tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post4925973692787464859..comments2024-03-17T08:25:33.806+00:00Comments on Thoughts of Francis Turretin: Craig's Dilemma - Escape for Aseity, but Hello Grounding ObjectionTurretinfanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-17352723061681027282014-05-27T15:22:19.010+01:002014-05-27T15:22:19.010+01:00Hi neurocscience,
I realise it's been a while ...Hi neurocscience,<br />I realise it's been a while (I've been out of town for a week), but in case you see this:<br /><br />You said: "Well, how would Molinists like it if we conducted the debate that way? "Calvinism is true because its just that way!" we could say in response."<br /><br />This is not how the Molinist / Craig conducts the debate. Craig argues for the Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03851949293386187426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-1272660947485713902014-05-17T01:38:40.267+01:002014-05-17T01:38:40.267+01:00Dan,
A "brute fact" is a fact that has ...Dan,<br /><br />A "brute fact" is a fact that has no explanation or grounding. "It is just that way" is how it is usually understood.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-59962147760217498312014-05-16T14:42:41.454+01:002014-05-16T14:42:41.454+01:00I did not say all this for hatred of you because I...I did not say all this for hatred of you because I actually like you and I also Like Rich Pierce. But I would be remiss not tell you I believe you are dead wrong in your Reformed views and i do not believe it is going to be pretty when you Finally meet the One God ie. The Lord Jesus Christ. Te same thing you feel about what I teach is wrong is the same way I feel about your doctrines.mlculwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13160062102050436408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-17160540078989551322014-05-16T14:35:09.339+01:002014-05-16T14:35:09.339+01:00You Calvinists and Armenians crack me up. You argu...You Calvinists and Armenians crack me up. You argue over un-biblical word games that you invented. That you then have to look in a dictionary to figure out what the garbage means. Yes Garbage Calvinism is utter philosophical Garbage and Armenianism is not far behind. I harken back to the two other evil inventions you forced upon God and his Holy Word and argue over. trinity not found there but mlculwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13160062102050436408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-74152280805380006432014-05-15T12:37:30.171+01:002014-05-15T12:37:30.171+01:00Hi neurosciencelinguisticsandhebrew,
What do you m...Hi neurosciencelinguisticsandhebrew,<br />What do you mean by "brute fact"?Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03851949293386187426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-59291186111728524252014-05-14T22:11:11.168+01:002014-05-14T22:11:11.168+01:00Dan,
That might be a response, but, as Dr. White ...Dan,<br /><br />That might be a response, but, as Dr. White said the other day, it sounds like such a response would be to say that these counterfactuals are brute facts. "It's just that way" might be what we would hear from a person saying that the truth of counterfactuals don't need to be grounded. Well, how would Molinists like it if we conducted the debate that way? "Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-63174852108868911242014-05-13T16:46:19.301+01:002014-05-13T16:46:19.301+01:00Turretinfan,
It's no less plausible than the f...Turretinfan,<br />It's no less plausible than the first option you do mention, namely that the objects of *middle* knowledge are based *in God*. However implausible it may be that they are simply true without being grounded in anything, this is one of the standard responses to the grounding objection. Craig defends it in the article you discuss. I'm not endorsing the response (I'm Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03851949293386187426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-27176361937588339592014-05-13T14:36:45.704+01:002014-05-13T14:36:45.704+01:00Dan:
That's the white flag response. It'...Dan:<br /><br />That's the white flag response. It's not just an admission that "we don't know why they are true," but a further admission that "there is no reason why they are true."<br /><br />Such a view is not just counter-intuitive, it places the position at odds with most views of truth itself.<br /><br />-TurretinFan Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-48890017584553455452014-05-13T11:16:42.916+01:002014-05-13T11:16:42.916+01:00Hi TFan,
You seem to have paraphrased Turretin qu...Hi TFan,<br /><br />You seem to have paraphrased Turretin quite accurately. Fancy that!<br /><br />Turretin restates the Molinist position (third topic, thirteenth question-<br /><br />The question is not whether the knowledge of conditional future things is in God antecedently... rather the question is whether a certain futurition of this or that thing precedes so that God may see that thing Ron Van Brenkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15623171051016737306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-73996470652009304502014-05-13T04:38:27.011+01:002014-05-13T04:38:27.011+01:00Hi Turretinfan,
"So, either what is called mi...Hi Turretinfan,<br />"So, either what is called middle knowledge is based on something in God himself...or middle knowledge is based on something outside God..."<br /><br />This inference seems too quick. Isn't there a third option, namely that middle knowledge (by which I take you to mean its objects, the things known) is (are) not based on anything? This is one of the responses Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03851949293386187426noreply@blogger.com