Browse

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 779 items for :

  • Theology and Religion x
Clear All
Open access

Tyler Dalton McNabb

Abstract

Molinists generally see Calvinism as possessing certain liabilities from which Molinism is immune. For example, Molinists have traditionally rejected Calvinism, in part, because it allegedly makes God the author of sin. According to Molina, we ‘should not infer that He is in any way a cause of sin’. However, Greg Welty has recently argued by way of his Gunslingers Argument that, when it comes to God’s relationship to evil, Molinism is susceptible to the same liabilities as Calvinism. If his argument is successful, he has undercut, at least partially, justification for believing in Molinism. While I concede that Welty’s argument is successful in that it does undercut some justification for believing in Molinism, this concession does not entail that, as it relates to the problem of evil, the Calvinist and the Molinist are in the same epistemic position. In this article, I argue that, when it comes to God’s relationship to evil, the Molinist is in a superior epistemic situation to the Calvinist. I do this in two steps. First, I argue for what I call the Robust Felix Culpa Theodicy. Second, I argue that the Robust Felix Culpa Theodicy is incompatible with Calvinism.

Open access

Kirk R. MacGregor

Abstract

Several philosophers and theologians (including Stump, Cross, Timpe, Keathley, and Evans) have attempted to formulate monergistic, soft libertarian accounts of salvation. These accounts hold that the sinner has the ability to either resist or to do nothing at all with God’s universally given saving grace, in which latter case God will save her. However, I wonder with Cyr and Flummer whether these accounts go far enough because the nonresistant sinner voluntarily remains quiescent and is therefore arguably praiseworthy. I aim to remedy this alleged weakness by formulating a possible account on which it never crosses the nonresistant sinner’s mind to resist, making her quiescence an involuntary omission. For all sinners whose minds it crosses to resist, they, on the proposed account, freely choose to resist. Combining Molinism with the scriptural notion of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, I proceed to explain why it may cross the mind of some sinners and not others to resist.

Open access

Kenneth D. Keathley

Abstract

Philosopher Greg Welty contributed a chapter entitled ‘Molinist Gunslingers: God and the Authorship of Sin’, to a book devoted to answering the charge that Calvinism makes God the author of sin (Calvinism and the Problem of Evil). Welty argues that Molinism has the same problems as Calvinism concerning God’s relationship to sin, regardless of what view of human freedom Molinism may affirm. The Molinist believes that God generally uses his knowledge of the possible choices of libertarianly free creatures in order to accomplish his will. (This knowledge is typically categorized as residing within God’s middle knowledge.) But affirming libertarian freedom for humans, he argues, does not help in dealing with the question of God’s relationship to evil. Therefore, Molinism is no better than Calvinism, at least concerning this issue. In response to Welty, (1) I agree with him that Molinism does not have a moral advantage over what he calls ‘mysterian, apophatic’ Calvinism, but Molinists don’t claim that it does, and (2) I argue that, contra Welty, Molinism indeed does have a moral advantage over the Calvinist versions that do employ causal determinism. Welty does not take ‘intentions’ into consideration in his argument, and this is a serious flaw. In the libertarian model of Molinism, intent originates in the doer of evil. However, in the compatibilist model of causal determinism, ultimately God implants intent. Thus, adherents of causal determinism have difficulty not laying responsibility at the feet of God.

Open access

John D. Laing

Abstract

John Martin Fischer’s charge that Molinism does not offer a unique answer to the dilemma of divine foreknowledge and human freedom can be seen as a criticism of middle knowledge for begging the question of FF (foreknowledge and freedom)-compatibilism. In this paper, I seek to answer this criticism in two ways. First, I demonstrate that most of the chief arguments against middle knowledge are guilty of begging the question of FF-incompatibilism and conclude that the simple charge of begging the question cannot be as problematic as some suggest. Determinists and open theists incorporate FF-incompatibilist notions into their respective versions of the grounding objection, their conceptions of risk and libertarian freedom, and their requirements for divine foreknowledge. Thus, while I admit that Molinism does rely upon Ockhamist and Augustinian principles in its approach to the dilemma and is guilty of presupposing FF-compatibilism, I deny that this undermines its strength as a model of providence. Second, I argue that, although all models are guilty of question-begging moves, they are not all on par with one another. Molinism offers a more orthodox and robust approach to providence than open theism and process theology, and it handles empirical data (e.g., from science) better than all of its competitors.

