The Problem Of Free Will 

What helps me is to remember that slaves have no will of their own. Certainly not slaves that worship their chains. The last thing we should want is for God to not intervene or toy with our free will. For without God overcoming what we want we would gladly march into hell.

“God knows what Sauls gonna do because God knows all time & because.. God made Saul.” I love it. It really is so obvious, when you acknowledge that it’s all about God & Him glorifying Himself.

I think the problem with all of this is that man thinks God has an obligation to save everybody, or give everybody a chance to be saved, and they think that salvation comes about how man respond to God. It's all about man, and therefore a false gospel. God can save whoever he wants and whenever he wants.

Dr. White is correct. There is one reason and one reason only that Molina ever thought this theological mess up: to protect the assumption of man's "free will", when such a concept is unknown throughout Scripture. Instead we find that all who are in sin are enslaved to sin (dead in their trespasses and sin, we are like the valley of dry bones in Ezekiel 37 which are utterly without life unless God gives us life, and naturally hostile towards God in our natural state) and that those who have been saved by the grace of God are now slaves to righteousness. In either case slaves, which by definition are not free.

Love the teaching!

Thank you so so much!

I really appreciate Dr. White and have listened to him for over 2 years now. However, seeing him in Professor White mode and hearing a lecture from him is really great. I am glad that y'all are accentuating this aspect of him for our benefit. Thank you! Good job, Rich! ;-)

Poor old John Smith has done a lot of things over the years.

Dr. James White, wonderful job explaining how middle knowledge is wishful thinking.

The difficulty I always have is God's Sovereign Decree + not being the author of sin. It's hard to reconcile that God is totally Sovereign and in complete control and we are the clay He is the Potter, yet simultaneously all sins and offenses against God are our own fault and on our own choice that He did not author.

God does not answer to man. Man answers to God! There is no in-between!

I am not a Calvinist but all of my favorite pastors/ preachers are. I am certain of Christ’s divinity, god’s sovereignty, and human free will. The seeming contradiction between the latter two I am uncertain of any reconciliation for, but I believe their is one and am eager to better understand.

Awesome Dr. White. I listened to podcast show you did with WLR and these concepts got brought up rather quickly. Thanks for taking the time to diagram and explain the details.

The problem with Middle Knowledge is that it is not derived from a careful study of Scripture, but from philosophy alone.

Correct , exact , truthful theology . This is why I love this man . It took me many years in my sanctification to learn this and I just learned it within the past couple years and now I hear it being talked about by someone else way more learned than myself to confirm it . I would say that’s the holy spiritual in action !

I like that "Who made Saul tall?"

And indeed God cannot create a world where everyone is saved without also eliminating the possibility of things like perseverance patience gratitude selflessness etc. because these things require adversity to exist and adversity requires bad agents.

I can't find the full length vid of this talk

I watched the debate between Dr. White and Dr. Craig, and both men explained their positions really well. But Dr. White won on this point. He convinced me of Calvinism rather than Molinism, which I had been considering.

we can think of it this way as well... Man is Not privy to the Counsel of God.. this is concerning all of God's decisions and why.... for example JOB..... JOB had No idea.. that God was holding him up to Satan as an example of a righteous man.. and God fearing.. but God knew....God's counsels are not made known to man.but we are the recipients of His decisions......

Thank you brother for the lesson.

Only God is autonomous.

A great rebuttal of Molinism. The concept of Free Will has been a controversial one down through the centuries. The one that appeals to me is that Mankind has Free Will, but only within limits. That covers all bases I hear you say. Well I believe in the Sovereignty of God, and that is biblical, but Man's free will does not override the Sovereignty of God. Otherwise man would be God. And here lies the problem.

Mahalo (thank you) for another one of your wonderful teachings. Sorry, but I still don’t quite get it and may never get it. God is absolutely sovereign in all things and I don’t need to know how 😄

You cannot recognize who Jesus is unless God intervenes (Mathew 16:7)

There is no problem with free will if properly understood.

The problem of free will is that it doesn't fit into calvinism. That's it. Calvinists create a bunch of false dichotomies to argue in defense of determinism. Quite absurd imo

Free Will is not the problem but Libertarian Free Will is. Libertarianism will eventually entails to Fatalism but not Determinism, Fatalism is aberrant from Determinism. Compatibilism affirms the compatibility of freedom and responsibility with determinism and it is consistent with scriptures. Just because Libertarian Free Will is convenient for apologetics doesn't mean that it is biblical, i rather be wrong if my wrong is right with God.

Thanks you! God calls his elect by the power of the Holy Spirit according to his plan and purpose. I’m guessing you’re seeking salvation. If so, then He has already touched your heart and is “drawing” you to Jesus.

Is there a good critique of middle knowledge in book form?

I'm no genius, but poor humble me can't understand how, the myriads of Bible verses notwithstanding to the contrary ( man slave to sin, blind, dead in trespassing, hostile to God, etc.), people still insist that men have free will. To believe that is proof that they're slaves to sin, blund, dead in trespasses, hostile to God, etc.

Why can’t God create creatures that share His autonomous nature?

Hmmm..... I'm a bit confused on this one. Certainly, God is timeless. In that regard, there is a chronological point at which creation came to be. Certainly, God knew what he was going to create and everything about what was going to transpire in his creation before he created it (because He Himself is timeless and all-knowing). Is this not true? Is this the same thing as "middle knowledge" or is this a different concept entirely? I think what I've written above is logically consistent and is backed up by Scripture, however I am confused in terms of it's relationship to "middle knowledge". I don't know. I believe that God is the ultimate authority in all things.

I believe that we have the ability to choose our earthly life as we see fit. We dont have complete free will, where we can do whatever we want, we have a limited amount of freedom, which can be atributed to beig made in gods image. I also believe that God is completely sovereign and knew all of history before the universe was created. I believe that God is able, in his infinielye abilities, to make creatures that are capable of making free choices, while being completely aivereign over everything, and maintaining his character through all of it. Thats how big God is. To me, if you want to reduce God to something smaller you can take 1 or 2 things away. I believe in an infinite God, which cannot be understood by man, so if your argument is that you understand God completely, therefore an argument I make couldnt fit into his character then i think you believe in a much smaller God.

Regardless of the labels or position and opinions expressed. I had zero will and hope.. When at my worst.. Christ Jesus was at his best. Jesus initiated my eagerness to accept his gifts and calling. Repentance wasn't required. Accepting his invitation on limited options or out of options...Gods will.Free will Is an illusion. We are slave's to the Law agree it is Rightous..Somehow this also .gives life to the Sinful Nature and its These 3 thing's remainFaith,Hope and Love Love the greater of them. The Lord Giveth and the Lord taketh away..He will bless whom he will bless. Curse whom he will curse. Free will leads to death. Surrendered will to Christ Jesus life. ❤

So belief in middle knowledge means that there are some “worlds” that God can’t create, which means God is not omnipotent. Middle knowledge is not a Christian doctrine.

What app and tv are you using??

It's there's a difference between Molinism and Pelagianism?

Heres an example of middle knowledge limiting God about which worlds he can create: you can't create patience and perseverance without the existence of adversity and trials. You can't create gratitude without also creating poverty.

His critique of the term middle knowledge also applies to terms natural and free which has been used traditionally but is not biblically expressed in the manner he seems to think middle knowledge should be

My question is did God have knowledge of what he could freely decree before he decreed to create? It seems like if He doesn't then it's a sort of blind decree in my mind.

I would rather become a classical Arminian than a molonist lol

Trying to figure this out. To decree something don't you have to have an idea of it before you decree it? Shouldn't God have an idea of us before He decrees us? Help

Middle knowledge sounds a whole lot like Monte Carlo Simulation

The idea that god knowledge is limited by middle knowledge is like saying God is limited because he cannot make a square circle, it doesn’t limit God if creation has properties than are limited and derived from logical truths

Is "accepting" Jesus appropriate language?

Trying to simplify this argument, badly admittedly as I'm new to Theology. 1. God can process and store X# of variables from t=0 to this moment. 2. The amount of variables humans can envision an entity processing and storing is X + Y where Y is a positive number accounting for everything, in heaven (other than Himself) and Earth. 3. God 'knows' the future as demonstrated in prophecy. 4. It is extremely unlikely for God to include in His design a universe with requisite processes, boundaries, limits, or any telemetric instrumentation in His creatures to accomplish every one of His goals in his creation of free willed agents. 5. Human and Elohim (other than the Trinity) free will are an insurmountable obstacle for God to accomplish His goals. 6. God's goals are accomplished. 7. Human free will cannot exist. Is this the argument presented in this particular snippet plainly stated? I am sure either I am missing something or there are much better arguments propounded elsewhere. My concern is that God has limited Himself in some ways, we all agree on that. From a deterministic perspective we are starting by limiting His computational power and ascribing every highest good and the most grotesque evil act to Him temporally in exchange for an eternal Glory. Secondary causation seems an absurd patch to those who can't swallow God committing all evil, seems a cowardly position not exegeted from Scripture. Free willers tend to limit God in thinking that EVERYTHING is about them and many believe that their belief in God saves them with cheap Grace. God turns around and poof, "Hey look at the tally board!". I am leaning toward free will because I would rather think that I am way too self centered (which is forgivable ad it is our natural estate), rather than ascribing every grotesque evil to my Holy God. Read this with your guard down as much as possible if you are courageous enough, these are the verses that haunt me as they are not in Psalms or Proverbs which can proof text anything but historical narrative, in context: Jeremiah 32:34-36 English Standard Version 34 They set up their abominations in the house that is called by my name, to defile it. 35 They built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. How else could He communicate this any more clearly saying there is at least 1 thing He didn't command and at least 1 thing did not come from His mind? Sovereign looks to those under him /vice versa. I would think if He created us as programmed iPads some with firmware repeating the words "Love you love you love" for eternity and some saying "hate you hate you hate you" He would never use the human concept of Sovereignty as there are no deeper parallels to draw from as human Sovereignty is categorically different. Conjecture: He would have likely used Storytelling or authorship most likely to describe our relationship to Him as characters or some kind of marionette. (I think the potter and clay is a beautiful and strong metaphor in favor of determinism.) Dr. White agreed that there was no concept of Determinism anywhere in Judaism or Christianity in the early Church until 400+ years A.D. with Augustine. Augustine had already been a determinist for at least a decade in a cult called Manicheanism prior to His convenient conversion to Christianity synchronous with Constantine's declaration of Christianity becoming the state religion. The only prior Deterministic major religions were Eastern (Vedic, Buddhist..) I am open to correction so please feel free to point me to any primary sources I may be missing. I am fully aware of the usual verses such as in Ephesians, Genesis, Romans 9 etc but those have excellent explanations to consistently interpret them from a non-determined, originalist perspective and most demonstrate the opposite conclusion to an uncommitted observer. I am also open because I don't want to commit either the genetic nor negative inference fallacies which I admit I fell into above a bit 🤦 I am still investigating this issue but what I DO know by direct, miraculous revelation is that I believe the Gospel in it's beautiful, Divine simplicity explained in FOUR verses 1 Cor 15:1-4 that we all agree on. I am a convert from the religion of Scientism, for which I've payed dearly with my reputation with other faculty, which is rooted in Determinism so I am taking it slow as I am biased toward it. Statistically we are likely all wrong from God's perspective in so many ways with our espoused propositional Truth claims that we absolutely KNOW to be True which is why I hold the Gospel in a separate, properly basic category. Our Master had to simplify His Gospel so succinctly and clear so that we as a family from Martin Luther to Dr. Michael Brown to Dr. Leighton Flowers to perhaps even Fred Phelps, Esq. we ALL agree on the MOST important thing. Love you Brothas and Sistahs!

James doesn't what you say mean that God’s omniscience is contingent upon His sovereignty? I thought none of His attributes were contingent on any of the rest of them.

Dr. White, is it true, as some say, that God knows everything from all eternity, including things that have not yet occurred in our natural world? Also, if man's will is not free, is man still morally culpable for bad acts? Is sin even possible if man isn't free?

Isn’t the problem with free will that we do it - and we ought not? (John 6:38)

“If we sin wilfully” 🤔 Do we have that terrible possibility to choose satan instead of God? Can’t we switch our attention from God to smth filthy? My experience say “yes”. I can say He allowed it to happen but didn’t order for sure.

"How can God know?" Easily with infinite wisdom and knowledge Middle knowledge is what God knows. He wouldn't be constrained to decree anything based off knowledge alone. I'm no molinist but your argument is full of holes. Can someone explain to me why God being infinite in knowledge and power cannot create a universe where he is completely sovereign and humans have free will?

Here's what I find most fascinating about Calvinists. They believe man was born sinful because of Adam, AND deserves eternal punishment for being sinful. Said another way: man has no free-will, AND suffers forever because God is just. There's only one possible explanation for this anti Christ unbelief; God has blinded their eyes so they can't understand the truth. God reconciled ALL to Himself in Christ, and is holding nothing against anyone. We played no causal role in becoming sinful, and no causal role in being redeemed. What God accomplished (past tense) in Christ was the redemption of ALL. Now that's GOOD NEWS. ☀️☀️

"If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it." Isaiah 1:19-20 God states it as a choice with a reward or consequence. That is a direct quote from God.

Don’t forget to leave a tip on the way out of the classroom for Dr. White.

You've got exactly were I led to, but I might of found a solution that maybe could work 1)Natural instead of God foreknowing what we will do, he foreknows what he will do which is when the time comes he is going to allow himself to allow you to degree a free choice decision[just not as many options as he does] 2)middle/degree he degrees that WE will live in our life with multiple degrees just like he does[again just not as many options as he does] 3)Free God has foreknown that at this point coming very soon, he was going to let you degree a decision just like he does, and him knowing exactly when the the time comes is exactly the same time you have made a decision[Not before and not after}

the enlightened man struggles with that the ancients understood in God’s perspicacious revelation. Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them. - Psalm 139:16 Against You, You only, I have sinned And done what is evil in Your sight, So that You are justified when You speak And blameless when You judge. - Psalm 51:4

Dr James White is like a math teacher

I think he is very confused of what Molinism really means. The fact is that while Calvinism is determinism by means of God acting on your will, Molinism is determinism by circumstances. So, both are really very similar at the very end. In other words, the supposed "free will" of Molinism is not such, since God has put the creature in a situation in which the creature cannot act or choose in a way he doesn't want. This is the part that he is missing and will never tell you.

Based on these definitions, I would also not hold to middle knowledge. (For what it’s worth, I am a Calvinist.) However, not everyone uses these definitions of middle knowledge. Thomists, for example, would differ with these definitions.

It should be noted that any reference to Molinism having its origin with a Jesuit during the Counter-Reformation as some sort of point against its validity is guilty of the genetic fallacy. A view is not invalidated because of where or when it originated.

I love James White, but it is so very obvious, as I know others have pointed out before, to anyone who has actually studied this that he totally misses the boat on this. Rather than continuing to teach on a topic he doesn’t seem to understand why not actually engage in direct conversation with someone like WLC and actually listen? You may not agree, but at least you’d have the opportunity of having someone who has studied this explain to you why you misunderstand the position. James, have you reached out to WLC? Unless you become a full blown determinist making God the author of evil, if you simply follow the logic of a White’s own reformed position then it is obvious that he himself believes in the concept of middle knowledge. Also, I don’t know any serious scholar who thinks Molinism/middle knowledge answers everything. However, it does at least attempt to offer a logically coherent explanation, in my opinion, then today’s traditional reformed position which violates basic logic in making man responsible (response-able), while claiming he has no ability to respond to anything himself. The whole thing is just laughable from a logical standpoint. This is why, for example, you’d be hard pressed to find people with formal training in logic subscribe to the traditional reformed position. To be fair, Calvinist theologians like Sproul always end up admitting this themselves by often concluding their long talks with something like, “it may not make logical sense, but that’s what the Bible says.” I cringe every time I hear that - maybe, just maybe, the problem is not the Bible, but your interpretation of the text which makes no logical sense?

But everyone who is saved has given up their free will, for the will of God, and everyone who is willful is not saved, so I'm not sure any of this matters.

My conclusion from this video and the wlc conversation is that white isn't a Calvinist. He is just too proud to concede his position.

13:19 "you and I both know that *so much* of what we do is based upon God's decree." James White can't consistently describe his own theology, let alone anyone else's.

I'm not a Molinist. The hypocrisy of the Calvinist to call out Molinists for their middle knowledge because it's not in the bible is made clear by their embracing ALL actions being predestined which also is not in the bible. It's doubly hypocritical in light of the FACT that believers from Acts to Augustine promoted free will and it was Augustine who introduced "Calvinistic" predestination into the church from his stoic past.... which most Calvinists are either ignorant of or plug their ears when told this.

Experience saying I AM is all you need to grasp what it means to you and all man say the same word. Imagination is the only God in man, the mind the same one does good and evil by God. Saved or waken is a first adam thinks he needs to be saved, second Adam is waken in you.

I reject autonomy as unbiblical, but I believe the bible may support a form of libertarian free will which refines Calvinist determinism to allow for a loving relationship in which love compels but does not force the will

all this AND the Lord God, the Holy Trinity, is not BEYOND TIME AND SPACE, so has already created all time, beginning to end, and is not somehow subject to it (time), perplexed by it, nor dependent upon it (those attributes are only for the created).

Its called middle knowledge because men decided it was called middle knowledge. Just another of the countless example of how man takes the Word and shapes it to his worldview.

I don't agree with Dr. White on this point, but I just wanted to say - can I PLEASE get me one of these boards!?!?!?

15:50 Middle Knowledge (MK) is define by the Pattern of Being. God is beyond being. To me, MK is recognizing God’s Decree follows a pattern of Being that is not arbitrary or based on mere rationalization

Three things jump out as indication that Dr. White does not know what he is talking about. 1. God's free knowledge is the knowledge of his decree. Allot of what Dr. White attribute the free knowledge is should be included in God's natural knowledge. 2. There are no counterfactuals in a Determinist world view. What man does is what God determined him to do. So counterfactuals are just natural knowledge under Dr. Whites view. 3. Dr. White allows for logical moments under his determinist view but the pretend that doesn't exist when talking about middle knowledge. He explains middle knowledge as being impossible because "john Smith" doesn't exist yet. If that's true then the lack "John Smith" existence would prevent God's free knowledge under Dr. White's view.

You mean the Problem of Determinism!!!

A lot of people take it to open theism

14:11 that is a metaphysical assertion. I see no reason to accept that SINCE if I WERE to accept that premise then as you said, it COSTS me my responsibility for my actions. It also makes GOD unjust for punishing Evil and therefore makes GOD unloving. I therefore reject a metaphysic which Makes God things contrary to what He says He is. At this point, DETERMINISM is no longer Biblical since it posits that there is no ME or CHOICE that I can truly make.

Not that I agree with middle knowledge but it's only pre-decree if you don't imagine God forming all of space and time, unbound by space and time. I can mold a piece of clay and change it everywhere at once. A 4 dimensional piece of clay is formed by God.

Middle knowledge shows a complete lack of understanding of God's eternal nature.

I'm a Reformed Christian that believes in free will. Too much evidence for it not to exist. The early apostolic fathers all taught free will. Irenaeus wrote extensively about it. It's the only thing wrong with Calvinism, yet their doctrine is the only one I find closest to the original church fathers, hence I subscribe to its theology, with that one exception. Every use of "predestination" and "foreknowledge" used in the bible has literally nothing to do with election and everything to do with God's ultimate plan which is for man to come to know him. Irenaeus explains it in great detail. It'll open your eyes. As he puts it, man was created in the likeness of God. One of the attributes of God is His free will.

God's decree is that man have full autonomy over his will.

A super computer greater than that which can be conceived.

I don't see why this is so difficult to grasp. God, being the omniscient Creator, knows infallibly how any creature, with any sets of characteristics, will choose in any given circumstances, but the circumstances doesn't necessarily fixed or determine the choosing. God doesn't micromanage. You can have, for example, exactly the same worlds and the only thing that change is the choice by the creature in the exact same circumstances. Circumstances and characteristics are factors, but not the determative factors to choose one way or another. The creature's will is the definitive factor. Dr. White says this delimits God, but keeps forgetting that this delimitation is placed by God himself. His will. Middle Knowledge is not an outside thing that delimits God. It's part of the logical process of God's mind. There are counter-factual of creaturly freedom, and there is also counter-factual of God's freedom. If God wants to create a world with libertarian free creatures and not one with determinism, then is God the one delimiting his options, not the creatures. If God selects to create a world with libertaria free creatures, then he can't interact with it has if they where deterministic creatures. God is the one delimiting his action because of His free will. After selecting this (to continue with the example) God has delimits his options of what to do next. He can choose to not be a Savior and let humans die on their sins or He can choose to be their Savior and some be saved. Again, it's all about God. Depending on His plans, he keeps delimiting his options. It does not delimits his power, benevolence, omniscience, nothing. It excuse God of being the author of evil and blames the sinners. As it should be.

