Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T03:57:22.104Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reply to Professor Rachels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

Robert A. Oakes
Robert A. Oakes
Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of Missouri-Rolla
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
A Reply To
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , June 1972 , pp. 165 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 165 note 1 ‘God and Human Attitudes’, Religious Studies, Vol. 7, No. 4, December 1971, pp. 325–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 165 note 2 For example, Cf. Findlay, J. N., ‘Can God's Existence Be Disproved?’ New Essays in Philosophical Theology, edited by Flew, and MacIntyre, (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1964), pp. 47–56.Google Scholar

page 165 note 3 Rachels rightly points out (p.333) that ‘God’ must be construed as a title rather than a proper name. This point has been made very clearly, as acknowledged by Rachels, by Pike, Nelson in his ‘Omnipotence and God's Ability to Sin’, American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 6, No. 3, July 1969, PP. 208–9.Google Scholar

page 165 note 4 Rachels, , p. 325.Google Scholar

page 165 note 5 Ibid., p. 334.

page 165 note 6 Ibid., p. 335.

page 166 note 1 Rachels, , p. 335.Google Scholar

page 166 note 2 Idem.

page 166 note 3 Rachels, , pp. 335–6.Google Scholar