Molinism, Middle Knowledge, Natural Knowledge, Free Knowlddge, Luis de Molina, Counterfactuals, Subjunctive Conditionals, Foreknowledge, Predestination, Election, Omniscience, Compatibilism, Libertarian Freedom, Calvin
Molinists maintain that middle knowledge is the best candidate for settling the historical debate on God’s sovereignty and man’s free will. The philosophical sophistication of the view can be alluring, and the efforts of Molinists to rationally defend it against criticisms have been impressive. But does Molinism still have a biblical problem? Proponents argue that the doctrine is compatible with the Bible's teaching on God's knowledge of counterfactuals, though admittedly, it is not explicitly taught in Scripture. But this claim is more problematic than advocates for the theory have alleged. The present study maintains that in the absence of a more complete biblical revelation regarding God’s knowledge logically prior to his eternal decree, philosophers of religion should exercise greater caution than is presently being advocated. It is argued that Paul supplies the reader with a necessary constraint to philosophical speculation regarding the deliberations of the divine mind (Rom 11:33–36), and it is John Calvin, not Luis de Molina, who best represents Paul’s appeal to mystery in this respect. Far from being an intellectual "punt" to mystery, this is an occasion to join Paul in awestruck wonder in the face of the unknowable.
Jeff Scott Kennedy, Ph.D. Bible Exposition (Rawlings School of Divinity, Liberty University / 2022)
Kennedy, Jeffrey S.. 2023. "An Appeal to Mystery Without "Punting": Revisiting Molinism’s Biblical Problem in Light of Ephesians 1:4–11 and Romans 11:33–36." Eleutheria: John W. Rawlings School of Divinity Academic Journal 7, (2). https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/eleu/vol7/iss2/7