The Molinism Directory

by Max Andrews

I’ve decided to gather all my posts on Molinism in one post for easy reference.

  1. Ebook: An Introduction to Molinism: Scripture, Reason, and All that God Has Ordered
  2. Middle Knowledge in a Nutshell
  3. A Review of Salvation and Sovereignty (Journal Publication)
  4. Review Essay: Four Views on Divine Providence
  5. Defining Omniscience
  6. Theological Elites and Their Dismissiveness of “Philosophy”
  7. Q&A 9: Layering Divine Middle Knowledge
  8. The Problem of Bad “Biblical” Rhetoric
  9. Why I’m Not an Arminian
  10. Why I’m Not a Calvinist
  11. The Incoherence of Theistic Determinism–Moral Responsibility
  12. Overpower–Is God Ultimately Responsible for Everything?
  13. The Singular Redemption View of the Atonement
  14. Is a Molinist Concept of Providence Discomforting?
  15. Word of the Week Wednesday: Supralapsarianism
  16. Can You Lose Your Salvation? A Molinist’s Perspective
  17. Molinism and the Grounding Objection
  18. Divine Foreknowledge In Sensu Composito
  19. Determinism vs. Fatalism
  20. A Molinist’s Soteriology
  21. How to be a Consistent Infralapsarianism
  22. Calvinists Got it Wrong
  23. Good God: Calvinists Got it Wrong
  24. Discussing Calvinism
  25. The Incompatibility of Middle Knowledge with Libertarian Freedom (Guest post by Roger Turner)
  26. Middle Knowledge and Eternal Omniscience (Guest post by Ryan Hedrich)



16 Responses to “The Molinism Directory”

  1. Awesome! I now have my summer reading list.

  2. Thank you very much for posting these links. I have been a Calvinist for a quarter of a century, but I also try to keep an open mind and study all sides of a question. If I were to be convinced that I was in error from the Bible, I would have to change my position- I just haven’t been convinced that Calvinism is not scriptural. I am looking forward to reading these posts.

    • Thanks James! Please let me know what your thoughts are on what you read, questions, etc.

  3. Hey Max, thanks for the directory for molinism. Most websites will advocate either calvinism or arminianism so it’s good to see your website being one of few that does advocate the doctrine of middle knowledge. There is a request I would like to make in light of the information you have given in this directory; I see that you have a link about how to be a consistant infralapsarian a la molinism. Yet after reading Plantinga’s “supralapsarianism or ‘O Felix Cupa'” I felt (and do believe) that a molinist can be consistant with the supralapsarian view (personally, I think that the supra [given middle knowledge] has an edge over infra in that it can provide a theodicy over why God permitted evil). In any case my request is this; would you be willing to write a summary of how a molinist can be a consistant supra? I myself have written a summary of Plantinga’s article and, if possible, would like to send you it albiet one where it does not quite do justice as I had to skip over some of the more complicated issues regarding possible worlds.

    • I’m glad to be of a good resource for you. I have a friend who is a supralaparian Molinist so I’ll see if he can get a post on that. I anything, it’s certainly a good idea!

  4. Thanks Max! I have a much better understanding of foreknowledge.

  5. ?Hey Max, how do i ask a question in Q and a?

  6. Hello,

    Would you be able to suggest the few leading books on Molinism for me? I haven’t studied the whole Calvinism/Arminianism issue for a long time. My email is:

  7. Thank you Mr. Andrews. I have long believed that I would just call myself a bible believing Christian and leave all of the arguing about philosophy and theology to high minded philosophers and theologians to spend their time on while I raise my family and practice my vocation – nuclear power plant engineering – thus safely keeping the lights on so the philosophers and theologians can continue to argue (dry humor intended) and helping to safely spread a modern measure of common grace to humanity. From my perspective I am a Christian and not a Calvanist, Arminian, or a this, or a that. However much to my horror people want to argue over such things and label me as a this or a that even as I protest that I believe the totality of scripture – I believe some of what they believe but also believe what they leave out. If the Bible says that God is sovereign (which it does) – I believe it. If it says that I have a choice to make in the matter of salvation (which it does) – I believe it. I was troubled by all of this so I started thinking. The “model” that I came up with independently of anything I have since read about simple or middle knowledge was a model that upheld God’s total sovereignty; God’s infinite omniscience about all things that were, are, are yet to be, could have been, and could be; God’s infinite omnipresence past, present, future; and man’s finite ability to know and choose. In simple mathematical thinking, the infinite always bounds the finite. The sovereignty of an infinite God is not threatened by giving finite man the ability to make a finite number of finite choices in their finite lives. This is really the only view that maximizes God’s greatness and glory – a condition that Calvanists insist must be present in any supposed solution to this debate. Any treatment of these matters that does not affirm what the Bible clearly indicates is in my honest opinion a form of idolotry that makes God into something that His Word indicates He is not – man’s act of trying to place an infinite God into a finite box made by the hands and mind of finite man. I was happily surprised when I stumbled across your blog – it appears that we have much in common – and I will be reading it regularly. God Bless.

  8. Concur on you! Good level of look at

  9. Trackbacks

Leave a Reply