Objections to Molinistic Monergism

Recently a committed Calvinist sought to interact with me regarding the model I have offered showing how Molinism can be completely monergistic (See A Molinistic Model of Monergism). That is to say, the model of Molinism I have offered shows how God is the author of salvation from beginning to end and man plays no … Continue reading Objections to Molinistic Monergism

My 5 Favorite Arguments for God’s Existence

A few months ago in a Facebook group (I think it was either Molinist – Official Page or The Christian Apologetics Support Group), someone made a poll asking what everyone’s favorite argument for God’s existence was. The poll creator exempted the historical case for the resurrection of Jesus from being among the options because, let’s … Continue reading My 5 Favorite Arguments for God’s Existence

The Vanishing “I”

Question: Tim, you suggest that the determinist would probably think, or be committed to thinking, that either God or nature evaluates our beliefs (one of these is “the ‘thing’ evaluating and judging” our beliefs). But at the same time, you allow that on determinism we have mental states, presumably including these evaluative mental states (about … Continue reading The Vanishing “I”

Objections to the Existence of the Soul

In a recent blog post, Professor Keith Parsons offers three reasons for why (he thinks) the soul does not exist. (You might recall that Parsons debated William Lane Craig in 1998). Since Parsons’ objections to substance dualism (for simplicity, I will hereafter refer to substance dualism simply as ‘dualism’) seem rather common among lay atheists, … Continue reading Objections to the Existence of the Soul

Does an Objective Moral Compass Point to God?

Question Hey Tim, A question from your fellow Nebraska Reasonable Faith chapter director! When discussing the Moral Argument with my Reasonable Faith chapter in Omaha, I received some pushback from one of our members, who just so happens to have his PhD in meta-ethics. The objection he had to the Moral Argument was to the … Continue reading Does an Objective Moral Compass Point to God?

A Theistic Response to Dan Barker’s “Free Will Argument for the Nonexistence of God.”

Abstract: Dan Barker has put forth a purportedly destructive objection against the existence of the Judeo-Christian God from what he perceives as an incompatibility between an all-knowing God and the existence of free will. This essay will scrutinize the claim that God’s free-will is incompatible with his omniscience and that the so-called Principle of Alternative … Continue reading A Theistic Response to Dan Barker’s “Free Will Argument for the Nonexistence of God.”

Emergence (Part 2): Responding to the Atheist Foe

It seems that emergent naturalists want to etch out a middle ground somewhere between reductive materialism and theism. They acknowledge that reductive materialism fails to explain key aspects of reality such as morality and consciousness, but they do not want to go so far as to posit an infinite-personal God who stands above and beyond … Continue reading Emergence (Part 2): Responding to the Atheist Foe

Emergence (Part 1): Friend, or New Atheist Foe?

Introduction & Background Christians have often used objective morality and human consciousness as building blocks from which to craft arguments for God’s existence.[1] This is usually done by arguing that theism provides a better explanation for these two phenomena than the most popular form of naturalism, that is, reductive materialism.[2] Reductive materialism claims that the … Continue reading Emergence (Part 1): Friend, or New Atheist Foe?

Arminianism vs Molinism

I once had the pleasure of interacting with Arminian theologian, Dr. Jack Cottrell. Many Arminians also claim to be Molinists. In fact, many scholars believe that Arminius was a Molinist! Cottrell, however, is an Arminian who opposes Molinism. Here is a sampling of our online debate. Hi Jack, I sincerely thank you for adding me … Continue reading Arminianism vs Molinism

Let Him Not Be Confused Forever: A Response to CARM.ORG’s “Prevenient Grace Fails as a Valid Option in Molinism”

This is an analytical inquiry of CARM’s article “Prevenient Grace Fails as a Valid Option in Molinism.” In his article, Matt Slick makes the claim that Molinists cannot appeal to prevenient grace because it is self-refuting. I argue that Slick is using idiosyncratic definitions of total depravity and prevenient grace and this results in the … Continue reading Let Him Not Be Confused Forever: A Response to CARM.ORG’s “Prevenient Grace Fails as a Valid Option in Molinism”