Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T02:47:30.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exclusivism, eternal damnation, and the problem of evil: a critique of Craig's Molinist soteriological theodicy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2003

DAVID B. MYERS
DAVID B. MYERS
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Minnesota State University Moorhead, Moorhead, MN 56563
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to orthodox Christianity, salvation depends on faith in Christ. If, however, God eternally punishes those who die ignorant of Christ, it appears that we have special instance of the problem of evil: the punishment of the religiously innocent. This is called the soteriological problem of evil. Using Molina's concept of middle knowledge, William Lane Craig develops a solution to this problem which he considers a theodicy. As developed by Craig, the Molinist theodicy rests on the problematic assumption that all informed persons who would freely reject Christ are culpable. Using an informed Muslim as a counter-example, I try to show that Craig's Molinist solution begs the question.

Type
Research Article
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , December 2003 , pp. 407 - 419
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)