Doğa yasalarının zorunluluğu, ilahi fiil ve mucize -tanrı dünyada fiilde bulunabilir mi?-

In this essay, first, I concentrate on the issue of miracle, divine action and divine intervention according to Enlightenment thinkers. Liberal teologians such as Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976), after Laplacian determinist metaphysics was added to the Newtonian mechanics, found that divine action in the world is contrary to the necessity of natural laws, i.e., to their being secientific and they defended a semi-deist view of "hand-off theology." Many modern theologians defended outdated Laplacian determinist metaphysics for the sake of complying with scientific standards. Then, I discuss famous causality debate between al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd in the light of the divine action and the New Scientific Picture that is intensively debated in the contemporary philosophy of religion. Here, contrary to the claim of Ibn Rushd, I argue that if quantum mechanics is correct, then al-Ghazali do not uproot science and his view that causality is contingent is more scientific and more modern than that of Ibn Rushd's position. Finally, I point out that outside of the theological project of al-Ghazali, in his epistemological project, al-Ghazali believes that natural laws are certain and I argue that he follows a middle way in this regard.

İlahi Fiil ,

Mucize ,

Nedensellik ,

Kuantum Teorisi ,

Plantinga ,

Gazâlî ,

İbn Rüşd ,

In this essay, first, I concentrate on the issue of miracle, divine action and divine intervention according to Enlightenment thinkers. Liberal teologians such as Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976), after Laplacian determinist metaphysics was added to the Newtonian mechanics, found that divine action in the world is contrary to the necessity of natural laws, i.e., to their being secientific and they defended a semi-deist view of "hand-off theology." Many modern theologians defended outdated Laplacian determinist metaphysics for the sake of complying with scientific standards. Then, I discuss famous causality debate between al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd in the light of the divine action and the New Scientific Picture that is intensively debated in the contemporary philosophy of religion. Here, contrary to the claim of Ibn Rushd, I argue that if quantum mechanics is correct, then al-Ghazali do not uproot science and his view that causality is contingent is more scientific and more modern than that of Ibn Rushd's position. Finally, I point out that outside of the theological project of al-Ghazali, in his epistemological project, al-Ghazali believes that natural laws are certain and I argue that he follows a middle way in this regard.

Divine Action, ,

Miracle, ,

Causality, ,

Quantum Theory, ,

Plantinga, ,

Al-Ghazali, ,

Ibn Rushd ,