I’m writing a paper on Molinism for a course I’m taking at Reformed Theological Seminary. For part of the paper, I’m researching how Molinism as a philosophical system interfaces with the Scriptural data on election. Typically, Molinists will view divine election as being primarily corporate as opposed to being individual. Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary has an article critiquing the corporate view of election. I reference this not for the critique itself, but for the way Wallace introduces the debate. Wallace is interacting with a pastor friend of his who, no doubt, is less of a scholar and exegete than he is. Notice what Wallace says:
Preliminarily, I should address an antecedent issue. Although I will express my opinion, you of course have to come to your own conclusions. Having a good conscience about the text doesn’t require agreement with others; it requires being faithful to pursue truth at all costs to the best of your abilities. To be sure, you want to seek the counsel and input of various experts. But when the day is done, you have to stand before God and tell him how you see your views as in harmony with Holy Writ. In other words, I never want you to feel any kind of intimidation or pressure from me or anyone else about your handling of the text. I do of course want you to feel a great duty (as you always have) to the Lord in the handling of his word. At bottom, all of us have to give an account of ourselves to the Lord, and any human loyalties will have no standing before him.