Featured A Middle Knowledge Perspective on Biblical Inspiration

God election precedes and causes us to accept for jesus as lord and saviour, so in the end, salvation based upon the free will of ONE party, that of God!

And scriptures use both divine and human element, but the human aspect has the Spirit Himself overseeing them to make sure final product was/is perfect, and that God predictions always came true, for God determined that would occur...

 

Thanks for posting this QF. Very thought provoking and helps me to understand a possible way to reconcile human's contribution to God's word. Excellent.

 

In the OP link William Lane Craig writes:

Among the first thoughts that entered my mind on reading this was that of a "scientist using cheese to direct a rodent through a maze." It seems to me that Lane is saying God manipulates man to achieve His purpose and ascribes this to some esoteric philosophy called Molinism or "middle knowledge". And then there are those on this Forum who use the terms "robots" and "determinism" to pejoratively identify Calvinists. So, there is a difference between a robot and a trained rodent?????? [At this point I will repeat for perhaps the 100th time that I am not a Calvinist. Calvin held to many doctrines I reject.]

I found the following remarks by Craig responding to a question that I find interesting:

The above quota from the Westminister Convfession is also in the 1689 London Confession [Chapter 3] and in somewhat different phraseology in the 1644 Baptist Confession. I see no "hard determinism" or "robots" in the quote from the Westminister Confession. Neither do I see the need to invent something called "middle knowledge" in an attempt to explain that which is beyond man's comprehension. I have said before that if I could understand God He would not be God. I firmly believe in the Doctrines of Grace but it would be foolish of me to try to understand why God chooses some to salvation in Jesus Christ and leaves the rest to the fate we all deserve. I accept that truth because I believe the Bible teaches that truth.

 

interesting that mnay want to hold to a view with little biblical support, notion of libertine free will for man, yet balked at the biblcal evidence that in the fall of adam, we became restictred by our now fallen natures!

 

is Middle knowledge an attempt to have God stay soveregn, and yet allow for full free will of man? that is my understanding of it, am I correct in that assumption?

 

Which means you must accept that we will be saved if among the elect, regardless of our sinful mindset, and that some are "elected" to not be saved. LUDICROUS!! That is not the God of the Bible.

I'm not sure why you keep going back to the subject of Scripture, other than it is discussed in the first few paragraphs of the article, but is not truly germane to the entire discussion of man's responsibility in light of God's sovereignty -- more proof you haven't read Craig's posting and therefore should not be commenting on it.

 

God intended that the Cross of Christ would save and reddem thsoe whom it was intended for, not ALL sinners, but for some!

that IS the Gospel of the bible, from the God of the bible!

And the scriptures themselves explain the divine and human interaction pretty well, as God intended and oversaw all that was recorded down, to make sure all was perfect in all attested to!

 

Sorry, but you can't even come close to proving that biblically.

No, it is the invention of hyper-Calvinists who would feel "superior" for being among the elect.

Indeed they do -- but not the way you and other Calvinists who believe as you do understand them.

 

You err in failing to see the effects of the fall of adam, how His sin was imputed to us by God, and that the Cross was meant and intended to save those whom God choose to save!

 

How, exactly? I acknowledge that without God's empowerment, no man can come to Christ on His own. Where we differ is in believing that, through His empowerment, man declares God's truth. You believe that, even in that, man has no choice. He's eventually going to declare that truth, provided he is among the elect. That's bogus.

Righteousness, not sin, is imputed by God to man. Sin is inherited from our father, Adam. Righteousness is imputed by the Second Adam, Jesus Christ.

I don't believe God is capricious or impulsive that He would choose some to be created for hell, and Romans 9:22 is no basis for you to believe such a flatly false teaching.

 

there are ONLY 2 groups of people on earth, those found by God as being in adam die to their physical births, and those found by God when spiritual reborn in Christ!

God is NOT choosing to send any sinners to hell, as he is ONLY choosing to save out from that group those whom he intended to save by the Cross, the remainder are passed over by him, and he allows them their 'free will choice!"

 

Question though is how can an absolute sovereign God even allow for real and full free will of any created being?

 

An intention is not a choice? That's what's wrong with the exacting Calvinist belief in limited atonement. It simply is not biblical. Using different words to say the same thing doesn't change it's incorrectness.

 

With statements and questions like these, QF, he keeps proving he either hasn't read the linked article, or refuses to try to understand it. :BangHead:

Yeshua, how can we have a discussion with you if you won't even make a minimal effort to look outside your box and see what's being said?

 

James White just reviewed a Craig interview. This might be helpful for those interested.

About 35 minutes in:

http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.p...premacy-and-molinism-on-todays-dividing-line/

 

Nothing.

You are being unbiblical to say that.

It's politically incorrect --that's for sure.

Did Christ die to save every single person on the face of the earth --past present and future? Obviously not.

Did He die to save no one? Of course not.

Did He die for some --namely His elect.? Indubitably!