Joshua Sijuwade

This article focuses on addressing Marilyn McCord Adams' 'Problem of Hell' - the argument that eternal damnation is incompatible with divine goodness and omnipotence. While Adams proposes universalism as the solution, this raises concerns about preserving human freedom and moral responsibility. Drawing on insights from Thomas Hopko, Richard Swinburne, Jacques Maritain, and Alexander Pruss (as supported by various Christian patristic writers), I develop the 'Presence-Union' model of hell that reconciles eternal separation from God with divine goodness. This model demonstrates how the unveiled presence of divine love, combined with a miraculous restoration of natural felicity and the distinction between formal and real union with God, provides a coherent alternative to both traditional views of hell and universalism, and maintains both divine mercy and the gravity of human moral choice.

This article focuses on providing a philosophical elucidation and reconstruction of the Eastern Orthodox conception of the Atonement. This elucidation will take the form of addressing three aspects: the recapitulative nature of Christ's life, the victorious nature of his death, and the transformative nature of his resurrection that enables theosis, which are central to the Eastern Orthodox understanding of the Atonement. These aspects will be addressed by employing a tri-conceptual framework that includes a combination of philosophical concepts proposed by Eleonore Stump, Linda Zagzebski, Alexander Pruss, and Richard Swinburne, which will provide a means, through the formulation of the 'Recapitulative Theotic Victory' model, for one to understand how Christ's atoning work enables humanity to enter into an everlasting agápēic relationship with God within our contemporary philosophical context.

The central focus of this article is resolving the ‘Ontological Subordination Problem’, produced by a joint affirmation of the aseity of a divine being and the doctrines of eternal generation and the monarchy of the Father, which are central to Conciliar Trinitarianism, through a reformulated Intrinsicality Solution. By applying Gene Witmer’s Simple Theory of Intrinsicality, this article argues that aseity is an extrinsic rather than intrinsic property—and is able to do so without being subject to the objections raised against the original Intrinsicality Solution that is grounded on Rae Langton and David Lewis’ combinatorial analysis of intrinsicality. This reformulation reconciles the doctrines of eternal generation and the monarchy of the Father with the ontological equality of the divine persons, thus addressing a key tension in Trinitarian thought.

The central focus of this article is resolving the ‘Ontological Subordination Problem’, produced by a joint affirmation of the aseity of a divine being and the doctrines of eternal generation and the monarchy of the Father, which are central to Conciliar Trinitarianism, through a reformulated Intrinsicality Solution. By applying Gene Witmer’s Simple Theory of Intrinsicality, this article argues that aseity is an extrinsic rather than intrinsic property—and is able to do so without being subject to the objections raised against the original Intrinsicality Solution that is grounded on Rae Langton and David Lewis’ combinatorial analysis of intrinsicality. This reformulation reconciles the doctrines of eternal generation and the monarchy of the Father with the ontological equality of the divine persons, thus addressing a key tension in Trinitarian thought.

This article focuses on addressing the 'Free Will Objection' to universalism (apokatastasis ('restoration'))—a view held by individuals such as St. Gregory of Nyssa. The objection stems from an apparent conflict between necessary universal salvation and libertarian free will, which requires the genuine ability to reject God. Using Robert Kane's theory of libertarian freedom, I demonstrate how all rational beings can necessarily yet freely develop characters that ultimately choose divine reconciliation, thus maintaining both the inevitability of universal salvation and authentic free will.

This article offers a plausible metaphysical framework to address the Apocalyptic-Visionary Challenge stemming from the work of Bart Ehrman and Dale Allison. Their research suggests Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet whose specific predictions seemingly failed and whose resurrection appearances parallel common apparitional experiences. These findings challenge traditional Christian beliefs regarding Jesus' divine nature and the objective reality of his resurrection appearances. To address this dual challenge, the article presents a model involving hypertime and hyperspace. While theoretical, this model aims to provide a coherent and plausible account, moving beyond mere logical possibility, to affirm Jesus' divinity and the objective nature of his resurrection appearances within a philosophically informed, historical-critical context.

This article offers a plausible metaphysical framework to address the Apocalyptic Visionary Challenge stemming from the work of Bart Ehrman and Dale Allison. Their research suggests Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet whose specific predictions seemingly failed and whose resurrection appearances parallel common apparitional experiences. These findings challenge traditional Christian beliefs regarding Jesus’ divine nature and the objective reality of his resurrection appearances. To address this dual challenge, the article presents a model involving hypertime and hyperspace. While theoretical, this model aims to provide a coherent and plausible account, moving beyond mere logical possibility, to affirm Jesus’ divinity and the objective nature of his resurrection appearances within a philosophically informed, historical-critical context.

This chapter provides a metaphysically informed framework for conceptualising the Eastern Orthodox understanding of the Holy Eucharist, focusing on the reality of the change that occurs during the Divine Liturgy. It formulates a model, termed the Neo-Aristotelian Model, using Edward Jonathan (E.J.) Lowe's metaphysical framework—namely, Serious Essentialism and the Four-Category Ontology—to articulate how the bread and wine truly become the body and blood of Jesus Christ whilst retaining their outward appearances. The chapter addresses the conceptual challenge of understanding this transformation by construing it as an essential (kind) change, utilising the distinction between dispositional and occurrent exemplification to account for both the change in reality and the persistence of sensible qualities. The same framework is then extended to address a parallel challenge in Orthodox ecclesiology, providing conceptual resources for understanding how multiple parish eucharistic celebrations within a diocese can constitute the one Eucharist of the bishop. The chapter demonstrates how philosophical modelling can offer conceptual clarity whilst fully respecting the character of these teachings as Holy Mysteries.

This chapter focuses on how contemporary analytic theology uses metaphysical models to clarify the doctrine of the Incarnation. It examines three main categories of models—compositional versus transformational, abstract versus concrete nature, and two-part versus three-part theories—exploring how each seeks to explain Christ as one person with two complete natures without fragmenting his personhood or conflating his natures. The chapter identifies key philosophical problems confronting these models, including the Nestorian Problem, the Attributes Problem, and the Assumption Problem, and evaluates solutions proposed by scholars such as Leftow, Hasker, Swinburne, Loke, and Sijuwade. It concludes that metaphysical modelling provides valuable conceptual resources for understanding the Incarnation while maintaining orthodox Christology.

In this article, I seek to assess the extent to which a ‘trope-theoretic’ version of Theism is a better theory than that of a theory of Atheism, as posited by Graham Oppy. This end will be achieved by utilising the systemisation of the theoretical virtues proposed by Michael Keas (as further modified by an application of the work of Jonathan Schaffer), the notion of a trope, introduced by D.C. Williams, and an aspect, proposed by Donald L.M. Baxter, which will establish the basis of the trope-theoretic account of Theism that will be at the centre of our analysis. This assessment will ultimately show that Theism, rather than that of Atheism (Naturalism), can successfully achieve the trade-off between minimising theoretical commitments and maximising explanatory power. And thus, given this, the best theory of Theism—namely, that of ‘trope-theoretic Theism’—is to be privileged over that of the best theory of Atheism—namely, that of ‘Oppyian Naturalism’—and is able to provide grounds for a decisive reassessment of the cogency of Agnosticism.

This article aims to provide a philosophical argument for Conciliar Trinitarianism, which is the teaching that there is one God, the Father, and two, relationally distinct, divine persons, the Son and the Spirit, who are homoousious (i.e., of the same substance, nature, and/or essence) with the Father, through the causal theory of reference developed by Saul Kripke and Gareth Evans. A deductive argument for Conciliar Trinitarianism (formally known as 'Monarchical' Trinitarianism) is proposed, termed the 'Semantic Argument', which enables one to affirm the veracity of this position, and also preserve monotheism and divine equality, while avoiding modalism and tri-theism altogether. This is that, the article demonstrates that if the proper name 'God' was baptismally fixed to the Father through Scripture and the first two ecumenical councils (with further ratification being made by the other five ecumenical councils), then any attempt to apply this same proper name nominatively to the Son or Spirit creates what I term the ‘Trinitarian Dilemma’, which is an unavoidable choice between modalistic collapse and tri-theistic fragmentation. Common (‘Egalitarian’) Trinitarian approaches, including social models and Latin Trinitarian strategies, face this dilemma inescapably, and so the solution thus lies in adopting Conciliar Trinitarianism and, therefore, recognising that the Father alone bears 'God' as a proper name (as the dominant source of the Godhead), while the Son and Spirit are called 'God' predicatively (by virtue of possessing the divine substance, nature and or essence) or metonymically (as perfect representatives of the Father). This semantic framework thus successfully preserves both the full equality of all three Trinitarian persons and the strict monotheism confessed by the Church

