I (REALLY) Love Molinists
- Tony Vance
- Oct 27, 2015
- 6 min read
In the continuing series, “I Love…,” I now find myself needing to tell why I love Molinists. I am a Molinist, and though I didn’t realize it, I have been one for most of my life. The Theological underpinnings of Molinism are ideas I came to many years ago, independent of other influences of Molinist Theologians, though in the past couple of years I have devoured many articles, essays, and books on Molinism. To make it as simple as possible, Molinism is based upon the ideas proposed by Luis de Molina (1535-1600) a Jesuit Priest who struck a balance between free will, predestination, and efficacious grace, in a way no one before had done. He coined a phrase, “scientia media” in French, translated as ‘middle knowledge’, the idea that God knows what anyone would have done, in all possible circumstances (though this is a poor explanation of Molinism and a better is here).
Just as I gave three reasons, though there are many others, why I love Calvinists and Arminians, I will also give ‘just’ the top three reasons for loving Molinists. Before the reasons why, I want to explain, just as Arminians and Calvinists have a clear understanding of Soteriology, based upon their theological beliefs, Molinism has a belief based upon this notion of ‘middle knowledge’ as a huge part of it. Molinism is safely in the Orthodox camp as it holds to salvation by grace, thru faith, and has no issue with most of what Arminians or Calvinist believe except the logical order of God’s decrees, of foreknowledge and predestination. Molinists believe God can really know everything, even what would have or would not have happened; middle knowledge. This article is not an attempt to discuss or define Molinism, but to give the three top reasons I love Molinists. So if you would like to learn more about Molinism, visit here or here. I would also encourage you to dive into these matters on your own, you may find yourself deeply in one camp or another, or as is more likely, a nuance of all.
FREE WILL VS. SOVERIGNTY
The first reason I love Molinist is the tension between God’s sovereignty and Man’s free will is not a tension. Many great Calvinist thinkers and theologians believe man does not have ‘free will’, as John Piper explains, “Verse after verse in the Bible teaches that my willing—which is real, responsible, accountable—is not decisively and ultimately my own creation. It is God's decisive governing,” (http://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/does-god-get-more-glory-if-people-have-free-will). In his book, ‘Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God’ (Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1961), J. I. Packer, no Calvinist light-weight, states that there is an antinomy between the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man (or free will). He defines "antinomy" as "an appearance of contradiction between conclusions which seem equally logical, reasonable or necessary...is neither dispensable nor comprehensible...It is unavoidable and insoluble. We do not invent it, and we cannot explain it..." (God) “orders and controls all things, human actions among them"...yet, "He holds every man responsible for the choices he makes and the courses of action he pursues...To our finite minds this is inexplicable." Piper disagrees, “Packer is too good a biblical scholar to think there ever was such a thing as "free will" taught in the scripture,” and adds, “Therefore, in order to see how God's sovereignty and man's responsibility perfectly cohere, one need only realize that the way God works in the world is not by imposing natural necessity on men and then holding them accountable for what they can't do even though they will to do it. But rather God so disposes all things (Eph. 1:11) so that in accordance with moral necessity all men make only those choices ordained by God from all eternity,” (http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/a-response-to-ji-packer-on-the-so-called-antinomy-between-the-sovereignty-of-god-and-human-responsibility). Molinists see a perfect harmony in God’s foreknowledge and predestination and man’s ‘free will’. Kenneth Keathley better explains the harmony:
“Because, like the Calvinist, I am convinced the Bible teaches that (1) God is sovereign and his control is meticulous; that (2) man is incapable of contributing to his salvation or of even desiring to be saved; that (3) God through Christ, is Author, Accomplisher, and Completer of salvation (i.e., salvation is a work of grace from beginning to end); that (4) individual election is unconditional; and that (5) the believer is secure in Christ.
