# Molinism Vs Calvinist view on the foreknowledge of God



## Dragoon (Nov 14, 2009)

So I have to defend the Calvinist view of Gods foreknowledge in a debate in my issues in theology class.I have not had any problems finding good argument against the Arminian view (simple foreknowledge) and Open Theism but I can’t seem to find and good articles on the middle knowledge or Molinism view. Can anyone link me to some?

Thanks


----------



## Grillsy (Nov 14, 2009)

Check out Craig's book on the subject _Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom_. And these links may help

"No Other Name":A Middle Knowledge Perspective on the Exclusivity of SalvationThrough Christ

Molinism

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Molinism

Also James Whites website Alpha and Omega Ministries, The Christian Apologetics Ministry of James R. White will have some excellent info.

And here is a link to more links! http://www.monergism.com/directory/...d=and&phrase=molinism&B1.x=0&B1.y=0&B1=Search


----------



## ChristianTrader (Nov 14, 2009)

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/Middle_Knowledge.pdf


----------



## charliejunfan (Nov 14, 2009)

When I argue with Molinists I use this argument: Your theology is stupid! Go read the Westminster Confession and Catechisms


----------



## JTB (Nov 14, 2009)

Reformed Apologist: Molinism - problems, problems, problems

Reformed Apologist: Molinism, Dualism & the Nicene Creed

Ron DiGiacomo has a couple of good, short articles you should read.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Nov 14, 2009)

Search for Thomism vs Molinism. That is basically the Roman Catholic version of Calvinism vs Arminianism. You may find some good arguments against Molinism from the Thomists.


----------



## akennethjr (Nov 14, 2009)

What's Molinsm and Thomists mean? how would you define these terms?


----------



## s.morris (Nov 14, 2009)

Here is a link to James White giving a presentation explaining and refuting molinism. He actually gave this near Biola, where William Lane Craig is.Great talk!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SNtuo7kGro]YouTube - Explanation and Refutation of Middle Knowledge[/ame]


----------



## Ron (Nov 14, 2009)

JTB said:


> Reformed Apologist: Molinism - problems, problems, problems
> 
> Reformed Apologist: Molinism, Dualism & the Nicene Creed
> 
> Ron DiGiacomo has a couple of good, short articles you should read.



Brothers,

That first piece is on this site with some others. 

Monergism ::

Ron


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Nov 14, 2009)

akennethjr said:


> What's Molinsm and Thomists mean? how would you define these terms?



The soteriology of Luis de Molinas and Thomas Aquinas. A Thomist and a Calvinist are very similar, except the Thomist isn't allowed by the Vatican to talk about reprobation and the Thomist also believes that the marks of grace are that you are Roman Catholic, of course. The molinist is synergistic and semi-pelagian, although they don't admit it because the Church of Rome has declared pelagianism and semi-pelagianism to be heresy. Most of the RCC these days is molinist.

Here is a Catholic link about TULIP and Thomism compared: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9309fea1.asp They are wrong of course, but you can see the similarities. However, the truth remains that it is the Thomist within the RCC who spends the most time debating the Molinist.


----------



## cih1355 (Nov 14, 2009)

akennethjr said:


> What's Molinsm and Thomists mean? how would you define these terms?



Molinism is a theory named after Luis de Molina. It says that God has three kinds of knowledge: natural knowledge, free knowledge, and middle knowledge. God’s natural knowledge is His knowledge of all the possible worlds He could create and all of the different creatures He could create and all of their actions. God’s free knowledge is His knowledge of the world that He actually created including everything that actually happened in the past, everything that is actually happening now, and everything that will actually come to pass. God’s middle knowledge is His knowledge of what every possible free creature would do under any set of circumstances. Molinism assumes that people have libertarian free will. Molinism does not teach that there is something that guarantees what a person would do in a certain circumstance. According to Molinism, God’s knowledge what you would do in certain hypothetical situations determines what His plan is like. 

A Thomist would be a follower of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas believed that there are certain truths about God that we can know through the use of our natural reason, unaided by supernatural revelation. He also believed that there are other truths about God that can only be known through supernatural revelation. According to Aquinas, the truths about God that are known through the use of our natural reason are called, “preambles to faith.” The truths about God that can only be known through supernatural revelation are called, “mysteries of faith.” 

Aquinas sees a clear division of labor between philosophy and theology. If you are using your natural reason alone to find truth, then you are doing philosophy. If you are depending upon God’s special revelation to find truth, then you are doing theology.


----------



## WAWICRUZ (Nov 26, 2009)

The doctrine of the sovereignty of God effectively invalidates Molinism.

_Scientia Media_ is foolishness since God really does not know about "counterfactuals" by virtue of the fact that everything that comes to pass is how He determined them to be even before a single atom was fashioned.

Again, God is not on Plan B.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 26, 2009)

WAWICRUZ said:


> The doctrine of the sovereignty of God effectively invalidates Molinism.
> 
> _Scientia Media_ is foolishness since God really does not know about "counterfactuals" by virtue of the fact that everything that comes to pass is how He determined them to be even before a single atom was fashioned.
> 
> Again, God is not on Plan B.



_Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions; yet has He not decreed anything because He foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions._ WCF III.2

That God has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass does not mean that God doesn't know alternate courses of events. 1 Samuel 23:11,12


----------



## WAWICRUZ (Nov 26, 2009)

py3ak said:


> _Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions; yet has He not decreed anything because He foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions._ WCF III.2
> 
> That God has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass does not mean that God doesn't know alternate courses of events. 1 Samuel 23:11,12



That God has had a plan for reality even before creation presupposes that there were no "alternatives" to how things are since the existence of such "possibilities" implies an external source for them, and therefore denies the ultimate causality of God.

God didn't have to choose between whether to have the dog bark or meow.

To claim the existence of counterfactuals as it bears upon humans as having the same import upon God is a distorted and mistaken anthropomorphism.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 26, 2009)

Warren, look again at the confession. Does it say that God knows things that don't come to pass?


----------

