Greg Koukl: Molinism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 сер 2010
- Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason answers the question, "What do you think of Molinism?"
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity
----- CONNECT -----
Website: www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: www.str.org/apps
Twitter: / strtweets
Facebook: / standtoreason93
Instagram: / standtoreason
LinkedIn: / stand-to-reason
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl, live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time, at (855) 243-9975. If you'd like to submit your question ahead of time for the broadcast, or if you'd like to submit a question for the #STRask podcast, fill out our form at www.str.org/broadcast.
----- GIVE -----
Support the work of Stand to Reason: str.org/donate
For more on Monism, see the following:
What are your thoughts on Molinism as it relates to God’s sovereignty and human free will?
rsn.pub/3vUZJa8
Is Molinism determinism?
rsn.pub/3Uc1QAu
Why do you disagree with Molinism?
rsn.pub/3UdHJlz
What are the advantages and disadvantages of Molinism?
rsn.pub/42jpWLN
Is there any reason why I must choose between the Reformed, Arminian, and Molinist views?
rsn.pub/493kE9p
I spoke to the lady doing my pretests at the eye doctor yesterday.She was raised an Arminian,but I explained the truth of the gospel to her and she was amazed at what I said,she said she had been confused by the Bible but how what I told her made perfect sense and she thanked me for telling her,she may even attend church with us now.I pray she will.
We are not puppets. We have free will, and God does not create people to populate the Lake of Fire. Calvanism is not Christianity but a gross perversion of God's truth. "Gospel means good news, but in calvanism it is bad news because for the vast vast majority of people have no chance because God did not predestine them to salvation. Molinism and determinism puts God in a philosophical box. The box is the limits to man's intellect. God is sovereign and in his sovereignty he can create man with free will, if he can't then he is no longer sovereign.
An honest assessment of the idea. Good stuff!
Personally, I was taught Arminianism when I was saved, but I have ended up more in the Reformed camp when it comes to this issue. Our will is not as free as some would like it to be, methinks. Even after I embraced the Reformed view, I realised that a sliver of pride could finally die in me when I saw that it was not my ability to understand and receive salvation that was the key to becoming a Christian - it was God's mercy and nothing more!
You've misunderstood the Molinist argument, my dear. Molinism states that humans have the ability to understand and receive salvation ONLY BECAUSE of God's mercy!
We are indeed fallen and fully deserve death, but God still loves us and is merciful towards us because we still possess His image as we were originally created in It in accordance to His own will.
It's by His perfect, absolute will that we humans have libertarian (not absolute) free will and though we do have the ability to make choices (that of course being the cause for our sinful state), the options that stand before us were already established by God and He influences our will passively so as to get us all -elect and lost- to actively bring about His will!
Ephesians 3:10-11 ~ "His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Romans 9:17 ~ For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”
But I'm grateful to have a brother in Christ like you, regardless of soteriology. God bless! 🙌
This is well articulated and well done. Thank you Greg.
God for 2 thousand years is using his last and greatest power power 'Grace': He now through Grace is working on believers inner man.
He never again will use any of his great powers in the Dispensation of Grace.
How about compatibilism, in that, God’s permissive will allows for freewill, yet it’s a limited freewill. The example you give from Samuel must be understood in the sovereignty of God… meaning that God certainly knew what David would choose and responded to his question rightly however, in God’s omniscient, his limited freewill was already calculated. That event couldn’t have had a different outcome yet mans limited freewill was in tact. Both are compatible! The problem here is that molinism has a god that is not omniscient, if He doesn’t know what choice man will make.
I don't think it's correct to characterize Craig's view of "God is only electing worlds" as being all Molinism. I don't see why it wouldn't fit with Molinism for God to know what each person would choose if they were to hear the gospel. And so based on that middle knowledge, God can select certain individuals from that subset to be his elect. Also as stated below in the comments, his view may not actually be "God does not elect persons".
You missed something important. God elects the world which has in consideration of who and how many elect individuals make up the world. So yes he directly elects individuals with everything (world) under consideration
I thank God that He raises up men to study and preach and teach the Word. It is a very serious calling. However, for the life of me, I do not see Molinism in the Bible. If it were Biblical, I would change my opinion of the theory. To be sure, the Word of God does confront us with difficult passages which we must consider with much prayer. God's mind/knowledge is infinite. We are finite. The difficulty is real. But to consider a theory about God's knowledge in order to solve some of our discomfort with the confronting truths of the Word of God, is to me, an unnecessary stretch. The natural tension many passages create in our minds is in part a cause for us to understand that His ways are not our ways. I think the Bible is clear on that.
Blessings!
I don't think you'll find any Molinist that claims Molinism is taught in the Bible. The claim is that Molinism is CONSISTENT with Scripture, though not taught by it.
I was listening with respect for Greg until he suggested that God actualized a world in which most people would choose him. What an absurd statement. The bible CLEARLY tells us, "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
Greg mis-stated that version of Molinism's view. Those Molinists that hold this view believe that the world God actualizes is the world in which the MAXIMUM POSSIBLE NUMBER OF PEOPLE come into saving faith. This maximum number of people may still be, for example, 15% of the population. So this type of Molinism doesn't believe the actual world is a world in which > 50% of people are saved. As you point out, this would seem to contradict scripture. Rather, that, for example, 15% was the highest in any possible world it would be.
🤯
He elected Christ the Elect One.... Any who are in Christ are elect. Any who are not in Christ are not elect. He elected Christ and those who would be in Him before the foundation of the world. He didn't elect us to be in Christ. We are ellect because we are in Christ.
Non-Calvinist ≠ Arminian
Why?
@@HearGodsWord Because both Calvinism and Arminianism are data sets. To be a Calvinist is to hold a set of beliefs, to be an Arminian is to hold a set of beliefs. There exist Christians who disagree with major components of both Calvinism and Arminianism and therefore identify as neither.
@@magepunk2376 so what point were you trying to make?
Im not calvinist nor Armenian
Both are false beliefs and two sides of the same coin
By selecting a certain world wouldn't God be selecting the individuals as well?
Yes! Of course he would. Have you ever seen a world of individuals that didn't contain individuals? LOL!
In a sense yes. This is how Molinist interpret predestination. Its an amazing view as it affirms libertarian free will as well as God's sovereignty!
I think we both agree that we are saved only by the grace of God through his Son Jesus. The difference is, I believe God gives grace to the humble(Prov 3:34) and resists the proud(meaning we must decide to humble ourselves to Him). We also need grace to grow so we must stay humble. You believe God gives grace only to those he has elected to give grace to and they can not reject it. We're going in circles. I believe you love God. Keep following, growing and learning and be very doing so.
In my experience salvation appears Monogistic, I desired to an extent to be saved but still held on to sin and never crossed that line of me wanting God enough, until God used the Spirit to soften my heart and fully give me that desire. If its synergistic why wasn't I saved when I first desired it?
Yes. I understand that's what you believe. Based on your belief, I'm curious, how do you evangelize? What do you tell people about the gospel?
Continued...
"Molinism: The Contemporary Debate" -Edited by Ken Perszyk
"Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach" - Kenneth Keathley
and of course,
"One Divine Foreknowledge, Part IV of the Concordia" -Luis De Molina (translated by Alfred J. Freddoso)
Yes, you gave it a valiant effort. I believe I gave you plenty of scripture that points to a God who is not only righteous but love as well(actually, the entire bible is about his love for his creation and his desire to restore it). I don't know of any other pagan gods who offer love unconditionally relentless love like Yaweh does through his Son.
I can easily say the same about you. If you are comfortable believing that God is not really the loving and just God that is portrayed throughout scripture but only righteous (based on adding into some select scriptures) peace be yours. I'm certainly not going to presume to know who is regenerated and who is not. Just keep loving God and spending time in His presence with an open heart and growing in the knowledge of Jesus Christ
Personally, I think that the more we know about God, the better. Categorizing God's Middle Knowledge in a different subset from his Natural Knowledge highlights the distinction between those two types of knowledge. Consciousness of this distinction adds a certain amount of richness to our understanding of the various ways that God's mind works, which can only benefit us in the long run.
Interesting video. I'm having a hard time grasping everything you're saying, but I think I agree that Molinism doesn't hold up.
I have a question regarding Calvinism though:
Why can't it be that God gives all souls enough grace to where they can make a decision to bend their knee to His grace, or resist it? A sovereign king can still offer his subjects ultimatums. No?
what do anyone here thinks of Water Martins view on free will and predestination?
what do anyone here thinks of Water Martins view on free will and predestination?
that's Walter Martin sorry
My trouble in understanding this view (not that I'm against it,just hard to get it) is that God is, or at least seems to me, the one who made me the way I am. Then since he creates the world in which I choose Christ because of the given situation, then wouldn't I be just as robotic as some say the Calvinist view is?Also, not anti-Calvinist, trying to learn where I stand.
God wrote a book before time and like all books it has one story that does not change,we don't know what's on the next page but God does and we all will do everything that is written for us to do,pray for understanding.
Eh, I'm not sure if election is individualistic, especially given the passages St. Paul's citations in Romans 9. Either way, the point of Molinism is to have God's predestination based upon foreknowledge (via Middle Knowledge), and thus negate the claim that God is the Author of sin. If God predestines sin without foreknowledge of sin, God then is consequently necessarily the Author of sin.
I don't see why people are saying election is either "electing worlds" OR "electing individuals". It sounds like it's both at the same time.
Aww thanks :) You are a nice person too.
Since Greg represented talking to WLC and confirming "God elects worlds!" I decided to correct this mistaken notion.
"Election, then, is first and foremost a corporate notion: God has chosen for Himself a people, a corporate entity, and it is up to us by our response of faith whether or not we choose to be members of that corporate group destined to salvation."
William Lane Craig states, "So-and this is the crucial point-who is it that God has chosen to save? The answer is: those who have faith in Christ Jesus."
The entire world is not saved, that is universalism. Just those who freely choose to follow Jesus.
WLC has dozens of papers, books, podcasts and email responses that deal specifically with this idea of how Molinism applies to election. The smallest amount of research by Koukl would have produced a very different video.
Don't get me wrong I love Koukl's podcasts,maned his book, "Tactics."
Read more: www.reasonablefaith.org/molinism-and-divine-election#ixzz4FQwOmwMG
Election is NOT, first and foremost a "corporate notion." That is your own personal view of election. Election began with one man: He chose Noah. He Chose Abraham. He chose each individual disciple. He chose me. Happy to make the corretion. You're welcome.
@@thereformedrant9592
God chose Noah because “Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.”
God chose Abraham because “Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”
God chose us because “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”
There is no corporate entity with the people making it up. God chooses individuals, not nameless corporate entities. And even in Molinism, God selected the world in which these individuals believe and reject worlds in which others did believe in preference for this world. Molinism is a philosophical failure, ends in determinism, destroys true freedom, and finally, does NOTHING to rebut the objection to God from the existence of evil. Absolutely nothing.
And if by chance they are not one of the chosen? How is that not giving them a false hope, a false testimony?
Greg, I appreciate the fair characterization of molinism. I think we have to agree to disagree. Because while the view is essentially that God elects worlds, this phrase is a bit misleading. It almost sounds like astrology or some sort of mysticism hocus pocus. But the actual concept, I think, makes a lot of sense out of scripture. But although your critique was brief, it's a thoughtful one that I will consider when I read scripture.
John 1:13
Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
How much clearer would it have to be before you can believe what the word of God is saying to show how dangerous your belief is?
Actually, I think I better picture of the grace that Calvinism presents would be like this - A Boss hands each of his 10 employees a stack of data entry and tells them it must be complete by the end of the day of they will be fired. They sit down at their computers and discover there is a password. They don't know it. Some try desperately to figure it out. The boss comes in and only gives the password to two of them. The rest are fired. How is that not favoritism?
Having the knowledge of good and evil does not mean he created evil, seriously?? and Isa 45:7 does not say he introduced evil to the world, it says he creates it (chooses it, dispatches it, stirs it up). Even if God is responsible for evil and sin in the world, we know he did not cause man to fall because the bible says he does not tempt. It also says there is no darkness in him. Sin is the result of rebellion against God.
Can someone prove the elect is talking about salvific people?
"For Jacob my servant's sake, and *Israel mine elect*, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me." --Isaiah 45:4 (emphasis added)
I can prove that elect is talking about salvific people...Paul refers to the church as "God's elect" and the "elect of God".
Elect means chosen and there are more verses that speak of believers as being chosen of God.
What will you do when you find out God is actually the God of the reformers and He tells you He will not share His glory with another?
It all boils down to one thing,people hate the God of the Bible and they are looking for any loop hole in order to not believe what scripture is actually saying.Many people claim to be Christian,yet they call the God of the Calvinists (who is the God of the Bible) evil.Now how can people claim to believe in the God of the BIBLE and then call Him evil?
"The difference is, I believe God gives grace to the humble(Prov 3:34) and resists the proud(meaning we must decide to humble ourselves to Him)"
You are not humble though,you are still in rebellion to the only God who exists because you hate Him,you hate the thought of God having 100% control over your life and especially salvation and in your rebellion you choose an idol that you are more comfortable with,God will not share His Glory with another.
Hi Tim :)
Let me say,I do sympathies with you,cus it's a hard thing to come to the realization that most everything you know about the scriptures and the gospel is wrong.I was an Arminian for 14 yrs until I had my shoulder replaced and had plenty of time to study,I prayed for wisdom and understanding and was first shocked to find that scriptures didn't match with the sappy god I had been taught by men.I was angry with my past preachers and myself for not being diligent in my studies.
I've never heard WLC say that Molinism deals with election in that God elects worlds and not individuals. But Greg says he checked with him on this, so I'll assume he's correct. If this is what WLC believes, he doesn't speak for Molinism in general, but only his brand of it. I highly recommend Kenneth Keathley's book "Salvation and Sovereignty". I think Greg could actually get on board with that. It uses election to speak about individuals, apparently unlike WLC. That book shows that Molinism solves a great many theological problems and mysteries.
+Deak2112 Craig would rightly point out that the election of worlds *entails* the election of individuals, so it's open to the Molinist which one he or she chooses to emphasize. Koukl gets a lot wrong here. Confusing would and might counterfactuals, etc. See the blog post I linked above.
"Yes, the Father knew before hand that man would fall and need a savior and that the only way to save him was through his Son. He decided we were worth it."
He didn't just know it,He set it up this way,He authored it in His eternal book.Nothing comes to pass unless God has ordained it.God can stop all sin if that was His plan,He shows us many examples of this in scripture.So if God can stop any and all sin whenever He chooses and doesn't, then this means all sin has a purpose.
Who causes man to sin? Man? Or God?
No one is saying that Jesus failed. He accomplished his work on the cross. Just because some reject the truth doesn't make it any less true. The bible never says that every person is saved (universalism), it says that through faith by grace it is available to all. Those who accept it are taken out of the world (chosen) and are in Christ. The gift is not flawed simply because someone refuses to accept it.
The Greek word for draw means to drag.When a bow is DRAWN or a bucket of water from a well is drawn,it means all resistance is overcome.Have U ever heard of someone whispering to water to get in the bucket and raise itself to the top?Does one pull a bow string back or speak to it softly?All of God's sheep are compelled to come,again this means one is imposing His will on another.I know of no Christian that hates God for causing them to believe,they are all very thankful God loves them that much.
Would you consider yourself to be a Calvinist?
It God is already giving 100% effort trying to save everyone already,why would you ever pray for anyone?Do you think your prayers will make Him work 110%,do you give Him more power when you pray for the lost?
2 Thess 3:2 and that we may be delivered from wicked and evil men. For not all have faith.
The different measures of faith is only for believers,check it out.
I have listened to (and read Piper)both of those men, whom I respect in many ways. I do not agree with them on this point. I listen to quite a few other reformists (Tim Keller is a fav). I understand what both sides believe. I completely agree with you about having scripture contradict itself, which is why I can't buy reformed theology. It not only contradicts scripture but glaringly contradicts God's complete character.
Arms believe God gives everyone the same amount of Faith and they believe because they are better in some way,either more spiritual,smarter,more holy or something else,while those who go to Hell do so even having the same faith.So what made you believe while billions of others don't? How can you secure your own salvation when scripture tells us that salvation is NOT BY MAN'S FREE WILL OR HE WHO WORKS FOR IT? If scripture says it's not according to one's free will,how did you choose Jesus?
The Reformer took a very strong view of God's sovereignty. Luis De Molina wanted to maintain this strong view of sovereignty, but not at the expense of man's free will. 1000s of scriptures require man to have freewill in order to respond to the scriptural command. Further Luis did not think that there was any hermeneutical justification for inserting (eisegesis), "The Elect," in passages like John 1:12, John 3:16, 2 Peter 3:9,10.
