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