the Website of Timothy McCabe Follower of Christ; Student of Epistemology, Apologetics, and Theology
Home Good News Proofs Questions Presentations Software More

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.

World Religions and Cults (volume 2)

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

"Mr. McCabe, you said "The three persons of the trinity have three distinct roles" , and "There is only One God". Is this a contradiction?"

It is often argued that Trinitarian doctrine is contradictory. How can three be one and one be three, all at the same time? It sounds like bad math. First, we need to recognize what is meant by the label "contradiction". A logical contradiction is something that makes a claim and then also claims its exact negation. A logical contradiction cannot possibly be true. It is impossible for something to both be and not be at the same time and in the same way.
Continue reading...

"Is there a question to which you all would give the same - or almost the same - answer?"

I certainly can't speak authoritatively for the opinion of anyone other than myself, but it seems to me that everyone can easily be convinced to agree that if something is, then it is; and also that nothing can both be and not be at the same time and in the same way. In other words, the Laws of Logic are valid. An interesting point to note, however, is that holding to the Laws of Logic can only be rationally justified under Christian assumptions.
Continue reading...

"Why should one believe in the validity of the Bible?"

Much could be said about manuscript evidence (demonstrating conclusively that the Bible has been reliably passed down to us), archaeological evidence (demonstrating that the locations, lifestyles, and many of the people in the Bible are genuine), eyewitness testimonies and changed lives (demonstrating the genuine sincerity of the authors, such as the apostles Peter and Paul, who were executed for their claims), and fulfilled prophecies (such as Daniel 9:24-25, Leviticus 26:44, Jeremiah...
Continue reading...

All articles