Religious Studies 33 (4):401-418 (1997)

A number of arguments have been put forward by D. Z. Phillips which purportedly establish that the problems that lie at the heart of the theological realism/nonrealism controversy are confused, and that realism itself is incoherent and may be refuted. These arguments are assessed and several different theories of realism are considered. The questions of the nature of religious belief and whether God is an object are addressed. Phillips' arguments are shown to fail to supply a substantial objection to any interesting variety of theological realism
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0034412597004058
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,118
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Religious Language Games.Graham Oppy & Nick Trakakis - 2007 - In Michael Scott & Adrian Moore (eds.), Realism and Religion. Ashgate. pp. 103-29.
Constructing a Religious Worldview: Why Religious Antirealism is Still Interesting.Thomas Schärtle - 2014 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6 (1):133--160.
Scientific and Theological Realism.Alexander Bird - 2007 - In A. Moore & M. Scott (eds.), Realism and Religion. Ashgate. pp. 61-81.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
42 ( #222,546 of 2,324,531 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #464,303 of 2,324,531 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes