By Robert Trebizo
Kenneth Keathley systematically treads into a misted jungle of the dialogue as a scrupulous cartographer might painstakingly trace out the ever-forking pattern of a river delta. In Christian theological circles, there is hardly a less prolific discussion-generator as is the topic of salvation – with Calvinism and Arminianism as the primary options available. He categorizes, … Continue reading Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach Book Review
by Brian Abasciano
There is an untenable grammatical argument contending that John 3:16 supports limited atonement that has recently received some attention. James White has made the argument for some time. But his use of it in response to Arminian philosopher Rich Davis’ argument against limited atonement from John 3:161 has now surprisingly received some approval from two respectable Calvinist … Continue reading Whoever Reads John 3:16 Can Know that “Whoever” Is Really There
By Tyson James
Summary: In the March 11, 2014 episode of The Dividing Line, James White offers an analysis of the discussion between Dr. William Lane Craig and Professor Paul Helm on the topic “Molinism vs. Calvinism,” which originally aired January 4, 2014. I conclude that White doesn’t actually offer an analysis so much as uses an incredulous … Continue reading Response to James White on the Unbelievable William Lane Craig and Paul Helm Discussion
By Tyson James
Summary: In the May 29, 2014 episode of The Dividing Line, James White attempts to refute the Molinist position on libertarian free will by using Psalm 33 as a prooftext. However, I demonstrate that the selected text provides the horns of a dilemma that undermines White’s own position. Source: http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/2014/05/29/upcoming-worldwide-ministry-tripspsalm-33-and-molinismpeter-lumpkins-tim-rogers-and-ergun-caner/ Video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6lW2h5nQOE#action=share I’ve transcribed relevant … Continue reading Libertarian Free Will: Did James White Unknowingly Provide Biblical Support?
By Kyle Barrington
Surprise! Welcome to an article founded on a false dilemma! It’s obvious that even if Saul of Tarsus (Paul hereafter) just so happened to be an epileptic, he could also have been an eye-witness, right? There is no logical malady between being both an eyewitness and an epileptic. It’s a false dilemma. However, this is the argument leveled against the veracity … Continue reading Paul, the Apostle: Eyewitness or Epileptic?
By Mike Licona
Are the New Testament Gospels historically reliable? Before we can answer this question, it will be necessary for us to define what we mean by the term “historically reliable.” Many events in ancient literature cannot be verified due to a lack of data. Moreover, the metanarrative in the Gospels is beyond the reach of historians. … Continue reading Are the Gospels Historically Reliable?
By Mikel del Rosario
What would you say if someone asked you, “Did Jesus say He was God?” In this post, I’ll give you a few talking points that you can use to give a thoughtful response to a question like this. But first, let me tell you a little story. One day, I was at this family reunion … Continue reading Did Jesus Say He Was God?
By Brian G. Chilton
An old adage claims that the two worst conversations to have with a person involve religion and politics. Since people hold deep emotional feelings pertaining to these two issues, the logic of the cliché claims that the two topics must be avoided. However, these two topics are arguably the most important topics that one could … Continue reading Are Religious Discussions Important?
By Jacob Brown
Many people today know of the free will defense to the problem of Moral Evil and that Molinism reconciles Gods sovereignty with Mans Free will. However not as many would be familiar with the Free Process Defense or Molinism’s reconciliation of Gods Sovereignty and Genuine Randomness in Nature. My goal today is to give a … Continue reading Molinism and Natural Evil
By John A. Limanto
Summary: Although the apologist James White has argued against Molinism by accusing it of denigrating the sovereignty of God, failing to countenance the card-dealer objection, and being unbiblical, this essay will demonstrate that White’s arguments seem to be poorly elaborated and are invalid. Moreover, White fails to provide any meaningful alternative that makes sense of … Continue reading Molinism and Creaturely Essences: A Response to James White (Part 2)
By Brian Chilton
Middle knowledge is a concept that describes how God sovereignly operates in time with free agents. These days, many individuals attempt to claim what innovative theologians say about the theological concepts they espouse with little interaction with the actual theologian. I think it is imperative that individuals engage with primary sources as much as it … Continue reading Molina’s 4 Proofs for Middle Knowledge
By Manuel Rincon
Question It’s platitudinous to claim that there are aggressive people in every group, however, it’s more controversial to claim that a particular group of people is more prone to aggression than others. For example, I take it that you share the same experience I do when I assert the proposition that “Internet atheists are generally … Continue reading Rude Reformers!
By Natan de Carvalho
Abstract: Naturalized Epistemology is usually seen as Quine’s attempt to move epistemology away from philosophy to science. Some ill-advised Naturalists make use of Quine’s response to Carnap to justify the “end of Philosophy” (or at least Epistemology), and to affirm the primacy of Naturalistic Scientism over other disciplines. Nevertheless, I suggest that such readings of … Continue reading Was Quine Naturalizing Epistemology?
By John A. Limanto
Summary: The two main arguments the Calvinist movie present against unlimited atonement are: 1) that unlimited atonement diminishes the effect of atonement and 2) that unlimited atonement fails to countenance the double jeopardy argument. Within this essay, I contend that these two arguments violate three basic principles within Biblical theology and the arguments are both … Continue reading Responding to the Movie “Calvinist” (Part 3): Limited Atonement
By Tyson James
Summary: In the segment of the Calvinist movie covering Unconditional Election, several interviewees describe the concept, provide proof texts, and recount their initial reactions to it. I conclude that the segment lacks nuance, that the proof texts fall short of their target, and that one man’s initial reaction to Unconditional Election evinces an intuitive truth. … Continue reading Responding to the Movie “Calvinist” (Part 2) – Unconditional Election
By Terry Hollifield
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?