God, Revelation and Authority Vol. 1, Chapter 22

Posted: March 5, 2011 in Uncategorized

Some post-Kantian thinkers have argued that religion is a necessary a priori at least in form rather than content.  They have argued that one must at least consider it an a priori given its universal existence.  These philosophers can still claim to follow Kant because they defend the idea of God but refuse to deal with competing claims regarding concrete beliefs about God.

Yet, such affirmations of the felt need for religion while refusing to judge the validity of various religions has failed to take hold among those willing to embrace religion even while it remains popular among agnostics and various other apathetic elements in our society.  Generally, those with any true interest in religion move to matters of doctrine.  As Henry puts it, “the reality question and the validity question cannot be segregated.”   

Ernst Troeltsch argued for a vague but real connection between the soul and the divine explains the universality of religion.  Yet, how do we know this nothing more than an illusion? In an attempt to be “inclusive” Troeletsch places a number of arbitrary constraints that ultimately fail.  We do not just possess an innate feeling that translates into religion but logic that guides us to judge competing truth claims.  If both are innate then what reason can be given for refusing to bring the two together?

In the end, we are hardwired to feel there is something more than just natural selection and to rationally judge competing truth claims.  It is who we are.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s