JOSTARHA-YE FALSAFE-YE DIN (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION STUDIES )
Year:2019 | Volume:7 | Issue:2|Papers Count:6

debate. Specifically, what is the meaning of revelation in the new age has created many challenges in the field of Islamic thought. The present article deals with a descriptive-analytical and critical-comparative approach to the issue of revelation from the perspective of Allamah Tabatabai (traditional Quran) and Nasr Hamed Abu Zayd (Modern Quran) to find similarities and uncertainties between the views of these two thinkers and discrepancies From the perspective of Allamah Tabatabai. Because the opinions of these two thinkers are in conflict, their comparison would be to find the searchers in the discovery of the truth. Allameh understands the truth of the revelation from the revelation itself. He considers the Qur'an a divine revelation, a miracle, with infallibility and a constant meaning. In his view, the truth of the Qur'an is eternal and it is in Umm al-Tabak. While Abu Zayd calls the Koran a human being. He calls the Qur'an a Prophet's word of history and culture, which has no fixed meaning. In his view, some beliefs have come from the culture of the age of decline in the Qur'an which are now obsolete in the present age.

Divine action in the world is one of the important problematic questions in contemporary philosophy of religion. After new inventions in modern physics during 20’ th century some of the scholars claimed that in spite of classical physics in which physical laws constrain divine actions, in modern physics, uncertainty principle could explain and justify God intervention in the world. But quantum mechanics had produced big challenges in ontology and had not straightforward metaphysics and resulted to different interpretations, each suggesting different way to explain divine actions. Bohmian interpretation of quantum mechanics regarding his special metaphysical ideas like implicate order, holomovement and holism presenting novel perspective on this issue. This article investigate relation between Bohmian interpretation of quantum mechanics and divine actions in the world and shows its capacities on this issue.

Testimony is an important source of religious beliefs in Abrahamic religions. The epistemological aspect of testimony is studied in contemporary epistemology and in the single report (al-Khabar al-Wahid) and massive report (al-Khabar al-mutawatir) in principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-fiqh). Regarding the main similarities and differences between testimonial justification conditions in Elizabeth Fricker and Morteza Ansari, a leading Shiite theologian, I examine the possibility of the comparison between them in this paper. Therefore, first of all, I compare the concepts of report and justification (hudjdjat) in Ansari’ s principles of Islamic jurisprudence with the concepts of testimony and justification in Fricker. Then, I compare the conditions of testimonial justification in Ansari and Fricker. Finally, I show that some apparent similarities are differences in fact. Accordingly, while the comparison is possible, it should be done with great caution.

The issue of the nature of God's knowledge is one of the problems that have long been caused by the minds of thinkers and intellectuals. In the philosophy of contemporary religion, William Alston deals with the nature of God's science. Is it possible to say that God's science is the same as honest belief? In Islamic philosophy, science is divided into two categories: the science of presence and acquired knowledge. What is the wisdom of God in the two things? Attractive science or presence? In this article, after expressing the theory of Alston and Sheikh Ishraq on the knowledge of God, we consider the theory that these two thinkers have somewhat a common view of the science of God after creation. Alstoun's direct intuition theory and the addition of Ishroikah Suhrawardi are two interpretations of one view. Alston's direct intuition theory means that God directly watts the world and therefore has that science. In this paper, it has been attempted to examine the views of these two thinkers on the nature of God's science by examining the views of William Alston and Sheikh Ishraq, and explain their differences and similarities in this regard.

Open theism is a theological movement rising out of the evangelical tradition at the end of the century. Seeking to resolve the incompatibility existing between the divine infallible foreknowledge and the human free-will, they sought to devise a theology that could be able to uphold human freedom and free will while keeping God at the centre of its system. According to their focal idea both God and the future are open, that is nothing is predetermined and set beforehand about future and since it has not yet taken place, God has no knowledge of it. The critique raised against them is that in their attempt to defend human free will and to resolve the challenge of incompatibility, they reduce the divine knowledge, hence distorting the image of the traditional God. In this contribution we seek to present a Shi’ a theological model that while seeking to resolve the problem, remains loyal to the traditional image of God, hence being immune of the critiques raised against open theism.