Molinism discussion

[DannyM]

Definition of freewill... The choice in several parts of ones life to choose love or hate; selfishness or submission; honor or cheapness; God or Earth; repentance or hardness; maybe a bunch of other nuetral decisions; and decisions which may a side of having both positive and negative(on a goodness/evil spectrum) at the same time in which the bible asks people to pray whan such dilemmas come. How do you guys define it?

Is that definition of free will free from outside influence, prior prejudice, inclination or disposition?

[domokunrox]

No, Danny, I don't have a link to the podcast, but WLC literally said

"I was surprised to find that many of the Calvinist scholars there at Calvin college are Molinists"
What he meant, I dunno.

Free will is very difficult to adequately define.
It depends on you want to analyze to see to what extent is "liberated" and what that means as well.
For example, if I stood up from my chair right now. Do you want to know if I stood up at my own will or if God determined that I would stand at this point in time?

Is the knowledge of my action to stand up a proposition or non propositional action?
Does foreknowing my action of standing mean that it is foreordained?

[wrain62]

Is that definition of free will free from outside influence, prior prejudice, inclination or disposition?

Yes and no.
Although influences play a huge part in our free will our free will is not a slave to them. And even despite these prejudices there exists the ability to choose the things on a goodness-evil spectrum that I put out on the list still exist on one magnitude/level or another which may not be immediatly or ever known to us.

This would be why judgement without love is prone to problems and loving sinners and enemies is the right thing to do. God is the ultimate judge in these matters; the best we can do (according to my philosophy)is to judge state law onto others to our best ability on the basis of order and fairness for the lesser evil and not necessarily as the ultimate moral fairness, and personally judge others independantly according to how the bible says we must. And if I may add the ultimate standard by which God judges according to the purest morals I think are outlined in the 2 commandments Jesus talked about. Other people decribe it differently though.

[DannyM]

For example, if I stood up from my chair right now. Do you want to know if I stood up at my own will or if God determined that I would stand at this point in time?

Is the knowledge of my action to stand up a proposition or non propositional action?
Does foreknowing my action of standing mean that it is foreordained?

It is not necessary to go to these extremes. I believe man is free to make choices without coercion, but he is not free from his own desires; he is not free from his own nature, his own prejudices, his own dispositions. Thus I believe there is no such thing as an unfettered, or libertarian free will.

[wrain62]

1.For example, if I stood up from my chair right now. Do you want to know if I stood up at my own will or if God determined that I would stand at this point in time?

2.Is the knowledge of my action to stand up a proposition or non propositional action?
3.Does foreknowing my action of standing mean that it is foreordained?

1. The two are not mutually exclusive. God could have determined that you stood up on your own free will before it happens. Or another perspective, God could have all the different "routes" preplanned to interact with the world according to his will and your will.

2.I think it depends on whether you yourself make it a propositional action or not according to your mind or choose whether or not to make it a proposition to make it a proposition and so on.

3. Foreordained maybe as an intention but not neccesarily as a reality.

[DannyM]

Is that definition of free will free from outside influence, prior prejudice, inclination or disposition?

Yes and no.
Although influences play a huge part in our free will our free will is not a slave to them. And even despite these prejudices there exists the ability to choose the things on a goodness-evil spectrum that I put out on the list still exist on one magnitude/level or another which may not be immediatly or ever known to us.

This would be why judgement without love is prone to problems and loving sinners and enemies is the right thing to do. God is the ultimate judge in these matters; the best we can do (according to my philosophy)is to judge state law onto others to our best ability on the basis of order and fairness for the lesser evil and not necessarily as the ultimate moral fairness, and personally judge others independantly according to how the bible says we must. And if I may add the ultimate standard by which God judges according to the purest morals I think are outlined in the 2 commandments Jesus talked about. Other people decribe it differently though.

Thanks wrain. Jesus says our will is a slave to sin. So yes, our will is a slave to the influences of sin.

