Molinism and Middle Knowledge

1« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Jema
- West Siieeduh
- Ex-Muslim
- I, a universe of atoms, an atom in the universe
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
OP - June 15, 2013, 03:08 PM

I was discussing the age old conundrum of free will vs. an all knowing God with a fellow Christian and he brought up the religious doctrine Molinism to reconcile the two. Molinism proposes a 'solution' to the dilemma by introducing the concept of middle knowledge. Middle knowledge is defined as God's prevolitional knowledge of all true counterfactuals of free will. This means that while God does not influence our decisions, he knows what our reactions will be in a particular setting thus giving him a degree of divine providence without stripping us of our libertarian freedom. Knowledge and influence are not linked apparently. Molinists maintain that God's middle knowledge allows him to survey all possible outcomes thus enabling him to know what an agent will do in a particular situation. So if God wanted to achieve a certain outcome all he has to do (using his middle knowledge) is to actualize a word in which the circumstances were conducive to producing the preferred outcome.

Does anyone else think this is a steaming pile of horse shit and only creates more problems for theists? Discuss why or why not here plz kthx.

Started from the bottom, now I'm here
Started from the bottom, now my whole extended family's here

JOIN THE CHAT
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #1 - June 15, 2013, 03:15 PM

Steaming pile of horseshit.

It sounds very similar to muslims trying to explain why predestination still allows for free will, in that allah knows what you will choose, hence knows the future, but it is still your free will and not him guiding/forcing you. Whereas in reality, like with the bible, there is way too much evidence against the free will concept.

Just sounds like bullshit prettified with fancy words really.

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #2 - June 15, 2013, 03:17 PM

Quote from: Jema on June 15, 2013, 03:08 PM
...................This means that while God does not influence our decisions, he knows what our reactions will be in a particular setting thus giving him a degree of divine providence .........................

Does anyone else think this is a steaming pile of horse shit and only creates more problems for theists? Discuss why or why not here plz kthx.

Oh! there is little doubt on that Jema. That is a biiiiiiig pile of horse shit

what is this god?? the "he god" ?? running in the clouds watching through his binoculars in to the bedrooms of human beings?? Or the silly thoughts in human brain?? because they are doings things that they are not supposed to do as human beings...

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- e-raja
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #3 - June 15, 2013, 05:56 PM

What I can piece to together over the freewill debate is the following.

I have noticed when discussing this issue, falling in to the trap of not properly defining what key words mean. For instance on the God existance 'pop' thread I went back and forth with dahir over the issue of omniscience and freewill. I didn't realise until fairly late that I tackled the issue from the wrong angle. However, he had failed to address the issue properly regardless of this.

I'll go through what I observed:

When debating freewill vs God's omniscience; we, the neutral observer assume omniscience includes predestination. When Muslims/christians debate this issue they convieniently leave that little part about predestination seperate. God's all knowing doesn't actually affect our decisions, THAT IS if he does not get involved directly at all. So when they argue their case, this is often what they are arguing. This is also the case when they bring the numerous analogies of making a choice. In this case it is fine but there is a massive flaw which the discussions are usually steered away from.

This flaw is the intervention of God in our lives. It is practically impossible to state the an omniscient bieng created us and not be involved in our lives. He basically did the most important part (creating us, starting it off, he sent prophecy etc.). He sets the rules, has set the laws. No Muslim or christian can deny this is the case, the scriptures are riddled with these ideas.

One thing I definitely forget to bring up was the idea of prophecy, particularly the end times prophecy. Is it possible for these alledged prophecies not to be fulfilled?. A muslim would have to answer no, for obvious reasons. Hence it is out of our control to stop crippling wars these foretell. If Muslims and every other religion did not kill each other, God would be wrong. So God, an all knowing bieng decided all out war between each and killing is the best solution to bring about the truth. Really is baffling if you think about it.
- dr_sloth
- Pub Regular
- Orthodox Atheist
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #4 - June 15, 2013, 08:22 PM

giving a philosophical sounding name to a stupid argument doesn't make it any more sophisticated.
it is simply the most predictable ad hoc side step to the challenge. One that I have heard plenty of times, but just never heard the name for it.
- zooby
- Ex-Muslim
- Snoozin'
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #5 - June 15, 2013, 08:45 PM

When God comes into the equation of the free will debate, free will must exist or God has effectively "programmed" some people to go to hell. Hell is only "moral" (even though its fucking stupid to say that it's moral to punish someone for eternity) if God can wash his hands of responsibility from our actions. Saying that free will exists and we're being tested by an all powerful God is silly because even though knowledge and influence are not linked, God is always the first influence (i.e. the creator) in religious narrative. Just because he's not influencing our decisions now doesn't mean he's not responsible for our actions. Lets not forget he knew the end game when he created the start and therefore "programmed" people to go to hell, this is a valid logical conclusion no matter how hard religious people may try to dodge this.

The whole story of God testing us is pointless and sounds like a convenient way of getting people to behave how you want. This would've been a lot of use in the old times, which coincidentally, is when this steaming pile of horse shit emerged.

Join us on chat. Click here.
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #6 - June 15, 2013, 08:58 PM

Quote from: dr_sloth on June 15, 2013, 08:22 PM
giving a philosophical sounding name to a stupid argument doesn't make it any more sophisticated.