However, like the Arminian, I am also convinced the Bible teaches (6) God is not the Author, Origin, or Cause of sin (and to say that he is, is not just hyper-Calvinism, but blasphemy); that (7) God genuinely desires the salvation of all humanity; that (8) Christ genuinely died for all people; that (9) God’s grace is resistible (this means that regeneration does not precede conversion); and that (10) humans genuinely choose, are causal agents, and are responsible for the sin of rejecting Christ (this means that the alternative of accepting salvation was genuinely available to the unbeliever). There is only one position that coherently holds to all ten affirmations, and that is Molinism.” (From ‘Salvation and Sovereignty’, pp. 7).
DR. WILLIAM LANE CRAIG: 'THE MAN'
The next reason I really love Molinist is because of Dr. William Lane Craig. I could say something similar about Calvinists and Arminians, in that the best representatives of their positions are the best of the best, just as Craig is of Molinism. John Piper is my favorite Calvinist, a thoughtful, gracious, and articulate proponent of his soteriological stance. In Arminianism, Dr. Michael Brown stands out as a reasonable, accommodating, and kind example of a Christian; you wish all stripes of Christians would exhibit. With Craig, he is amazing in his ability to articulate, argue, and relate on three very demanding levels; scientifically, philosophically, and theologically. A Philosopher by trade, his extensive knowledge in science, theology, and (of course) philosophy has propelled him into the limelight of today’s best Christian apologists. In studying his work, listening to his podcasts, and reading numerous articles, I’ve discovered an appreciation for Molinism in a way that is intellectually honest, theologically rich, and defendable. My appreciation for Craig is not as much a soteriological function of his ministry as is his defense (apologetics) of the Christian Faith, but in discovering his work in Apologetics I found myself agreeing with many of his positions on soteriology, and thus, if it’s good enough for Dr. Craig, I’m sure not one to argue with him.
A RISING 'ROCK STAR'
My last reason for loving Molinists is a personal one. I discovered Molinism through the calm, reassuring voice of someone I discovered on a podcast that I plan my week around; ‘The Gospel Friends’. The hosts, Chase, David, and Nick, express no proclivity towards Molinism, themselves (actually David and Chase fall in the Reform Camp, while Nick fancies himself an Arminian), a featured guest was a Molinist, on a particular episode, almost two years ago now. I was enthralled with his ability to articulate his positions. I found him thoughtful, reasoned, and logical. I began investigating his website, writings, and even subscribed to HIS podcast. It didn’t take me long to realize that I, too, was a Molinist. Molinism was the ideas I had bounced around in my theological thinking for years, but didn’t understand there was a place to come down on, outside Calvinism or Arminianism. After years of struggling with my aversion to Calvinist’s predestination, excluding free will, and Arminians’ free will notions trumping God’s sovereignty, I found a position, I had firmly believed for decades, yet didn’t know what it was called.
The young man I referred to earlier also had a desire to begin a ministry in Apologetics, much like Craig. He has had a couple of debates, to date, and I believe he held his own against a well-studied atheist. His writings are smartly done, well defended, and theologically and philosophically reasoned. This young man is none other than, who I like to refer to as, ‘The Rising Rock-Star of Apologetics’, Rob Johnson (see his website- here). His articulation of Molinism convinced me that I was truly a Molinist, and had been, for decades. It wasn’t till later I learned that Rob is younger than many of the shoes I own, he is not even 26, yet, and that he was very wet behind the ears as a Christian, less than 10 years. Even though I had come to many of the same positions that Molinism articulates, many years before Rob was born (!); his ability to voice Molinism, as a legitimate theological and soteriological position, convinced me to begin using the title, Molinist. In spite of his, seemingly, youthfulness (he is young, VERY YOUNG), both in biological age and spiritual, he is astute, well read, and knowledgeable. I am convinced that his contribution to the Body of Christ and our Lord’s Kingdom will be far reaching and lasting. I remember reading a text from my brother one day, “have you listened to this Rob Johnson guy, he is the bomb.” I couldn’t agree more with my brother and Rob is a fantastic ambassador, first for Christ, then Apologetics, and finally Molinism.