IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 161 RATIONAL AFFIRMATION OF GOD’S EXISTENCE IN MEYER’S REALIST HERMENEUTIC METAPHYSICS Ikechukwu Anthony KANU Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies Tansian University Umunya, Anambra State ikee_mario@yahoo.com DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36469.60642 & Philip Osarobu ISANBOR1 Department of Philosophy, St. Albert Institute, Fayit-Kagoma, Kaduna State osarobuisanbor@gmail.com. & ADIDI, Dokpesi Timothy2 Department of Philosophy, Veritas University, Abuja timshow03@gmail.com Abstract The debates on the certainty and uncertainty for the existence of God have been the major thrust of contemporary philosophical engagement as results of emotivist and relativist epistemic traditions, as they are hinged on the evaluation of human religious practices and epistemic conditioning. They have been problematic on the basis of their linguistic and pragmatic connotations of human attributes to God. The belief of the existence of God outside the workability of human senses remains epistemologically problematic. Hence, the paper tries to explicate the criticisms and assertions for the existence and authoritative claims of the attributes of God as the Ultimate Metaphysical Reality in Ben Meyer’s Realist Hermeneutic Tradition/Metaphysics. Meyer observes that the general God-talks have not been done outside the realm and domain of science and its claim of exert methodology in establishing and verifying facts, especially in relation to indispensability of truth. Therefore, the paper recognises that theology has been seen as an established science, especially by its tool of rational hermeneutics, by the virtue of it being methodological and rudimentary in attaining certain knowledge through faith and 1Philip O. ISANBOR, lecturer, Department of Philosophy, St. Albert Institute, Fayit-Fadan, Kagoma, PMB. 1006 Kafanchan, Kaduna State, Nigeria. Email: osarobuisanbor@gmail.com. 2Timothy D. ADIDI, lecturer, Department of Philosophy, Veritas University, Abuja, FCT, Nigeria. Email: timshow03@gmail.com. The Corresponding Author: Phone: 0813-860-5055 mailto:ikee_mario@yahoo.com mailto:osarobuisanbor@gmail.com mailto:timshow03@gmail.com mailto:osarobuisanbor@gmail.com mailto:timshow03@gmail.com IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 162 revelation that are enlightened by reason, under the pavilion of Truth, which is God, the author of knowledge, despite the gravity of the human limitedness in certainty. Background Realist hermeneutic tradition (the metaphysical affirmativeness of existents) is about the interpretation of theological-eschatological beliefs which are based on biblical claims and convictions, under the foundation of scientific modelling of the contents of truth. Its scientific modelling, here, is on the materialistic judgment and evidences in the world and around humanity, especially; to ascertain the existence and attributes of God in relation to humanistic epistemic conventions. The fact may be that the rational affirmation of God’s existence does not fall within the ambit of empirical science.3 Verification, on the other hand, crucial as it is to empirical science, is not relevant to every kind of knowledge. The sense of verification indicates the epistemic concern for the establishment of truth. Truth here; is about the elimination of doubt and disappearance of unbelief. Thus, there is no basis on which to insist on verification (in the strict sense) of things of common sense, or of mathematics or logic. Not of common sense, for empirical data cannot be expected to reveal whether a possibly relevant unity or relationship (insight/construal) is actually relevant to this, or this kind of, concrete case. Not of logic or mathematics, for in neither case are empirical data the relevant fulfilling conditions sought by reflection on hypotheses. Idjakpo epistemologically puts it; What is truth? The Holy Bible records that Pontius Pilate was one of those who first raised this fundament question. It is commonly believed that the philosopher who is also concerned with ‘truth’ is one of those best suited to answer the question. Many definitions have been given as answers to the questions of the meaning of truth and these answers are said to constitute the theories of truth. We have the correspondence, coherence, pragmatic and semantic theories of truth among others. Conceptually speaking, do these theories really answer our question? If not. What does the question ‘what is truth’ really mean?4 3See, T. D. Cooper and C. K. Epperson, Evil: Satan, Sin & Psychology. Mumbai: St Paul., 2008, p. 35. 4Onos Godwin Idjakpo, “The problem of epistemic truth.” AICI Journal of Religious Studies and Theology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2105, pp. 85-91. See, p. 85. