Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. On the Infinite God Objection: A Reply to Jacobus Erasmus and Anné Hendrik Verhoef.Andrew Loke - 2016 - Sophia 55 (2):263-272.
    Erasmus and Verhoef suggest that a promising response to the infinite God objection to the Kalām cosmological argument include showing that abstract objects do not exist; actually infinite knowledge is impossible; and redefining omniscience as : for any proposition p, if God consciously thinks about p, God will either accept p as true if and only if p is true, or accept p as false if and only if p is false. I argue that there is insufficient motivation for showing (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Harmonizing Molina’s Rejection of Transworld Damnation with Craig’s Solution to the Problem of the Unevangelized.Kirk R. MacGregor - 2018 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 84 (3):345-353.
    Recent scholarship has demonstrated Molina’s rejection of transworld damnation, claiming instead that there is at least one feasible world where any individual is freely saved, lost, or does not exist. This article argues that one can subscribe to Molina’s doctrine of individual predestination while maintaining, with William Lane Craig, that no actual person who fails to hear the gospel and is lost would have been saved in some feasible world where s/he heard the gospel. As part of the divine deliberation, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Loke on the Infinite God Objection.Jacobus Erasmus - 2018 - Sophia 57 (1):151-156.
    In a recent article, Andrew Ter Ern Loke raises several objections to Jacobus Erasmus and Anné Hendrik Verhoef’s exposition and response to the so-called ‘Infinite God Objection’ to the kalām cosmological argument. According to this objection, the argument against the possibility of an actual infinite brings into question the view that God’s knowledge is infinite. Erasmus and Verhoef’s solution to this objection, which Loke criticises, depends on an unusual account of omniscience. In this article, I respond to Loke and show (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark