Abstract

This article aims to provide a metaphysical elucidation of the notion of Theism and a coherent theological synthesis of two extensions of this notion: Classical Theism and Neo-Classical Theism. A model of this notion and its extensions is formulated within the ontological pluralism framework of Kris McDaniel and Jason Turner, and the (modified) modal realism framework of David Lewis, which enables it to be explicated clearly and consistently, and two often raised objections against the elements of this notion can be successfully answered.

Highlights

  • The Nature of TheismProponents of Neo-Classical Theism (hereafter, NCT) have sought to affirm a different conception of God—one that maintains God’s perfection and ultimacy, yet replaces the four ‘unique identifying attributes’ of CT with their contraries: complexity, temporality, mutability and passibility

  • The question that is presented to a proponent of GMR is: should one reject the GMR framework, given the incompatibility between our intuitions, counterpart theory and the possibility of island universes, or is there a way to deal with these two problems by providing a version of modal realism that is not plagued by these issues? I do believe that one can take the latter option by adopting elements of two alternative versions of modal realism: Modal Realism with Overlap—proposed by Kris McDaniel—and Leibnizian Realism—proposed by Philip

  • The primary focus of this article was to provide an elucidation of the nature of Theism so as to uncover a means for a ‘traditionalist’ to ward off the Theism

Read more

Summary

The Nature of Theism

Proponents of Neo-Classical Theism (hereafter, NCT) have sought to affirm a different conception of God—one that maintains God’s perfection and ultimacy, yet replaces the four ‘unique identifying attributes’ of CT with their contraries: complexity, temporality, mutability and passibility. God is temporal by him existing with temporal succession (i.e., there being a succession of events within the divine life), location (i.e., God’s existence the sole way, according to the proponents of NCT, that simplicity can be coherently affirmed (Swinburne 1994). God is temporal by him existing with temporal succession (i.e., there being a succession of events within the divine life), location (i.e., God’s existence is datable) and extension (i.e., God perseveres through time)

Theism Dilemma and Creation Objection
The Nature of Ontological Pluralism
Theistic Ontological Pluralism
Genuine Modal Realism
Leibnizian Realism with Overlap
Theistic Modal Realism
Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.