I am posting here the subject of Molinism due to the debates we encounter here at the forum as the subject keeps popping up, and, to be balanced, I am posting both sides - for and against it.
Frist, I am posting both Pro Molinism and anti-Molinism links to articles so the readers can become familiar with the subject. I chose Craig's and White's positions that they themselves wrote concerning the debate between the two. What I find fascinating are the actual tones from the writers of the articles themselves. One comes off as rational and the other more militant. Why? I really don’t know but it is there nevertheless.
…If possible, if you chose to respond to these articles, please leave militancy at the door and this goes for both sides
William Craig on Molinism
Counter Molinism Article
Dr White on Molinism
For those that do not know what Molinism is here is the Wiki link that tells of it
Link to Wikipedia: Molinism
PS – Note I am trying to locate the transcripts from Dr James White to post and it is hard to find but I found this interesting link – hard to read though do to the color scheme of website. Please, try to avoid Utube Links from James White – the transcript is better for review as one can refer to it better.Molinism, named after 16th Century Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina, is a religious doctrine which attempts to reconcile the providence of God with human free will. William Lane Craig is probably its best known advocate today, though other important Molinists include Alfred Freddoso, Alvin Plantinga and Thomas Flint. In basic terms, Molinists hold that in addition to knowing everything that does or will happen, God also knows what His creature would freely choose if placed in any circumstance.
Quoted from the Wiki Link provided
Interesting Link J. White
Aside note for first time readers please note: I posted part of this segment on Page Nine of this discussion on 12/31/2011 and am copying it now on page one so those reading can brush up on the subject of Molinism free from Rabbit trials. I began this segment on 12/24/2011 concerning Molinism but soon discovered that the discussion was being sidetracked into never ending rabbit trails. To avoid that, I began posting articles on the subject of Molinism that shown that Molinism is not purely Armenianism, nor is it purely Calvinism either. It is not Pelagianism, nor is its concept of free will mean that God is a slave to human choice. Such accusations, I hope, have been dealt with through the articles provided so far that we can actually begin to move forward and make some progress in understanding more about Molinism, and its use in helping the human mind comprehend a little bit more about God.
So how best to describe Molinism in plain ordinary English that everyday people can understand it? I can only give you my own definition which is a composite statement brief from all the posted articles so far. What is Molinism in a nutshell?
Molinism is a study on the absolute omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence of Almighty God regarding Predestination and Free will and other matters as well.
It begins to look into these matters by first looking into the epistemology handed down by Aquinas’s called Natural and Free Knowledge, and then demonstrates that there is something missing between these two types of Knowledge as pertaining to God called God’s Middle Knowledge.
So what is God's Natural Knowledge , and God’s Free knowledge i.e. Future Knowledge in a nutshell?
God’s Natural Knowledge can be summed as God's own omnipotent ways.
God’s Free knowledge i.e. Future Knowledge can be summed up as God's own omnipresence ways in the day to day dealings in the reality of human beings.
The epistemology handed down by Aquinas’s and later by Calvin deals primarily with God's Natural and Free Knowledge by using a systematic equational form. What is lacking from this ordered equation is God’s omniscience. This is where Molinism comes in. It defines what is missing from the systematic equation and indentifies it as God’s Middle Knowledge so people will be attracted to explore God’s omniscience further. Despite objections stating otherwise - God's Middle knowledge is bible based and there are plenty of verses that verify it.
The systematic approach talks much on the omnipotence of God and God omnipresent work in human reality as primary and comes in a specfic order but appears to neglect, or pay lip service, in cases even downplays God’s omniscience in its absoluteness, and its coequal influence upon the omnipotence and omnipresence workings of God achieving his will, purposes, etc…
Therefore, God’s Middle knowledge simply stated, is the investigation into the absolute omniscience of God Almighty. God knows all things; God knows and understand all our thoughts from afar off and is intimately acquainted with all our ways as Psalms 139:2-3 states and God’s Middle Knowledge looks intently upon how God does that. It investigates God’s Omniscience in its total absoluteness working alongside together and at the same time with God’s omnipotence and omnipresence that answers the hard questions about predestination that a systematic approach cannot adequately achieve.
That is the simplest definition I can give for Molinism Middle Knowledge (the investigation into the absolute omniscience of God Almighty). Next, Lord willing, I will try to give more clarity into the workings of God’s Middle Knowledge as it related to predestination. Please use the articles posted as points of reference.
So if you are beginnig this study on this subject, please read the articles mentioned on pages One thru Nine with the insight just provided and God Bless you all!
B. W. Melvin