Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Reformed Theology - Analytic ...

above.
31
Paul L. Manata © 2011
Of course, a full scriptural defense of the above would be needed to show that
the Reformed view is something more than man’s opinion. It should first be
pointed out that the concern of this paper is not to give the exegetical
foundations for the Reformed position on the decree, providence, and God’s
foreknowledge. Rather, I am simply drawing out in broad ways what affirming RT
commits one to. I am not asking too much by this commitment, as I have argued
that commitment to determinism simpliciter leaves quite a bit of leeway for how
one might put the various pieces together (more on this below).
Nevertheless, one does not need to go far to find the scriptural support for these
Reformed convictions. One may read Calvin’s Institutes, Turretin’s Institutes of
Elenctic Theology, and Shedd’s Dogmatic Theology for good analysis of the
scriptural data in support of the Reformed understanding of the decree,
providence, and omniscience. More modern theologians would include the
systematic theologies of Berkhof, Reymond, and Grudem. Lastly, two excellent
discussions concerning the biblical data in support of the Reformed views of the
decree, providence, and God’s foreknowledge as it relates to these, can be found
in the doctrine of God books by John Feinberg and John Frame (see the “further
reading” section at the end of this paper for details).
3.5 Nature determinism vs. act determinism
One issue I should address is what I’ll refer to as ‘nature determinism’ and ‘act
determinism.’ 44 Nature determinism means that we must act according to our
internal natures. Humans cannot choose to flap their arms and fly to the top of a
44 This distinction is based off John Feinberg’s remarks on what he calls Necessity1
and Necessity2, corresponding to what I’m calling ‘act determinism’ and ‘nature
determinism,’ respectively. See Feinberg, No One Like Him (Crossway, 2001), 636.