I have missed Dr. Keathley. As I began, I had to leave the room. Here is the beginning. I have found out that they are doing podcast for this at lifeways website.
Sovereingty and permission as they relate to predestination.
Similarities of infralapsarian Calvinism and Molinism
Molinism–affirming divine sovereignty with genuine permission.
Olson–an Arminian rejects Molinism because it is to Calvinistic.
Supralapsarianism–the concept of permission rejected. Calvin held to double reprobation. The key to supralapsarianism is reprobation and damnation. God does not reject the reprobate because he is a sinner, but the sinner becomes a reprobate because he rejected God. Grace plays no part in the supralapsarian decree–Bruce Ware.
Most Reformed people follow the infralapsarian view.
There is a sweet lady, named Janet, sitting beside me taking meticulous notes in a word document. She just gave me the entire outline up to Dr. Welty. Below is the entie outline of Dr. Keathley.
+ Ken Keathley – A Molinist View of Election
- Two essential doctrines: sovereignty and permission (given to angels and humans) our freedom is a derived freedom
- Permission -
- Islam – Divine sovereignty taken to the extreme
- Process theology – permission taken to the extreme
- Biblical truth – God sovereignty rules over people who he allows a permission
- The similarities of infralapsarian Calvinism and Molinism
- Question of the reprobate – God’s decision based on our rejection or His choice
- Superlapsarians – double predestination prior to creation
- Infralapsarians God first allowed to permit the fall, then decided to choose some to be saved
- Molinism – high view of sovereignty with a robust understanding of permission
- Molin – 16th century Jesuit priest
- Calvin’s Supralapsarianism: The Concept of permission rejected
o Reprobation – God’s rejection of an individual
§ The reprobate becomes a sinner because he rejects God
o Damnation – God’s punishment of the individual who is reprobate
o Election & reprobation have equal
o Grace plays no part in the initial double decree
§ Grace does not enter the picture until God decides save the elect from the fall
- Infralapsarianism: the attempt to blend Calvinism & permission
o Dort – says that any attempt to lay sin at God’s feet is blasphemy
o Refuses double predestination
o Some aspects of God’s will with regard to evil etc. are permissive
o Election is unconditional but reprobation is conditional
- Problems with the Infralapsarianism position
o It is very difficult to reconcile permission with the traditional Reformed view of sovereignty
o The infralapsarian system is rationally inconsistent
o The concept of permission doesn’t solve anything is reprobation is still the result of “God’s good pleasure”
- Conclusions among Calvinists concerning infralapsarianism
o Many supra-Calvinists dismiss the infra as incipient Arminianism
o Some Calvinist despair of enterprise completely
o Many Calvinists appeal to mystery
o But there is difference between mystery and contradiction
- Molinism: affirming both sovereignty & permission
o 2 affirmation of Molinism: Meticulous sovereignty and libertarian free will
o God controls all things primarily by his omniscience but is not the determinative of all things
o 3 moments in Molinism
§ Counterfactual: a statement contrary to fact which still yet has truth content
§ Possible worlds: complex scenarios made up of counterfactuals
§ Natural knowledge – God knows everything that can happen, free knowledge – God sovereignly chooses what will happen to make His will , middle knowledge – God sees all the scenarios that can happen as the result of man’s free will
- Advantages of the Molinist Approach
o Molinism affirms the genuine desire on the part of God for al to be saved in a way that is problematic for Calvinism
o Provides a better model for understanding how it is simultaneously true that God’s decree if election is unconditional while his rejection of the unbeliever is conditional
§ Why is the reprobate reprobate? – because God wills it (i.e. wills the world where this can occur), although it is because of the reprobate’s choice
o In the Molinist system, unlike Arminianism, God is the author of salvation who actively elects certain one
o Molinism has a more robust and scriptural understanding of the role God’s foreknowledge plays in election that does either Calvinism or Arminianism
o Molinism provides a better model for understanding the biblical divine sovereignty and human responsibility
o Molinism places mystery where it should be located, i.e. in God’s infinite attributes rather than His character
o Molinism has a valid concept of permission that does not have to resort to special pleading
- Molinism is a defense not a theodicy (an attempt to explain why God created the world as He did)
- Molinism presents a forceful affirmation of both sovereignty and permission
