Unitarianism
Definition
Unitarianism refers to any philosophy which claims that divine sovereignty is not shared in any way.
Keywords: Unitarianism, Philosophy, God, Irrational, False, Contradictory, Reality, Deductive, Universe, Time, Argument From Reason.
Veracity
Unitarian claims are false .
Proof
Simplified
Any worldview that denies an omniscient, sovereign, rational author of time and the universe allows for no possible rational justification for the assumption that reality is non-contradictory.
Premise 1: A rational, sovereign, omniscient author of time and the universe will, of necessity, eternally conceive of himself as his own ultimate reason for everything that occurs. The conception of himself will eternally be the exact representation of himself, sharing divine sovereignty, since this conception is the reason for everything that occurs.
Premise 2: Under unitarianism, divine sovereignty is not shared.
Conclusion: Therefore, under unitarianism, either there is no author of time and the universe; or else the author of time and the universe is not omniscient; or else the author of time and the universe is not sovereign; or else the author of time and the universe is not rational.
Humans assume that reality is non-contradictory. Under unitarianism, there can ultimately be no rational authority behind this assumption, making it an irrational assumption. This makes unitarianism deductively false.
In depth
Any worldview that denies an omniscient, sovereign, rational author of time and the universe allows for no possible rational justification for the assumption that reality is non-contradictory.
A. All things formed must be formed by reasoning causes for our beliefs about them to be rational.
Premise 1: Any belief formed by non-reasoning causes is believed without reason.
Premise 2: A belief about anything is caused in part by the existence of that thing.
Conclusion: Therefore, any belief about anything is believed without reason unless the existence of that thing is not formed by non-reasoning causes.
B. All things formed must ultimately be formed by only one reasoning cause for our beliefs about them to be rational.
Premise 1: In the convergence of multiple causes, the result is at least partly the result of the convergence of causes.
Premise 2: The convergence of multiple causes is not itself reasoning.
Conclusion: Therefore, any belief formed by the convergence of multiple ultimate causes is believed without reason.
C. God conceives of himself as his own reason.
Premise 1: If all things formed are formed by one reasoning cause (from B above), it itself is the only reason for them.
Premise 2: Anything that reasons, and has only one reason, conceives of that reason.
Conclusion: Therefore, if all things formed are formed by one reasoning cause, it conceives of it itself as the reason for them.
D. Divinity is shared in any rational god.
Premise 1: With a rational god, god's reason is god himself.
Premise 2: There is a distinction between the concept and the thing conceived of.
Conclusion: Therefore, with a rational god, divinity is shared between the concept and the thing conceived of.
Humans assume that reality is non-contradictory. Under unitarianism, there can ultimately be no rational authority behind this assumption, making it an irrational assumption.
This Argument from Reason demonstrates that unitarianism is deductively false.
Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons
Riveting, yet absurd; romantic, yet innocent; Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons is a little Roald Dahl, a little Harry Potter, and a little Chronicles of Narnia, all rolled into one. Timothy McCabe collaborates with the great Benedict Ballyhoot to bring you the novel of the century!
In Printed Form
Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson, Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume from Master Books.
Other Writings
"Jesus explicitly says "Many will say to ME (Jesus) LORD LORD, on that day... and I will say to them Depart from here ye that work iniquity" Full context Matthew 7:21-23. What is the Christian's response?"
I'm sorry, but response to what, exactly? I'm really not sure what you are looking for in your question. Here is the full verse and a little more context: Matthew 7:21-27 (NASB) "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.
Continue reading...
"William Lane Craig offers 5 arguments against divine determinism at reasonablefaith.org in an article called "Troubled by Calvinists". Do you agree?"
Dr. William Lane Craig is an astounding debater and an extremely intelligent individual. He has many excellent arguments with regard to many things. These arguments, however, are not among them. The question of free will is one that has been thoroughly debated for thousands of years. Some would say that free will can be defined as "the ability to do what you want".
Continue reading...
"How would you respond to Stephen Law's Evil God Challenge?"
Atheist Stephen Law challenges monotheists everywhere to explain "why the good god hypothesis should be considered significantly more reasonable than the evil god hypothesis". Most classical theistic arguments for the existence of God, Dr. Law claims, even if successful in proving an omnipotent and omniscient God, do nothing to speak to His moral character.
Continue reading...