But I agree that man can make choices, is responsible for his actions, etc.

What I think is clear from the bible is that man needs his will to be 'liberated' in order to come to God. Once the Spirit begins to work in the man, his will really does obtain a kind of freedom it never had.

[DannyM]

Sorry for the derailment, B.W. I think this thread is an important thread, and I'm looking forward to the discussion on Molinism. I think people should just get down to the discussion now, since we might be in danger of squabbling over definitions. We can always ask for clarification on definitions as the thread goes on, but anyone who wants to fire away on the subject of Molinism ought to go ahead, I think, if B.W.'s happy with that.

[B. W.]

A fair definition that sums up Free Will quoted from the Internet Philosophy Encyclopedia would be the following:

Free Will: the ability to make autonomous decisions. Apply this to a biblical standard this would involve Gen 1:26 fashioned in the image and likeness of God further defined as autonomous decisions concerning exercising dominion on the earth, autonomous decisions involving taking care of families /social exchanges (Gen 1:28), autonomous decisions involving tending to and taking care of things (Gen 2:15), autonomous decisions to ascribe names/decipher meaning about things (Gen 2:19), and the autonomous decision involved in obeying God or not (Gen 2:16-17) all sanctioned and blessed by God himself (Gen 1:28). God reneges-not any of his promises, or word, because he blessed- conferred autonomous decision making in these areas on humanity with a purposeful intent in doing so.

Note: We all know what Gen 1:26 means and in case a person does not, this verse does not mean human beings are an exact duplicate of God. We are not gods, nor shall we ever be. The image and likeness is defined in the text through these chapters in Genesis as described and blessed by God: the ability to make autonomous decisions concerning exercising dominion, family matters (social exchanges), tending too and taking care of things, naming (decipher) things, obey God or not, all sanctioned / blessed by God himself.

The ability of having free will, the ability to autonomously make decisions, also has limitations. The limitations are discussed in the article I posted on page one. So If a deterministic person attempts to overwhelm the conversation with deterministic propaganda, a molinist has at his/her disposal though that article to thwart common objections to free will posed by determinist.

Free will was conferred on man by God to make autonomous decisions concerning exercising dominion properly within certain limits, autonomous decisions concerning family matters (social exchanges), autonomous decisions concerning tending to and taking care of things, autonomous decisions concerning naming (decipher) things, autonomous decisions concerning to obey God or not, all sanctioned / blessed by God himself with purposeful intent to reach a good and noble finale.

So Free will is the ability to make autonomous decisions concerning exercising dominion, family matters (social exchanges), tend to and taking care of things, naming (decipher) things, obeying God or not obeying, all sanctioned / blessed by God himself with purposeful intent to reach a good and noble finale. Please note, there are self evident limits to exercising autonomous decisions concerning these matters that both sides agree and recognize. To continue to haggle to gain the upper hand would be pointless discussing self evident limitations such as man cannot fly unless he builds an airplane, man cannot run through a brick wall in the flesh alone, man cannot save himself, man due to the fall cannot obey God with complete obedience, etc…

Fact is God blessed humanity with an ability to make autonomous decisions regarding the affairs of our mortal life. Let’s please move on…

Therefore

Now, what does the word itself ‘Decree’ mean – not the Westminster Shorter Catechism definition of decree, but the word ‘decrees’ itself means what?

…“decrees” itself -- what does this word mean?

Westminster Shorter Catechism "The decrees…." (Hodge, Charles; Gross, Edward N. Ed.; "SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY"; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988, p 535)

We need to understand what Westminster Catechism is actually saying. Is the definition of decree being changed to mean something else or is it used to retain something of its original meaning?
-
-
-

[August]

Are we going to talk about free will or Molinism here?

[RickD]

Are we going to talk about free will or Molinism here?

Isn't reconciling God's sovereignty, and man's free will, what Molinism attempts to do? I'm new to this Molinism thing, but don't we have to talk about free will, if we talk about Molinism?

