Abstract
This article evaluates the discussion concerning the relationship between the Kalām Cosmological Argument (KCA) and Divine Omniscience in recent articles in Sophia (Erasmus and Verhoef Sophia, 54, 411–427, 2015; Loke Sophia, 55(2), 263–272, 2016; Erasmus Sophia, 57, 151–156, 2018a). I argue that, in his latest article, Erasmus is guilty of shifting the focus of the discussion from the KCA to the Infinity Argument (the argument that actual infinities cannot exist). I contribute to the discussion by replying to the four difficulties Erasmus Sophia, 57, 151–156, (2018a: 153) mentions against my defence of the notion that God has an undivided intuition of all reality. I show that Erasmus has failed to allay the worry that the redefinition of omniscience by Erasmus and Verhoef is unmotivated and problematic.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 651–656 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Sophia |
| Volume | 59 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2020 |
User-Defined Keywords
- Abstract objects
- Infinite God objection
- Kalām cosmological argument
- Omniscience
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The Kalam Cosmological Argument and Divine Omniscience: an Evaluation of Recent Discussions in Sophia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver