Every believer I know struggles with understanding how God acts in our lives. Are we predestined to make choices, including even our decision to follow Christ? Or is this a decision we freely make? Or is the answer somehow both? If both, how can this be without entailing a contradiction? Or is a contradiction acceptable in this case?
Month: November 2019
In my final post in this series I’ll discuss the last three objections that are often raised against Essentialism. If successful, they give us reason to think Libertarianism is correct, and therefore, the LGBTQ+ conversation is on track. If these objections are unsuccessful, we have good reason to believe the LGBTQ+ conversation has gotten off track, and true progress is made only by retracing our steps to see where we went wrong.
I have made the case that people flourish when living according to an Essentialist view of what we are. If I’m right, much of the narrative in Western culture should change, including our response to the LGBTQ+ debate. But if I’m wrong, we have the right narrative, which means we are on the right path to human flourishing and the common good.
In my last post I concluded, “[I]n order to help one another flourish, we must determine whether Libertarianism or Essentialism is the correct way to understand what we are. Understanding this clarifies the questions we should be asking and discussing. It determines how the data of experience should be interpreted. And it highlights the wrong questions both sides have been focusing upon.”