So there are some biblical passages that would appear to support divine middle knowledge, yet I think the more convincing arguments for it are theological. Divine middle knowledge provides explanations for numerous theological dilemmas that are otherwise very difficult to provide a satisfactory explanation for.

Middle Knowledge and Foreknowledge

As mentioned earlier, divine middle knowledge logically precedes foreknowledge. God did not acquire his foreknowledge of what will happen simply by looking ahead into the future. Instead his middle knowledge furnished him with knowledge of what would happen in every situation (not just what could happen). From this knowledge, he selected which possible world to create. God effectively chose the content of his foreknowledge by selecting which possible to create.

So, would it be possible for God to have foreknowledge without middle knowledge? I think it would be very strange. It would imply God would know what will happen, but without any planning of it. He would have only his natural knowledge, and so if his creatures are genuinely free, then his act of creation is a blind act, not knowing exactly what will happen. His natural knowledge provides him with all possibilities, but he would not know what his creatures would do if he created them. So at the moment of creation, God cannot know what world he is in fact creating.

Consequently, I don't think that simple foreknowledge is a coherent view.

The other alternative is Calvinism, where God knows what will happen because he has pre-ordained it to happen. This means that God knows exactly what world he is creating, but I cannot see how their can be genuine free will in this case.

Providence

Middle knowledge provides arguably the best explanation for the compatibility of God's providence and human freedom. Since God knows what everyone would do when placed in any situation, he is able to bring about those situations where his creatures will bring about his purposes, but will do so freely. Craig points out that when you consider that those free decisions are the result of earlier free decisions, only the omniscient God would be able to bring these out to fulfill his plans.

As Craig says: "Given middle knowledge, the apparent contradiction between God's sovereignty, which seems to crush human freedom, and human freedom, which seems to break God's sovereignty, is resolved. In his infinite intelligence, God is able to plan a world in which his designs are achieved by creatures acting freely."

Consequently this means that everything occurs by the permission or will of God. Without middle knowledge, there appears to be no explanation for providence without destroying human freedom.

Predestination

The concept of predestination is really just part of the bigger concept of providence. The problem with predestination is that there are passages in the Bible that God has predestined those who will be saved. Yet there are other passages that claim that the responsibility is our own. Middle knowledge allows this apparent contradiction to be resolved. God knows who would chose in and under what circumstances logically prior to creation. Having that knowledge, he is then able to chose to create them and then place them under the right circumstances. Consequently, the choice is free, yet God is still ultimately in control - he choses who is created, their circumstances, and thus, who is saved.

Furthermore, it solves the problem of what happens to children who die before having a chance to be saved. God's middle knowledge provides him with knowledge what those children would have done if they had grown up, and so he knows if they would have been saved. This view is much more sensible that the often put forward view that those dying in infancy are all graciously saved by God - but that would imply that the best thing a parent could do for their child would be to kill them! That is simply untenable.

Assumed implicitly by many Christians.

Finally the concept of middle knowledge is implicitly assumed by many Christians. We frequently pray to God for guidance - to ask him what we should do in a particular situation. If God only posses simple foreknowledge, then all he can tell us what we will do. But how is that useful? When asking for God's guidance, I want to know what I should do, not what I will do.

When asking for God's guidance, we are effectively asking him which of several paths our lives could take would be better. These possibilities are part of God's middle knowledge, not his foreknowledge. If God does not possess middle knowledge, asking him for guidance does not appear to make sense.

Conclusion

So we previously looked at biblical evidence for divine middle knowledge. There is some, but the Bible does not focus on how God knows the future. However, middle knowledge provides sensible explanations for God's foreknowledge, providence, predestination, and guidance. Neither simple foreknowledge nor Calvinism would appear to provide satisfactory explanations for these. Divine middle knowledge seems to be implicitly assumed by many Christians, often without knowing it, and so unless a good reason can be found to oppose middle knowledge, I submit that it should be accepted.

Posted by Dave Bryant at 8:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (2)