-
-
Recent Posts
- Revisiting free will, in conversation with Robert Picirilli (1)
- Why is God’s knowledge of counterfactuals valuable to a compatibilist doctrine of providence?
- William Lane Craig now affirms universal revelation accessibilism
- When you make a decision, what do you actually change?
- Pope Francis on the nature of Hell
Recent Comments
- Baptist Joshua on YouTube on “Four-point” and “five-point” Calvinism defined
- Brad Rininger on “Four-point” and “five-point” Calvinism defined
- D. Andrew White on Is the theory of evolution compatible with theism?
- Richie on The distinction between Reformed Arminians and Wesleyan Arminians
- D. Randall on William Lane Craig now affirms universal revelation accessibilism
- Terrance Tiessen on The distinction between Reformed Arminians and Wesleyan Arminians
- Richie on The distinction between Reformed Arminians and Wesleyan Arminians
- Dwight on Should local churches be autonomous?
Categories
Archives
Tag Cloud
accessibilism annihilationism Arminianism atonement autobiography baptism Calvinism coherence compatibilism conversion Daniel Strange death divine freedom election grace Gregory Boyd hell human freedom hypothetical knowledge Islam John Laing Michael Horton middle knowledge missions Molinism monergism N. T. Wright open theism original sin Paul Helm Paul Helseth prayer providence Robert Letham Roger Olson Ron Highfield salvation sin synergism theodicy Thomism traditionalism unevangelized union with Christ William Lane CraigPages
Tag Archives: compatibilism
Is “hypothetical knowledge Calvinism” vulnerable to the same grounding objection which makes Molinism problematic?
At the ETS meeting in Baltimore in November/13, John Laing read a paper entitled “Middle knowledge and the Assumption of Libertarian Freedom: A Response to Ware.” Though Bruce Ware and I have never collaborated, we reached similar conclusions about the usefulness of God’s knowledge of counterfactuals in his deciding what world he would create, and I appreciate the work he has done. In Providence and Prayer, I had called my model of providence “middle knowledge … Continue reading
Choose your theological mystery or conundrum
If we hear most loudly in Scripture the description of a world in which God has given moral creatures significant control of how things turn out, why would we thank and glorify God when good things occur? But if we hear most loudly in Scripture the description of a world in which God has maintained meticulous control, why would we feel responsible when evil occurs rather than holding God accountable? The synergist conundrum “I would … Continue reading
Posted in Theological method, Theology Proper
Tagged coherence, compatibilism, monergism, mystery, synergism
5 Comments
Monergism/synergism, compatibilism/incompatibilism and the nature of human freedom.
Recently I have had some correspondence with a gentleman who has read a bit of what I have written and who has had questions. Among his recent inquiries was this one: Could you please explain to me the difference between compatibilism and monergism? Similarly, what’s the difference between synergism and libertarianism? I tried looking it up, but I can’t seem to really understand the differences in these concepts. His questions are common, and quite natural, given the complexity … Continue reading
Posted in Providence, Theology Proper
Tagged compatibilism, human freedom, incompatibilism, monergism, synergism
6 Comments
“Monergism” and “Determinism:” Are they useful terms?
I had brief correspondence recently with an evangelical theologian whom I am going to call “Peter,” so that I can cite some of our private conversation without putting him on public record. For my purposes here, what he said is the important thing, not who he is. Our brief interchange prompted me to ruminate about the terminology we use to describe a Calvinist understanding of God’s role and ours, in salvation and in history more … Continue reading
Posted in Theological method
Tagged Arminianism, Calvinism, compatibilism, determinism, hypothetical knowledge, monergism, synergism
2 Comments
W. L. Craig’s understanding of freedom: Molinism or monergism?
In December, I wrapped up my review of Four Views on Divine Providence, dealing with responses to Greg Boyd’s Open Theist proposal. In that post, I expressed my surprise concerning William Lane Craig’s redefinition of libertarian freedom, in which he denied that it entails the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP), often described as the “power of contrary choice.” Craig proposed instead that a libertarian account of freedom requires only “the absence of causal constraints outside … Continue reading
Posted in Theology Proper
Tagged compatibilism, human freedom, hypothetical knowledge, middle knowledge, Molinism, William Lane Craig
17 Comments
Responses to Boyd’s open theist model of providence
The questions that expose the incoherence of the neo-Molinist account of divine providence . . . establish that the God of open theism is an ambivalent and arbitrary warrior who cannot be trusted to rule in every situation in a way that minimizes evil and maximizes good for his creatures. (Helseth, 222) Molinism [handles the problem of evil better than open theism] for God permits horrible evils only in view of morally sufficient reasons, whereas … Continue reading
Posted in Books, Providence
Tagged Calvinism, compatibilism, Gregory Boyd, hypothetical knowledge, Molinism, open theism, Paul Helseth, Ron Highfield, William Lane Craig
2 Comments
Compatibilism: a puzzlement for both Arminians and Calvinists
It has dawned on me that, despite the strong Arminian criticism of compatibilism, their statements regarding justification are actually an affirmation of the essence of compatibilism! Hopefully, though both groups charge one another with incoherence, we can be thankful that essential truths of Scripture are being affirmed, even though we can’t figure out how. The puzzlement of Calvinists Calvinists are used to strong objections from Arminians that their belief in God’s meticulous divine control of … Continue reading
Posted in Theology Proper
Tagged Arminianism, Calvinism, coherence, compatibilism, human freedom
3 Comments
Responses to Highfield’s model of providence
I wonder if his reluctance to address the “how” of God’s providential relationship to the world that he has made fosters a measure of confusion that, in the end, is largely unnecessary.” (P. K. Helseth, 167) It is hard not to detect here a certain distrust of logical analysis and philosophical reflection, which is both unfortunate and naïve: unfortunate because it would deprive us of the insights such reflection might bring and naïve because such … Continue reading
Posted in Books, Providence
Tagged compatibilism, Gregory Boyd, Paul Helseth, Ron Highfield, William Lane Craig
Leave a comment
The God who controls by liberating
“I think it is defensible, even if frustrating, for advocates of complete divine sovereignty to admit they do not know a way to bring belief in God’s perfect lordship in complete harmony with human freedom” (Highfield, 142-43). In Chapter 3 of Four Views on Divine Providence, Ron Highfield presents a model whose central thesis is that “God controls by liberating and liberates by controlling” (141) A restatement of Ron Highfield’s … Continue reading
Restorationist and Open Theist responses to a determinist model of providence
I have described and interacted with W. L. Craig’s Molinist response to Paul Helseth’s omnicausal (determinist) model, and now we’ll consider the other two responses presented in Four Views on Divine Providence. Ron Highfield’s response Ron Highfield, representing what Dennis Jowers calls a “Restorationist” position, notes that his view and Helseth’s view are closer to one another than to either of the other two positions. But Highfield attributes his “fundamental agreement with Helseth’s view,” not … Continue reading
Posted in Books, Providence
Tagged compatibilism, Gregory Boyd, human freedom, open theism, Paul Helseth, Ron Highfield, theodicy
3 Comments