The meaning of the word “Philotheos” is indicated by its constituent classical Greek words, philo = love and theos = God . Philotheos is therefore love of God, ie a psychology of allegiance to God. It starts with the concept of GOD as true and valid.

As used by the author of this website, philotheos therefore means a God centred, God derived ‘philosophy’.

The word ‘philosophy’ itself comprises two classical Greek words, namely philo = love and sophia = ‘wisdom”. It means ‘Love of wisdom’.

In general terms, I view “Philosophy” as the over-arching discipline concerned with answering the ‘big’ questions of life – the most fundamental, strategic questions about our existence. But both western philosophy and culture are constrained by Materialism and its consequent God denial.

Because philosophy is bound by the assumptions of our Materialist Age, I promote a God centred alternative ‘philosophy’ and I use the terms Philotheos and Philotheism to make the point. I also adopt these terms because “Theology” [Greek: the study of God] functions as a subsidiary discipline of Philosophy; theos becomes the creature of anthropos!

Since the Scientific Revolution and the subsequent Enlightenment, Rationalist, Materialist thinking has progressively replaced the Christian premise of a God who declares or reveals ‘himself’ in the Creation, in the Bible, and in the Person of Jesus Christ.

Philosophy today relies on human Reason plus a merely Materialist view of our existence. It not only rejects “Revelation” as unreasonable, but its attitude – its psychology – is negative and dismissive.

Modern, western Philosophy therefore inevitably fails to provide the answers to the “big” questions.

Questions like

  • Why does the sun not burn out ?
  • Why does the earth orbit the sun at exactly the right distance to sustain our life form ?
  • Why do animals instinctively know what to do ?
  • Where does God come from ?

But we can answer these ‘big’ questions about our existence when we start with the premise and perspective that God exists, Philotheos, and apply the consequent framework of thinking and reference [or paradigm] philotheism.

But philosophers divert attention from their failure by pointing out that there are many views of God, gods and the spiritual in general. So, which of these views can possibly be right ? This multitude of views proves their ‘truth’ that everything turns on perception and interpretation – not on objective, spiritual reality.

Philosophers therefore limit their metaphysical understanding to human reason and Materialist assumptions. Thus they censor the range of perceptions and views, simultaneoulsy claiming objectivity for their version of reality. They usurp the place of God.

The quintessence of God is evident in the revealed definition, “I AM”. Reflection upon that definition must lead us to realise that it is indeed correct, even if we refuse to accept God for ourselves.

I accept the “I AM” definition which God has declared, as would Jews and Muslims.

I also accept Jesus Christ’s claim to be the incarnate “I AM”.

Our existence must then be predicated on God’s existence. Therefore:


Graham R. Catlin



Exeter College, Oxford