (Macmillan 1973) especially Chapter 3;Google Scholar
  15. Caroline Franks Davis, The Evidential Force of Religious Experience (Clarendon Press 1989) especially Chapter 9;Google Scholar
  16. William J. Abraham, ‘Cumulative Case Arguments for Christian Theism’ in William J. Abraham and Steven W. Holtzer (eds), The Rationality of Religious Belief, (Clarendon Press 1987)Google Scholar
  17. Michael C. Banner, The Justification of Science and the Rationality of Religious Belief (Clarendon Press 1990) especially Chapter 6;Google Scholar
  18. R. Prevost, Probability and Theistic Explanation (Clarendon Press 1990).Google Scholar
  19. 24.
    James Dunn, Christology in the Making (SCM Press 1980) p. 251. See also p. 253.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© A. Richard Kingston 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Richard Kingston
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and PoliticsUniversity of UlsterUK

Personalised recommendations