Increase in No Religion?

[Francis Beckwith]

Interesting.  A couple of years ago I suggested in a discussion with a
colleague that one may have secular reasons for believing in revealed truth,
insofar as one attempts to marshal evidence for the inspiration of a
particular text.  So, in principle, one could have a religious reason that
is really just an intermediate conclusion for more basic non-religious
reason.

Frank

On 8/7/05 7:06 PM, "RJLipkin at aol.com" <RJLipkin at aol.com> wrote:

>         I am curious about the relationship between "revealed truths" and
> "reason" in the contention that one could embrace both. Is it that some
> canonical authority states a truth such as "Love thy neighbor" or "God is the
> source of moral goodness", and reasons explicates the content of these
> "revealed" truths?
>  
>         Being able to offer non-religious arguments for religious claims
> raises the problem that the non-religious arguments--if available for all
> religious claims--might render the religious claims superfluous. I suppose one
> test of whether someone is really committed to both revealed truths and reason
> is how he or she resolves conflicts between the two.
>  
> Bobby
>  
> Robert Justin Lipkin
> Professor of Law
> Widener University School of Law
> Delaware
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
> 
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
> Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
> read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
> messages to others.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050807/f8193061/attachment.htm