Molinism is one way of accounting for the mans' apparent libertarian free will that does make him, not God, responsible for sin. It is philosophical in nature as were most of the church councils when deciding on the nature of the trinity, or Jesus. Molinism could turn out to be false but not for the reasons Greg gives. Calvinism (5-point) seems incoherent and requires exigesis of many scriptures, an account of election and predestination that doesn't seem consistent with God's nature or his teaching (which assumes we have the freedom to choose to follow it).
You don't have to shout at me (just makes you sound like those heretics on tv). I don't believe God is out there begging people to come to him. Jesus is drawing them gently (because of the cross).
Which is a better picture of love - Jesus, by his sacrifice, telling you the Father loves you and bidding you come to him or the Father programming you to come to him (you have no choice in the matter)? Which is more relational? Which makes more sense?
Thanks I found to books look helpful too
God's Greater Glory: The Exalted God Of Scripture And The Christian Faith - Bruce A. Ware
Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach - Kenneth Keathley
If you offer me a gift of a million dollars and I refuse that gift, does that mean the money is then worthless? No. It's still worth a million dollars. If I accept that money from you, does that mean I somehow earned that money? No. God offers salvation to all and it is effective only to those who accept it. That doesn't mean they did something to earn it and if they reject it that doesn't make it worthless.If God did not offer salvation to us, no one would be saved because they can't earn it.
"Why would God create a world in which people are forced to accept Him?"
God never forces anyone to accept Him. He changes mans will and natural enmity towards Him through regeneration or the new birth.
If Jesus told you right now that He never knew you what would you say? Would you say,"but Lord I chose you when I didn't have to,I could have told you to get lost,but I CHOSE YOU by my free will''?This would mean that you believed you were saved,not by God's choice,but by something you did and everyone who hears those words are declaring what they did too.We who know Christ could only say"but LORD,I only believe because the Father made me born again so I could believe".No one says that though
Why can't it be that election and predestination is God choosing to save those who do bend their knee and prepare them for glory. He can do this before they're saved because he knows they will surrender. Wouldn't that harmonize better with the way the Bible presents salvation as an ultimatum?
I hold to classical theism, which is perhaps best articulated by St Thomas Aquinas. For classical theism, God is outside of time and space, and therefore has fore knowledge of all of our free choices without compromising this freedom. Infact, it is a metaphor to speak of God's FORE knowledge, because taken literally this suggests that God is in the present looking into the future; but that would be misleading. Past, present and future (from our perspective) are eternally present to Him
This is a late reply, but I feel compelled to respond.
What you have asserted is false. Molinism has been appealing to both Calvinists and Arminians. See Kenneth Keathley of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He was partial to the Reformed but then found that the doctrine of middle knowledge helped regardless of what side of fence you fell on (see his book: Salvation and Sovereignty). Unbalanced arminians? Couldn't it just be that all Christians trying to form our theological pictures?
I'm not saying mans will comes before God. It would be like this.
1. God CHOOSES to give all men common grace which includes the ability to surrender to Him.
2. Some surrender to God's grace.
3. God CHOOSES to save those who do in real time.
(pre step 1) God foresees this happening and therefor has already decided to save them when the time comes and has elected and predestined them to glory.
Interested to hear what you thing Greg.
No hypercalvinist haters please.
Sorry for the 3 comments.
Middle knowledge is the knowledge of Would-Counterfactuals of creaturly freedom, not might-counterfactuals! It is the knowledge of what any free creature Would do if placed in a situation or what Would result from any free action. Greg seems to misunderstand, greatly, what middle knowledge does scripturally (it makes a world of difference)! For starters he seems to miss how it solves the tension between supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism by consistently maintaining a view of permissive sovereignty such that most infralapsarians attempt (obviously this is to eliminate the possibility of God being the author of sin). Molinists are very much not Arminian in persuasion lol! In fact, most Molinists hold to many tenets of Tulip but disagree with the corollaries and thus found a consistent way to include creaturely freedom and responsibility.
If I were anyone looking into this, I would suggest reading Salvation and Sovereignty by Kenneth Keathly for a scriptural introduction and a look at common implications, followed by Divine Providence by Thomas Flint for a philosophical breakdown. A lot of people are very confused and guarded who critique Molinism, so be aware of that!
For the record, I lean more towards power theism than Molinism but it sure is a lot more consistent than five point Calvinism.
No offense to Greg but I hope that whoever watches this finds other sources!
