Posts tagged ‘Sodom’

June 8th, 2012

The Molinism Directory

by Max Andrews

I’ve decided to gather all my posts on Molinism in one post for easy reference.

  1. Middle Knowledge in a Nutshell
  2. A Review of Salvation and Sovereignty (Journal Publication)
  3. Defining Omniscience
  4. Q&A 9: Layering Divine Middle Knowledge
  5. Why I’m Not an Arminian
  6. Why I’m Not a Calvinist
  7. God Controls Everything–Good and Bad
  8. The Incoherence of Theistic Determinism–Moral Responsibility
  9. Overpower–Is God Ultimately Responsible for Everything?
  10. The Pelagian Equivocation
  11. The Singular Redemption View of the Atonement
  12. Does God Ever Literally Change His Mind?–Yes
  13. Is a Molinist Concept of Providence Discomforting?
    read more »

May 30th, 2012

“They Would Have Believed…” – A Molinist Exegesis of Matthew 11:20-24

by Max Andrews

I.  Introduction

The Matthean account of Jesus pronouncing judgment on the cities of Choarzin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum may be found in Matthew 11.20-24.  This passage of Scripture contains a historical context of six particular cities that were condemned for their depravity.  The following contains a grammatico-historical examination of the text, which is an example of the doctrine of revelatory judgment applied, a verse often used to support the soteriological problem of evil, and is a problem passage for the doctrine of transworld damnation.  The purpose of Jesus’ pronouncement of judgment on these cities was to convey the depravity of man.

II.  A Grammatico-Historical Exegesis

Before any critical examination of the text can be made a conclusion on the genre must be established.  The book of Matthew is a Gospel, which is a genre in and of itself.  Many studies performed in modern scholarship of the Gospel literature link the Gospels with Hellenistic biography.[1]  Hellenistic biographers did not feel compelled to include all periods of an individual’s life or to narrate in chronological order.  The selected events were carefully ordered to promote a particular ideology.[2]  In slight contrast to Hellenistic biographies, Robert Guelich proposes formal and particular genera for the Gospels: