The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Does Anyone Have a Definition for "Molinism"?

Evangelical Universalism
#1

In the discussion over how the irreconcilable differences between Calvinism and Arminianism points to the only logical answer as UR I have had a number of folks say that they are “Molinists.” I have researched it and find it difficult to define, or at least to define for your average believer who is looking for a third option. Apparently William Lane Craig is the most well known Molinist.

BTW it was interesting to note that Alvin Plantinga is/was a Molinist after seeing his testimony here regarding his openness to UR. evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=2745&p=42578&hilit=alvin+plantinga#p42578 Do you think it is a philosophical “bridge” to UR?

Anyone familiar with Molinism who could give a definition that would satisfy its proponents as being an accurate understanding of it?

#2

just had a look, probably didn’t find anything you haven’t already seen, but there’s this bit about God knowing what circumstance would cause a person to choose something freely. so God actualises that circumstance and thus the person freely chooses what God wants him to.

frankly, i don’t see how this truly preserves free will. rather, it sounds like manipulation (albeit for the good of the subject). but one thing it definitely does do is argue for universal salvation, as if God wants everyone to choose Him, and He knows what circumstances would cause them to choose Him, then He WILL actualise those circumstances for all.
ergo, everyone is saved. albeit, with a fair amount of manipulation.

#3

Here’s what a Molinist wrote recently:

? ? ?

I think his days are numbered.

#4

yeah, that doesn’t seem to be “free will”, really?!

i dunno…i think there are obvious contradictory issues if we have a measure of free will, and i’ve not figured it out yet either, but this sounds like determinism to me…perhaps with just a slightly modified (to sound more friendly) mechanic behind it. but it still isn’t free.

#5

I can’t say I’m very familiar with it either, but I think my church’s teachings fit. They teach that God wants all people to be saved and that God chooses the elect for salvation, and they also teach that Man chooses salvation by free will. They don’t know how this works (“it’s a mystery”), but they believe these principles are clearly taught in scripture and cannot be denied just because we can’t make sense of them.

My opinion is that any “mystery” is removed simply by removing the “death deadline” for salvation. And also by realising that “free will” is merely a range of limited choices within a set of circumstances over which we have little or no control.

Sonia

#6

that sounds about right, though i personally deny the elect doctrine. i think that has poisoned people for too long.
election only works if EVERYONE is elected.

#7

Sorry to introduce a note of sheer levity, but I am suddenly reminded of Yul Brynner’s brilliant response to Steve McQueen in The Magnificent Seven, after he almost gets his head shot off while they’re driving the hearse up to Boot Hill:

McQueen: You elected?

Brynner: No. But I got nominated real good.

:smiley:

J