1) The “in God” question is the whole debate Panentheism lives or dies on what “in God” means. The phrase is doing all the work, but it’s usually left undefined—so it can function like a rhetorical bridge from omnipresence to … Continue reading Panentheism: Too Strong or Too Weak
Mindtrap’s argument (in brief) runs like this: God’s aseity means none of God’s knowledge “comes from” creatures (or from any “logical implication” involving creatures). God’s knowledge of you is the “idea of you.” All contingent details about you (desires, actions, … Continue reading Aseity Without Modal Collapse: A Neo-Reformed Reply to Mindtrap
Tim Stratton has repeatedly argued that Calvinism—if consistent—renders God a “deity of deception.” The idea is simple but alarming: if God determines all beliefs, and some of those beliefs are false (including beliefs about God Himself), then God must be directly causing theological falsehood—and thus functions as a deceiver:
“If exhaustive divine determinism is true, then God causally determines all false theological beliefs—even those about Himself. That would make Him the ultimate source of deception.”
Continue reading “Is God a Deceiver? Response to Tim Stratton’s Argument”
A popular anti-Calvinist tweet recently circulated, citing Hosea 8:4 (“They set up kings without my consent”) and Isaiah 30:1 (“They carry out plans—but not mine”) as supposed proof that some human actions fall outside of God’s will. The argument goes … Continue reading Not His Plan? A Reformed Response to a Common Prooftext Error
This is the continuing dialogue with Theophilus (Eastern Orthodox). Here are his questions in response to my article: http://spirited-tech.com/Council/index.php/2020/07/04/besides-me-there-is-no-god/ Theophilus: We can discuss this in as much detail as you like, but I’m curious how you resolve the exegetical issue … Continue reading The Son as Servant: Understanding the Trinitarian Distinction in Isaiah
W/ Jimmy Stephens The Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) asserts that for every fact or state of affairs, there must be a sufficient explanation for why it is the case. This principle underlies much of metaphysical and epistemological inquiry, seeking … Continue reading The Flaws of Reason: Non-Contrastive PSR and Its Metaphysical, Ethical, and Biblical Consequences
There’s a lot I could say about this. The speaker in Isaiah 44 is God the Father, because in Isaiah 42:1 He refers to the Messiah as “my servant,” and the speaker remains consistent throughout the next several chapters. However, … Continue reading Beside Me, There Is No Other: The Case for Christ’s Divinity
ContraModalism’s view essentially posits that the Father eternally caused the Son to exist. The Son is seen as a numerically distinct being from the Father, inherently inferior to Him, which establishes an asymmetrical relationship between them. This leads to the … Continue reading The Eternal Creator: Christ’s Divine Role in Creation
Representative Quote from Ulfilas:“Paul makes a distinction between God and Lord in 1 Corinthians 8:6. This shows that Jesus is not included in the one God of the Shema but is instead a subordinate figure, similar to how Old Testament … Continue reading One God, One Lord: Refuting Unitarian Claims About Jesus in 1 Corinthians 8:6
by Jimmy Stephens The Argument: Let’s recap the discussion as it stands—please correct me if I’ve misunderstood any points. Initial Claim: CLAIM: If God is Actus Purus, He is vacuous. REASON GIVEN: According to the linked video, God avoids vacuousness … Continue reading Actus Purus, Univocalism, and the Trinity: Clarifying Divine Self-Consciousness
You must be logged in to post a comment.