Summary: In the movie “Calvinist” several interlocutors take the position of irresistible grace, which they take to mean that regeneration logically precedes faith in the process of salvation. In this article, I demonstrate that they commit several logical fallacies in their argumentation. I show that the text used to support irresistible grace does not fulfill … Continue reading Responding to the Movie “Calvinist” (Part 4): Irresistible Grace
Question: Dear Tim, I just finished reading your “Dangerous Grounds” article and I could use a little clarification. Can you please further explain why it is that if God does not possess knowledge of creaturely freedom logically prior to his creative decree, then the only two options we are left with are open theism or “exhaustive … Continue reading Is God’s Knowledge Like a Box of Chocolates?
I recently had the pleasure of meeting the former atheist and French Calvinistic philosopher named, Guillaume Bignon (Click here to read his amazing story). I attended the EPS/ETS conference in Rhode Island and was invited to lunch with a few philosophers, theologians, and apologists. I happened to sit right next to Bignon as I was sipping … Continue reading Excusing Sinners, Blaming God, Compatibilism, & the Consequence Argument
One of the most common protests against Molinism today is a purely philosophical argument known as the “Grounding Objection.” This complaint is based on a controversial version of the correspondence theory of truth known as the theory of truth-makers. Accordingly, in order for a statement to be true, then there needs to be something else in … Continue reading Dangerous Grounds: The Grounding Objection vs Divine Determinism
Last year, Tim Stratton proposed an outline for “Mere Molinism.” The concept is essentially that Molinism rests upon two fundamental pillars to which all Molinists agree while other components of Molinism are ancillary and can be disagreed upon by Molinists. The two pillars are: 1- God eternally possesses middle knowledge. 2- Humans possess libertarian free … Continue reading A Third Pillar for Mere Molinism?
Does Libertarian Free Will Imply That We Can Stop Sinning Altogether?: A Response to Monergism Books
Monergism Books (hereafter, MB) posted the following on Facebook: Source: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150964832184949&id=15086969948 Just in case MB’s Facebook post gets compromised I will reproduce their statement here: “You think you have a free will? Then demonstrate it: in your own power, stop sinning altogether. The fact that no person can choose to live a sinless life is … Continue reading Does Libertarian Free Will Imply That We Can Stop Sinning Altogether?: A Response to Monergism Books
Summary: In the movie Calvinist the interviewees (ostensibly) argue in favor of the doctrine of total depravity and that it precludes libertarian free will (hereafter LFW). In this essay I demonstrate that the interviewees beg the question in favor of total depravity and for the idea that it is at odds with LFW. Introduction The … Continue reading Responding to the Movie “Calvinist” (Part 1): Total Depravity
Summary: In my essay “How Should a Molinist Understand 1 Peter 1:3?” I defended the idea that 1 Peter 1:3 underdetermines whether libertarian free will (LFW) or divine causal determinism (DCD) obtains. One way one could attempt to adjudicate between these competing theories is to appeal to Ockham’s razor. Specifically, one could argue that a … Continue reading Does Ockham’s Razor Preclude a Libertarian Interpretation of 1 Peter 1:3?
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. . .” 1 Pet. 1:3 (ESV) For the determinist, this verse would seem to pose a problem for … Continue reading How Should a Molinist Understand 1 Peter 1:3?
An Unfortunate Appraisal of Molinism: A Response to CARM.org’s “What Is Molinism and is it Biblical?”
Summary: CARM, a Reformed ministry, has given a negative appraisal of Molinism. I lay out 9 issues with their explanation and critique of the doctrine, undercutting/rebutting their claims by showing that they either rely on comprehensional errors, dictional ambiguity, or question begging (or some medley of these).1 Source: http://carm.org/what-molinism Issue 1: CARM Misrepresents Libertarian Free … Continue reading An Unfortunate Appraisal of Molinism: A Response to CARM.org’s “What Is Molinism and is it Biblical?”