Nottheworld
07-28-2009, 12:24 AM
Middle knowledge is God’s knowledge of the free choices that we individuals would make if we were put into a given situation. For example, imagine that I decide to go out for ice cream tonight and I am given the choice of chocolate or vanilla ice cream. Given God’s knowledge of me and these exact circumstance God knows that in this situation I will would pick chocolate over vanilla. My choice might very well be vanilla in a different situation, but God knows what my choices will be in these situations as well.
God possesses a seemingly infinite array of knowledge of an infinite number of different scenarios. Since each choice we make might be different in a different situation there are a wide variety of different scenarios that God knows. Together all these choices come within a seemingly infinite number of possible worlds. There are possible worlds where I freely choose to go out for ice cream tonight and other possible worlds where circumstances are different and perhaps I choose not to go out for ice cream.
According to the theology known as Molinism God freely chose one of these possible worlds out of a seemingly infinite possible number of choices. God knew just what would happen and what we would freely choose in this world. So, God freely chose to create this world out of all of his possibilities. God thus predestined and foreknew all that would happen in the sense that God created a world in which all possible choices were known by him in advance. In this way, the Molinist would claim to have the best of all worlds (pardon the pun!) by combining several very important theological themes that often seem to contradict one another:
1 – That human beings have the freedom of choice.
2 – That God foreknows these choices.
3 – That God freely chose exactly what world this would be.
The most common objection to this theological system seems to be the so-called “grounding objection.” In a nutshell, this objection calls into question whether a choice can truly be free if it is known ahead of time. In other words, no one (God included) can know my choice of vanilla or chocolate until I make the choice. If a choice is determined ahead of time, then it is not free.
Matthew 11:23 seems to be one biblical example of Middle Knowledge. Here we have Jesus saying that if certain miracles had been performed in Sodom then they would have repented. This seems to indicate that Jesus knew what the free choice of individuals would have been if circumstances were different.
My reaction to Molinism and Middle Knowledge is somewhat favorable. As mentioned above it seems to make sense of key theological themes that are often held in tension. The Matt. 11 passage also seems to lend some support to this view. Furthermore, I do not believe a choice is any less free if it is known ahead of time, so I do not buy into the Grounding Objection. (Although I do recognize that it is a good objection if you are an Indeterminist (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/incompatibilism-theories/), however I have always had stronger inclinations toward Determinism, myself.)
The one problem with this neat and tidy system for me is simply the fact that it is so neat and tidy. The Scriptures seem to consistently defy systems by presenting counter examples of a God who just plain meddles with things! God, at times seems to override the free will of humanity in order to accomplish his purposes:
Deuteronomy 2:30 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=5&chapter=2&verse=30&version=31&context=verse) tells of how King Shihon refused to let Israel pass through, but God “made his heart stubborn.”
In 2 Samuel 24:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=10&chapter=24&version=31) God “incites” David to take a census.
The Exodus account tells us that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart.
The above are just a few examples off of the top of my head, but there seems to be a biblical motif (theme) that God acts on the wills of people in order to get done what he needs to do. Essentially, then I would want to reserve the right for God to sovereignly act in a unilateral way and override the will of human beings. As Creator God this is his prerogative and his right. We might not like it, but this seems to be the nasty truth.
Molinist links of interest:
Some links of William Lane Craig on Divine Omniscience. (Craig is the leading proponent of Molinism):
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/omniscience.html (http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/omniscience.html)
Alfred Freddoso:
http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/molinism.htm (http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/molinism.htm)
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Middle Knowledge:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/middlekn.htm (http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/middlekn.htm)
Molinism dot com:
http://molinism.com/ (http://molinism.com/)
“The Heresy of Middle Knowledge”:
http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonHeresyMiddleKnowledge.htm (http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonHeresyMiddleKnowledge.htm)
Posted by Jonathan Erdman at Wednesday, August 30, 2006 (http://theosproject.blogspot.com/2006/08/molinism-in-nutshell.html) (http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=9242710&postID=115695001483730442)
God possesses a seemingly infinite array of knowledge of an infinite number of different scenarios. Since each choice we make might be different in a different situation there are a wide variety of different scenarios that God knows. Together all these choices come within a seemingly infinite number of possible worlds. There are possible worlds where I freely choose to go out for ice cream tonight and other possible worlds where circumstances are different and perhaps I choose not to go out for ice cream.
According to the theology known as Molinism God freely chose one of these possible worlds out of a seemingly infinite possible number of choices. God knew just what would happen and what we would freely choose in this world. So, God freely chose to create this world out of all of his possibilities. God thus predestined and foreknew all that would happen in the sense that God created a world in which all possible choices were known by him in advance. In this way, the Molinist would claim to have the best of all worlds (pardon the pun!) by combining several very important theological themes that often seem to contradict one another:
1 – That human beings have the freedom of choice.
2 – That God foreknows these choices.
3 – That God freely chose exactly what world this would be.
The most common objection to this theological system seems to be the so-called “grounding objection.” In a nutshell, this objection calls into question whether a choice can truly be free if it is known ahead of time. In other words, no one (God included) can know my choice of vanilla or chocolate until I make the choice. If a choice is determined ahead of time, then it is not free.
Matthew 11:23 seems to be one biblical example of Middle Knowledge. Here we have Jesus saying that if certain miracles had been performed in Sodom then they would have repented. This seems to indicate that Jesus knew what the free choice of individuals would have been if circumstances were different.
My reaction to Molinism and Middle Knowledge is somewhat favorable. As mentioned above it seems to make sense of key theological themes that are often held in tension. The Matt. 11 passage also seems to lend some support to this view. Furthermore, I do not believe a choice is any less free if it is known ahead of time, so I do not buy into the Grounding Objection. (Although I do recognize that it is a good objection if you are an Indeterminist (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/incompatibilism-theories/), however I have always had stronger inclinations toward Determinism, myself.)
The one problem with this neat and tidy system for me is simply the fact that it is so neat and tidy. The Scriptures seem to consistently defy systems by presenting counter examples of a God who just plain meddles with things! God, at times seems to override the free will of humanity in order to accomplish his purposes:
Deuteronomy 2:30 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=5&chapter=2&verse=30&version=31&context=verse) tells of how King Shihon refused to let Israel pass through, but God “made his heart stubborn.”
In 2 Samuel 24:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=10&chapter=24&version=31) God “incites” David to take a census.
The Exodus account tells us that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart.
The above are just a few examples off of the top of my head, but there seems to be a biblical motif (theme) that God acts on the wills of people in order to get done what he needs to do. Essentially, then I would want to reserve the right for God to sovereignly act in a unilateral way and override the will of human beings. As Creator God this is his prerogative and his right. We might not like it, but this seems to be the nasty truth.
Molinist links of interest:
Some links of William Lane Craig on Divine Omniscience. (Craig is the leading proponent of Molinism):
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/omniscience.html (http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/omniscience.html)
Alfred Freddoso:
http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/molinism.htm (http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/molinism.htm)
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Middle Knowledge:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/middlekn.htm (http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/middlekn.htm)
Molinism dot com:
http://molinism.com/ (http://molinism.com/)
“The Heresy of Middle Knowledge”:
http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonHeresyMiddleKnowledge.htm (http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonHeresyMiddleKnowledge.htm)
Posted by Jonathan Erdman at Wednesday, August 30, 2006 (http://theosproject.blogspot.com/2006/08/molinism-in-nutshell.html) (http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=9242710&postID=115695001483730442)