Prominent Christian philosopher and apologist William Lane Craig recently (2016) published a book God over All: Divine Aseity and the Challenge of Platonism (Oxford) focused on divine aseity, i.e., the idea that God exists a se, from Himself alone. Aseity is a standard commitment of monotheism. It means that nothing is more fundamental than God… Read More »
I’ve thought a lot about the Christian doctrine of the Trinity over the years. I’m persuaded that the core of the doctrine is coherent and true, but there are three commonly affirmed trinitarian theses that I see no way to reconcile. Indeed, they constitute an aporetic triad. It’s a triad because there are three claims… Read More »
Linda Zagzebski, a distinguished philosopher who recently retired from the University of Oklahoma, has written a book titled Fatalism and the Logic of Time (Oxford, 2024). This book is a culmination of many years of reflection on the challenges posed by fatalistic arguments. Thirty-five years previously she wrote a well-received book titled The Dilemma of… Read More »
This post is about the essence–energies distinction, that is, the distinction between God’s essence and God’s energies. The distinction is central to Eastern Orthodox theology, but is largely ignored and often denied in Western Christianity. So what gives? What is this distinction supposed to be? Why do Eastern Christians think it’s vitally important? And why… Read More »
If one starts with absolute simplicity, then the only way to develop trinitarianism is to view the divine Persons as relations of the simple divine essence (e) to itself. We might, for example, think of the Father, Son, and Spirit in terms of the three relations entailed by identity. Thus, the Father is a monadic… Read More »
A frequent reply to foreknowledge / future contingency incompatibility arguments is that something must be wrong with all such arguments simply because “foreknowledge isn’t causal” and so cannot constrain our freedom. Thus, William Lane Craig writes: “No matter how ingenious the argument, fatalism [i.e., the incompatibilist’s argument] must be wrong. For it posits a constraint… Read More »
This post is the third in a series on a recent book by James D. Gifford, Jr. titled The Hexagon of Heresy: A Historical and Theological Study of Definitional Divine Simplicity (Wipf & Stock, 2022). In the first post I discussed the problem of the One and the Many and why the idea of absolute… Read More »
Here is my ranking of the most serious problems with Molinism. (For an explanation of Molinism, see Section 1 of this post.) This is not an exhaustive list, and I do not mean to suggest that items lower on the list are not of serious importance. The top 5 are ones that can be pressed… Read More »
This post is the second in a series on a recent book by James D. Gifford, Jr. titled The Hexagon of Heresy: A Historical and Theological Study of Definitional Divine Simplicity (Wipf & Stock, 2022). In the previous post I discussed the problem of the One and the Many and why the idea of absolute… Read More »
This blog post is the first in a series on a recent book by James D. Gifford, Jr. titled The Hexagon of Heresy: A Historical and Theological Study of Definitional Divine Simplicity (Wipf & Stock, 2022). I have several reasons for interest in this book. First, its discussion of “definitional divine simplicity” (DDS), which modern philosophers… Read More »