Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Religion textbook edited by Graham Oppy and Nick Trakakis
chapter eleven on Paul Tillich
Paul Tillich’s thought. For the discussion, please explain why he claims that “God does not exist?” (p. 137)
Tips: you may choose to consider the existential situation of non-being as it relates to God as being-itself; Tillich’s account of religious symbols that participate in being-itself; his notion of the human experience of religious symbols as matters of what concerns us ultimately; and/or, the adequacy of being-itself as a literal term for God.
Graham, and Trakakis, N. N.. 2014. Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Religion. Durham, GB: Routledge. Accessed April 10, 2016.
Pyysiainen, Ilkka. “RELIGION, THEOLOGY, AND COGNITION: ON READING PAUL TILLICH†Literature & Theology 28 (2014): 258-269
McAnnally-Linz, Ryan. “The Multivalence of Participation in Paul Tillichs Systematic Theology Journal of Religion 92 (2012): 373-391.
Rowe, WIlliam. “Paul Tillich in Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Religion, edited by Graham Oppy and N Trakais, 133-144. N. Durham: Routledge, 2009.
Foster, Rachel Ann and Babcock, Renée L. “God as a Man Versus God as a Woman: Perceiving God as a Function of the Gender of God and the Gender of the Participant.” The international Journal for the Psychology of Religion11, no. 2 (2001): 93-104.
Nelsen, Hart M., Neil H. Cheek Jr, and Paul Au. “Gender differences in images of God.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (1985): 396-402.
Rowe, WIlliam. “Paul Tillich†in Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Religion, edited by Graham Oppy and N Trakais, 133-144. N. Durham: Routledge, 2009.
Tillich reading
What is meant by non-being in this context? Being-itself? p. 133-34
Why doesn’t Tillich think God exists? p. 137
What is meant by ultimacy? p. 138
Why are religious symbols so important to Tillich? p. 141
Why doesn’t anyone experience being-itself? p. 141
What is the metaphysical shock of non-being? p. 142ff |
