Faith and Philosophy 23 (4):381-408 (2006)
|Abstract||Adherents of traditional western Theism have espoused CONJUNCTION: God is essentially perfectly good and God is thankworthy for the good acts he performs . But suppose that (i) God’s essential perfect goodness prevents his good acts from being free, and that (ii) God is not thankworthy for an act that wasn’t freely performed.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kevin J. Vanhoozer (2010). Remythologizing Theology: Divine Action, Passion, and Authorship. Cambridge University Press.
John F. X. Knasas (2002). Contra Spinoza. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 76 (3):417-429.
Susan Peppers-Bates (2008). Divine Simplicity and Divine Command Ethics. International Philosophical Quarterly 48 (3):361-369.
Graham Oppy (1992). Is God Good by Definition? Religious Studies 28 (4):467 - 474.
Joseph L. Lombardi (2005). Against God's Moral Goodness. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 79 (2):313-326.
Michael D. Robinson (2000). Why Divine Foreknowledge? Religious Studies 36 (3):251-275.
W. Matthews Grant (2003). Aquinas, Divine Simplicity, and Divine Freedom. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:129-144.
T. J. Mawson (2005). Freedom, Human and Divine. Religious Studies 41 (1):55-69.
R. Zachary Manis (2011). Could God Do Something Evil? A Molinist Solution to the Problem of Divine Freedom. Faith and Philosophy 28 (2):209-223.
William L. Rowe (2010). Response To: Divine Responsibility Without Divine Freedom. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 67 (1):37 - 48.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads65 ( #16,919 of 722,744 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,437 of 722,744 )
How can I increase my downloads?