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 163 The question sounds widely impossible to infer any substantive answer meaningfully, when such is directed to the clarification of the existence of God. But there is ‘truth’ and there is something that regarded as being ‘truthful’. While drawing upon all the contributions made by the sciences and philosophy, Catholic Social Teaching or Philosophy is aimed at helping humanity on the path of salvation, understanding the social integration and interaction of God with the world (the physical phenomena).5 As a body of faith, she is not in doubt of the existence of God, but always ready in conformity with the truth for all knowledge in substantiating the claim, with or without science. This view about science can be aligned with the Paul Obada when he asserts that; “with the failure of science and secular humanism, religion becomes an avenue for lasting solutions to the innumerable problems of man. Consequently, it is thought that salvation comes from Zion. Unfortunately, the condition of faith-expression in the religious arena is one to question the depth and genuineness of our religious convictions”6 The culture of epistemic verification of the contents of faith, as demand of their authentication; will always lead to another culture of insatiable desires for knowledgeable truth. So demandingly, in logic, the fulfilling conditions are what satisfy criteria of clarity, coherence, and rigor; in mathematics they are what reduce, in virtues of conclusions rigorously drawn, to any freely chosen set of suitable postulates.7 These features of the concept of verification- that verification consists in the exclusion of grounds for rational doubt concerning the truth of some proposition; that this means its exclusion from particular minds; that the nature of the experience which serves to exclude grounds for rational doubt depends upon the particular subject matter; that verification is often related to predictions and that such predictions are often conditional; that verification and falsification may be asymmetrically related; and finally, that the verification of a factual proposition is not equivalent to logical certification- are all relevant to the verification of the central religious claim, “God exists”8, and that it takes some elementary level of epistemic interests to explain factual propositions of materials in relation to the transcendence. 5John Paul II, Centesimus annus. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1991, no. 54. 6Paul. O. Obada, “Bringing faith out of the closet”, The Voice, Vol. 42, 2004. 7Ben F. Meyer, Reality and illusion in New Testament scholarship: a primer in critical realist hermeneutics. Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1994, p. 198. 8John Hick, The existence of God. London: Collier Macmillan, 1964, p. 259. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 164 Rational Affirmation of the Beingness of God in Realist Hermeneutic Metaphysics From scholarly consideration and foundation, Ben Meyer for example, who is emeritus of McMaster University, has an intellectual tradition on Realist Hermeneutic authority on Biblical Scholarship. His works bears the imprint of the Late Bernard Lonegan’s “critical realism” and of the European tradition of philosophical and historical scholarship. He has a contemporary concern on the interplay of science and religion in understanding God, as the ultimate Reality, in accordance with biblical convictions and scholarship. He studies this development with philosophical intellectual background, most especially, understanding human intentionality and epistemic interdependency of the minds. Reflection on the growth of knowledge in the modern world and in particular of mathematics and the natural sciences since the seventeenth century has changed the state of the question for the rational affirmation of the existence of God to mere materialistic verifications. According to Ben Meyer; Empirical science has become for Western civilisation the supremely obvious instance of valid knowledge. It is empirical, for it proceeds from data and returns to data to verify all its affirmations in them. Verification; in the strict sense is a cumulative convergence of direct and indirect empirical confirmations.9 Such a factual claim is an empirical hypothesis and, as every empirical hypothesis must, it conveys definite expectations about the future. These expectations, under the appropriate circumstances, with either are satisfied or disappointed.10 With realist development, modern hermeneutics encompasses everything in the interpretative process including verbal and non-verbal forms of communicative as well as prior aspects that affect communication, such as presupposition, pre-understanding, the meaning and philosophy of language, and semiotics. The central notation of it is on the personhood of God.11 Though, most of the implications are: there are no data, no empirical given- on God. Then, there cannot be any factual claim on the personhood of God. Accordingly, based on the explicated thrust of realist hermeneutic, God cannot be an object of scientific knowledge. Science calls for the limitations of particular 9Ben Meyer, 197 10Fredrick Ferre, Basis modern philosophy of religion. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1967, pp. 336-7. 11See, James Collins, God in modern philosophy. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1967. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 165 objects of realities to be verifiable. There is no verifiable principle by which to conclude from the world to God, for a principle is verifiable only if there are data on both the terms that the principle relates and of object of verification. Since there are no data on God, there can be principle verifying a relation of the world to God. Thus, for the purpose of clarity, that to be scientifically educated in this regard, will be on the condition that if informed question on the prospect for a rational proof of God’s existence is asked, then it will be “by what unverifiable principle do you propose to infer the existence of God from our world?”12 To John Paul II, when analysing the congruence of faith and reason to the establishment of human understanding of God, asserts that; On this understanding, everything is reduced to opinion; and there is a sense of being