50 Key Concepts in Theology

Philosophy of Religion
The philosophical study of the truth claims, presuppositions and arguments of
religion.
The philosophy of religion is the philosophical analysis of religious
claims to truth. Unlike general theology, or ‘philosophical theology’ (see
below), the philosophy of religion is not committed to any particular
theological or religious view. Rather, it subjects all theological views to
interrogation and critique.
At the centre of the philosophy of religion has been the question of
whether it is reasonable to believe in God, and indeed, what kind of God it is
reasonable to believe in. Other important issues are the problem of evil,
miracles, life after death and the nature of religious language.
The last of these has come to dominate contemporary philosophy of
religion. Since all our philosophical reasoning must take place in language,
the question of the status of that language is absolutely crucial. Some recent
philosophers of religion, strongly influenced by Wittgenstein and post-
structuralist language theory, regard all linguistic meaning as a social
construct. This implies that the meaning of the word ‘God’ is just an agreed
convention. Other philosophers of religion have argued against this, saying
that religious language is only meaningful if it can be shown to refer to
objective realities.
How the philosophy of religion is practised depends upon what one
means by ‘philosophy’. The most common definition is that philosophy is a
form of questioning and enquiry. The method used by Socrates – as we see
from Plato’s depiction of him – was a process of questioning the views of
others. By asking the right questions, Socrates tried to eliminate false
arguments and reveal the truth. Aristotle saw philosophy in more analytical
terms as ‘inquiry’ (historia). The philosopher should conduct a careful
analysis of the ‘reputable opinions’ (endoxa) on the subject. From this the
philosopher draws up a list of problems (aporia) that must be worked through
in order to reach the truth of the matter.
R. G. Collingwood in the twentieth century helpfully described
philosophy as ‘the science of absolute presuppositions’ (Essays on
Metaphysics), meaning that philosophy should look beneath the surface of
thought to question the fundamental assumptions upon which our thinking is
based.
But if philosophy is just relentless questioning, enquiry and interrogation,

---

where is its commitment to truth? The word ‘philosophy’ means literally ‘the
love of wisdom’, which implies that questioning is the method of philosophy
rather than its identity. In Book 6 of The Republic Plato says that the
‘philosophic nature’ must be a love for the truth. So philosophical questioning
must be motivated by a commitment to the truth (however complex,
ungraspable or apparently impossible). Without this love of truth, says Plato,
philosophy becomes the province of ‘useless cranks’.
The philosophy or religion, then, should subject religious claims and
presuppositions to rigorous examination, but should do so with a concern to
uncover the truth. A purely critical philosophy of religion would be
vulnerable itself to the philosophical questioning of its own motivation and
purposes.
An objection that can be made to all philosophy of religion is that
theology cannot, by definition, be verified or falsified by human reason. Karl
Barth, for example, argued that the attempt to judge theology by reason is
irrelevant to faith. ‘God is love’ is a revealed truth which no amount of human
reasoning can change.
But a religion that is not subjected to rigorous questioning is at risk of
deluding itself. Philosophy of religion protects religion against error and
should be an integral part of theological practice. To function properly,
philosophy of religion must be given an absolutely free hand to question and
investigate any aspect of religious reasoning or any claim to truth. When
religions claim that they are too sacred to be questioned, we can be sure that
they have degenerated into fundamentalism.
THINKERS
Thomas Aquinas (1225–74) argued that philosophy and theology have
distinct perspectives: ‘The believer and the philosopher consider creatures
differently. The philosopher considers what belongs to their proper natures,
while the believer considers only what is true of creatures insofar as they are
related to God, for example, that they are created by God and are subject to
him, and the like’ (