Customer Reviews

Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Salvation And Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach
by
Kenneth Keathley

Kenneth Keathley is professor of Theology and dean of Graduate Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina.

Keathley is a man who found himself struggling with traditional Calvinist reasoning regarding TULIP (Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, Perseverance of the saints), yet was also convinced of many good points that are made by Calvinists. What would he do? After all, he agreed with three points out of five,but did not agree with limited atonement or irresistible grace. Not only that, but he couldn't totally embrace T,U, or P as they are presented by Calvinists.
The choice was to be inconsistent in many ways, or to find a way to be both consistent and Biblical. Keathley chose the latter, and has built upon the ROSES acronym. Radical depravity, Overcoming grace, Sovereign election, Eternal life, Singular redemption.
Keathley then sought to place all of this in a molinist perspective. Molinism (Named after Luis Molina) posits that God is indeed in control, and yet affords man free will. "Molinism teaches that God exercises His sovereignty primarily through His omniscience, and that He infallibly knows what free creatures would do in any given situation." (pg 5) This allows for God to indeed be sovereign, but it also allows for man to be truly free in that his choices truly are his own, and count as something other than a necessary response to Divine stimuli. Because God knows all things He knows all possibilities as well as which possibilities are feasible. In other words, God not only knows what could happen, He knows what will happen in any given circumstance, and He chooses to create the world in which all circumstances and choices bring the most glory to His name. In the world that God chose He both knows all things and man is free to make his own choices. Thus God is sovereign and man is free.
Keathley uses the Molinist perspective to set forth the following: God is both good and great, so He wants to save all and does save all who believe; human freedom is derived and genuinely ours, so it is not absolute, unlimited, or autonomous; God's grace is both monergistic and resistible, so salvation is totally of grace, but grace can be scorn and refused; God's election is both unconditional and according to foreknowledge, because "God's sovereign choice is informed by foreknowledge but not determined by it." (pg 11);the saved are both preserved and will persevere; and Christ's atonement is both unlimited in its provision and limited in its application, so we can indeed say that Christ died for each individual, but only believers enjoy the benefits of Jesus' sacrifice.
While it may take a while for it all to soak in (Indeed, I plan to go back and read portions of the book again to gain a better understanding of the issue.), this perspective is a very reasonable one. It is the one toward which I had already found myself moving, but was unable to ariculate.
This book is not deep philosophy, or difficult doctrine. It is a well written book that will be a great blessing to anyone struggling with the inconsistencies of Calvinism or Arminianism.
I highly recommend it.

I recently became a Molinist, but hadn't found a book that I could fully understand until this one. I am a huge William Lane Craig fan, but so many times I find myself having to go back and reread the same paragraph several times before I understand it. As you may or may not know, Dr. Craig is one of the most prolific thinkers of our time, and is a self proclaimed Molinist. His works are great, but sometimes hard to fully comprehend. Kenneth Keathley steps in and makes Molinism more understandable. Although it is not void of difficult ideas to understand, it is, I believe, written more for the laity.

Dr. Keathley begins by defining several terms associated with this field, and continues to do so as new ones arise. He goes on to show that not only is Molinism biblically supportable, but that it is also logically consistent. He sets forth many arguments that Calvinists need to think about and reply to. He notes the subtle dangers of accepting determinism and compatibilism and challenges his readers to seek the truth. He explains how soft libertarianism honors Scripture best by affirming both God's sovereignty and man's freedom. I don't want to give too much away, so I will stop here, but I highly recommend this book. It should be noted that Keathley is coming from the reformed tradition, so it is NOT anti-Calvinist (too much literature these days is). However, like he says in at the beginning of the book, the Reformed tradition and its TULIP have some problems that must be dealt with. I believe Dr. Keathley provides a biblical response to some important questions raised by any truth seeking Christian. Even if you are not convinced of Molinism, this book will still provide some valuable insights into God's relationship to humankind as well as challenge the way you think.

Keathley's crisp thinking and clear writing style will keep you so interested that you won't want to put the book down (of course, if you're like me, the subject alone does that). He uses numerous sources so that you can go and research further. This fact adds to the books appeal. This truly is an excellent read!

In recent years Reformed theology has experienced a significant resurgence. Books, blogs, seminaries . . . the evidence is hard to miss. Several of the emphases of the Reformed resurgence have helped restore much-needed balance to evangelical Christianity. It is unfortunate that the Reformed have often been branded with stereotypes that are ill-founded, unfair, and at times blatantly ignorant.