adrift. While, on the one hand, philosophical thinking has succeeded in coming closer to the reality of human life and its forms of expression, it has also tended to pursue issues—existential, hermeneutical or linguistic—which ignore the radical question of the truth about personal existence, about being and about God.13 The radical questions on the authenticity of truth may be personal but in most instances, are universally objective, because truth remains immutable. Hence, realist hermeneutics seems to suggest the philosophical engagement of “transcendent realism” to remain in the realm of factual objectivity, to be within experiential pavilion. For Paul Oredipe, analysing the thoughtfulness of Fides et Ratio, a precise evaluation of philosophical modernity for the interplay of faith and reason for integral human development; recognises or admits that John Paul II makes informed statements about the philosophical, theological, and cultural roots of our crisis, the crisis of interrelation of faith and reason especially. Here, we infer a process philosophy that deals with the understanding of the cosmos and our place in it, a religio-philosophical assertiveness on the exaction of the indispensable and indisputable placement of God’s active beingness in our universal cosmological common existence. This school of thought has proponents like Henri Bergson and Alfred North Whitehead, the philosophers who believe in absoluteness and progressiveness of God’s unquantifiable creativeness and the God in the progressiveness of the created order, respectively. In substantiating philosophical modesty of the valuation of truth, John Paul II asserts that; “with a false modesty, people rest content with partial and 12Ben Meyer, 197. 13John Paul II, Fides et ratio. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1998, no. 5. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 166 provisional truths, no longer seeking to ask radical questions about the meaning and ultimate foundation of human, personal and social existence. In short, the hope that philosophy might be able to provide definitive answers to these questions has dwindled.”14However, he acknowledges the positive aspects and great merits of philosophical modernity as including, for example, the development of attention to humanity rather than the universe, to history and to the problem of knowledge; concern for the world of learning, and so on. Yet he links this crisis to certain philosophical ideas: epistemological and moral relativism, materialism, and an undifferentiated pluralism, to name a few.15Realist hermeneutic tradition possesses and tries to exhibit facts on the claim for the existence of God and His attributes, in His relationship with the created order of the world. It is by the assertion of the cosmic phenomenological events, about and around the existence of the physical world and humanity, about the supernatural happenings that are beyond human full comprehension and above human inventive skill when demanded, all based on biblical factual claims, especially around and about the personhood of Jesus Christ, the Messiah (the Suffered Redeemer) of the good and not perfect world. A perfect world does not need redemptive intervention of any external personality to retain its holds. This is scriptural truth with meta-realist objectivity on the application of the interplay of human reason and faith in the affirmation of religious truth. Meyer tries to distinguish the domain of scientific realism from idealistic or transcendent realism, in analysing the existence and attributes of God, by separating the factors of physicality from the domain of metaphysically acclaimed realities. In the words of Mel Thompson, “Scientific realism is of the view that the objects with which science deals are separate from, and independent of, our own minds, and that scientific theories are therefore literal description (whether true or false) of the external, objective world.”16Scientific realism may not support the epistemic certainty by mere metaphysical rationality, but cannot be distant from its epistemic foundation in the establishment of truth. “The implication is that we can assume that there is a truth out there to be had, even if we have not yet found the perfect theory by which to describe it.”17 In the other hand, “transcendent realism” is a 14John Paul II, Fides et ratio, no. 5. 15Paul Oredipe, “The church’s diakonia of the truth: an appraisal of John Paul II’s philosophical legacy.” West African Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol. 11, 2008. 16Mel Thompson, Understanding philosophy of science. London: McGraw-Hill, 2012, p. 91. 17Mel Thompson, Understanding philosophy of science, p. 91. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 167 philosophical practice merely by metaphysicians, by laying facts and rational existential assertions on the metaphysical realities, especially God. It is rational affirmation which is scientific, because of its exhibition and habitation of methodologies. It is on this that theology is taken as science. The philosophy of transcendent realism has its central objective based on the realisation of possible worlds under the possible existence of God. Epistemic-Religiosity of Truth for Scientific Exaction of God’s Existence Scientific realism appears to be more exact than of transcendent realism epistemologically. Be that as it may, “general transcendent knowledge,” in other words, the “rational affirmativeness” of God’s existence, is the only ‘principle’ apropos of which the issue of “verification” might arise: it is the human