The Foreknowledge of God: An Evangelical Defense of Molinism and Middle Knowledge

Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

The question of how God’s omniscience, particularly His foreknowledge, harmonizes with human freedom has occupied theological discourse for centuries. The core difficulty centers on whether human decisions are genuinely free if God infallibly foreknows them. This challenge directly impacts doctrines of divine sovereignty, providence, human responsibility, salvation, and theodicy. Within the conservative evangelical framework, which upholds the absolute inerrancy of Scripture, the view known as Molinism—derived from Luis de Molina (1535–1600 C.E.)—offers a coherent and biblically faithful solution by proposing the doctrine of middle knowledge (scientia media).

Molinism asserts that God’s omniscience encompasses three categories: natural knowledge (knowledge of all necessary truths and possibilities), middle knowledge (knowledge of counterfactuals of creaturely freedom), and free knowledge (knowledge of actual events contingent on divine decree). Middle knowledge uniquely bridges divine foreknowledge and libertarian free will, affirming both divine sovereignty and genuine human choice without collapsing into determinism or open theism.

Understanding God’s Threefold Knowledge

In Molinism, the first category, natural knowledge, refers to God’s comprehensive awareness of all logical possibilities and necessary truths. This includes mathematical certainties, metaphysical necessities, and all potential circumstances. It is independent of God’s will and flows necessarily from His omniscient nature.

Middle knowledge, the centerpiece of Molinism, concerns what free creatures would do in any hypothetical situation. These are known as counterfactuals of creaturely freedom. Such statements take the form: “If person X were in situation Y, X would freely choose action Z.” This knowledge is prevolitional, meaning it exists prior to God’s decision to create any particular world.

Free knowledge refers to God’s awareness of all actualized events—what will happen—stemming from His sovereign decree to actualize a specific world among all possible worlds.

This triad of divine knowledge allows Molinism to uphold two non-negotiable biblical truths: that God is fully sovereign (Psalm 135:6; Daniel 4:35) and that human beings are genuinely responsible moral agents (Deuteronomy 30:19; Joshua 24:15; Romans 14:12).

The Nature and Coherence of Middle Knowledge

Middle knowledge hinges on the truth of counterfactual propositions—statements about what free creatures would do in any given circumstance. Such knowledge is logically prior to God’s creative decree but contingent upon the hypothetical free decisions of creatures.

A critical issue in middle knowledge is the so-called “grounding objection,” which challenges the truth status of these counterfactuals. The objection claims that if the creature has not yet been placed in the situation, there is no fact of the matter about what the creature would freely choose. However, this objection misunderstands the nature of propositions as dependent upon God’s perfect omniscience, not upon temporal actualization. Truths about counterfactuals are grounded in God’s complete and exhaustive understanding of every creature’s essence and disposition, derived from His natural knowledge of all possible agents and their compatibilities with all possible circumstances.

This understanding avoids the determinism implied in Calvinism’s exhaustive divine decree model while maintaining a high view of God’s sovereignty. God’s selection of which possible world to actualize remains entirely within His sovereign will. However, His knowledge of what choices free creatures would make under all circumstances allows Him to sovereignly direct history without violating human freedom.

Biblical Basis for Middle Knowledge

While Scripture does not explicitly articulate the concept of “middle knowledge” as a technical term, there is strong biblical evidence supporting the idea that God possesses knowledge of counterfactuals.

One of the clearest examples is found in Matthew 11:21-23, where Jesus declares:

“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented in sackcloth and ashes long ago. But I tell you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will go down to hades. For if the miracles that were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until today.”

This statement reveals Jesus’ knowledge of what non-existent counterfactual situations would have produced. Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom would have responded differently had they experienced the same historical circumstances as Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum.

Another example appears in 1 Samuel 23:9-13, where David inquires of Jehovah whether the people of Keilah will surrender him to Saul. God reveals that they would hand him over if he remained, leading David to flee. The surrender never actually takes place because David changes his course of action, yet God’s knowledge of the hypothetical scenario remains accurate.

These texts, alongside others such as Jeremiah 38:17-18 and Deuteronomy 7:3-4, support the claim that God possesses knowledge of counterfactuals of creaturely freedom. Such knowledge is not grounded in the actual occurrence of events but in God’s perfect understanding of all possible outcomes.

