I recently listened to a lecture by Ronald Nash, where he recounts a conversation he had with J. I. Packer. They are both Calvinists. Nash brings up the subject of Middle Knowledge. Packer says that it is Arminian. Nash says no, that it could be used by Reformers to maintain God’s total sovereign control and still preserve responsibility. Packer says that he may have a point there. Here’s a link to the clip. (link) The conversation is about 11 minutes in.
That got me wondering if Calvinists wish for a better explanation of responsibility. Our moral instincts are kind of like animal instincts. They can erode over time, especially for those who experience the opposite from a young age. Thus pigeons may overcome their natural fear of man. (No offense intended by the analogy. I think of Calvinists like Nash and Packer as brilliant rather than birdbrains.)
I doubt mature Calvinists feel a pull of their moral intuitions against their doctrine, but I bet more recent Calvinists still do. Still, Packer and Nash’s conversation makes me wonder if perhaps even experienced Calvinists have flashbacks from time to time. I have heard Calvinists say that they don’t trust their moral intuitions due to the fall and subject them to the word of God (which I can admire). Has anyone else (Calvinist or Arminian) come across cases like this, or have an explanation on how moral intuitions work for Calvinists?