TEHRAN – Noting that the Abrahamic prophets were great reformers of their era, a Professor of the Philosophy of the Christian Religion says that Christianity and Islam are trying to secular world to a religious view.

"We have so much in common that we should both seek to convert the secular world to a religious view," Richard Swinburne tells the Tehran Times.

"I certainly accept the view that they were the great reformers of their era."

Professor of the Philosophy of the Christian Religion at the University of Oxford from 1985 to 2002 believes the core of Abrahamic religions is represented in worshiping only one God and caring for humankind.

"The core of the messages of the Abrahamic prophets is contained in the Ten Commandments. (See Exodus 20); and the prophets continually reminded the notions of those commandments, centered on the obligations to worship only one God and to care for our neighbors."

Following is the text of the interview:

Q: What are the main differences between the teachings of Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) and other religions like Buddhism? The existence of an omnipotent and omniscient God?

A: Yes. The three Abrahamic religions claim that the universe was created by and sustained in existence (by keeping the laws of nature operative) by an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good God who chooses freely to do that; and can, if he so chooses, interfere in its regular operation by setting aside the laws of nature. Also, these religions all have as one foundation the Scriptures of the Hebrew Bible (which Christians call "the Old Testament").

Q: Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are interlinked religions; Christianity approves Moses' teachings, and Islam endorses Moses and Jesus' messages and prophecy. However, history says these three religions have had violent struggles. What are the main causes of such struggles when they have similar roots and origins? 

A: The wars between Christian states and Islamic states (and especially the Christian Crusades) were a disgrace to both; as was the persecution of Jews by (largely, I suspect) Christian states; and also the persecutions by Christian states of those Christians whom they deemed to be "heretical" (of Protestants by Catholic states, and Catholics by Protestant states). 

On the other hand, the spread of Christianity throughout the Western world during the first five Christian centuries involved no use of physical force and was achieved by preaching the Christian gospel and by the example of so many Christians who were subjected to a cruel death if they refused to deny their faith. (In the words of the historian Gibbon, "the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church.") The use of force to expand the Church would have been contrary to the example of its founder, Jesus Christ, who allowed himself to be crucified rather than attempt to impose his views by force. There have been no wars of religion and no persecutions of heretics in Christian countries for the last two centuries, and all Christians agree that every human has the right to practice their religion. I am not knowledgeable enough about the history of Islam to know exactly what the position of Islam on these issues is. But I have been led to believe that its expansion in the early Islamic centuries and subsequently was largely the result of military conquest. But Islamic states have been much more tolerant of Christian and Jewish subjects than (In the past) Christian states have been of Islamic subjects. However, some Islamic states today consider it a very serious crime for a Muslim to convert to Christianity or for any Christians to seek to persuade them to do so. 

However, there are significant differences between the doctrines of Christians and those of Judaism and Islam – notably, Christians claim that God is a Trinity (three persons of one essence) and that the second person of the Trinity, the Son, became incarnate as Jesus Christ, lived for 30 years on earth, preaching his gospel, was crucified for doing so, but rose again from the dead after three days; and that his death provides atonement for our sins. These are central claims of Christianity, and so contrary to the central claims of Islam, I cannot see any grounds for convergence of views. Both Christianity and Islam believe that it is important to convert others to their faith: and so we must each seek to persuade each other by rational means of the truth of our different views.

Although as a Christian, I believe that Christian doctrines are more probably true than are other doctrines, and I argue for this in my writings, I hope that I am open to taking all arguments seriously from Muslims, seeking to persuade me otherwise. However, we have so much in common that we should both seek to convert the secular world to a religious view.

Q: In Islam and Christianity, there is a division between scholars who believe that God's existence is provable by rational arguments and thinkers who reject rationalistic ways highlighting intuition and non-rational models to conceptualize the notion of God. Do you endorse the first group (rationalists)?

A: I believe that it is a basic principle of epistemology, which I call "the principle of credulity." that it is always rational to believe that things are as they seem to you – in the absence of counter-evidence. Hence, if it seems to someone they have a deep experience of God, it is rational for them to believe this – in the absence of counter-evidence. It is also a basic principle of epistemology, which I call "the principle of testimony" that it is always rational to believe what anyone else tells you – in the absence of counter-evidence. Hence, if the only people you know tell you that there is a God, it is rational to believe them – unless you have any evidence to the contrary. But in the modern world, almost all of us are aware of counter-evidence in the form of people who tell us that there is no God or produce arguments purporting to show us that there is no God. Hence almost all of us in the modern world need arguments to show that there is a God. The production of such arguments is called "natural theology," and natural theology has always been a part of Christian and Islamic thought; and we need it a lot more today than we did in the past. I have written much in defense of the view that the existence of the physical universe, its conformity to natural laws, the fact that these natural laws lead to the evolution of humans, and humans being conscious, makes it probable that the universe was created and is sustained by God.

Q: How do you respond to the "problem of evil," which tries to question the main monotheistic religions: how God could allow humans to do evil and suffer?

A: God gives to humans free will and the power to make great differences to the world, others, and themselves. This is a great gift, but almost inevitably, many humans sometimes make the wrong choices and thereby cause much pain and other sufferings to others. Such suffering, which is the result either of the deliberate choices of a human or of a human neglecting to prevent it, is called "moral evil". But there is also "natural evil," that is pain and suffering caused by natural processes which humans so far have not learned to control; these include incurable diseases, accidents, and the infirmities of old age. If the only choices we had were deliberately harming or not harming others or neglecting to prevent them from being harmed, many of us would have relatively little opportunity for serious choices at all. But the occurrence of any natural evils gives to each of us a choice – if I am suffering from disease, others have the choice of whether to sympathize with me and try to cure me, or to be callous and ignore me: and I have the choice of whether to bear my suffering with patience or to be bitter about it. Humans are so made that each time we make a choice of a certain kind, it becomes easier to make the choice of that kind next time. If we decide to tell the truth when it is very difficult for us to do so, it will be easier to tell the truth next time; and by continually forcing ourselves to tell the truth, we naturally become truth-telling people. So we can alter our characters. So evils of both kinds give us choices with important effects for good or ill at the time and enable us gradually over time to make ourselves good people, or to allow ourselves to become bad people. It is a great gift from God that we are in this way, mini-creator, making a difference to the world, each other, and ourselves. Evils provide these opportunities. If God had so arranged the world that there were no evils, we would not have any serious responsibility for it, and it is good for us that we do have that responsibility.

Q: What are the main cores of Abrahamic prophets' messages? Some scholars say they were great reformers of their era, but their followers distorted their messages and teachings over time. What is your comment?

A: The core of the messages of the Abrahamic prophets is contained in the Ten Commandments. (See Exodus 20) The prophets continually reminded the notions of those commandments, centered on the obligations to worship only one God and care for our neighbors. They also developed and applied these commandments in various ways. I certainly accept the view that they were the great reformers of their era, and I don't see that their message has been distorted at all in the written texts of the Hebrew Bible.

(The views expressed in this interview do not necessarily reflect those of Tehran Times.)