One of my long-term goals is to explore the consequences for divine providence on the assumption that open theism (OT) is correct. As I shall understand it here, OT is defined by the following commitments: Monotheism: There exists one and only one God who is personal; necessarily existent; and essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.… Read More »
In a comment on an earlier thread, C Grace posed me the question: Do you think QI [quantum indeterminacy] is needed for God to manipulate the material universe without breaking His natural laws? It seems to me that without QI, God’s freedom to affect the physical universe would be limited to what he could do… Read More »
Here’s a link to a transcript of a recent debate between William Lane Craig and Bart Ehrman entitled “Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?”
Here’s a recorded interview with the Intelligent Designer. I like his shades.
OK, I’m back from vacation and well-rested. Writing-wise, I’m currently finishing an epistemology paper on inferential justification and skepticism. Reading-wise, I’m wrapping up Trenton Merricks’ interesting book Objects and Persons, in which he defends the interesting thesis that conscious organisms are the only macrophysical objects there are. On his view, things like chairs, statues, brains,… Read More »
This is funny. (HT: Victor Reppert)
In comments on an earlier thread, both Ocham and Brandon express perplexity over my defense of the impossibility of traversing an actually infinite past. Before responding, I must first elaborate a bit on the potential / actual infinite distinction. The distinction goes back to Aristotle and is pivotal in his response to Zeno’s paradoxes. Basically,… Read More »
Is it possible for there to be an omniscient being? Patrick Grim doesn’t think so. Before looking at his arguments directly (which I’ll save for a later post), I think it would be helpful to take a step back and reflect a bit on what omniscience could be. First, omniscience is supposed to be a… Read More »
In my previous post on this topic I argued (a) that Craig’s argument against the possibility of actually infinite collections of real things doesn’t work given presentism, and (b) Craig’s argument against the possibility of traversing an actually infinite series in finite, step-wise fashion doesn’t work given a B-theory of time. My post generated quite… Read More »
As satire goes, this is pretty funny. Here’s my favorite: Richard Dawkins: To say that it took a Darwinist to do the screwing in of the lightbulb is to explain precisely nothing. The obvious question becomes: Who did the screwing to create the Darwinist screwer? And who did the screwing to create that screwer? There… Read More »