The endeavour to prove God's existence through rational argumentation was an integral part of classical Islamic theology (kalam) and philosophy (falsafa), thus the frequently articulated assumption in the academic literature. The Islamic discourse in question is then often compared to the discourse on arguments for God's existence in the western tradition, not only in terms of its objectives but also in terms of the arguments used: Islamic thinkers, too, put forward arguments that have been labelled as cosmological, teleological, and ontological. This book, however, argues that arguments for God's existence are absent from the theological and philosophical works of the classical Islamic era. This is not to say that the arguments encountered there are flawed arguments for God's existence. Rather, it means that the arguments under consideration serve a different purpose than to prove that God exists. Through a close reading of the works of several mutakallimun and falasifa from the 3rd-7th/9th-13th century, such as al-Baqillani and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi as well as Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd, this book proffers a re-evaluation of the discourse in question, and it suggests what its participants sought to prove if it is not that God exists.

This book offers an in-depth exploration of the international phenomenon of enlightened paternalist capitalism and social engineering in the golden age of capitalism in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and France. Erik de Gier shows how utopian socialist, religious, and craft-based ideas influenced the welfare work and educations programmes offered by paternalistic businesses in different ways from nation to nation, looking closely at sites like the Pullman community in Chicago and Port Sunlight in the UK. De Gier brings the book fully up to date with a brief comparison to contemporary welfare capitalism in our highly flexible working world.

This book is dedicated to an analysis of the writings of modern religious Jewish thinkers who adopted a neo-fundamentalist, illusionary, apologetic approach, opposing the notion that there may sometimes be a contradiction between reason and revelation. The book deals with the thought of Eliezer Goldman, Norman Lamm, David Hartman, Aharon Lichtenstein, Jonathan Sacks, and Michael Abraham. According to these thinkers, it is possible to resolve all of the difficulties that arise from the encounter between religion and science, between reason and revelation, between the morality of halakhah and Western morality, between academic scholarship and tradition, and between scientific discoveries and statements found in the Torah. This position runs counter to the stance of other Jewish thinkers who espouse a different, more daring approach. According to the latter view, irresolvable contradictions between reason and faith sometimes face the modern Jewish believer, who must reconcile himself to these two conflicting truths and learn to live with them. This dialectic position was discussed in Between Religion and Reason, Part I (Academic Studies Press, 2020). The present volume, Part II, completes the discussion of this topic. This book concludes a trilogy of works by the author dealing with modern Jewish thought that attempts to integrate tradition and modernity. The first in the series was The Middle Way (Academic Studies Press, 2014), followed by The Dual Truth (Academic Studies Press, 2018).

Saints and holy (and not so holy) individuals out of whom they are fashioned have held a perennial fascination for sinful, wayward mankind. Over the last forty years, Peter Brown has transformed historians' ways of looking at early Christian saints, with a new, anthropologically orientated approach. His ideas are tested and modified in novel ways in this book which takes a broad view of the cult of saints in its first millennium.

This volume, the second of a five-volume edition of the third order of the Jerusalem Talmud, deals in part I (Soa-ah) with the ordeal of the wife suspected of adultery (Num 5) and the role of Hebrew in the Jewish ritual. Part II (Nedarim) is concerned with Korban and similar expressions, vows and their consequences, and vows of women (Num 30).

The legacy of late medieval Franciscan thought is uncontested: for generations, the influence of late-13th and 14th century Franciscans on the development of modern thought has been celebrated by some and loathed by others. However, the legacy of early Franciscan thought, as it developed in the first generation of Franciscan thinkers who worked at the recently-founded University of Paris in the first half of the 13th century, is a virtually foreign concept in the relevant scholarship. The reason for this is that early Franciscans are widely regarded as mere codifiers and perpetrators of the earlier medieval, largely Augustinian, tradition, from which later Franciscans supposedly departed. In this study, leading scholars of both periods in the Franciscan intellectual tradition join forces to highlight the continuity between early and late Franciscan thinkers which is often overlooked by those who emphasize their discrepancies in terms of methodology and sources. At the same time, the contributors seek to paint a more nuanced picture of the tradition's legacy to Western thought, highlighting aspects of it that were passed down for generations to follow as well as the extremely different contexts and ends for which originally Franciscan ideas came to be employed in later medieval and modern thought.

"I wish I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist had been available when I was an atheist-it would have saved a lot of time in my spiritual journey toward God." Lee Strobel, author, The Case for Christ, The Case for Faith, and The Case for a Creator "This extremely readable book brilliantly builds the case for Christianity from the question of truth all the way to the inspiration of the Bible. And the verdict is in: Christians stand on mounds of solid evidence while skeptics cling to nothing but their blind, dogmatic faith. If you're still a skeptic after reading I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, then I suspect you're living in denial." Josh McDowell, speaker and author of Evidence That Demands a Verdict This study guide is the ultimate resource to use side-by-side with I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist and help the reader draw out the evidence for Christianity as well as provide practical insights on how to engage skeptics with the truth addressed in the book. The study guide is divided up into three parts that emboldens the reader to get motivated, equips the reader to be trained, and engages the reader so that they are prepared to readily respond to the objections asserted by skeptics and atheist. Dr. Norman L. Geisler has taught at the university and graduate levels for more than 50 years and has spoken and debated all over the world. He holds an MA from Wheaton College and a PhD in philosophy from Loyola University, and is presently Provost and Distinguished Professor of Apologetics at Veritas Evangelical Seminary in Murrieta, California. He is the author and coauthor of more than 70 books. For more information, check out Dr. Geisler's website www.normgeisler.com. Jason Jimenez has pastored families for 15 years and is founder and president of reshift ministries, Inc. He is the author of The Raging War of Ideas: How to Take Back Our Faith, Family, and Country and The Raging War of Ideas study guide for small groups. For more information, check out www.reshiftministries.org.

"Shakespeare Now!" is a series of short books of truly vital literary scholarship, each with its own distinctive form. "Shakespeare Now!" recaptures the excitement of Shakespeare; it doesn't assume we know him already, or that we know the best methods for approaching his plays. "Shakespeare Now!" is a new generation of critics, unafraid of risk, on a series of intellectual adventures. Above all - it is a new Shakespeare, freshly present in each volume. In "Godless Shakespeare", Mallin argues that there is a profound absence of, or hostility to, God in Shakespeare's plays. It is clear that Shakespeare engaged with and deployed much of his culture's broadly religious interests: his language is shot through with biblical quotations, priestly sermonizing, Christian imagery and miracle-play style allegory. However, he claims that a counter-discourse also emerges in the works, arguing against God, or the idea of God. This is a polemical account of the absence of God and of belief in the plays, and of how this absence functions in theatrical moments of crux and crisis. Following Dante's three part structure for the "Divine Comedy" - the first part (Inferno) represents expressions of religious faith in Shakespeare's plays, the second (Purgatorio) sets out more sceptical positions, and the last (Paradiso) articulations of godlessness. The discussion focuses on the moral and spiritual dilemmas of major characters, developing the often subtle transitions between belief, scepticism and atheism and suggesting that there is a liberating potential in unbelief.