[wrain62]

Are we going to talk about free will or Molinism here?

Isn't reconciling God's sovereignty, and man's free will, what Molinism attempts to do? I'm new to this Molinism thing, but don't we have to talk about free will, if we talk about Molinism?

When I looked at the Molinism article I thought the same.

[August]

Are we going to talk about free will or Molinism here?

Isn't reconciling God's sovereignty, and man's free will, what Molinism attempts to do? I'm new to this Molinism thing, but don't we have to talk about free will, if we talk about Molinism?

No, not man's free will, man's responsibility. That is the tension that needs to be resolved.

[B. W.]

To clarify.:

Molinism, is a religious doctrine which attempts to reconcile the providence of God with human free will... In basic terms, Molinists hold that in addition to knowing everything that does or will happen, God also knows what His creature would freely choose if placed in any circumstance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molinism

Molinism deals with the subject of free will and God's sovereignty so both Free Will and the word ‘Decree’ are terms needed to examine molinsim fairly.

I think we covered Free Will enough for now and can use what we have to fall back on as things are likely to develop. The reason for going slow and defining terms is so that we can have a standard by which people can understand each other and explore this subject, rationally, without preconceived suppositions imposing conjecture on what molinism means.

I think the definition of free will posed helps bring about molinism’s free will concpt on a biblical footing.

Please not that molinism is a system of reason that allows for growth and development of themes/scripture found in the bible and Craig’s molinism varies from its founder. To say the word Catholic and then add Jesuit into a debate often skews perception of molinism as automatically heretical due to anti-Roman Catholic bigotry and is often spoon fed to listeners so as to poison honest inquiry into the development of molinism as it currently define today..

The founder, the Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina, was a man in his time and influenced by his time. God often uses such influences to bring about a method of inquiry that helps uncover aspects of his Glory more fully to be later refined and built upon later: Much the same manner as Calvinism. A person can do their own research into Luis de Molina concept of molinism and then notice the differences of Craig’s molinism to see this development. I hope to stick with Craig’s development and examine it. The reader can come to their own conclusions at the end.

So before e move own we need to compare what the word itself Decree means according to Calvinism… Now, what does the word itself ‘Decree’ mean – not the Westminster Shorter Catechism definition of decree, but the word ‘decrees’ itself means what?

…“decrees” itself -- what does this word mean?

Westminster Shorter Catechism "The decrees…." (Hodge, Charles; Gross, Edward N. Ed.; "SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY"; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988, p 535)

We need to understand what Westminster Catechism is actually saying. Is the definition of decree being changed to mean something else or is it used to retain something of its original meaning?

Then go from there to examine molinism’s Free will with Decree to see if there are differences or not to man's responsibility...

[RickD]

Are we going to talk about free will or Molinism here?

Isn't reconciling God's sovereignty, and man's free will, what Molinism attempts to do? I'm new to this Molinism thing, but don't we have to talk about free will, if we talk about Molinism?

No, not man's free will, man's responsibility. That is the tension that needs to be resolved.

If you don't want me to participate in this discussion, you could have pm'd me. No need to confuse me out of the discussion.

[wrain62]

Are we going to talk about free will or Molinism here?

Isn't reconciling God's sovereignty, and man's free will, what Molinism attempts to do? I'm new to this Molinism thing, but don't we have to talk about free will, if we talk about Molinism?

No, not man's free will, man's responsibility. That is the tension that needs to be resolved.

Man's resposibility may differ on an indiviual basis. Matthew 25:13-30 tells us of a master who entrusts different amounts of talents based on his judgement of of their ability. There is still a choice between being faithful or lazy, but the magitude of each ones responsibilty was different. I translate this to when a person has better ability and freedom, more is expected out of him than a person who has uncontrollable prior negative influences laid out for him; a choice/resopnsibilty is still entrusted to each person but the expectation of what is to be returned is different for each person.