عنوان مقاله [English]
Since the age of science emerged and empirical views of the world were developed, religious beliefs have been under attack by empiricists. With the emergence of logical positivism in the philosophy of science, this radical worldview led to the claim that religious beliefs are meaningless. In such a context where it seemed unexpected for there to be a dialogue between empiricists and religious believers, Anthony Flew introduced the criterion of falsifiability as the condition for the meaningfulness of religious beliefs, and this led to a heated debate between empiricists and religious believers. Flew’s Challenge was frequently reprinted and gave rise to many positive and negative reactions rooted in the brevity and ambiguity of Flew’s writing. In this paper, we examine such reactions to Flew’s view and then provide a detailed analysis of his challenge, unveiling the significant insight lurking in it; an insight that not only does not degrade religious values, but provides a foundation to elucidate religious beliefs and issues concerning the language of the religion.