https://www.cultopedia.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Theological_veto 2026-04-05T17:24:45Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.44.5 https://www.cultopedia.org/index.php?title=Theological_veto&diff=1432&oldid=prev 2026-01-11T17:26:19Z

<p>Adding <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_description" class="extiw" title="wikipedia:Short description">short description</a>: &quot;Concept in philosophy of religion&quot;</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>{{Short description|Concept in philosophy of religion}}<br /> {{NN|date=June 2018}}<br /> {{improve references|date=June 2018}}<br /> The &#039;&#039;&#039;theological veto&#039;&#039;&#039; is the [[concept]] in [[philosophy of religion]] that [[philosophy]] and [[logic]] are impious and that [[God]], not [[reason]], is [[sovereign]].&lt;ref name=&quot;ferre&quot;&gt;[[Frederick Ferré]], &#039;&#039;Basic Modern Philosophy of Religion&#039;&#039;&lt;/ref&gt;{{Page needed|date=January 2013}} This concept is held as true by some [[Theism|theists]], especially [[Religious fundamentalism|religious fundamentalists]].<br /> <br /> The idea is derived from a belief that mankind is [[Total depravity|depraved]], and its [[intellect]] is a flawed product of this [[Fall of man|fallenness]]. In this view [[religious conversion|conversion]], not reason, is the way to the truth; [[preaching]], not [[argument]], is the way to [[persuasion|persuade]]; and [[divine grace|grace]], not [[evidence]] is the way [[belief]] is confirmed. In this view, natural reason is so profoundly hostile to the divine that holding it above [[faith]] is tantamount to worshiping a sinful creature as an [[idolatry|idol]]. Even the use of [[reason]] on behalf of faith is rejected under the theological veto, as it shows faithlessness. It presupposes by practice that faith can be benefited by reason.<br /> <br /> ==Usage==<br /> An early use of the phrase is reported from a 1925 critique of opponents of [[evolution]]: &quot;They meet the accumulating evidences of the descent of man with a theological veto. They set the limit to science by the quotation of a verse from the creation legend &quot;Genesis.&quot;&quot;&lt;ref&gt;American Ethical Union, &#039;&#039;The Ethical Outlook&#039;&#039;, Volume 12, 1925, page 67.&lt;/ref&gt;<br /> <br /> == Rejecting the theological veto ==<br /> There are several reasons put forth by those who reject the theological veto. One way to reject the theological veto is to assert that one cannot isolate reason from faith. Intelligible use of language is claimed to commit one to [[consistency]], so to reject reason is to refuse to make sense. This argument asserts that even the theological veto itself must be consistent with itself and inconsistent with reason. Another way the theological veto is rejected is to assert that rejection of critical control over one&#039;s beliefs, as for instance by the requirement of evidence, lowers the barrier against [[bigotry]], [[fanaticism]], and [[persecution]]. While its high aspiration is to warn against human [[pride]], some say its supporters are [[Guilt (emotion)|guilty]] of what they themselves claim is the highest form of pride: They claim that they know the mind of God.&lt;ref name=&quot;ferre&quot; /&gt;<br /> <br /> == See also ==<br /> *[[Fideism]]<br /> <br /> ==References==<br /> {{reflist}}<br /> <br /> {{philosophy of religion|state=collapsed}}<br /> <br /> {{DEFAULTSORT:Theological Veto}}<br /> [[Category:Criticism of religion]]<br /> [[Category:Philosophy of religion]]<br /> [[Category:Psychology and religious fundamentalism]]<br /> <br /> <br /> {{reli-philo-stub}}</div>

imported>WeyerStudentOfAgrippa