Open access

Tim Stratton and Jacobus Erasmus

Abstract

Molinism is founded on two ‘pillars’, namely, the view that human beings possess libertarian free will and the view that God has middle knowledge. Both these pillars stand in contrast to naturalistic determinism and divine determinism. In this article, however, the authors offer philosophical and theological grounds in favor of libertarian free will and middle knowledge.

Open access

Tim Stratton and Jacobus Erasmus

Abstract

Divine determinism, though affirmed by many Calvinists, implicates God in the decisions people make that ultimately damn them to the terrible destiny of hell. In this paper, the authors argue that this scenario is a problem for divine determinism. The article contends that determinism is inconsistent with God’s love and the Scriptures that explicitly state that God does not ‘desire’ anyone to go to hell. Even human love for others strongly suggests that God, who is ‘love’, will not determine anyone to hell. On the other extreme, those who argue for universalism, though appealing to Scripture, often do so with questionable exegesis.

Open access

Alhassan Abdur-Rahim Husein

Abstract

Arabic speaking countries live in diglossic communities. This is where two or more varieties of a language are used by the same speech community. This paper examines students’ attitude towards Arabic language varieties. It focuses mainly on Egyptian students’ attitude towards the fuṣḥā on one hand and the Egyptian Arabic (EA) variety on the other. A survey of fifty university students from the American University in Cairo and Ain Shams University, Cairo was conducted using the questionnaire instrument. The data was analysed descriptively. The study reveals that Egyptian students have a slightly positive attitude towards the fuṣḥā Arabic. Notwithstanding, they tend to exhibit positive affective and behavioural tendencies towards EA. Based on this, the study proposes that language planners and for that matter, Arab states should adopt a vibrant ‘status planning’, whereby fuṣḥā is properly recognized and widely used in official and state institutions and functions.

Open access

Orsolya Nyilas and Mihály Fónai

Abstracts

Nowadays, whether we discuss either adult education or continuing training we possess comprehensive knowledge of the input side of the trainings. We have detailed data of the accredited institutions, instructors, the structure, content and operational indicators of the trainings, still we know less of the drop-outs, absentees and the reasons for the low participation rate in adult education. We have minimal information even when we analyse the existing data concerning the outcome of the successfully finished adult educational programs.

Open access

Veronika Bocsi and Andrea Ujvarosi

Abstract

The aim of our study is to give an overview about language and musical skills of students in musical traning courses and we try to outline the effects of the sociocultural background in these fields. We would like to show the main patterns of language proficiency (the number of langugages they speak and levels of the language skills) and we also analyse the efficiency of language learning. The institutional language courses and the practices of interpretation in the original language will be analysed as well. Our questionnare was used in this analysis in the spring of 2017. Students from six higher educational institutions were the respondents. The number of the respondents was 90 and from the answers a database was created with the help of SPSS 19 Programme. Percents, means and chi-square statistics were used. We have verified our hypothesis which refers to the effects of students’ sociocultural background because these variables (parental education, economic capital, type of the settlement) have formed the chances and forms of the music learning (e.g. the starting date of learning music) and language skills. If we analyse the patterns of the language proficiency the central position of the English is obvious, but this pattern is not in line with the expectations of singing in the original language because the main body of vocal literature is composed in Italian, French, Russian and German. In our opinion this gap should be covered by the institutions as well and these requirements should be incorporated in the curricula.

Open access

Eva Antal

Abstract

The context of the present paper is given by my research on philosophy of female education and the questions of female culture in the 18th and 19th centuries in England. I have been studying not only works of educationalist and philosophical concerns, but also literary works such as the education romans and utopias written in the related period. Female writings - either literary-utopian or educational-philosophical - seemingly rely on the framework and theoretical background of wellknown male works so that they should present a critical and ironical reading while also raise the questions of social solidarity and (e)quality in individual education. I will mainly highlight the strategies of feminist rhetoric, taking my textual examples from Mary Wollstonecraft’s anti- Rousseau A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), while I also refer to two of her contemporaries, Catherine Macaulay’s and Maria Edgeworth’s educational writings.