Historical “knowledge” was not the only casualty of the Enlightenment. Knowledge of moral and philosophical truth fared no better. I’ll outline how this led to our modern assumptions concerning what we can or cannot know about what is good, true, and beautiful.
A thirteenth shift in thinking that came about during the Enlightenment has surfaced many times in my posts. In fact, a day does not go by that we do not see this new way of thinking bubble up in conversations, news reports, editorials, books, and everywhere else we turn. I am speaking of the way we now assume there is a difference between “facts” and “values” and between “reason” and “faith.” But this has not always been the case.
“What biblical texts speak directly to this issue?” This is the first question to ask when working through a theological question. However, sometimes we find that different passages seem to indicate different, and even contradictory answers. Such is the case with predestination and free will. So how can we decide between the two?
The year was 1994. I was in my final semester at Talbot School of Theology, and wrestling with the question of predestination or free will. I was stuck.
That semester I was taking a class on the metaphysics of freedom. We spent much time debating the pros and cons of the Libertarian and Soft Determinist views of freedom (discussed here).