Sovereignty and Free Will in Biblical Theology

Scripture consistently affirms both God’s comprehensive sovereignty and genuine human responsibility. Proverbs 16:9 states, “A person’s heart plans his way, but Jehovah determines his steps,” while Proverbs 19:21 declares, “Many plans are in a person’s heart, but Jehovah’s decree will prevail.” These affirm that God’s purposes govern history without denying human decision-making.

Joshua 24:15 explicitly affirms human freedom: “Choose for yourselves today which you will worship… but as for me and my family, we will worship Jehovah.” Such passages are inconsistent with exhaustive divine determinism and instead support the compatibilist or libertarian view of human agency.

Acts 2:23 speaks of Jesus being “delivered up according to God’s determined plan and foreknowledge,” revealing both divine sovereignty and the culpability of human agents in crucifying the Messiah. This aligns well with the Molinist assertion that God orchestrates His will through foreknown free decisions of human agents.

Addressing the Grounding Objection

Critics of Molinism frequently raise the grounding objection, arguing that middle knowledge requires factual grounding outside of God’s mind. However, this criticism misunderstands the metaphysical basis of divine omniscience. God’s knowledge of counterfactuals does not depend on external temporal facts but rather on His perfect knowledge of every logically possible creature and their dispositions.

Because God’s natural knowledge includes an understanding of every creature’s nature, character, and motivational structure, He knows precisely what any creature would freely choose under any given circumstance. These truths are contingent but knowable to the omniscient God prior to any actualization.

The assertion that counterfactuals lack truth value unless actualized confuses epistemic access with ontological grounding. God’s middle knowledge is not based on observational data but on His timeless, exhaustive understanding of all possible states of affairs.

Philosophical and Theological Soundness of Molinism

Molinism avoids the pitfalls of both determinism and open theism. Determinism collapses genuine human freedom by making all events necessary consequences of divine decree, rendering human choices illusory. Open theism, on the other hand, sacrifices divine omniscience by claiming that God does not know future free decisions.

Molinism affirms libertarian freedom: the capacity of agents to choose between alternatives without coercion. Yet it equally maintains God’s meticulous providence, as He actualizes a world in which His sovereign purposes are fulfilled through the free choices of His creatures.

This model preserves the moral responsibility of human beings while safeguarding the biblical doctrine of divine foreknowledge. It also allows for coherent explanations of divine providence in historical events, including the crucifixion (Acts 4:27-28) and the rise and fall of nations (Daniel 2:21).

Implications for Salvation and Evangelism

Molinism provides a biblically consistent framework for understanding election and predestination without necessitating unconditional determinism. God’s choice of which world to actualize incorporates His middle knowledge of how individuals would freely respond to the Gospel message.

This allows for a robust doctrine of evangelism, consistent with passages like Matthew 28:19-20 and Romans 10:14-15, which emphasize the necessity of preaching for salvation. God foreknows which persons, in which circumstances, would respond positively to the message of Christ and thus orchestrates history accordingly.

The encouragement to preach and evangelize remains vital and undiminished under Molinism. Rather than undermining human responsibility, middle knowledge emphasizes it, affirming that the means (evangelism) are part of God’s sovereign plan.

Conclusion: A Rational and Biblical Model of Divine Foreknowledge

Molinism offers a compelling and biblically faithful model of divine foreknowledge that harmonizes God’s sovereignty with human freedom. Rooted in Scripture and logically coherent, it stands as a powerful answer to the enduring question of how an omniscient God can justly hold free creatures accountable for their actions.

Molinism avoids both the fatalism of determinism and the limitations of open theism by maintaining that God’s omniscience includes the exhaustive knowledge of all possibilities, all contingencies, and all actualities. His governance of the universe incorporates His awareness of all potential creaturely choices, actualized through His sovereign decree.

In this way, Molinism affirms the full counsel of biblical teaching on God’s foreknowledge, providence, and human accountability.

You May Also Enjoy

Gnosticism: A Biblical and Evangelical Apologetic Analysis of Ancient Heresy and Its Modern Echoes

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).