Answer one:

A) Explain how the two empiricists Berkeley and Hume could have such widely divergent views of God, even though both had empiricist starting points. Which one do you think is being more empirical?

B) Do you think it is damaging to a religion, or helpful, to admit, as Kant did, that our finite human minds are not capable of knowing God, and that there are limits to human knowledge? Should Kant's view silence the theologians forever, or does it just move the conversation about God to a different level?