Category: Dialogue/Debates
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
A Response to Aron Ra
I regret that this response must be written. The atheist blogger Aron Ra and I recently participated in an event together. We were at a church, answering questions on the topic of creationism and Darwinism in front of about 300 high school students. Despite the fact that we differ greatly on the topic at hand—I, … Continue reading A Response to Aron Ra
Does True Love Require Libertarian Free Will? A Response to Greg Koukl
Greg Koukl is one of my favorite apologists and theological thinkers. I have been reading his blogs and listening to his podcasts for years. His book “Tactics” is one that all Christians who care about evangelism should own. In my professional opinion, Koukl’s ministry, Stand To Reason, is one of the best resources available to … Continue reading Does True Love Require Libertarian Free Will? A Response to Greg Koukl
Molinism & the Golden Chain of Redemption
One of my favorite things to do is engage in respectful dialogue with those who disagree. Whether it is a debate with atheists over the existence of God or a debate with a fellow Christian regarding theological issues, I love being challenged to think and to constantly reexamine my views. These conversations have forged my … Continue reading Molinism & the Golden Chain of Redemption
Hays’d & Confused
I recently had the privilege of meeting the French Calvinist philosopher Guillame Bignon. Although I disagree with Bignon, in my opinion, he offers the best defense of Calvinism today. With that said, however, I wrote an essay critiquing a small portion of Bignon’s recent book. In response to my arguments, Hays quickly wrote a response … Continue reading Hays’d & Confused