Huh! "Molinism " sounds philosophical??? That is one heck of a ugly name and ugly faith based idea.. dr_sloth., At least other faith heads have hell. heaven, after life, before life..... do good ..be good. yada yada dadada.., whatever good/bad said in their respective religious doctrine written by some cave dwellers they follow it in some way....

but this Molinism is part from ugly name it serves no purposes..

goddy god just flies and watch you what you are doing ...but.....but never interferes with anything?? what is the point?? see this news

poor lady she was looking after a pet chimpanzee right from its baby days.. That damn thing grew in to 200 pounds brute and mauled her . She went from this to this

what kind of molly dolly god is that sitting and flying around watching a poor lady get mauled by a chimpanzee that was spoon fed by her when it was baby?

that Molinism is one heck of horse shit and UGLY NAME
..

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- Jema
- West Siieeduh
- Ex-Muslim
- I, a universe of atoms, an atom in the universe
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #7 - June 16, 2013, 06:40 PM

Quote from: BerberElla on June 15, 2013, 03:15 PM
Whereas in reality, like with the bible, there is way too much evidence against the free will concept.

This comes to mind:
"As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them Whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe. Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur)." 2:6-7

And I don't see how they could reconcile that with the idea that God has written our fate.

Quote from: yeezevee on June 15, 2013, 03:17 PM
Oh! there is little doubt on that Jema. That is a biiiiiiig pile of horse shit

(Clicky for piccy!)

Dude... MY EYES D:

Quote from: e-raja on June 15, 2013, 05:56 PM
I have noticed when discussing this issue, falling in to the trap of not properly defining what key words mean.

Voltaire rolls in his grave every time this happens.

Quote from: e-raja on June 15, 2013, 05:56 PM
One thing I definitely forget to bring up was the idea of prophecy, particularly the end times prophecy. Is it possible for these alledged prophecies not to be fulfilled?. A muslim would have to answer no, for obvious reasons. Hence it is out of our control to stop crippling wars these foretell. If Muslims and every other religion did not kill each other, God would be wrong. So God, an all knowing bieng decided all out war between each and killing is the best solution to bring about the truth. Really is baffling if you think about it.

This is especially true for Molinism because there is a contradiction. They want to save God's omnipotence by saying he can control our circumstances in order to produce the outcome he desires. But we still have free will because he didn't affect our particular actions he simply predicted what they would be with his middle knowledge! MIND-FUCK GALORE.

If God is omnipotent and has written our fate then he has - using his middle knowledge - created the circumstances that have resulted in many a war and famine. Molinism actually makes God directly responsible for evil.

Quote from: zooby on June 15, 2013, 08:45 PM
The whole story of God testing us is pointless and sounds like a convenient way of getting people to behave how you want. This would've been a lot of use in the old times, which coincidentally, is when this steaming pile of horse shit emerged.

Another question I'd ask is if God does not interfere in our lives then why do theists pray? Why do they thank God for the good in their lives if, according to their rationale in this type of discussion, it is thanks to their freewill and therefore all their doing?

Started from the bottom, now I'm here
Started from the bottom, now my whole extended family's here

JOIN THE CHAT
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #8 - June 17, 2013, 10:32 PM

This argument would be fine if we were designing god and batting ideas around. Trouble is, god is already pretty firmly defined and this argument is nothing more than flimsy retrospective apologia. It seems completely redundant concerning the conventional God of monotheism. God, the all-knowing, all-seeing, eternal and changeless, alpha and omega. The grand architect of the universe, outside of time and space, who set in motion all things according to his whim. The god that god is required to be in order for all the other central claims of religion to have a foundation.

At the moment of creation, god would simultaneously know all of our future and would have designed it thus. The map of time and all events, the very structure and nature of time and the very things all events are made of, would have been determined at the moment of creation. How else can an omniscient and timeless creator create a universe? Molinism only works if god created, then saw. This isn't omniscience. Omniscience is knowing all things. If god did not know the universe before or while creating the universe, then he was not omniscient. Unless god was not omniscient previously, but became omniscient once the universe was created. In which case, god is not eternal and changeless.

I cannot fly. I cannot walk on the surface of the sun. I cannot teleport, read thoughts or become mist. I cannot stop an emotion or feel one at whim. I cannot not think about certain things. Cannot not be changed by certain things. Cannot choose to believe a thing or disbelieve something I am compelled to believe. I don't have free will. I have conditional will, at best. Will predetermined by the physics, parameters and dynamic forces of the world around me and further restricted by them should I ever attempt to exercise it. Will decided by the nature and capacities I have inherited as a mammal, adjusted by experience, acting/reacting in a reality outside of my will, an objective universe apprehended by the sensory organs I happen to be allocated by evolution. The only one who could have free will in an absolute sense is a god defined as having it. This conditional will might be what people are referring to when they say 'free will' but it is not enough to absolve the creator of responsibility for the nature of his his creation. Which, let's be honest, is the real goal of the argument – to reconcile the irreconcilable problem of evil and/or hell.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- ibn Bilal
- Global Moderator
- سلاسي هو المسيح
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #9 - June 17, 2013, 10:46 PM

^Good stuff
- schizo
- tesco value gabba
- Ex-Muslim
- One must be absolutely modern.
- offline
Molinism and Middle Knowledge
Reply #10 - June 17, 2013, 11:07 PM

The doctrine comes to the absurd conclusion that God is in time.
1« Previous thread | Next thread »