-
William Lane Craig – not a Molinist?
Terrance L. Tiessen (TLT) makes an argument that William Lane Craig (WLC) is not a Molinist. In summary, the argument is (1) a Molinist must hold to Libertarian Free Will (LFW) in the sense of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP); (2) WLC claims to hold to LFW but not in the sense of PAP;…
-
R. Scott Clark Responds to Molinism
I am glad to report that R. Scott Clark provided a fairly concise response to Molinism on his blog (link to response). Enjoy! -TurretinFan UPDATE/ADDENDUM: RSC is getting some heat for characterizing MK this way: According to MK, God knows all the contingencies which could be actualized in the world by persons with free will…
-
Responding to Wes Widner
I had been planning to respond to Wes Widner’s critique of Dr. White on Molonism (critique here) but then I noticed Steve Hays’ response to Widner (Steve Hays’ response here). Steve Hays does a great job, so for a detailed response, see his comments. I’ll add a few thoughts of my own by way of…
-
So Good Men Differ … so what?
One of the perennial comments one hears is that if either A or B were correct “it is doubtful that so many Bible-believing, godly evangelical Christians would have wound up on each side.” This flawed position assumes that “godly evangelical Christians” always tend to end up agreeing with correct positions. That’s a flawed assumption. In…
-
Springboarding off of Hays Against Molinism
Background:Steve Hays (Calvinist) wrote: God’s freedom is sui generis. It doesn’t fall into either model of human agent theory, whether libertarian or determinist. GodIsMyJudge (Molinist) wrote: Determinate and indeterminate seem like mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories. Are you suggesting there is some third category we don’t know about or perhaps this is a logical paradox?…
-
Middle Knowledge – Video Series
I have now concluded the series on Middle Knowledge and specifically of Turretin’s treatment of it, in his Institutes of Elenctic Theology. I should note that a summary of the section that I addressed has been created and can be found at the following link (link). I didn’t consult this list specifically in the preparation…
-
Middle Knowledge – Part 6
This is the sixth and final section on Turretin’s discussion of Middle Knowledge. This section delves into the philosophical arguments that undermine the concept of middle knowledge, demonstrating that the concept of middle knowledge leads to inevitable self-contradictions. 1. Two categories of knowledge are all that are required, because all true objects of knowledge are…
-
Middle Knowledge – Part 5
This is the fifth video in the series, of which (for those already weary of the series) there are six videos. This section deals with alleged proof texts of Middle Knowledge: (1) 1 Samuel 23:11-12 This is the place where David asked God whether the men of the city would deliver David up if David…
-
Middle Knowledge – Part 4
This is the fourth section of the discussion of Middle Knowledge taken from Turretin’s Institutes. This section deals with Turretin’s six main objections to Middle Knowledge: (1) Two categories of knowledge are enough, because all things are either merely possible or actually future, (2) Untrue things cannot be foreseen as true, (3) God’s exhaustive providence…
-
Middle Knowledge – Part 3
This is the third video in the series on Middle Knowledge. This section presents the “state of the question.” That is to say, it helps describe what exactly is under consideration. Thus, in this video we distinguish the issue from the issue of God knowing all possible contingent things, of God knowing necessarily contingent things…