Many believers, however, are not comfortable with a fully Reformed soteriology. Neither are they willing to accept the alternative Arminian position. Variously called "four-pointers," "moderate Calvinists," "Calminians," and other less-repeatable epithets, they seek to reconcile two equally Scriptural truths: the free-will of man and the sovereignty of God.

In Salvation and Sovereignty, Dr. Kenneth Keathley advances the cause for just such a median position. He argues for a soteriology that finds this balance, while avoiding the respective blind-spots of both alternative systems and remaining faithfully based in Scriptural truth.

Based on a Molinist understanding of God's middle knowledge, the author replaces the familiar TULIP with a soteriology of ROSES:

R - Radical depravity,

O - Overcoming grace,

S - Sovereign election,

E - Eternal life,

S - Singular redemption.

Each point reconciles the Biblical truths of the sovereignty and free will.

Whether the author is successful in this "balancing act" will largely depend on the presuppositions of the reader. This book will not satisfy critics from either side. In fact, this "middle ground" could become a theological "no-man's-land." I suspect Keathley will be critiqued by both sides, with each labeling him as the other. What the author does accomplish is to provide a valid alternative to the debate. It is a well-written book that adds much to the discussion.

He argues his position well, while presenting opposing views in a civil and even-handed manner (Something theologians of all stripes could take note of). The presentation is scholarly, logical and most importantly, Scriptural. One might disagree with his conclusions, but it would be difficult to deny the legitimacy of this position.

Regardless your theological persuasion, I recommend this book. For those who seek a scholarly, yet accessible presentation of a more balanced position, this book will provide it. It is the clearest, most understandable explanation of Molinism I have yet encountered, and I found the author's balanced discussion both refreshing and enlightening.

Though it will not end this centuries-old debate, this approach certainly provides satisfactory answers to many of the pertinent questions of this debate. Anyone seeking to understand Molinism can do no better than Salvation and Sovereignty.

I must say that I went in to reading this book already a Molinist, so I can't say that Dr. Keathley converted any of my school-of-thought [per se]; however, I can comment as an insider looking back in on my own system. I had been in touch with Dr. Keathley prior to the publishing of the book seeking more sources when he shared that his own work was being published. I was excited to gain some more insight to the issue as well as being able to [somewhat] provide critical feedback.

Keathley begins by introducing and summarizing the issues of classic reformed theology (particularly the Calvinist TULIP) followed by an introduction to the Molinist paradigm. He initiates his case for Molinism at an appropriate place by asking if the whole thing is even biblical. Great question! As a Molinist myself, I often run in to objections stating that none of this "stuff" is in the Bible nor can you have a "halfway point" between Calvinism and Arminianism (Hey, why not both?). The biggest hurdle is the issue of divine middle knowledge to which Keathley provides ample explanation in an easy-to-understand format. Honestly, it took me about two years to really understand middle knowledge. If I had his summation I could have easily expedited that learning process. Perhaps the most important preliminary comments in this work is when he clarifies that middle knowledge and Molinism isn't a philosophical grid being laid over Scripture, rather, it's a derivation of a commitment to certain principles already obtained from Scripture (cf. p. 19).

I don't want to explain the whole book in this review so I'll keep it brief. On the issue of depravity I stand shoulder to shoulder with Dr. Keathley in that man continues to have a soft libertarian freedom while still maintaining an appropriate distance from semi-Pelagianism (I had a professor label Molinism as this and it was something I've actually been accused of by peers since then). Keathley's chapter on election is a fine work. I recognized it the moment I started reading it as a paper he had presented to an earlier conference at Building Bridges (I believe). It also may have very well been that he took that presentation from his work on the book, anyways, it's still a piece you should not pass over! As already noted in the book, the issue of the atonement is perhaps the most divisive one when it comes to the TULIP and as Keathley notes, if you hear of a "four-point Calvinist" then you can probably guess which letter was dropped. Keathley makes the distinction between limited and unlimited/general atonement as well as recognizes the importance with each view. I went in to the book committing myself as a fellow of the "L." I didn't see too much of an issue with actually holding to what the doctrine actually claimed. I had summarized my position in an earlier paper I had written stating that the atonement is for and offered to everyone [unlimited] but it is only efficacious [limited] to those who are the elect/respond affirmatively to the Gospel message. It may seem that he is trying to make this doctrine go down the center of the road but he makes an important note so that it still affirms freedom in that it's not determined of fatalistic in any way. That may sound convoluted or ill explained, which is why you may just need to read the book. On the issue of grace, Keathley really helped me understand a consistent model of monergism and soft-libertarianism. I really appreciated this chapter and his advocacy of the ambulatory model. After reading the chapter I had to close the book and respond to God in prayer and worship for overcoming my wicked rebellion and not giving up on me and being patient with me. God's grace is amazing in that He gives me the breath to blaspheme His name and yet He relentlessly pursues me and overcomes my rebellion. The last issue of perseverance is a good model, something I may need to clarify my own personal opinions on, but is something worth embracing. When ask if a Christian can lose their salvation I always answer, "You can... but you won't" which seems to me like a fair assessment (and you'll know what I mean after you read the book!).