This article aims to elucidate Conciliar Trinitarianism, the teaching that, in the Trinity, there exists one God, the Father, and two relationally distinct divine persons: the Son and the Spirit, who are homoousios with (i.e. of same substance as) the Father, through the novel metaphysical framework (or model) of Conciliar Aspectivalism. By integrating complex concepts from contemporary metaphysics, Conciliar Aspectivalism provides a coherent and philosophically robust framework for expressing the central tenets of Conciliar Trinitarianism in a way, however, that preserves fundamentality of the one God, the Father, and the absolute unity and singularity of the divine substance that is equally shared by the Trinitarian persons. Hence, through this elucidation, Conciliar Aspectivalism offers a unique perspective for understanding and articulating the core teaching of the Trinitarianism that is expressed by the Seven Ecumenical Councils within a metaphysically coherent framework.

This work presents a (historically grounded) philosophical argument for identifying the Eastern Orthodox Church as the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church affirmed in the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. Utilising Richard Swinburne's philosophical criteria of continuity and connectedness, the work evaluates the Roman Catholic, Protestant, Non-Chalcedonian, and Eastern Orthodox traditions. By applying these criteria to doctrine and organisational structure, the study argues that the Eastern Orthodox Church possesses full, unbroken continuity and connectedness in doctrine and organisation with the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, and no other ecclesial body possesses continuity and connectedness equal to (or greater than) its own. Thus, while acknowledging the complexities of Christian divisions, the work presents a reasoned case for considering the Eastern Orthodox Church as the truest representation of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed's vision of the Church—that is, it being the Church affirmed within this central and authoritative creed. This argument is offered as a plausible and defensible position, aiming to contribute to broader discussions on ecclesiology and Christian unity.

This article develops a philosophical explication of monotheism through fundamentality, using Rudolf Carnap's method of explication and Karen Bennett's concept of building-fundamentality. By examining how contemporary philosophers and theologians have struggled with defining monotheism in light of Second Temple Judaism's complex theology, this article argues that understanding monotheism as the belief in one fundamental deity provides a more philosophically robust framework than numerical definitions. This framework helps reconcile divine plurality in Jewish theology while offering new perspectives on polytheistic traditions and interfaith debates, thus contributing to broader discussions in philosophy of religion and theology.

This article introduces and explores the ethical theory of Robust Exemplarist Natural Law, which is a combination of John Finnis’s Natural Law Theory and Linda Zagzebski’s Exemplarist Moral Theory within the framework of Robust Realism proposed by David Enoch and Russ Shafer-Landau. It aims to integrate moral realism’s objective truths with the notion of basic goods and the principles of practical reasonableness, with the influence of moral exemplars on belief and behaviour formation. In achieving this end, a robust ethical framework will be provided, which is able to ward off the various issues that can be raised against the individual theoretical components of it, and a particular theistic extension of the theory will be provided, which applies the central components of it within a theistic context.

A comprehensive analysis of Richard Swinburne's intellectual journey and philosophical work, A Rational Faith explores the legacy of one of the most influential and rigorous philosophical defenders of theism. Across Swinburne's written career, he has displayed a deep commitment to demonstrating the intellectual credibility of the Christian faith, facing modern scientific and philosophical challenges and the materialistic worldview of modern intellectualism. Analysing his life and work through in-depth, accessible explanations of key issues and their context, Joshua Sijuwade brings together collected criticism of Swinburne's work and explores possible counter-arguments, alongside a foreword by Richard Swinburne himself. Suitable for any reader interested in Swinburne's 'philosophy-first' approach, or those intrigued by a philosophical defence of the Christian faith, A Rational Faith reveals Swinburne's life and work as a witness to his belief that belief in the central tenets of the Christian faith is rational.

By developing a new ontological argument for the existence of God, Joshua R. Sijuwade presents an innovative approach that enriches the existing discourse with fresh insights and a contemporary perspective. The ontological argument seeks to demonstrate the existence of God from an a priori standpoint and Sijuwade begins by addressing the substantial critique the modal argument has received. He embarks on a rigorous exploration, providing needed analysis and a positive iteration termed the 'Rational Ontological Argument', rooted in a novel modal methodology known as Rational Modal Realism. Using this new method, Sijuwade focuses on demonstrating how the central concepts and theories within modal metaphysics and epistemology-such as modal realism, modal rationalism, trope theory and ontological pluralism-offer a means to develop a victorious ontological argument. Employing contemporary analytic methods and suggesting productive directions for further research, Sijuwade makes a key contribution to philosophy of religion and re-invigorates the age-old philosophical argument for the existence of God

