This is part five of eleven in a series responding to the essays in Ben Arbour’s edited volume, Philosophical Essays against Open Theism (Routledge, 2019). In this post I tackle chapter 5 by Paul Helm, “The ‘Openness’ in Compatibilism” (pp. 80ā92). Helm is a well-respected philosopher of religion and a long-time staunch defender of theisticā¦ Read More »
In my previous post on Ch. 2 of Patrick Todd’s bookĀ The Open Future (Oxford 2021), I criticized Todd for confusingĀ supervaluationism with the view defended by Elizabeth Barnes and Ross Cameron in two influential papers. In this post I want to look more closely at the view of Barnes and Cameron (hereafter B&C). For ease ofā¦ Read More »
This is part 2 of my ongoing series on Patrick Toddās recently published book The Open Future: Why Future Contingents are All False (Oxford, 2021). You can find part 1 here. In chapter 2, Todd compares and contrasts “three models of the undetermined future” and proposes a unified semantics for the future tense. I argueā¦ Read More »
In philosophical theology, simple foreknowledge (SF) is the view that Minimal monotheism is true, i.e., there is one, necessarily existing, personal, omniscient, etc. God who freely creates ex nihilo. God is temporally everlasting and therefore has a past, present, and future. The future is causally open, i.e., there are multiple causally possible futures, and thereforeā¦ Read More »
This is the fifth installment in a series of posts responding to a 2013Ā paperĀ by William Lane Craig and David Hunt (hereafter, C&H) entitled āPerils of the Open Roadā. In the paper C&H critique two papers defending open theism: a 2006Ā paperĀ (hereafter, RBB) that I co-wrote with Greg Boyd and Tom Belt entitled āOpen Theism, Omniscience, andā¦ Read More »
This is the second installment in a series of posts in which I respond to a recent 2013 paper by William Lane Craig and David Hunt (hereafter, C&H). Entitled “Perils of the Open Road,” C&H critique two papers defending open theism: a 2006 paper that I co-wrote with Greg Boyd and Tom Belt entitled “Openā¦ Read More »
With this post I begin a series in which I respond to a 2013 paper by William Lane Craig and David Hunt. Entitled “Perils of the Open Road,” the paper critiques two papers defending open theism. More specifically, they critique a 2006 paper that I co-wrote with Greg Boyd and Tom Belt entitled “Open Theism,ā¦ Read More »