In the end Dr. Keathley gives a fair representation of the other sides being discussed with ample footnotes and references to double back on. I highly recommend this book and I will certainly keep it in my personal library for years to come and I already know that it will be cited in my graduate work any time now. I anticipate a response or two to it so we can witness some peer review on the issues and get some more light. In summary, for those who have no idea what I just said, if you're tired of the Calvinism-Arminianism debate, try Molinism. Molinism actually accomplishes and affirms what the other schools want to appear to have done. Please buy this book.

I got this book because I wanted to read a Baptist theologian's perspective on molonism. I knew when I got the book that the author embraces molinism and I knew that he was somewhat anti-calvinist but that didn't stop me (a reformed baptist) from getting the book because I wanted to read about molinism and how it could fit in with Baptist beliefs and theology. I was quite dissappointed because this book is nothing about molinism but completely a work written against Reformed theology and Calvinism. Molonism is only briefly discussed in the introduction and first chapter and then alluded to throughout the rest of the book.

Not enough scriptural evidence was produced to support molinism and middle knowldege in my opinion - though the author did do a good job exegiting the few texts that were provided. The propblem that I have with the exegis however is that it did not necessarily prove or support the concept of counterfactual existences nor did it support molinism. The author also did not take into account the possibility of hypotheticals in scripture.

But as already stated most of this book is nothing more than an effort to disprove or discount Calvinism. The author goes after every Reformer that you can think of - from Luther and Calvin to Edwards to Piper and Sproul. Very little effort in this book is given to supporting and presenting molonism - every effort is given to to debunking Calvinism. Molinism is just one small tool used in this book to debunk Calvinism.

I will say this in regards to Dr. Keathley's approach to disprove Calvinism. It is by far the best I've seen presented to date. There is absolutely no comparison between this book and others (such as Geisler's "Chosen But Free"). I would say that this is one book that could give us Calvinists a run for our money. Though I remain unconvinced by Keathley's arguments I must say I impressed by them non-the-less.

Having said that - the problem with this book is that it is not presented as a response to Calvinism but as a molinist approach to salvation and sovereignty. Surely such a presentation could have been made more thoroughly and without trying to disprove calvinism with every turn of a page. It is for this reason that I had to go with three stars on this book and not higher.

I thought the book was wonderfully written and should prompt some engaging dialogue on the subject in the months to come, especially among Southern Baptists. I'm looking forward to seeing the rebuttals and responses to them over the next year or so. Though I haven't completely adopted the Molinist position yet and inevitably have questions that need further research along with a re-reading of certain parts of the book, Keathley does an amazing job in presenting a balanced view of this very controversial topic.

Many of his insights on the issue and the reconciliation of certain seemingly contradictory Scriptures have made much more sense to me than many other attempts I've read on either side. I put the book down being more theologically as well as intellectually satisfied with an interpretation of this subject material from the biblical witness than I have ever been. It appears true to Scripture, free from reductionism, logical, consistent and also knowledgable about the tenets of Calvinism and Arminianism; it is likewise honest but lovinginly humble when presenting the problems with each system. However as stated before, I intend to study more and I do plan to go on to read both Craig and Flint's books on Molinism to get a greater grasp on the position.

I learned of this book while working on a Disaster Relief project in Maryland in September, and ordered it from Amazon.com soon after returning. My husand and I have enjoyed reading this book together and discussing it. We think it is a great book and have given copies to our pastor and other family members who had not heard about it. It makes clear so many things about the Calvanist and Armenian thoughts on salvation and God's grace. I knew what I believed before reading the book. However, there were some passages that I found difficult to understand and explain to others about the God I know and have a relationship with through Christ Jesus. Dr Keathley uses his knowledge of the Bible and teaching ability to make those passages clear. Some terms are a little techinical and new to me but Dr. Keathley defines and explains them well. I would recomend this book to anyone who has questions about God's grace and man's responsibility in salvation.

