5

Plantinga is definitely a Calvinist, though most Calvinists would call him an inconsistent one. Reformed teaching plays a very significant, if at-times tangential, role in much of his work. (For example his work on epistemology is known as Reformed Epistemology) He's known for Molinism because of his books God, Freedom & Evil and The Nature of Necessity ...


3

The view of Norman Geisler, who was a Thomistic scholar, is that free will and election are not innately contradictory. Geisler wrote the book "Chosen but Free". He explains that while God's choosing and man's free will seem to be contradictory, philosophically they can't be shown to be so. A key verse for Geisler is 1 Peter 1:1-2 where God's choice is "...


1

God moves a thing according to the nature of thing he moves. So when God gives grace to a man, he gives it to him according to his nature; so God gives grace to a man so that man receives it freely. Also, predestination is in God, and our choices are in us, so they inhere in two different subjects. Also, it is important that God is not one influence and our ...


1

I am not especially Molinist, by either formal declaration or preference. But, as a 3rd party observer, my quick review of wikipedia indicates to me that both options A and B require underlying assumptions that Molin may not have accepted. Both seem to assume that everyone choosing belief in God before they die is a good thing. And they both seem to ...


1

The confusion may arise from the way you've stated the view. A clearer version might be: "If person P experienced circumstances C, she would freely choose to perform action A." This doesn't mean that P must choose A, it means that P will freely choose A. If P were to freely choose not-A, then God would know something different from eternity, namely P ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible