Page 127 - A Study of Theological Responses to Alvin Plantinga’s Aquinas/Calvin Model of Warranted Christian Belief - Kees van Kralingen
P. 127

Theological Responses to Plantinga’s A/C Model – James Beilby
                                              
                              model “could be developed with either an affirmation or a rejection of the Calvinist doctrine of ‘irresistible grace’”                states: “Nevertheless, the image of the Holy Spirit’s ‘enabling us to see’ the truth of the great things of the gospel is a fruitful revision of how the cognitive process of the internal instigation of the Holy Spirit might function.”     ‘seeing’ is the native cognitive faculty Beilby wants to involve. He suggests that the Holy                                       He concludes that “The Holy Spirit might be the cause of the belief in question, but the means to the belief is found in the believer’s native cognitive faculties.”
What should we think of Beilby’s objection and his proposed solution? I want to   
                       the nature of the IIHS as a process, he describes this also as “a cognitive device                   ways.” If this process is also a ‘device’ what is the difference between a device and a                                                                                          
                             native                  As Plantinga’s model suggests, t      
  Epistemology as Theology    WCB 
  Epistemology as Theology    WCB                          
  Epistemology as Theology  
  Epistemology as Theology  
  Epistemology as Theology 
  Epistemology as Theology, 201; Beilby, ‘Plantinga’s Model of Warranted Christian Belief,’ 
 WCB   
             
 125
7
 


















































































   125   126   127   128   129