" if I'm saved I can't resist the truth and if I'm not then there's nothing I can do about it since God determined what I would believe regardless of my will. "
This is true,but you must understand God uses means,He uses His word and others to give a reason why they believe and why you should believe according to the scriptures,Acts 13:48 ,,, and all who were CHOSEN 4 eternal life believed,NOT all who believed were chosen 4 eternal life.JN 10:26 but U do not believe because you are not my sheep
Luis de Molina, Kenneth Keathley and William Lane Craig play a game of poker together.
Who's the dealer?
Why did God choose you and not Hitler? What do the scriptures say?
Molinism is an interesting position.
I believe Jesus when he says -"Whosoever therefore shall confess [testify of] Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven”(Mt 10:32).I believe the bible when it says - "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.(1 John 2:2).
You never answered before,Why do you think God created people to only sin and go to Hell when He didn't have to?He could have either made them like the sheep or cancelled their births and no one would know the difference and please don't say He only made people with a potential to do evil because nothing is potential from God's point of view,He knows exactly what people will do and how they will end up before He ever makes them.I know why He did it,but do you have an answer for it?
Have you never read the parable of the wheat and tares?Tares are goats and the servants wanted to pull them up as soon as they sprouted,so the angels must know something we don't know.The tares can never become wheat or wheat tare.They look just alike at first,but the Master said let them grow with the wheat until they mature and then bundle and burn them.The tares are who God made for destruction to show the wheat what HE saved them from,so again,God knowingly and freely made them to burn.
Titus 3:5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done(believed), but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,
I know you disagree with this because you think you righteously believed by some manmade faith that you had within you,but those who are dead in sins cannot believe.We don't believe until we are first made alive by God(new birth),with Christ,only then can & will one believe, never b4 or else you could boast.
Don't you think that God made the world that would generate the most people who would accept Him? "The most people" is not the same as "most people", meaning the majority.
ua-cam.com/video/tZwywSLnJK4/v-deo.html WLC lays out that it is actually mainly about individuals 54:00-1:04:00.
Well it really wouldn't matter what I say because according to the God of the reformers if I'm saved I can't resist the truth and if I'm not then there's nothing I can do about it since God determined what I would believe regardless of my will. It's a pointless question. All I know for sure is that in the end, every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.
He is the teacher of those who have been regenerated,not everyone.If you deny what scripture teaches in order to hold on to man's tradition you are in sin at the very least or lost at the very worst.The Holy Spirit does not proclaim a Jesus who loves and is trying but failing to save every individual and then teach that He will save every person that He died for,these are two exclusive,contrary gospels,so one is false,care to guess which one is false?
So Jesus only died for the elect. He is only the propitiation for the elect and not the whole world? Is that what you are saying?
You forgot the part that even God's elect are sinners and can't come to Christ until God gives them to Christ.The Bible is showing all men they are totally helpless to save themselves,that it is impossible for man to save Himself and that if one repents and believes it is because God made HIM BORN AGAIN FIRST so that he can.This is the Gospel and all who believe it are God's elect,all who reject are the goats.
God was not forced to Create our universe or any creature in it,yet before time He wrote His book ,it contains everyone who ever will live and every event that ever will happen until the very end.Before He created He decided who would be sheep and who would be goats in His book and then He created locking in the future,just like after a author writing a book,once it's finished the book never changes.So yes,God did create people with no hope of Heaven,we just don't know who they are.
So you are saying that Jesus will forcibly draw all men to himself? I'm not going to haggle over what it means to be drawn. I don't believe God forces anyone to do anything but perhaps I'm wrong. You win.
* why or how can God be grieved or blessed by mans actions if he pre-wrote everything they would do in the first place? Why would God require obedience and belief if it's impossible? That makes no sense at all. Accepting a gift is not a work. The receiver doesn't get credit for the gift, the giver does! If I accept a gift from you does that mean I earned that gift from you? Of course not...(cont. in next post)
Yes, I have read Romans a whole bunch of times lately. You have to look at the entire book of Romans to get the big picture actually. If you read past Rom 9:22-23 and read 30-33 you will see that Paul is talking about unbelief, not some special kind of election. We are chosen "in Christ" because he was chosen. I really don't want to rattle your cage. We can agree to disagree. May the Lord bless and keep you.
That doesn't change the fact that you are presenting a false hope to some who are not chosen. If you are going to be honest, you can't tell someone that God loves them and that Jesus died for them. You have to say God maybe loves them and that Jesus may have died for them.
You have to reject the Calvinist concept of Total Depravity for Molinism to even be logically possible-something I can't find any scriptural justification for doing.
As I see it, Molinism is the result of trying to interpret Scripture with philosophy, rather than allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture.
Personally, I lean towards Calvinism because of a similar reason which you pointed out, humans being depraved. That is a nature with a disposition opposed to God, which only God can reverse. But I'm not sure of what you mean by "Allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture?" If I am understanding what you mean by such a claim then I take it to mean something like the following; In order to understand scripture one ought to begin by understand scripture via understanding the language and contextual relevance of the langauge as the means of interpreting scripture therefore bringing about an understanding of scripture. If this is so then I would find it to be strange how you're not acknowledging the fact that with such an exegetical practice or belief, you yourself would be using logic, as your seeking to understand scripture, as the supreme authority to judge the syntaxic order of langauge and therefore by default bringing about your own understanding of sciptural semantics.. I hope that wasn't to much but I thought it would be necessary to write this to make clear the Craig is just doing the same thing, only he understands and seeks to understand to form of logic he uses to justify his claims. This is not to say he is correct.
+BehaviorModification "You have to reject the Calvinist concept of Total Depravity for Molinism to even be logically possible"
Why think a thing like that? Only if you assume that man does not have LFW and thus cannot respond to God's call/offer of salvation (something akin to prevenient grace), but this is entirely question begging. It requires argument, not assumption.
"As I see it, Molinism is the result of trying to interpret Scripture with philosophy, rather than allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture."
Philosophy, simply defined, just means 'reasoning' and one literally cannot avoid the reasoning process, regardless of their soteriology. Molinism is an attempt to understand how man can be free (in a libertarian sense) and God can maintain sovereignty in light of this freedom that He has given us. I do not think it makes any sense biblically, theologically, or philosophically to suggest that God unilaterally selects certain persons to be damned for all eternity, which Calvinism entails.
Have you never heard of the church councils?
These were dominated by philosophy. Monophysitism vs dyophysitism. Hypostatic union and the nature of Jesus are filled with philosophical arguments, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, and Eutychianism all challenged the view that the one person of Christ included a human and divine nature. They are determined to be heresies by philosophical arguments.
But it is fair to say that most of the "How" questions are not answered in scripture. And how God maintains his sovereignty and allows libertarian free will (if we are in fact free) is not disclosed.
How he is all-loving and yet creates creature who he predestined to never know him and elected to damnation seems to be an easier claim to deal with on scripture than molinism. Paul Helm and Greg, and Calvin for that matter, as great as they are end up equivocating on the term "free will," and it makes passages like John 1:12, 3:16, 2Peter 3:9 incoherent unless you insert "the elect," into them.
It actually means that God holds his creation to a higher standard then himself."
1 Kings 22: 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into
attacking Ramoth Gilead ...
1 Kings22 ;20“One suggested this, and another that. 21 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’
22 “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked.
‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets, he said.
U will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.
@EverydayRevival all molinists are arminians only to a calvinist. just because you see theology as binary doesnt make it that way. mind you, i myself have strong calvinist tendencies, but in years and years of studying calvinism, there's never been one calvinist to be able to demonstrate sola scriptura that god's sovereignty means determinism. additionally, calvinists always say god being a "great responder" takes away from his glory. on the contrary...
uuuuh...i cant even believe im taking issue with something koukl says...but molinism is wholly seperate and distinct from arminianism.
."I believe God gives everyone a measure of faith."
This is only the elect or the sheep that are given a measure of faith,always look at the beginning of the book you are reading to see who's being spoken to.
2 Thess 3:2 and that we may be delivered from wicked and evil men. For not all have faith.
So this one verse blows Arminianism out of the water,cuz if all men don't have faith,then all men can't believe,BTW,all men means Gentiles and Jews NOT every individual who ever lived,.
@EverydayRevival any calvinist that acts like there's no case for free will in the bible has already shown their not painful biased on the issue. that's completely not the case. additionally, there's no way to move from the things the bible DOES say about god's sovereignty to the things calvinists say it clearly and conclusively says. i say this sorta thing to arminians who say there's no biblical case for calvinistic views also. the fact is both views ARE biblical, hence the truth is both.
