Istnieje nowsza wersja tego artykułu opublikowanego 24.05.2021. Przeczytaj wersję najnowszą.
Polemiki
Opublikowane 24.05.2021
Wersje
- 24.02.2023 - (2)
- 24.05.2021 - (1)
Słowa kluczowe
- naturalism,
- theism,
- miracles,
- biblical interpretation
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Jak cytować
Harris , Mark. “Response to ‘Mark Harris As a Naturalistic Theist’ by Piotr Bylica”. Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy , vol. 13, May 2021, pp. 267-73, https://doi.org/10.53763/fag.2016.13.133.
Abstrakt
In this paper, I respond to a recent published analysis of my work by Dr Piotr Bylica, which characterises me as a “naturalistic theist”. I suggest that Bylica’s analysis takes this approach in order to fit my thought into his own “levels of analysis” scheme, but that it does not accurately represent my own theistic beliefs. I further argue that this process has resulted in the loss of important nuances in my work on areas such as miracles, dualism, and biblical interpretation.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Bibliografia
- Bylica Piotr, “Mark Harris as a Naturalistic Theist: The Perspective of the Model of Levels of Analysis”, Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy 2015, vol. 12, pp. 7-36.
- Harris Mark, “When Jesus Lost His Soul: Fourth-Century Christology and Modern Neuroscience”, Scottish Journal of Theology 2017, vol. 70, no. 1. pp. 74-92.