He implies that the Lord's return may have been delayed by the Church. I thought the Father knows the day and hour. Are we now to think that he also may in fact be merely waiting to find out, based on how his Church is doing ????
Sorry, but I will need to reply to you and DaveVan3 in one post. Actually it is taught “explicitly” that the Lord “could have” come back at an earlier date, “if” the church had it all together …., and that put up red flags for me (Gal 4:4, etc.).
TMK Pratt has not addressed the Molinism issue, but ... a Molinian desires to make a case that an action must first take place before it can be true. Thus, God cannot know anything as absolute unless it has happens first and thus God becomes reliant upon the acts of men instead of on His own eternal decree(s). However, Pratt does say, “we must approach prophetic predictions with assurance that historical contingencies have never interrupted the immutable decrees of God. No uncertainties ever lay before him, no power can thwart the slightest part of his plan. Yahweh spoke through his prophets with full knowledge and control of what was going to happen in the near and distant future. Any outlook that denies this theological conviction is less than adequate.” Thus, at best this issue is “confusing,” as I hear truth in one ear and then something else (Molinism?) in the other. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/spin.gif" alt="" /> This article is in Bruce Waltke’s book (
Way of Wisdom, actually honoring Waltke) as well (edited by Packer), and thus it makes me wonder if “I” am missing Pratt’s point. He is a GREAT professor in so many other areas and delivered this address in 1993, and I thus wonder if it was only me … that had a problem …
How does one reconcile Pratt’s article with
Isaiah 46:10-11? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />
