Page 61 - A Study of Theological Responses to Alvin Plantinga’s Aquinas/Calvin Model of Warranted Christian Belief - Kees van Kralingen
P. 61
Theological Responses to Plantinga’s A/C Model – K. Scott Oliphint
Oliphint returns to a more critical assessment of Plantinga’s work in his 2011 4 Using Reason by Faith
WCB, Oliphint interprets Plantinga as if he is saying: “In keeping with Kant’s emphasis, the
‘ .’” And he
“So, Plantinga strikes the Kantian pose and argues for a rational th metaphysical.”
Despite the variation in the expression of his critique of Plantinga’s approach, Oliphint’s de jure de facto modification of Plantinga’s epistemological approach. I will now discuss his objection and
4.2.1 Is it Legitimate to Address the Question separate from the Question?
First, we have to ask the question whether Oliphint’s criticism is correct that Plantinga does not address the question of truth and ‘ignores things metaphysical ’ This criticism
Oliphint’s point about a Kantian approach in Plantinga’s work of not seems to ignore Plantinga’s extensive refutation in WCB of Kant’s claim that w
Plantinga’s work addresses how theistic and Christian belief can have
The key issue in Oliphint’s response seems to me to be the lac de facto de jure questions. Plantinga’s clearly stated conclusion is that the answer to the de jure de facto
Oliphint, ‘Using Reason by Faith.’
iphint, ‘Using Reason by Faith, 100.
59