Practical Determinism?

[seer]

I wrote this in response to Rick, he thought it was off topic, so here it is:

Well even if God didn't directly create evil He certainly did create the agents that would create evil. And He knew full well what the outcome would be. Joe six pack dies unconverted - God knew from all eternity that Joe would not accept the gospel - yet knowing that end God still allowed (or caused) his birth. And even if old Joe had the power to receive our Lord, God knew he wouldn't - his fate, in the mind of God at least - was certain. If God has absolute foreknowledge of all future events (which He does) I don't think we can escape at least some form of determinism... It is all determined or certain in the mind of God...

[Sean]

God knowing what the outcome of all things does not = all things determined by God. It means known by God. (To put it simply)

[seer]

God knowing what the outcome of all things does not = all things determined by God. It means known by God. (To put it simply)

Well yes and no. Once God created He set a series of events into motion. Not only our acts, but His reactions, and our reactons to His reactions, etc... And long before He ever created these acts and reactions were certain in the mind of God, even though there may (and I stress may) have been alternative outcomes. So God creates Joe six pack, or allows Joe six pack to be born, knowing full well that he would never receive Christ. In the mind of God Joe's fate was certain. And has been from all eternity. This is why I call this Practical Determinism. The means as well as the ends are certain.

[Sean]

Joe is held accountable for his actions. God is a just Judge. I don't have a problem with Joe's "fate" being "determined" by God's knowledge of the future. Since Joe doesn't know the future, his actions are still his own. And he is accountable for them. The key question is what God is actually "seeing"?

-The Calvinist generally believes that God only knows all things about the future because God predetermined all things that would come to pass.
-The Open Theist generally believes that God does not know the outcome of free will agents. He knows the future only by the information present at the time and by His reasoning powers.
-The Arminian believes God knows the future because He knows all things about the future including the outcome of free will agents. God can then use this knowledge to determine what He wants to come to pass without interference to free will creatures if He so desire. The difference is that God is seeing the outcome of free will choices, not causing them.
-The Molinist believes God's foreknowledge includes "middle knowledge" (which includes counterfactual knowledge) in addition to natural knowledge and free knowledge. Meaning, God knows what free creatures would do in given states of affairs, even if they are never actually in, nor ever will be in said state of affairs. Matthew 11:23 is one example.

I believe God has "middle knowledge"(counterfactual knowledge). This opinion of mine would tend to make me a Molinist. But I don't necessarily hold to all the tenants of Molinism, so I still think it's consistent with the Arminian position. Clear as mud, eh?

[seer]

Joe is held accountable for his actions. God is a just Judge. I don't have a problem with Joe's "fate" being "determined" by God's knowledge of the future. Since Joe doesn't know the future, his actions are still his own. And he is accountable for them. The key question is what God is actually "seeing"?

-The Calvinist generally believes that God only knows all things about the future because God predetermined all things that would come to pass.
-The Open Theist generally believes that God does not know the outcome of free will agents. He knows the future only by the information present at the time and by His reasoning powers.
-The Arminian believes God knows the future because He knows all things about the future including the outcome of free will agents. God can then use this knowledge to determine what He wants to come to pass without interference to free will creatures if He so desire. The difference is that God is seeing the outcome of free will choices, not causing them.
-The Molinist believes God's foreknowledge includes "middle knowledge" (which includes counterfactual knowledge) in addition to natural knowledge and free knowledge. Meaning, God knows what free creatures would do in given states of affairs, even if they are never actually in, nor ever will be in said state of affairs. Matthew 11:23 is one example.


I believe God has "middle knowledge"(counterfactual knowledge). This opinion of mine would tend to make me a Molinist. But I don't necessarily hold to all the tenants of Molinism, so I still think it's consistent with the Arminian position. Clear as mud, eh?

I would tend to agree with Molinism, with a Calvinist bent of course. But again, the end and well as the means is certain.