By Jimmy Stephens Subjectivism and Moral Facts It makes no sense to talk about a being that controls the facts of creation as a subjectivist. Subjectivism is a problem for humans because human opinions, preferences, and other conscious states do … Continue reading Navigating Between Divine Command Theory and Natural Law Theory: A Balanced Approach
Jimmy’s Perspective in His Own Words “I’m a pessimist about these questions. Meaning, I think analytic philosophers falsely assume there’s some transcultural, abstract answer that will magically avoid the need for further analysis and synthesis. I reject that as nonsense … Continue reading The One and the Many: A Perspective on Philosophical Complexity and Theological Insight
Satan For Christ: Satan For Christ’s Argument Against Pragmatism: Premise 1 (P1): If pragmatism is true, then those theses are false which lack inferential utility. Premise 2 (P2): Pragmatism lacks inferential utility. Conclusion (C): Therefore, if pragmatism is true, then … Continue reading Why Pragmatism Falls Short: A Simple Analysis
It is presented by some enthusiasts that the Jews were just materialists, believing that no Jew in the 1st century thought God was a being transcending the physical world. However, this is not accurate as various perspectives existed in Second … Continue reading Transcendence and Materialism in Early Jewish Thought
by Jimmy Stephens: This has the odd (from a modern perspective) result that will’s correspond to nature’s, not “persons.” And in talking to some of its defenders, they will even decry the use of “person” for the Trinitarian Persons as … Continue reading The Complexities of Trinitarian Wills: Unitary and Social Perspectives
Jimmy Stephens (Satan For Christ): On Implication and Linear Inference The long-short of it is that he made a false dichotomy, which Van Til himself anticipates and emphatically precludes, between “linear” inference and implication. Implication is not a competitor with … Continue reading Implication and Mental Constructs: A Theological Dialogue on Knowledge, Representation, and God’s Omniscience
From Chris Matthew: There are a couple of remarks that merit response, @FondestAlloy. 1. Do you deny the possibility of knowing whether something is objectively true?2. You describe pessimistic meta-induction well. In the future, there is the possibility (a high … Continue reading Epistemic Chaos: The Disarray of Unbelief
Nickk:@A… hey, can you type up your reasons for accepting molinism in here. A…:@Nickk Sure, so the first thing to do is to define the central claim of Molinism. As I see it, the claim is that God predestines you … Continue reading The Incompatibility of Divine Intent and Molinist Freedom
Squash: Gents and ladies, I’ve been hanging around POLITICS and am experienced with a flavor of presup over there that looks a little like this. P1: God is the necessary precondition for knowledge.P2: Knowledge.C: God. When pushed for P1, I’ve … Continue reading Theonomous Reasoning and Knowledge: A Philosophical Discussion
Addressing Objections from Scholastic Lutherans: A Rebuttal In this article, Jimmy and I will address the objections raised by a collaborative YouTube channel called Scholastic Lutherans. This channel uploaded a video last December on the topic of Presuppositionalism, providing several … Continue reading Debunking Scholastic Lutherans: A Defense of Presuppositionalism
The Council 
You must be logged in to post a comment.