mind itself- a principle more fundamental than any process of verification, since every such process supposes it. And since any process of verification of any kind supposes it, there is no point in talking about verifying it.18 In the realm of scientific meanings, the ultimate mind appears as the Truth. The “Truth” in the religious sense does not mean simply the sum of the entire true propositions known and yet to be known. It means the one Source and Ground of all partial truths and the Light that shine within every particular illumination of intelligence. The capitalised terms are symbols of “ultimacy” in relation to the enterprise of empirical inquiry.19 According to Gbenga Fasiku, analysing the thought of David Lewis, on the possible worlds with meta-realist tradition, said that; The notion of possible worlds is not just a philosophical tool useful of the purpose of elucidating philosophical arguments or claims. Possible worlds are real in some way. In this conception of possible world, what makes worlds distinct is that they are spatial-temporally separated from one another. In other words, existing physical world really is. So, possible worlds are real worlds and they actually exist in the same sense the real or concrete world we inhabits exists.20 18Ben Meyer, 198 19Phillip H. Phenix, Realms of meaning. London: McGraw-Hill Books, 1964, p. 247. 20Gbenga Fasiku, “Moral facts, possible moral worlds and naturalised ethics.” West African Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol. 11, 2008, pp. 105-128. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 168 Almost generally speaking, the religious consciousness seeks to affirm a reality from which the phenomenal world is derived, a Being whose intelligence is revealed in the laws and theories of empirical science. The man of faith affirms an explanation in which all particular explanations are comprehended, and a First Cause (not in order of time, but of being) in which all proximate causes are grounded. The man, who is a being of faith, is the same man of science. Both reason and belief reside in his “beingness” to exert the existence of the reality in accordance with his consideration and mental conviction. In some words of Benedict XVI; “the world of the Bible presents us with a new image of God. In surrounding cultures, the image of God and of the gods ultimately remained unclear and contradictory.”21It should be recognised that science and philosophy are not totally separable. This is because the former makes an exposition of the world realities while the latter provides the tool for establishment of realities.22 Another way of putting this: when we grasp the idea of God, we do not grasp God, that is, an unrestricted act of understanding. We grasp an extrapolation that consists in removing the restriction from a restricted act of understanding (our own).23 The Source, Ground, Light, Being, Reality, First Cause, is named by many names, and all are names of the divine or of God, the term most commonly applied to the ultimate Truth. By faith, the God is held to be the primal fact, whose being and nature are expressed in theological propositions and creedal formulas. These statements of faith are not regarded as empirical proposition in the same class as other such propositions referring to the finite realm. Yet they are stated in empirical form to express the conviction that the God of faith is actual fact and not a fiction of the imagination. Theology is regarded as the supreme science, providing systematic generalisations and theories about the ultimate Reality.24 Commonly inspiring is the epistemic condition for the truths concerning fact is not logically necessary. Their contrary is never self-contradictory. But at the same time the bare logical possibility of error does not constitute ground for rational doubt as to the veracity of our experience.25 While it is a truism that individuals 21Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2005, no. 9. 22J. O. Ayeni, “Naturalism: the foundation of scientific studies.” Enwisdomization Journal, 4(1&2), 2009, p. 77. 23Ben Meyer, p. 198. 24Phillip Phenix, p. 247 25John Hick, p. 258. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 169 make perception, yet this is not to deny objectivity of perceptions since whatever maybe perceived has objective identity in nature. It is the impression a person forms about a phenomenon that carries the imprint of his personality. Experience consists in perceiving ourselves along with other objects of cognition.26 But, the perception of nature has been the perception of God. Hence, God has not been discussed outside the domain of science; since theology is scientific, as it is analytical and methodological in its assessment and consideration of the existence, nature and relevance of the Believed realities and convictions. God’s talks have been realist and factual, even linguistically ascertain. Surely demanding, the ontological argument requires that we make the transition from analytic proposition (a necessary and universal judgment relevant to possibility, i.e., leaving concrete existence bracketed) to an analytic principle (analytic judgment whose terms and relation are existential, that is, occur in judgments of facts). But we cannot make this transition except by affirming the fact of God’s existence. Thus, the rational affirmation of the existence of God is requisite to its ontological argument; it is not its result but presupposition.27On this, Oppy asserts that “ontological arguments are arguments, for the conclusion that God exists, from premises which are