Lydia McGrew on Minimalism & the Resurrection

Since I have turned my research attention to the argument in favour of the resurrection of Jesus (simply called the Resurrection Argument), I face the question as to which is the best (or at least a good) approach to take in arguing for the resurrection. The debate about the different approaches to the argument is … Continue reading Lydia McGrew on Minimalism & the Resurrection

Atheists Opposing Molinism

In my experience, not only do I find myself defending Molinism from the likes of Calvinists and Open Theists, but I am amazed to see the vigor in which atheists also oppose Molina’s doctrine of middle knowledge. After all, why should the atheist care what view a Christian holds of divine sovereignty and human responsibility? It … Continue reading Atheists Opposing Molinism

A Quick History Lesson

Objection: The Bible is a compendium of fire side tales and fables recounted orally for generations by goat herders and primitive tribes from the stone age, until writing was invented, and then again many different sources, transliterations, and versions were written down. There were no grand central universities to organise the many various versions of … Continue reading A Quick History Lesson

Is the Freethinking Argument Question Begging?

Question: Dear Tim, I will try to be as concise and brief as possible. I am a Christian and my question is concerning free will, determinism, Molinism and of course, with respect to your Argument of Freethinking against Naturalism. The Freethinking Argument Against Naturalism is formulated as follows:   1- If naturalism is true, the immaterial … Continue reading Is the Freethinking Argument Question Begging?

Divine Sovereignty, Human Choice, & Seven “Theological Truths”

Tom Barnes is a pastor, author, and theologian who lives in Nebraska — a mere twenty miles from my current residence. Tom is brilliant and one of the nicest guys I know. He is also one of the first to encourage me to take my systematic theology seriously. In fact, a decade ago (2008) we … Continue reading Divine Sovereignty, Human Choice, & Seven “Theological Truths”

More Concessions and Counter-Arguments: Further Response to Andrew Harland-Smith

I. Preliminaries Once again, I’d like to begin by stating further concessions I can give to clear the periphery of the debate. First, within this dialogue, my arguments shall operate under the presumption of A-theory of time. Second, I concede that if Andrew can successfully argue that correlation is a form causation, that then (MT2) … Continue reading More Concessions and Counter-Arguments: Further Response to Andrew Harland-Smith

Molinism: A Mutual Understanding

1. Preliminary Remarks In their forthcoming exchange, Andrew and John will focus their attention on a narrowly framed articulation of the “Grounding Objection” to the Molinist account of Middle Knowledge. The two are conscious that, unless they are cautious to avoid doing so, they risk either clouding the discussion with peripheral matters, or talking past … Continue reading Molinism: A Mutual Understanding

Counter-Arguments and Concessions: Reply to Andrew Harland-Smith’s Grounding Objection

1. Preliminaries In avoiding unintended off-tracking, it is necessary for me to state the points I concede in Andrew’s essay. First, I concede that there may be some ways in construing (DT) that should not bother Molinists (Andrew’s formulation of [(DT)] does not necessarily entail his conclusion as I will argue later). Second, I concede … Continue reading Counter-Arguments and Concessions: Reply to Andrew Harland-Smith’s Grounding Objection

Hoist by its Own Petard – A Grounding Objection to Molinism

By Andrew Harland-Smith 1. Preliminary Remarks This exchange between John and myself concerns a narrowly framed articulation of the grounding objection. Mine is not an argument founded on any universal theory of truth; not truthmaker maximalism, not atomic truthmaker, not even truth-supervenes on being. Rather, mine is a much narrower claim. It is only that … Continue reading Hoist by its Own Petard – A Grounding Objection to Molinism

Hoist by Its Own Petard Part 2 – a Rejoinder to John Limanto

1. A Re-Cap of My Argument It will be recalled, that in my first essay, I developed an argument from what I called “The Dependence Thesis” (‘DT’) which held: (DT). For any person S and CCF C, if C is true, S has made it true that C As I noted in part 3 of … Continue reading Hoist by Its Own Petard Part 2 – a Rejoinder to John Limanto