Graduate studies at Western
Faith and Philosophy 20 (3):345-363 (2003)
|Abstract||Michael J. Murray defends the traditional doctrine of hell by arguing directly against its chief competitor, universalism. Universalism, says Murray, comes in “naïve” and “sophisticated” forms. Murray poses two arguments against naïve universalism before focusing on sophisticated universalism, which is his real target. He proceeds in this fashion because he thinks that his arguments against sophisticated universalism are more easily motivated against naïve universalism, and once their force is clearly seen in the naïve case they will be more clearly seen in the sophisticated. In this essay, I argue that Murray’s arguments against naïve universalism have no force whatsoever.|
|Keywords||hell Christianity universalism Michael Murray heaven|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nikk Effingham, Debunking a Mereological Myth: If Composition as Identity is True, Universalism Need Not Be.
Nikk Effingham (2011). Universalism and Classes. Dialectica 65 (3):451-472.
Andrew Jason Cohen (2000). On Universalism: Communitarians, Rorty, and (“Objectivist”) “Liberal Metaphysicians”. Southern Journal of Philosophy 38 (1):39-75.
Thomas Talbott (2001). Universalism and the Supposed Oddity of Our Earthly Life. Faith and Philosophy 18 (1):102-109.
Michael J. Murray (1999). Three Versions of Universalism. Faith and Philosophy 16 (1):55-68.
Thomas Talbott (2001). Universalism and the Supposed Oddity of Our Earthly Life: Reply to Michael Murray. Faith and Philosophy 18 (1):102-109.
Michael C. Rea (1998). In Defense of Mereological Universalism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (2):347-360.
Eric H. Reitan (2001). Universalism and Autonomy: Towards a Comparative Defense of Universalism. Faith and Philosophy 18 (2):222-240.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads48 ( #26,617 of 739,399 )
Recent downloads (6 months)18 ( #7,185 of 739,399 )
How can I increase my downloads?