supposed to derive from some source other than observation of the world—e.g., from reason alone. In other words, ontological arguments are arguments from nothing but analytic, a priori and necessary premises to the conclusion that God exists.”28It is in view of the fact that they want to acquire more in-depth knowledge of the physical world in order to make fuller use of it for their survival; realists favour extrinsic use of knowledge.29 It is in knowledge as the truth. For Saint Paul, in the words of William Ede in the interpretation of philosophical notation of the truth, that; in human’s search for the ultimate and indivisible truth, faith plays a fundamental role while man’s conscience ultimately determines the positive outcome. This gives St Paul a relativist stance on the notion of Truth, but he affirms that objectivity and universal certainty are the crowning of this process of the discovery of truth via a conscience search drive. Here is a logical build-up from relativity to objectivity, from the particular mind to the universal mind, and 26J. O. Ayeni, p. 79. 27Ben Meyer, p. 199. 28G. Oppy, “Ontological argument.” Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, First published Thu Feb 8, 1996; substantive revision Fri Jul 15, 2011. 29O. E. Ekpe, “Applying four pedagogic perspectives and their didactic objectives to the teaching of information and communication technology (ICT) at primary level.”Journal of Teacher Perspective, 9(2), 2015, pp. 419-430. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 170 clearly put, from the state of conscience to the ultimate and unchanging idea- the truth which is God.30 Affirming Metaphysics of God in Truth through Biblical Hermeneutics and Theocratic Exegesis In all indications, there have been several attempts to reconcile the existence of evil with the reality of a loving, powerful, good God.31From Biblical hermeneutic on the creation account of the world; and on the certainty of the existence God, it is believed that the world is created by God. In it, God is said to have pronounced the Created World as good. The account did not record that the world was created in accordance with the nature of Creator, God. It only created humanity in its own image and likeness. It did assert that the Creator pronounced the created world as good, just because it is good. Also, the created world was not pronounced to be perfect. That is, the pronounced created order may be good but perfect. If the world is created in accordance with the ontological good of God, then the world is good not perfect. This is on the pronouncement of the nature of the created world and its ordering. The Creating deity, God only pronounced itself to be perfect in terms of moral, attitudinal prowess and restiveness in relationship of its nature with humanity. It is ontological valuing of nature, not materialistic consideration of the creative ordering of existence. It is since the created world is not perfect but only good. “Goodness has its perfection in God, and the real truth is the perfection of certainty realised in God, and knowing God as the Ultimate Being who created and rules over the universe”,32 but the world remains imperfect materialistically and demands the embrace of perfection as an intervention for its redemption. Another point of limitation is the problem of evil which religious do not associate with the nature of God. God is claiming to be ultimately good, but of whom presence the reign of evil is mightily visible.33 Before now, there is a usual question of “if God is the source of Good? Such question affirms the existence of God at a glance. This affirmation of the existence of God must be generally 30Stan-William Ede, “The Pauline concept of truth: epistemological insights from the philosophy of St. Paul.” Enwisdomization Journal, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2010, pp. 71-89. 31See, Francis A. Olajide, In defence of the unborn and the limit of existential option. Being 47th Inaugural lecture of Ekiti State University, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria, 2017, p. 28. 32S-W Ede, “The Pauline concept of truth: epistemological insights from the philosophy of St. Paul.” Ibid. 33P. O. Isanbor, “Evaluation of the meaning and working of religion.”The Social Scientist, 2(1), 2012, pp. 78-86. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 171 established before the discourses of the problem of evil. One way of approaching the question before us is to inquire whether, as a result of modern investigations into history, philosophy, comparative religion or what have you, we should sort the validity of the source of faith and reason in relation to human freedom and responsibility, before the questioning of God. It should be assumed that, there is the liturgical cosmos, confined to the realm of immediate sense data, and it is the sign of the presence of God and contains the pledge of the life to come. Over against it stands the cosmos studied by the work of the mind. This arrangement increases the limitedness of human nature, because the devil, whose will is wholly given over to hatred, wishes to distort the cosmos as much as it can; to this end it tries to corrupt and pervert the human race.34 This development is a propositional and factual contradiction to the human reasoning and sensory conviction to assert the exactness of the existence of a Good and Perfect God as the pragmatic and divine Entity or Reality will always remain limitless. Our precepts and concepts fashioned by the intellect as representation of reality in abstract and universal