İbrahim Yıldız

In Turkey, where the philosophy of religion is still a relatively new academic field, there are different approaches regarding the fundamental principles that should guide its development. It has been claimed that to conduct a Muslim philosophy of religion, it is necessary to stay away from the concepts that are the product of the intellectual pursuit of Western thought. This claim, which is put forward by Hasan Er, is justified by the thought that some of the basic concepts that emerged in the philosophy of religion in the West are a product of the West’s confrontation with the Christian medieval thought, and therefore, they do not comply with the basic Islamic principles. The judgment that the philosophy of religion in the West arose based on Christianity seems acceptable. From this point of view, since the belief system of Christianity is very different from Islam, it has been argued that the concepts used in the philosophy of religion in the West should not be associated with Islam. Three concepts are especially claimed to be avoided here. These are deism, atheism, and theism. This claim triggers an important debate in philosophy of religion. This is whether there can be a philosophy of religion specific to a particular religion. In this study, the claims briefly described above will be discussed. While doing this, the claims put forward will be subjected to an analytical evaluation. As a result, it will be discussed that the concepts should be considered not only with the meanings they first appeared but also with the meanings they acquired in the process. On the other hand, if it is not possible to make a Muslim philosophy of religion with Western concepts, then it will be taken into consideration that it is necessary to ask “How Muslim is the philosophy of religion?”

Antony Flew has spent nearly two-thirds of his life arguing against the existence of an omnipotent and all-knowing God, but towards the end of his life, he has accepted the existence of one. He argues that his change is due to the principle of “follow the argument wherever it leads”. He states that at first the argument required to oppose the existence of God, but the argument now leads him to accept the idea that there is a God. This study will consider whether Flew applies the principle “follow the argument wherever it leads” when it comes to Islam. While doing this, first, Flew's conception of God, which he endorsed after accepting the existence of God, will be briefly described. Then, his thoughts on Christianity after the acceptance of God’s existence will be addressed. Next, the arguments he developed against Islam will be evaluated. Finally, it will be discussed whether he adapts the principle of “follow the argument wherever it leads” when Islam is at stake. As a result, it has been seen that Flew should at least have shown the tolerance he showed to Christianity, which he rejected, to Islam in accordance with the principle of “follow the argument wherever it leads” nevertheless, he did not reconsider his former harsh and biased claims about Islam.

Delilci kötülük argümanları, teizme karşı sunulan en güçlü argümanların başında gelmektedir. Bu argümanlar arasında gereksiz ve anlamsız kötülük türlerini merkeze alan argümanlar özellikle önemlidir. Edward H. Madden ve Peter Hare gereksiz kötülük üzerine bir argüman formüle ederken, William Rowe anlamsız kötülük üzerine argümanlar geliştirmiştir. Madden ve Hare argümanlarını altmışlarda, Rowe ise yetmişlerde öne sürmüş olsalar da İslam düşüncesinde gereksiz ve anlamsız kötülük kavramına ışık tutabilecek bir teori bulunmaktadır. Bu tür kötülükleri açıklamak için öne sürdüğüm teori, ivaz teorisidir. Bu makalede ivaz teorisinin nedensiz ve anlamsız kötülükleri nasıl açıklayabileceğini inceleyeceğim.