Escaping hell but not heaven
Benjamin Matheson (Int J Philos Relig 75:197-206, ) has recently critiqued the escapist account of hell that we have defended. In this paper we respond to Matheson. Building on some of our work in defense of escapism that Matheson does not discuss (in particular, Buckareff and Plug, The problem of h...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Tipo de documento: | Recurso Electrónico Artigo |
| Idioma: | Inglês |
| Verificar disponibilidade: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Carregar...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publicado em: |
2015
|
| Em: |
International journal for philosophy of religion
Ano: 2015, Volume: 77, Número: 3, Páginas: 247-253 |
| Outras palavras-chave: | B
Retribution
Religious aspects
B Heaven B Afterlife B Future Life B God Omniscience B MATHESON, Benjamin B Hell |
| Acesso em linha: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Resumo: | Benjamin Matheson (Int J Philos Relig 75:197-206, ) has recently critiqued the escapist account of hell that we have defended. In this paper we respond to Matheson. Building on some of our work in defense of escapism that Matheson does not discuss (in particular, Buckareff and Plug, The problem of hell: a philosophical anthology, Ashgate, Burlington, ) we show that the threat posed by Matheson's critique is chimerical. We begin by summarizing our escapist theory of hell. Next, we summarize both Matheson's central thesis and the main arguments offered in its defense. We then respond to those arguments. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8684 |
| Obras secundárias: | Enthalten in: International journal for philosophy of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s11153-014-9490-1 |