I am a Methodist. I enjoyed reading the book. Compared to other books on similar topic, it is more readable and interesting.

It is said in the book that because of His foreknowledge of how man would react when placed in certain circumstances, God sets the table or scene to enable man to exercise his free will and God cannot be so liable. I wonder if God could still be guilty of entrapment when He places someone in a potential sexual crime scene. It also makes one wonder why God places the rapist's victim there in the first place.

It is said that God preordained the maximum ratio of those who will be saved to those who will not. When we evangelize, I wonder what we are - are we merely actors or complying the Great Commission or what?

The battle has been raging for hundreds of years over whether or not humans have a form of free will or if every single event in human history has and is rolling out exactly as God predetermined it. The two sides of this battle have been typically characterized by those who call themselves Calvinists and those who call themselves Arminians. But in his book SALVATION AND SOVEREIGNTY Kenneth Keathley proposes a middle-ground solution to the debate in the form of Molinism, a theological system concerning the nature of God's foreknowledge developed by sixteenth century Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina.

I first heard about Molinism from the writings of Dr. William Lane Craig as I was looking for a better solution to Divine Sovereignty/Human Responsibility dilemma, and have since read Luis de Molina's original work on the subject PART 4 of the CONCORDIA.

Molina sought to devise a system that affirmed both man's libertarian freedom and God's meticulous sovereign control. He did this by proposing that God's knowledge was of three different types and that God's knowledge came in three logical (not chronological) moments.

Natural Knowledge is the first moment, and it comes logically before God's creative decree. This knowledge consists of all possibilities. For example, in God's natural knowledge, he knew that it was possible for Adam to not sin in the garden. He also knew that it was possible that he would. These were both possibilities of what Adam "could" do.

Skipping ahead, the third moment is known as God's Free Knowledge. This is God's perfect knowledge of every single thing that will happen in the universe that God created, and this knowledge comes logically after his creative decree. For example, God knows that Adam "will" sin in the garden.

Between these two knowledge moments Molina proposed a moment called Middle Knowledge. This knowledge consists of free choices that a creature would make under any given circumstances. For example, God knows that if he placed Adam in the garden, Adam "would" sin, but if placed under a different set of circumstances, Adam "would" not sin. Either way, Adam's choice would be freely made. This knowledge comes logically before God's creative decree. So God surveys all the free choices that free creatures would make and decides to create the world in which all the circumstances that would bring about the free choices of free creatures that also lined up with his perfect will. Once he creates, the script is set and human history will flow exactly as he wanted it to, and human freedom remains intact. In this model God exercises his meticulous sovereignty using his exhaustive omniscience.

Dr. Keathley presents the Molinist model as an attempt at explaining the Divine Sovereignty/Human Freedom dilemma better than five point Calvinism. He believes, like me, that Calvinism's problems lie in the fact that when followed to its logical conclusion, Calvinism sets God up as the author of evil, though most Calvinists reject the idea. Dr. Keathley appreciates Calvinism's attempt to do justice to God's sovereignty, but believes that Calvinism's TULIP acronym needs to give way to a new acronym - ROSES.

Radical Depravity in place of Total Depravity
Overcoming Grace in place of Irresistible Grace
Sovereign Election in place of Unconditional Election
Eternal Life in place of Perseverance of the Saints
Singular Redemption in place of Limited Atonement

ROSES isn't original to the system of Molinism. Molinism was more of an explanation of how humans could be free and God be in absolute control than a system of the application of salvation. Dr. Keathley, however, takes the ROSES scheme and combines it with the Molinist system to describe why, if God is sovereign and desires the salvation of all mankind, not all are saved.

Though I don't personally buy into Molinism, Dr. Keathly makes an excellent case of it in SALVATION AND SOVEREIGNTY. I can't get past how God choosing which free choices we make doesn't equally lead to God being the author of sin as Calvinism does. One of the strengths of Molinism, however, is the concept of Counterfactuals of Creaturely Freedom. God knows exactly what free choices any person would make under any given circumstances. If A person was under a certain set of circumstances, the that person would make certain free choice. It's easy to see how God could and would use this knowledge to orchestrate the world to his desired end. However, Molinism places this knowledge in a place where it is essentially useless to God in the course of history because he already decided what each person would do before creating anything. Hence, it doesn't seem that Molinism really retains much human freedom at all.

The reason I do love the book, though, is because Dr: Keathley does an excellent job at presenting a very biblical critique of Calvinism. Each chapter of the ROSES scheme tackles the problems of Calvinism's five points and often presents a better, more biblical solution that leaves God's character intact.

