Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Infinity, the Neoclassical Concept of God, and Oppy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Models of God and Alternative Ultimate Realities

  • 2333 Accesses

Abstract

In this article I concentrate on three issues. First, Graham Oppy’s treatment of the relationship between the concept of infinity and Zeno’s paradoxes makes apparent several problems that must be dealt with if the concept of infinity is to do any intellectual work in the philosophy of religion. Here I will expand on some insightful remarks by Oppy in an effort to adequately respond to these problems. Second, I will do the same regarding Oppy’s treatment of Kant’s first antinomy in the first critique, which deals in part with the question of whether the world had a beginning in time or if time extends infinitely into the past. And third, my examination of these two issues will inform what I have to say regarding a key topic in philosophy of religion: the question regarding the proper relationship between the infinite and the finite in the concept of God.

This article is reprinted with permission of the author and publisher. The original article was entitled “Oppy, Infinity, and the Neoclassical Concept of God” and appeared in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 61 (1), 2007.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Cobb, John. 1975. Christ in a pluralistic age. Philadelphia: Westminster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombrowski, Daniel. 2004. Divine beauty: The aesthetics of Charles Hartshorne. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombrowski, Daniel. 2005. A platonic philosophy of religion: A process perspective. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombrowski, Daniel. 2006. Rethinking the ontological argument: A neoclassical theistic response. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombrowski, Daniel. 2007. Oppy, infinity, and the neoclassical concept of God. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 61: 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1941. Man’s vision of God. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1962. The logic of perfection. LaSalle: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1965. Anselm’s discovery. LaSalle: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1967. A natural theology for our time. LaSalle: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1970. Creative synthesis and philosophic method. LaSalle: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1972. Whitehead’s philosophy: Selected essays, 1935–1970. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1975 [1937]. Beyond humanism. Gloucester: Peter Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1983. Insights and oversights of great thinkers. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1984a. Omnipotence and other theological mistakes. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1984b. Creativity in American philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 1991. The philosophy of Charles Hartshorne. LaSalle: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorne, Charles. 2000 [1953]. Philosophers speak of God. Amherst: Humanity Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone-France, Derek. 2006. Deep empiricism: Kant, Whitehead, and the necessity of philosophical theism. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G.E. 1953. Some main problems of philosophy. London: George, Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppy, Graham. 1995. Ontological arguments and belief in God. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppy, Graham. 1997. Countable fusion not yet proven guilty: It may be the Whiteheadian account of space whatdunnit. Analysis 57: 249–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppy, Graham. 2006. Philosophical perspectives on infinity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Viney, Don. 2010. How firm a possible foundation? Modality and Hartshorne’s dipolar theism. In Metaphysics, analysis, and the grammar of God: Process and analytic voices in dialogue, ed. Randy Ramal. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • White-Head, A.N. 1948 [1911]. An introduction to mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White-Head, A.N. 1953 [1925]. Science and the modern world. New York: New American Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • White-Head, A.N. 1957 [1929]. The aims of education and other essays. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White-Head, A.N. 1958 [1938]. Modes of thought. New York: Capricorn.

    Google Scholar 

  • White-Head, A.N. 1967 [1933]. Adventures of ideas. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White-Head, A.N. 1978 [1929]. Process and reality. Corrected ed. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Suggested Readings: Neo-classical Theism

  • 1.Bergson, Henri. 1977. The two sources of morality and religion. Trans. Brereton. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 2.Bishop, John. 1993. Evil and the concept of God. Philosophical Papers 22: 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • 3.Bishop, John. 1998. Can there be alternative concepts of God? Noûs 32(2): 174–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • 4.Bishop, John. 2009. Towards a religiously adequate alternative to omnigod theism. Sophia 48(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • 5.Craig, William Lane. 2000. The only wise God: The compatibility of divine foreknowledge & human freedom. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • 6.Dombrowski, Daniel. 2006. Rethinking the ontological argument: A neoclassical theistic response. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 7.Forrest, Peter. 2007. Developmental theism: From pure will to unbounded love. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • 8.Ganssle, Gregory (ed.). 2001. God and time: Four views. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 9.Griffin, David Ray. 2001. Reenchantment without supernaturalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 10.Hartshorne, Charles. 1948. The divine relativity. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 11.Leslie, John. 1989. Universes. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • 12.Morriston, Wes. 2001. Omnipotence and necessary moral perfection: Are they compatible? Religious Studies 37: 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • 13.Nagasawa, Yujin. 2008. A new defence of Anselmian theism. Philosophical Quarterly 58: 577–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • 14.Whitehead, Alfred North. 2007. Religion in the making. New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, USA

    Daniel A. Dombrowski

Authors
  1. Daniel A. Dombrowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel A. Dombrowski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Philosophy, University of Toledo, W. Bancroft Street 2801, Toledo, 43606, Ohio, USA

    Jeanine Diller

  2. Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv, 69978, Israel

    Asa Kasher

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dombrowski, D.A. (2013). Infinity, the Neoclassical Concept of God, and Oppy. In: Diller, J., Kasher, A. (eds) Models of God and Alternative Ultimate Realities. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5219-1_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation