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
"What's the most attractive thing about your worldview? What sets it apart from the others?"
Only Christianity can provide a solution to the problem of sin. We know that we aren't perfect. We know that we should do better. We know that there is a perfect moral law that governs us, and we don't live up to it (Romans 3:23). Atheism denies all of these obvious facts. Other worldviews recognize them, but tell us that we must do better -- that we must be perfect -- that we must fix the problem of sin. Christianity alone tells us the obvious truth -- that we can't be perfect.
Continue reading...
"Where is existence going (i.e. eschatology), both immediately and ultimately?"
The Bible states that no one is perfect but God alone (Luke 18:19). As a result, all of us have earned death and condemnation (Romans 6:23). However, in an amazing substitution, God Himself lived the perfect human life in our place, and paid our fine on the cross (2 Corinthians 5:21, Romans 5). Those of us who put our trust in the work He did in our place will be forgiven (Romans 4:5, John 3:18).
Continue reading...
"Are all presuppositions equally valid? If not, how does one determine which are more valid than others?"
Internal consistency is the most common method I know of for determining the truth value of presuppositions. The test of internal consistency is what presuppositional reasoning is all about. If, for example, a view presupposes "A" and "not-A" at the same time and in the same way, then, in that worldview, reasoning, knowledge, learning, meaning, morality, science, mathematics -- everything -- becomes utterly incoherent.
Continue reading...