The Radical Depravity chapter presents a view of human freedom called soft libertarianism and shows why Calvinism's freedom to do what one most desires is no real freedom at all.

The Overcoming Grace chapter clearly shows that, biblically, God's grace is resistible and offered to all. Dr. Keathley presents an "ambulatory model" of grace where human beings are responsible not to resist God's grace that is carrying them to salvation. Salvation is all of God and damnation all of man, as Charles Spurgeon put it.

The Sovereign Election chapter was difficult to comprehend. This was the chapter that had the most to do with Molinism. Essentially, it said pretty much the same as Calvinism in that God chooses who will be saved apart from anything the people might do. Given the previous Overcoming Grace chapter, this chapter seemed in contradiction. God offers grace to all, and those who don't resist are saved, but God sovereignly chooses who will be saved before the foundation of the world apart from anything they might do. Dr. Keathley states that in this system God actively uses his foreknowledge in election, buy rejects the common Arminian perspective if God's use of foreknowledge in election. He doesn't make real clear how exactly God uses his foreknowledge in election.

Eternal Life essentially affirms the Calvinist position that all genuine believers will persevere.

The Singular Redemption chapter refutes Limited Atonement and shows how Christ died for the sins of all people, but only believers enjoy the benefits of Christ's atonement.

Before these chapters Dr. Keathley includes an excellent chapter on the biblical idea that God desires the salvation of all, and strives to answer why not all are saved even though God wills their salvation. He describes God's will as an antecedent/consequent will. God antecedently wills the salvation of all humanity, but consequently wills that those who resist faith not receive salvation.

As far as Molinism goes, I'm not convinced. But as a thorough examination and correction to much of the problems of Calvinism, Dr. Keathley's book is one I go to again and again. His writing style is warm and without a hint of arrogance. It's clear that Dr. Keathley cares deeply about people and loves God profoundly. Though there was much I disagree with, there was still much in the book that got me thinking in the right direction.

Salvation and Sovereignty by Kenneth Keathley is an outstanding book, but it is a challenge for anyone not prepared to deal with the twists and turns of Calvinistic theology. If you want to learn about Calvinism and its limitations, this book is outstanding.

For starters, don't judge this book by the cover, which lacks any appeal whatever. The publisher let the author down; that is a common experience.

Aside from clear writing about a complex subject, the special value of this book is that it tries to explain how Molinism (see below) combines with Calvinism to make a biblical and sensible explanation of salvation and sovereignty. At the end of the day, I don't buy it, but there was never much chance the author could bring me to the somber shores of Calvinism no matter what boat we sailed on.

Let's take a minute to introduce Molinism (also known as "middle knowledge"). The Jesuit scholar and priest Louis Molina (1535-1600) originated a way of applying God's comprehensive knowledge to the issues of sovereignty, human freedom and salvation. It's a bit of a head-spinner, so hang on!
Molinism hinges on the words could, would and will. First, God knows everything that could possibly happen; he knows all possible worlds that could be created. Second, God knows everything that would happen; he knows which worlds -- out of all the possible worlds -- would accomplish his purposes. Third, out of all the possible worlds that would accomplish God's purposes, he chooses one and creates that one world. In that one created world, God knows everything that will happen.

Now, let's stop and ask one simple question: where is any of that stated in the Bible? If you answered "Nowhere!" to that question, then give yourself a reward.

By some slick (?) logic, Molinism upholds both human freedom and divine sovereignty. So, I guess it is time to break out the champagne and celebrate. Not so fast! Many Calvinists and Arminians have rejected middle knowledge, each because it makes concessions to the other side of the argument.

I see several problems with this theory of middle knowledge, at least in the form Keathley describes:
1. The system is still deterministic enough to leave God responsible for sin.
2. The created world lacks any life-like dynamism because all the choices were made before the world was created.
3. The system fails to account for the real-time emotions, actions and contingencies that God initiates in the scenes described by the Bible.

I have explained the details in my blog ([...]), but here is my conclusion about Molinism as presented. Maybe I'm missing something, but for now it seems that Keathley has only traded problems. He does a terrific job of respectfully showing the shortcomings of standard Calvinism. Keathley appropriately notes that while Calvinism stresses God's sovereignty above all else, Molinism stresses God's omniscience the most. Molinism is indeed preferable. Unfortunately, both roads still lead to determinism.

If you like philosophical theology that has a high view of Scripture and is very well written, this book is for you. I really enjoyed it.