Question: "What is middle knowledge?

"

Answer: Middle knowledge is a theological concept developed by Luis Molina and espoused by
modern Christian philosophers such as William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga. Middle knowledge is
the philosophical cornerstone supporting the theology of Molinism. In short, middle knowledge is
Gods omniscient awareness of what would happen if certain circumstances were to occur,
including the free, un-coerced choices of creatures in those scenarios.

Middle knowledge is so named because it comes logically between Gods natural knowledge,
which is truth existing independent of Gods acts or choices, and His free knowledge, which is truth
dependent on His acts or choices. Like natural knowledge, middle knowledge is not subject to Gods
control, a point of great controversy for some theologians. And yet, like free knowledge, truths known
by middle knowledge are contingent on Gods actions, meaning which truth is made real is entirely
within Gods control.

An analogy to middle knowledge from mathematics is the Order of Operations, sometimes known
as PEMDAS. The order of operations sets the proper sequence of tasks to be done in arithmetic:
Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, and Subtraction. None of these
operations happen before or after another in a chronological sense, but do occur before or
after in a logical sense. That is, when we calculate (1+2) x 3 = 9, 1 and 2 are added earlier, with
multiplication by 3 later, only in the logical sense of earlier and later, not in terms of the passage
of time; there is no time involved. Order of Operations simply explains the logical order in which
these concepts play out. In much the same way, the concept of middle knowledge implies a logical
not chronologicalprogression in Gods knowledge, as follows:

Natural knowledge: what can happen (independent of Gods control).

Middle knowledge: what would happen (independent of Gods control).
Creative command: Gods choice, action, intervention, etc.
Free knowledge: what will happen (completely under Gods control).

Calvinism and Arminianism hold that the salvation of any particular person is determined, respectively,
entirely by Gods direct action or entirely by human choice. In rough terms, this is seen as a debate
over the interplay between Gods sovereignty and human free will. Molinism, in essence, upholds
both real free will and Gods total sovereignty, through the use of middle knowledge. By this, it is
claimed that God knows all things a free creature would do in all possible circumstances, and so
infallibly enacts His will through those circumstances, rather than directly overriding that creatures
freedom.

Perhaps the strongest scriptural support for middle knowledge, and therefore for Molinism, comes
from the use of counterfactuals in the Bible. Counterfactuals are if-then statements about situations
or choices. For example, Jesus explicitly says, twice, that under different circumstances certain
people would have made a different free choice of whether or not to repent (Matthew 11:2123; Luke
10:13). Jesus also refers to different outcomes under different circumstances (Matthew 26:24; John
14:2). God also references different choices leading to different results in the Old Testament (Exodus
9:15; Isaiah 48:1719). Further, the Bible clearly states that God allows us to make choices contrary to
His preferences (Matthew 23:37; 2 Peter 3:9; Psalm 5:10; Isaiah 30:1).
Middle knowledge is often hotly contended by supporters of Reformed
theology. Calvinist and Reformedtheologians object to the idea that God is not directly in control of the
choices of free creatures. Molinists would counter that directly controlled free choice is a logical
contradiction. The counter to this counter, frequently, is to appeal to the mystery of Gods nature and
omnipotence, suggesting that there is some way in which God can both decide for us and we be
free, without its being a contradiction.

Open theism and Arminian theologians who reject middle knowledge usually do so under the claim
that these counterfactuals cannot be logically framed without either being circular or determined
beforehand as dependent on Gods nature. This is known as the grounding objection and is the
most common foundation for critiques of both middle knowledge and Molinism.

Despite what may be said in well-meaning zeal, middle knowledge is well within the boundaries of
orthodox Christianity. Whether or not a person believes in middle knowledge is more a question of
philosophical tastes and denominational history than anything else. Truth or falsehood is important,
of course, and how one views middle knowledge will affect his theological approach to other issues,
particularly evangelism. Yet, in practice, Calvinism, Arminianism, and Molinism apply the same basic
biblical, moral, spiritual, and cultural approaches. Middle knowledge is controversial to some but
ought never to become a point of division between true believers.

Recommended Resource: Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach by Kenneth

Keathley and The Potter's Freedom by James White