manner, do not as yet constitute knowledge; rather than being finished products, they are the materials of knowledge. Knowledge comes from the affirmation of “something; and that takes place in the interpretative judgment. Judgment here possesses a truth- claim, but also be erroneous. Now, what is truth?35 It is important to remember that we do not speak of verifying logically necessary truths, but only propositions concerning matters of fact. Accordingly verification is not to be identified with the concept of logical certification or proof. The exclusion of rational doubt concerning some matter of fact is not equivalent to the exclusion of the logical possibility of error or illusion.36 In nutshell, there have been series of arguments on the existence of God, and no one has been able to exact its claim optimally convincingly and maximally dominating. Any of them has been meaningful and at the same time, very limited. But, on an idealist pavilion; based on naturalised convictions of Ben Meyer, which are also realistic, the God-talks are enough to ascertain that He exists, then beyond full comprehension by a particular mode of human knowledge. Nowhere is this fascination with the world more evident than 34P. O. Isanbor, “Evaluation of the meaning and working of religion.”Ibid. 35S-W. Ede, “The Pauline concept of truth: epistemological insights from the philosophy of St. Paul.” Ibid. 36John Hick, p. 258. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 172 science and the technology that it make possible. From speculations about the origins of matter, to the understanding and manipulation of genetic information or the working of the human body, it thrives on the human desires to unlock the mysteries of the world around us- both for the sake of knowledge itself and for the benefits it can offer.37 There reside the powers of limitless self-transcendence, the ground for self-awareness, imagination, self-determination, and participation in real time, including the ability to remember and to anticipate. Theology is thinking within the faith, through the faith and about the faith. Philosophy as such is thinking on reality in general. Theology is supernatural wisdom, since the faith is a gift from God coming from above; philosophy is natural wisdom in the light of reason alone. It is not surprising therefore that a Christian (with faith) may engage in dialogue with a non-Christian, since both are philosophers, that is to say, both are interested in the great questions of man, the world and God, and both know what they are talking about when they engage in dialogue. The philosophical dimension to be noted in this biblical vision, and its importance from the standpoint of the history of religions, lies in the fact that, on the one hand, we find ourselves before a strictly metaphysical image of God: God is the absolute and ultimate source of all being; but this universal principle of creation—the Logos, primordial reason—is at the same time a lover with all the passion of a true love.38 Hence, Phenix asserts that; In the light of faith these latter capacities betoken the union in the soul of the temporal and the eternal, and form this joining spring intimations, hopes, and expectations of a destiny of the soul beyond the mortal span, as symbolised in doctrines of pre-existence, reincarnation, immortality, and resurrection- the various beliefs differing in the matter of the relation between the body and soul in the person.39 On the other hand, the act of will include affirmations on man and on God: affirmations of man’s spiritual nature, freedom, responsibility, and sinfulness, of the existence and nature of God, and of “the solution” that transcendent solution that God provides for man’s problem. It will include an announcement and an account of the solution.40Certain tendencies in contemporary moral theology, under the influence of the currents of subjectivism and individualism just 37Mel Thompson, Understanding philosophy of science. London: McGraw-Hill, 2012, p. 1. 38Benedict XVI, no. 10. 39Phillip Phenix, p. 249. 40Ben Meyer, p. 164. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 173 mentioned, involve novel interpretations of the relationship of freedom to the moral law, human nature and conscience, and propose novel criteria for the moral evaluation of acts. Despite their variety, these tendencies are at one in lessening or even denying the dependence of freedom on truth.41 These tendencies have projected unified consideration of God, and that He exists. Some scientists and thinkers may say that the conception of the existence and attributes of God is on the realm of faith only, not on reason. The domain of faith cannot be illusive of the working of reasoning. It takes the compatibility of both reason and faith to perceive and assert the domain of the transcendent and divinity, where the thought and belief of the existence and attributes are asserted. In fact, these assertions are beyond one domain of knowledge, especially that of science. Ferre will further expound that; Of course, this does not mean that all genuine empirical hypotheses have to be actually falsifies. Some empirical hypotheses happen to be consistently reliable in the expectations they support, and it would be absurd to mistrust them just because they never known to let us down.42 Put simply, in the analogue of the scientific community, the pursuit of truth is a collaboration on which “science” in the concrete term, is a compound of belief and immanently generated knowledge. But among scientists this collaboration is an entirely human affair. Brought