In a previous post, I considered two ways of thinking about God’s omnipresence. After careful examination, neither offers a satisfying model of God’s omnipresence. I tease...
Grim reapers have recently been employed in an argument against an infinite past. I’d like to see if grim reapers may similarly be employed in an argument against uncaused beginnings.
I am very excited about the relaunching of Prosblogion. When I was a masters student, I would regularly read this blog. This was one of the...
Inman (2021) identifies two features characteristic of discourse on divine presence: immensity and omnipresence. Briefly, divine immensity says no boundary can limit or contain God. Divine omnipresence may be construed in one of two ways.
A necessary and sufficient condition for being a universalist is that you maintain UNIVERSAL. According to UNIVERSAL, every being that could have salvific union with God...
In his 2014 paper, ‘A New Kalam Argument: Revenge of the Grim Reaper’, Rob Koons presents what is surely the canonical version of the Grim Reaper...
I want to give this argument in part to provoke a bit of discussion of the role of FOL in philosophy. Though, I don’t think the argument carries great weight.
The only way for proponents of divine simplicity to avoid modal collapse implies rejecting the idea that God really loves people.
Let ‘w’ refer to any world. Then “exists in” expresses a perfectly fine relation between entities and worlds. Let S be the set of worlds in which history ends in 30 BC.
Pretend that the following argument is sound. Let ‘God’ abbreviate the indefinite description ‘a being than which none greater can be conceived’.
Recent Comments