@EverydayRevival any calvinist that acts like there's no case for free will in the bible has already shown their painfully biased on the issue. that's completely not the case. additionally, there's no way to move from the things the bible DOES say about god's sovereignty to the things calvinists say it clearly and conclusively says. i say this sorta thing to arminians who say there's no biblical case for calvinistic views also. the fact is both views ARE biblical, hence the truth is both.
What do all those people in the world do that are not theologians? Those who are not intellectually at the same level as they are? How can they every hope to understand scripture? I sure hope the bible is correct when it says that the Holy Spirit is our teacher.
PS 139:16 You saw me before I was born. Every day of my life was recorded in your book. Every moment was laid out before a single day had passed.
Can you comprehend what this means for every human who ever lived or ever will live?Every persons life already exists in God's book,there is no add libbing,this is why Peter could NOT not deny Jesus even with the knowledge Christ had given him,because it had already been written by God to be part of Peter's life.Free will doesn't exist.
Romans 10:1-3...
Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.
For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God.
This is the same problem with many Arminians who have been corrected in their belief but refuse correction,they ,like the Jews,hold to man made doctrines.
I agree that once God says something he doesn't change it. I have a serious problem with the idea of predestination that reformed theology presents because it does not portray God's love in the way that the bible does. To say we can't understand God's love is hogwash. The bible is very clear as to what God's love is. God would not purposely write a story involving evil (which would make him the author of evil). Evil is a by product of free will. The corruption of God's perfect goodness.
All I can say is if you have been corrected by scripture and you still refuse to believe in your heart,then you have not been regenerated yet,you still are belieeving in the god of the humanists,you just have named him Jesus,that makes him no different that the J.W,,Roman Cath.,mormon,or Muslim jesus.
No matter how you slice or dice it, I know that you're saying that God's grace is irrisistable to the elect. If that's the case, no one has a choice in the matter whether they choose to love God or not. That would pretty much negate the majority of what the bible says about believing. If that's true, then no matter how hard I try to find truth and love and serve God it won't matter one single bit if I'm not chosen. So I'm not sure why you're wasting your time on me.
Greg Koukl is a great guy, but his denial of Molinism is based on semantics. A "possible world" is the set of state of affairs containing individuals. For more readings on Molinism, see the following:
"The Only Wise God" -Bill Craig
"Divine Providence" -Thomas Flint
"God, Freedom, and Evil" -Alvin Plantinga
"Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom" -Craig
"The Problem of Divine Foreknowledge and Future Contingents From Aristotle to Suarez" -Craig
"The Nature of God" -Edward Wierenga
Whose idea was it for Satan to bring so much trouble on Job?God or Satan?
Sin is the result of rebellion against God. In order for someone to rebel, they must have the free will to do so or it's not rebellion. you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong) - God wrote out his entire plan before he created anything. This plan included evil and destruction and the testing, torture and murder of his Son soley so that he could bring more glory (then he had before thru out eternity) to himself. If that doesn't sound crazy then I don't know what does.
First of all, Jesus finished the work and he is the one who said, "If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me."God gave man dominion over the earth but man lost it (prince of world is satan). That authority has been restored through Christ and only those who are in him have access to it. God uses men to accomplish his work here on earth. Prayer is the plug into the power source(God) to bring the light here (we are the lamps). That's why I pray. To bring His Kingdom here.
God's ways aren't man's ways,He created light before the light givers and the plants before the sun,He also called people His sheep before He saves them,so Jesus only died for the sheep,not the goats.
I don't believe in Universalism,I'm saying that God knew exactly who He would save before time ever began and He also knew exactly who He would not save before Creation and that Christ Died for all those He chose to save, the sheep only.
I believe in the Jesus that is consistent with all of scripture, not just some of it. And please, let's get this straight, I am not the one saying that the God presented in Scripture is responsible for evil, you are. I don't believe there is any evil in God or his Son. You do. I believe evil is the result of having the ability to choose to reject God. You believe we have not choice in the matter.
Act 13:48 ....and as many as were chosen for eternal life believed.God chooses them,the Holy SPIRIT RENEWS THEM through the gospel and Jesus paid for them with His own blood,this is how the TRINTY accomplishes salvation,we repent and believe in response to what has been done for us(believers).