13 found
Order:
See also
  1.  24
    The Kalām Cosmological Argument: A Reassessment.Jacobus Erasmus - 2018 - Cham: Springer.
    This book offers a discussion of the kalām cosmological argument, and presents a defence of a version of that argument after critically evaluating three of the most important versions of the argument. It argues that, since the versions of the kalām cosmological argument defended by Philoponus (c. 490–c. 570), al-Ghazālī (1058– 1111), and the contemporary philosopher, William Lane Craig, all deny the possibility of the existence of an actual infinite, these arguments are incompatible with Platonism and the view that God (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  2. The Kalām Cosmological Argument and the Infinite God Objection.Jacobus Erasmus & Anné Hendrik Verhoef - 2015 - Sophia 54 (4):411-427.
    In this article, we evaluate various responses to a noteworthy objection, namely, the infinite God objection to the kalām cosmological argument. As regards this objection, the proponents of the kalām argument face a dilemma—either an actual infinite cannot exist or God cannot be infinite. More precisely, this objection claims that God’s omniscience entails the existence of an actual infinite with God knowing an actually infinite number of future events or abstract objects, such as mathematical truths. We argue, however, that the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  3.  23
    A Philosophical Argument for the Beginning of Time.Laureano Luna & Jacobus Erasmus - 2020 - Prolegomena 19 (2):161-176.
    A common argument in support of a beginning of the universe used by advocates of the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) is the argument against the possibility of an actual infinite, or the “Infinity Argument”. However, it turns out that the Infinity Argument loses some of its force when compared with the achievements of set theory and it brings into question the view that God predetermined an endless future. We therefore defend a new formal argument, based on the nature of time (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4. Divine Determinism and the Problem of Hell.Jacobus Erasmus & Tim Stratton - 2018 - Perichoresis 16 (2):3-15.
    Divine determinism, though affirmed by many Calvinists, implicates God in the decisions people make that ultimately damn them to the terrible destiny of hell. In this paper, the authors argue that this scenario is a problem for divine determinism. The article contends that determinism is inconsistent with God’s love and the Scriptures that explicitly state that God does not ‘desire’ anyone to go to hell. Even human love for others strongly suggests that God, who is ‘love’, will not determine anyone (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  5.  37
    Is There a Problem of Creatio Ex Nihilo? A Reply to Pao-Shen Ho.Jacobus Erasmus - 2020 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 88 (2):215-218.
    Pao-Shen Ho attempts to argue that the Christian doctrine of _creatio ex nihilo_ violates modal logic and is necessarily false. More precisely, Ho argues that, if God creates the universe out of nothing, then the non-existence of the universe is both possible and impossible, which is logically incoherent. I point out, however, that Ho commits the modal scope fallacy by confusing the scope of necessity in the argument and, therefore, Ho's argument is unsound.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  34
    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   1 citation  
  7. Why It Is Difficult To Defend the Plantinga‐Type Ontological Argument.Jacobus Erasmus - 2022 - Heythrop Journal 63 (2):196-209.
    The Heythrop Journal, Volume 63, Issue 2, Page 196-209, March 2022.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  94
    The Case Against Theism: Why the Evidence Disproves God’s Existence.Jacobus Erasmus - 2019 - International Journal of Philosophy and Theology 80 (3):303-304.
    Volume 80, Issue 3, July 2019, Page 303-304.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Is the Big Bang the Sole Cause of the Universe? A Response to John J. Park.Jacobus Erasmus - 2016 - Acta Analytica 31 (3):337-344.
    In a recent paper, John J. Park argues (1) that an abstract object can bring a universe into existence, and (2) that, according to the Big Bang Theory, the initial singularity is an abstract object that brought the universe into existence. According to Park, if (1) and (2) are true, then the kalam cosmological argument fails to show that the cause of the universe must be divine. I argue, however, that both (1) and (2) are false. In my argument I (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  50
    Mere Molinism: A Defense of Two Essential Pillars.Jacobus Erasmus & Tim Stratton - 2018 - Perichoresis 16 (2):17-29.
    Molinism is founded on two ‘pillars’, namely, the view that human beings possess libertarian free will and the view that God has middle knowledge. Both these pillars stand in contrast to naturalistic determinism and divine determinism. In this article, however, the authors offer philosophical and theological grounds in favor of libertarian free will and middle knowledge.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  29
    Is there a problem of creatio ex nihilo? A reply to Pao-Shen Ho.Jacobus Erasmus - 2020 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 88 (2):215-218.
    Pao-Shen Ho attempts to argue that the Christian doctrine of creatio ex nihilo violates modal logic and is necessarily false. More precisely, Ho argues that, if God creates the universe out of nothing, then the non-existence of the universe is both possible and impossible, which is logically incoherent. I point out, however, that Ho commits the modal scope fallacy by confusing the scope of necessity in the argument and, therefore, Ho's argument is unsound.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Perfect and Worthy of Worship.Jacobus Erasmus - 2022 - In Mark A. Lamport (ed.), The Rowman & Littlefield Handbook of Philosophy and Religion. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  4
    On Roach’s Presuppositional Response to Licona’s New Historiographical Approach.Michael R. Licona & Jacobus Erasmus - 2021 - Perichoresis 19 (4):21-33.
    In a recent article, William C. Roach offers a presuppositional critique, which is inspired by Carl F. H. Henry, of Michael R. Licona’s so-called New Historiographical Approach to defending the resurrection. More precisely, Roach attempts to defend six key theses, namely, that the NHA is an evidentialist approach, the NHA is a deductive argument, the NHA is an insufficient approach, believers and unbelievers share no common ground, the NHA does not embrace a correspondence theory of truth, and the presupposition of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark