- Necessarily, federalism is incompatible with LFW.
- The consensus of Reformed Orthodoxy is federalism.
- The consensus of Reformed Orthodoxy is incompatible with LFW.
I may expand on this later, but those familiar with the relevant concepts will see that this spells doom for Muller et al’s thesis that Reformed Orthodoxy wasn’t determinist and compatibilist.
Analytic Theology, et cetera. 
How do you arrive at your “consensus of Reformed Orthodoxy” compared with how he arrives at his? What would make your “consensus” more representative than his?
Who’s “he”? Muller? He doesn’t deny it. I’m not stating a controversial point here. He agrees with it. That point is uncontested. There are some rare moments of Augistinian realism, but those are the minority. The problem here is that federalism has *metaphysical implications*, and Muller and most of the other *theologians* are simply unaware of these issues.
Yes, I was asking about Muller. In your follow-up statement. you are saying that Muller’s thesis is that “Reformed Orthodoxy wasn’t determinist and compatibilist”. I haven’t read all of Muller, but I find it hard to believe that he’s saying that.
John, I’ve demonstrated quite clearly at this blog that Muller says precisely that. Check the archives here. It’s rather common knowledge that Muller says this. It’s part of the effort of a small but vocal group of scholars who deny Reformed theology is deterministic, that’s rather an Edwardsian invention (it’s argued).
Thanks Paul. I’ve found some of the Muller/Edwards posts, and I’ll certainly try to read them, although when the p’s and q’s come out, for some strange reason, my eyes roll up into the back of my head.
Well, you only need to read them to see his quotes about determinism, right? :)