This article explores the significance of the qur'anic term al-Masīh. (the Messiah) as applied to Jesus, son of Mary (ʿĪsā ibn Maryam). Previous scholarship has often drawn a direct, though problematic, line from first-century messianic expectations to the Qur'an. This article argues for a revised interpretive approach: understanding the qur'anic usage of al-Masīh. through its more immediate biblical subtext, namely the messianic theology of Late Antique Christianity, particularly within the Syriac tradition. This approach acknowledges that the Qur'an engages not with the Bible as a static text or with the historical Jesus directly, but with Scripture as understood and preached in its seventh-century milieu. The study surveys foundational Second Temple Jewish messianic expectations and the New Testament's portrayal of Jesus's messianic role, then explores how these traditions were received and developed in Late Antique Syriac Christianity, which formed a crucial part of the Qur'an's environment. By analysing the qur'anic account against this backdrop, the article offers a fresh perspective on the term's theological significance, moving beyond the often de-contextualized interpretations of later Islamic exegetes. Ultimately, the article aims to foster Muslim-Christian dialogue by revealing the Qur'an's profound engagement with the living messianic traditions of its time.

This article examines the concept of divine modesty as a criterion for evaluating the coherence of Abrahamic monotheistic conceptions of God. Utilising Nicolas Bommarito's attention-based account of modesty and applying it to the framework of perfect being theology, the article formulates a rigorous philosophical argument termed the ‘Modesty Argument’, which argues that modesty is an essential attribute of a maximally great being, with the Christian conception of God, as evidenced by the exaltation of Jesus and early Christian devotional practices described by Larry Hurtado, being shown to align with this understanding of divine modesty. However, in contrast, both the Islamic conception of God (particularly as expressed through the 99 Names of Allāh, as authoritatively taught by the Qurʾān, Prophet Muhammad, and authoritative individuals such as Imām Alī, Al-Ghazālī and Mullā Ṣadrā) and the Rabbinic Judaic conception of God (as expressed through liturgical traditions such as the Shema, the Amidah, and various other formulations, and theologians such as Moses Maimonides, and other rabbinic authorities) are argued to be inconsistent with this attribute. This analysis thus provides a novel philosophical basis for favouring the Christian conception of God over both the Islamic and Rabbinic Judaic ones, thus addressing a key question in comparative theology and philosophy of religion.

This article examines the ‘King Jesus Gospel’ concept proposed by Michael Bates and Scott McKnight, which frames the biblical gospel as a proclamation of Jesus’ kingship. It ad- dresses the ‘Failure Objection’ that Jesus was merely a failed apocalyptic prophet who died without fulfilling his predictions. Drawing on N.T. Wright’s work, this article constructs the ‘King Jesus Hypothesis’ and evaluates it using evidence from religious transforma- tion, cultural values, and human progress. Employing the Criterion of Predictive Power, it argues that historical religious innovations (drawing on the work of Larry Hurtado), Western moral values (drawing on the work of Tom Holland), and measurable human flourishing (drawing on the work of Steven Pinker) are best explained by Jesus successfully inaugurating God’s Kingdom through cultural transformation rather than apocalyptic intervention. Through this analysis, the article demonstrates that compelling evidence supports Jesus’ kingship despite the Failure Objection.

This article offers a critical response to Richard Swinburne's “The Free Will of a Sinless Incarnate God”. Swinburne addresses an apparent contradiction in traditional Christology: how Christ can possess a human nature, including genuine free will, while being necessarily sinless. After reviewing Swinburne's proposed solution - that Christ was predetermined not to sin but still experienced genuine temptation - I develop an objection based on Kane's libertarian theory of free will. I argue that genuine human freedom necessarily involves Self-Forming Actions where alternative possibilities, including the possibility to sin, are genuinely available. Since Christ, on Swinburne's account, lacks this capacity, he cannot possess genuine human freedom and thus lacks an essential component of human nature. I propose the Dispositional Incarnation Model as the most robust solution to this dilemma, as it allows Christ to possess genuine libertarian freedom at the occurrent level of his human experience while securing his sinlessness through his divine nature dispositionally exemplified. This, rather than the solution proposed by Swinburne, provides the conceptual basis for one affirming the traditional Chalcedonian claim that Christ is “perfect in humanity” and “like us in all respects except for sin”.

This article focuses on addressing Marilyn McCord Adams’ ‘Problem of Hell' - the argument that eternal damnation is incompatible with divine goodness and omnipotence. While Adams proposes universalism as the solution, this raises concerns about preserving human freedom and moral responsibility. Drawing on insights from Thomas Hopko, Richard Swinburne, Jacques Maritain, and Alexander Pruss, I develop the ‘Presence-Union’ model of hell that reconciles eternal separation from God with divine goodness. This model demonstrates how the unveiled presence of divine love, combined with a miraculous restoration of natural felicity and the distinction between formal and real union with God, provides a coherent alternative to both traditional views of hell and universalism, and maintains both divine mercy and the gravity of human moral choice.

This article focuses on examining a particular method of Biblical Interpretation. This specific method is that of the Patristic Method of Biblical Interpretation, proposed by Richard Swinburne. The Patristic Method faces a specific issue, ‘the Authority’ Issue, which will thus be dealt with within this article by utilising the notion of epistemic authority, as conceptualised by Linda Zagzebski, and restating it within an Eastern Orthodox interpretative framework. Doing this will thus enable the Patristic Method to be presented as a robust and cogent contemporary method of Biblical Interpretation that offers a unified and accurate understanding of God's revelation in the Bible.

This article focuses on providing a new a priori argument for the veracity of the doctrine of the Incarnation. This new argument, called the Subjectivity Argument, will be formulated in light of the concept of "omnisubjectivity," as proposed by Linda Zagzebski, and an "emotion," as conceptualised by the "somatic feeling theory," posited by Jesse Prinz. Doing this will provide a specific argument that provides strong grounds for affirming the necessity of the Incarnation, without, however, being subject to the primary objections that can be raised against other a priori arguments for the Incarnation in the contemporary literature.

This article aims to formulate a philosophical problem that is grounded upon the Pan-Abrahamic nature of early Islam, focusing on the implications that this has for understanding the identity of the contemporary Islamic community. This philosophical problem—termed the Pan-Abrahamic Problem—is structured around the examination of Prophet Muhammad’s leadership and the inclusivity of the early Islamic community, as proposed by Fred Donner in the form of the Pan-Abrahamic Thesis. The formulation of this philosophical problem is presented through the lens of the philosophical criteria of continuity and connectedness of aims (doctrine) and organisation, as proposed by Richard Swinburne. This philosophical problem will, thus, offer a challenge against traditional exclusivist narratives within Islam, ultimately aiming to emphasise the inclusive and pluralistic foundation of the religion and the significance of this for the contemporary Islamic identity.

This article presents a novel argument for the existence of God based on the metaphysical concept of grounding. Using the methodology of Inference to the Best Explanation, as conceptualised by Peter Lipton, it evaluates six foundationalist theories: Trope-Theoretic Theism, Monistic Substantivalism, Pure Stuff Theory, Mereological Bundle Theory, Extended Simples Theory, and Priority-Based Structural Realism-for their ability to explain the existence of grounding relations in reality. Through rigorous internal and external assessments focusing on coherence, simplicity, unification, and evidential virtues, the paper argues that Trope-Theoretic Theism, which conceives of God as a maximal power trope, provides the most satisfactory explanation for grounding relations. This conclusion offers a new abductive argument for Theism and demonstrates the potential for productive dialogue between metaphysics and religion.

An invited talk delivered at the Logos Institute of Analytic Theology at the University of St Andrews. The topic was on the coherence of the doctrine of the Incarnation. I sought to introduce my solution to the logical challenge against the doctrine of the incarnation and also my own metaphysical model of the incarnation (called the transformational model). This talk summarises my article on this topic published previously in IJPR (termed 'On the metaphysics of the incarnation'). Handouts for the talk are included in the file.

This article aims to provide a philosophical elucidation of the concept of divine atemporality (i.e. divine timelessness and immutability), found within the theological trajectory of Classical Theism, and a philosophical model – termed Aspectival Pluralism – that demonstrates its compatibility with the further notion of Divine Preservation. To achieve this end, an original interpretation of the concept is formulated within the Aspectival Account and the thesis of Theistic Ontological Pluralism, as extended by the temporal ontology of Priority Presentism, introduced by Sam Baron, and the Exdurantist view of persistence, introduced by Theodore Sider, which will ultimately enable the notion to be elucidated in a clear and consistent manner and help to answer an important conceptual question concerning it.