to bear on human living, a purely human collaboration would be flatly implausible. Hence, the new and higher collaboration belonging to the solution could hardly be the work of human beings alone. It must be mainly the work of God. Indeed, if a human role is to be functional at all, the solution must provide an enabling form qualifying the intelligence of human subjects for a share in this cognitive quest. We may call this form “faith”; and since belief and only belief is universally accessible and fits harmoniously within a continuation of the actual order of the world, this faith will be a transcendent belief, its motive, the omniscience, goodness, and omnipotence of God, originate and preserver of this divine-human collaboration.43 Then, the union of faith and reason in ascertain the existence of God is realistic, especially it is situated in the domain of Biblical hermeneutic tradition, as He is personified in the personhood of Factual Messiah, the Christ. 41John Paul II, Veritatis splendor. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1993, no. 34. 42Fredrick Ferre, p. 337. 43Ben Meyer, p. 164. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 174 So, the assertions and the certainty of the existence are in the domain of the collaboration of faith and reason. Though, The Sceptics are on the position that there is no knowledge so indubitable that cannot be doubted. So, Meyer’s Realist Hermeneutic tradition for the affirmation of the God’s existence is not an exception. The factual positioning remains that the realist tradition for the existence of God and for the oiling of its attributes ascribed to it by humanity, is needed, within the pavilion of abstraction. That, there are wonders and other non-explainable events, especially in the name of miracles are not enough to exact the existence of God. These are the happenings that associated and ascribed to chance and the cosmic privilege. It is beyond the domain and application of reason in the name of verifiable principle and falsification without the atom of faith. Humanity is a complex entity of matter and spirit, and the union of these make-ups is even beyond scientific proving and assertions, and the above the establishment of the existence of the divinity. The realist tradition based on the Biblical hermeneutics is a reaffirming notation in the establishment of already existing facts of the Ultimate Being, the Ultimate Truth, in which all knowledge reside and all atoms of facts are verified. Conclusion The discourses of the existence of God may be different from that of the attributes of God. That God exists or not, is rather of separate consideration of His attributes. For example, the goodness of God is distinct from His existence. It is transcendent. It is beyond the realm of science and its evaluation. Even, many theorists, while claiming to be operating strictly as scientist, make metaphysical or ultimate claims about life.44 True knowledge or human wisdom is metaphysical. It consists of the understanding of forces in their hierarchy, cohesion and interaction.45The existence and attributes of God are on the realistic apprehension and comprehension of the physicality of the world in relation with man’s metaphysical limitedness, by faith which engages the revelation of his personhood in a transcendental apprehension. The relation is that of mundane to eternal. The disclosure of this relation is revelation, and its mode of apprehension is faith. 44See, T. D. Cooper and C. K. Epperson, Evil: Satan, sin and psychology. Mumbai: St Pauls, 2008, p. 35. 45C. B. Okoro, Tempel’s Bantu philosophy: analysis and critique. Journal of African Philosophy and Studies, Vol. 1, Nos. 1 & 2, 1988, pp. 83-92, see, p. 85. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 175 Therefore, the philosopher who tends his or her heart and soul to the philosophic reasons for establishment of the goodness of God will find nourishment therein, in order to sustain his or her sense of the world and world-process as good. For most of the world’s contents of truth, it will be from other sources, perhaps unsearchable, inaccessible sources for his or her academic or intellectual gymnastics.46 It may well be that the horizon requisite to the rational affirmation of the existence and attributes of God is not open to many. Of the numerous blocks to that horizon, some may prove to be relatively irremovable. Others, however, may yield to the cultivation of specifically religious experience.47 So, understanding the grounds of Meyer’s realist hermeneutics tradition, we do not accept any argument for the goodness of God (in the sense of God as moral agent caring for the world) from an independent premise of the goodness of the world. But, ascribe to the rational affirmation and conviction, based on the indispensable epistemic connection of faith and reason, that the world is good and life is good on condition that God, the author of the world and life, is good. If the creative fiat is good, then the world and world process, the origin and destiny of the world is good, and it is good to believe that God is good, only in order for him to be in tune with the world. 46See, Reginald O. Idode, God’s attributes and the problem of evil: a critique of Hume on the design argument. Enwisdomization Journal, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2016, pp. 94-109, see, pp. 106-7. 47Cf, Ben Meyer, p. 254. IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 6. ISSN: 2488- 9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020. Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University 176