Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2007
In this paper we respond to Benjamin Crowe's criticisms in this issue of our discussion of the grounds of worship. We clarify our previous position, and examine Crowe's account of what it is about God's nature that might ground our obligation to worship Him. We find Crowe's proposals no more persuasive than the accounts that we examined in our previous paper, and conclude that theists still owe us an account of what it is in virtue of which we have obligations to worship God.
1. Crowe, Benjamin D. ‘Reasons for worship: a response to Bayne and Nagasawa’, Religious Studies, 43 (2007), 465–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar (in-text references are to this article); Bayne, Tim and Nagasawa, Yujin ‘The grounds of worship’, Religious Studies, 42 (2006), 299–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2. Rachels, James ‘God and human attitudes’, Religious Studies, 7 (1971), 325–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3. There is a rather tricky issue here that ought to be recognized. According to many versions of theism, our ability to worship God is dependent on the grace of God. Such accounts often come close to the position that all of those with the ability to worship God do in fact worship God, and that those who don't worship God fail to do so only because God's grace hasn't been given to them.
4. See Brown, Campbell and Nagasawa, Yujin ‘I can't make you worship me’, Ratio, 18 (2005), 138–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5. We wish to thank Benjamin Crowe for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.