Back to the future

Molinism is the basic theology formulated by Jesuit theologian Luis De Molina.1 Molina taught that God's knowledge can be divided into 3 "logical moments". Natural, middle, and free.

God's Natural Knowledge is His knowledge of everything that could happen in any given circumstance. It's His knowledge of all the free choices any creature could make in any given circumstance. It also is His knowledge of all necessary truths such as 1 + 1 = 2.

God's Middle Knowledge is His knowledge of everything that would happen in any given circumstance. It's His knowledge of what any free creature would freely choose in any given circumstance. For example, God knows "If Evan Minton were given $2,000 worth of Kindle gift cards, he would freely choose to download all of the books on his GoodReads 'to-read' list", or "If Bob went to Tatsuki's Japanese Restaurant, he would freely choose to order sushi".

God had these two logical moments of knowledge logically prior2 to His decision to create any world. Logically prior to His decision to create the universe, God knew everything that could happen in any given circumstance and everything that would happen in any given circumstance.

God's Free Knowledge is His knowledge of everything that actually will happen. Free knowledge is synonymous with foreknowledge. This knowledge is the knowledge of all future events. The content of God's free knowledge is a result of the sovereign choice of God to actualize one of the worlds God knew about in His middle knowledge.

On Molinism, Everything happens because God decreed it, yet all of our choices are free. All Molinists agree on these facts. This is "Mere Molinism".

Let's take the crucifixion of Jesus as an example. The Bible says "This man [Jesus] was handed over to you by God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross." (Acts 2:23, emphasis mine). The crucifixion of Jesus was deliberately planned by God, His foreknowledge played a role in the matter, but it was wicked men who put Jesus to the cross. Molinists say that God knew that if Caiaphas was high priest in the first century, then he would freely condemn Jesus on grounds of blasphemy and he would freely take Him to Pilate for execution. He knew that if Pilate was prefect in the first century, then he would freely comply with the demands of the crowd. And God knew that if Judas was born in the time and place that he actually was, then he would become Je

Although it was a Jesuit who came up with the theory on how to reconcile free will and divine sovereignty that bears his name, there is nothing about it that is contrary to protestant theology. As you can tell by my description, there isn't anything particularly catholic about saying God controls events via His omniscience of how creatures WOULD behave.

And really, one can be a Calvinist or an Arminian and hold to Molinism. Molinism is simply a theory of how God can be in control yet humans are simultaneously free. So you can be a Molinist and either accept or reject the L in T.U.L.I.P (I reject it. Jesus died for all people - 1 Timothy 2:6). That said, Molinism can have implications for soteriology, and I wrote about that in this lengthy article on my blog -- https://cerebralfaith.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-soteriological-case-for-molinism.html

That is an interesting possibility. Do you think it will be so, and if so, how do you think it will come about?

I have no idea. I would hope not.

It doesn't seem implausible to me that English could evolve in a few hundred years though. Just as we no longer say "thou", someday, English speakers may no longer say "you".

But as for an NIV Only movement, I don't see that happening. But it would be funny if history repeated itself that way.

I can see it with cults as one who would cliam to be a prophet would claim that the NIV is the only inspired version, but i do not see it going beyond it, certainly not to the level of the KJV Only camp.

With that said, I take it that you have had a number of encounters with the latter group?

Some, but not many. I don't know if that's just the circles I find myself in or if that's a sign the movement is finally dying out. Maybe a bit of both.

I used to go to a KJV Only church, but though I love the KJV, I have never subscribed to their point of view. The reason for it is that I've grown up reading other versions so I knew from the very beginning that their belief on other version are wrong.

And frankly i appears to me that their beliefs borders on Tin Foil type conspiracy theory.

Are you a KJV Only or do you just prefer to read the KJV, like me?

Neither. I prefer either the ESV or NIV.

The ESV is becoming quite popular with good reason. May I ask, why have you chosen that particular version?

I have heard a large number of biblical scholars recommend it, saying it's a very accurate word-for-word translation.

I've heard that as well; you've made an excellent choice.

BTW, are you Protestant?

Yes.

Ah.. I've never heard of them before. What makes Molinist, "Protestant"?

That's great; are you an Arminian or a Calvinist? I'm a Calvinist.

Molinist.