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
 



















































































   59   60   61   62   63