Featured A Middle Knowledge Perspective on Biblical Inspiration

interesting reading, but is he trying to say in long winded terminology and verbage that he rejects God has predetermined the future events akready, so that he cannot be fully sovereign and allow for the human element at all?

 

All of that could very well be true, but isn't it interesting that 2 far smarterthan him persons chose to NOT use philosophy to convey spiritual truths, but used word of God itself? jesus/paul?

And isn't he still trying to rationalize that he has problems with trying to accept and see God being fully sovereign, and man has real and full free will, that he cannot accept that is a faulty premise?

 

Middle knowlwgde is liberal heresy which is not much better than open theism and it is heresy.

 

Good gravy...QF, this is a great post. Thanks!

 

The article is hogwash. Craig is a Darwinist. To be consistent, if one sees Genesis through naturalistic goggles, he can't escape the same conclusions on the subject of inspiration. It is simply an endeavor to give human will a place on the Throne. Paul was a prophet, according to Craig, because at heart he was a better man than one who is not a prophet.

But despite Craig's distaste for anything that might be a violent overthrow of the will and mind of man, Paul's conversion was anything but natural. Was nothing gradual nor gentle. It was the violent overthrow of a devil hell bent on the destruction of Christ and Christianity, then in an instant, and quite against Paul's will, God changed him.

 

:laugh::laugh: Now who's the cloistered one, using a term to describe sexual arousal for consternation?

 

Pure display of ignorance...

 

Nice try. Look up the word faggot. Now use it when speaking of a bundle of sticks in casual conversation.

 

Greater ignorance is when Christians try to support to the myth of real free will, and that God cannot be sovereign if that means we don't still have real free will!

 

Does he hold that God either cannot predict/know fully the future, or that God cannot fix and determine it from happening?

 

Is that another way, Middle Knowledge, of trying to support the concept that God is not really all knowing in the tradirional meaning of that term?

 

A common tactic of the intellectually weak, when confronted by an argument they cannot neither master nor overcome, is to bring down the level of conversation to the mundane and boorish.

Clear examples of this here.

 

The problem is that we have 2 with MUCH greater IQfactors to quote here who disagree with "Middle Knowledge" Jesus and Paul!

Wonder if paul would respond to this concept by:
i 8See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. 9For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,…
Col 2:* Nasv