The Narrow Path Ministries

If my understanding is correct the classic Arminian believes that God does not decree sin,rather that He only exploits the sin & sinner for His purpose.Is that not the same thing that Molinism teaches?Is not middle knowledge & counterfactuals just ways of explaining the mechanism that God uses to exploit sin for His purpose?Should Molinism be the natural progression of Arminianism?

Arminians, Molinists, and Open Theists would all say that God doesn't decree sin but He often uses sinners and their sins to bring glory to Himself. There are quite a few examples in the Bible where sinners do evil, but God uses that evil to accomplish His purposes.

I do think middle knowledge and counterfactuals better explain God's providence.

Open Theism and Molinism make more sense to me than Classic Arminianism, but it's difficult for many Arminians to accept Open Theism because they've always believed that God knows the future exhaustively and they're not willing to accept a view that says actually much of the future God can see only as possibilities (open). Likewise, many Arminians have trouble with Molinism because they think that God's middle knowledge strips humans of their free will.

psimmond wrote:Likewise, many Arminians have trouble with Molinism because they think that God's middle knowledge strips humans of their free will.

Do many Arminians actuallly think that? That's amazing because if pre-knowledge does that, then the Arminian understanding that God looks into the future and sees all events (or stands "outside of time" and sees all events simultaneously) would "strip humans of their free will"!

Actually, knowledge in itself isn't inconsistent with free will. Rather the idea that the future is settled is inconsistent with free will. And if sentences about the future are logical statements (either true or false), then the future is settled and there is no free will. For example, consider the sentence that P Simmond raises his hand at 3 P.M. next Friday. If this sentence is true, then that aspect of the future is settled. It will be inevitable that P Simmond will raise his hand at 3 P.M. next Friday. He CANNOT do otherwise.
If the sentence is false, then that aspect of the future is also settled. It will be inevitable that P Simmond will not raise his hand at 3 P.M. next Friday. He CANNOT raise his hand at that time. Therefore P Simmond DOES NOT have the choice as to whether to raise his hand or not.

If one extends this argument to ALL events, then no one has a choice about anything — there is no free will.

If we are to maintain that human beings have choices, that it is up to them whether or not to do a thing, then we must affirm that sentences about the future have no truth value.

Some sentences about the future appear to have truth value. "I will go to the city tomorrow." This sentence is written in the FORM of a logical statement. But it really means "I intend to go to the city tomorrow," and is not a statement about my action tomorrow at all. It is a statement about my intention.

Similarly, the sentence "The New York Rangers will win the game next week" is not a statement about the New York Rangers' accomplishment next week. It really means "I predict that the New York Rangers will win the game next week". It is a statement about my prediction.

God also predicts the future. But He is in a much better position to predict the future than any or all human beings. For a good prediction is based on knowledge of the past — and God has total knowledge of the past. Thus God makes many predictions which he often reveals to His prophets, and which come true. But not all of them come true.
Because God is in close relationship with people, God will often act contrary even to his intentions, if man changes his ways:

If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it, and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will relent of the good that I had intended to do to it. (Jeremiah 18:7-10 ESV)

Paidion wrote:Thus God makes many predictions which he often reveals to His prophets, and which come true. But not all of them come true.

If that's true, then God is a false prophet.

(Of course, it's obvious to most here that God is not a false prophet, therefore it's your statement that's false.)

BW, was Jonah a false prophet? He prophesied "“Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” (Jonah 3:4)

However, Nineveh was NOT overthrown in 40 days.

When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it. (Jonah 3:10)


So God changed His mind about his decision to overthrow Ninevah. So does that make God a false prophet? I think we agree that it does not. So the only other possibility according to you is:

...therefore it's your statement that's false.

And what is my statement?

God makes many predictions which he often reveals to His prophets, and which come true. But not all of them come true.

The example I have quoted above concerning Ninevah CONFIRMS my statement. Thus your conclusion shouldn't be that my statement is false. Perhaps a more rational conclusion would be that your reasoning is insufficient.

This is an example of an area where Open Theists depart from everyone else. They take the passages about God changing his mind literally; they are, however, the only ones who can define libertarian free will as "the ability to choose otherwise" and have a view that supports this.

Arminians often claim that they have libertarian free will that gives them the ability to choose otherwise, but if you press them on that, they will probably take an open theist position or stick to their guns and walk away confused.

As a Molinist, I've accepted and actually take great comfort in the fact that God does know the future exhaustively. And when Molinists read in the Bible that God changed his mind, we understand it to mean that from a human perspective it looks like God changed His mind, but in reality, God knew before the foundations of the world that he would tell Jonah that He was going to destroy Nineveh and He knew they would repent and He knew He would relent.

I grew up with an Arminian view, but Boyd turned me into an Open Theist. About a year ago I discovered William Lane Craig and became convinced that Molinism best aligns with the whole of scripture. So in a roundabout way, I did progress from Classical Arminianism to Molinism.

Paidion wrote:BW, was Jonah a false prophet? He prophesied ""Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!" (Jonah 3:4)
However, Nineveh was NOT overthrown in 40 days.

You quoted the Jeremiah passage about God relenting from a judgment if people repent, but that's not at all where you went in the paragraph from which I quoted. Quoting a little more than before:

God also predicts the future. But He is in a much better position to predict the future than any or all human beings. For a good prediction is based on knowledge of the past - and God has total knowledge of the past. Thus God makes many predictions which he often reveals to His prophets, and which come true. But not all of them come true.

Let me paraphrase what seems to me to be the clear meaning of that, and I'd appreciate if you'd tell me where I've misunderstood you:

Essentially, you said God makes predictions about the future the same way we do -- simply by making an educated guess based on knowledge of the past. He's just better at it than we are because His knowledge of the past is total, while ours isn't. But some of God's predictions are wrong for the same reason some of ours are wrong -- He guesses wrong.

And that, of course, would make Him a false prophet. So, what did I misunderstand?

psimmond you wrote:...but in reality, God knew before the foundations of the world that he would tell Jonah that He was going to destroy Nineveh and He knew they would repent and He knew He would relent

Hmmm...
If God told Jonah he was going to destroy Ninevah while He knew that He wouldn't do so, that sure sounds like lying to me!

Essentially, you said God makes predictions about the future the same way we do -- simply by making an educated guess based on knowledge of the past. He's just better at it than we are because His knowledge of the past is total, while ours isn't. But some of God's predictions are wrong for the same reason some of ours are wrong -- He guesses wrong.

Predictions are not guesses. They are based on facts.Tossing a die, and guessing what number comes up — that's guessing. Guessing does not require any knowledge at all. Making a so-called "educated guess" implies a guess based on partial knowledge. God's knowledge is not partial and so God's predictions are perfect and flawless. His intention to destroy Ninevah was based on his total knowledge of the Ninevites. He knew the thoughts and intentions of their hearts! His complete knowledge indicated that the Ninevites were unlikely to repent, so He decided to destroy them. He wasn't "wrong" in his prediction. He made a perfect prediction based upon His complete knowledge. But, having libertarian free will, the Ninevites did repent. And so God changed His mind and didn't destroy them as He had intended.

Hmmm...
If God told Jonah he was going to destroy Ninevah while He knew that He wouldn't do so, that sure sounds like lying to me!

Sounds like lying to me too, but since God doesn't lie I have to wonder if a threat which causes someone to repent is always viewed by God as a lie. If a wife says "I'm leaving" to an abusive husband, and these words cause him to repent will God hold this woman guilty of lying? What if in reality she feels trapped and knows she won't leave?

When you visit your friend who's in the last stages of cancer and you say, "You look great" while inside you're thinking they look terrible will God hold you guilty of lying? Does God consider this a lie? Does it depend upon intent?

I don't have definitive answers, but I sometimes think God is not as legalistic as we are (holding to the letter of the law). The story of Rahab also makes me wonder.