God does not have a problem with free will . If he did, he wouldn’t have given it to us. I understand how intelligent and respected Dr. White is, but there are plenty of examples in humanity to show us that we can be gravely wrong on a subject, despite being able to eloquently defend our position.

Not exhaustive divine determinism, nor middle knowledge, nor some turbo kind of Pelagianism (if that was even a thing), but Synergism is the Orthodox / early Church view. Essence-Energy distinction. Providence = the view of the Greek Fathers, John of Damascus etc... God in no way decrees the bad, evil, privation of the good. Sovereign, yes... But In No Way the the micro manager x

Funny, at the beginning, I'm sitting here thinking that this sounds more like a philosophy lesson than theology. It's so many layers upon layers of reasoning applied to the biblical text, and then some conclusion. He then says something like, "when I read philosophy it's so much like putting God into the categories of mankind" etc. He seems to be criticizing what he himself is doing. He's using his framework and putting God into those categories. That's how it seems to me anyway.

Under the rigour of a proper Biblical exegesis, we quickly discover that the idea of God’s ‘natural knowledge’ and God’s ‘free knowledge’ is a theological canard constructed to accommodate the (utterly unBiblical) idea of God’s ‘middle knowledge’ - an artificial abstraction contrived by men like William Lane Craig to somehow salvage the ‘sovereignty of man’ while paying little more than lip service to the absolute sovereignty of God… I really don’t understand why the disciples of Dr Craig aren’t also troubled by the fact that he insists on appealing to two extra-Biblical sources to support his Autonomian commitments, rather than allowing the sufficiency of the very Word of God (2Tim 3:16,17) to speak for itself on the things of God… On the one hand, Craig employs an argument formulated by a Muslim apologist (amongst others), Al-Ghazali, as ‘proof’ for the existence of God (as though it were possible to reduce the infinitude of God to the level of finite human comprehension)! And then, Craig employs an argument formulated by Luis de Molina, a Spanish Jesuit priest commissioned by Pope Paul III as a Romanist ‘soldier of the Catholic Church’ to counter the Scriptural principle of Sola Scriptura upheld by the Protestant Reformation It is little wonder that God has (yet again) given His church over to the Fool into apostasy…

I’m interested in this topic but hes trying to say in the video isn’t necessarily clear to me

This is the first time I'm hearing about Middle Knowledge, but is this guy essentially saying that humans have no free will whatsoever?

Calvinism logically leads to the heresy of monothelitism. Thank God early christians like Saint Maximus the Confessor already rejected such heresy. I recommend reading “Reconsidering Tulip” by Alexander Renault, as well as Disputations with Pyrrhus by St Maximus the Confessor

11:17 Yes.. there are a few verses where God says If Sodom and Gomorrah HAD seen the miracles you see, they WOULD HAVE repented IF I go to the City, WILL Saul come? GOD: Yes, he will come. David: If I go anyways, will the people of the city give me to Saul or protect me? GOD: They will give you to Saul. David: Thanks Lord for your middle knowledge. I will NOT go to the city then.

Finally James admits that in Calvinist philosophy there is no free will.

If God "made me" this way, why am I being punished for sinning? Because I was born into sin and was enslaved to it? But then I'd have no way to be saved. If God "made us" this way rather than being autonomous, did God create Satan to be evil?

LMBO, so, according to Dr. Jmmi, god can not handle this thought such a large number of things, but n Calvinism, he can. Molinism is just one view of how Calvism could be done

Is it so outrageous to conceive that a creator can know his creation before the act of creation in the same way that an artist has a vision of his piece before actually crafting it? Are you doubting God's capacity to do that at an infinitely more complex and wonderful way? And what if God wanted some of his creatures to have free will, are you saying that God couldn't do it if he wanted to? Moreover, do it in a way that His will is entirely fullfied through these free creatures? All that the concept of middle knowledge (and molinism) is saying, is that all this and more is possible for God and that this is compatible with scripture. It obviously doesn't arise directly from scripture, but neither do the concepts of natural and free knowledge.

If anything, this has sold me on molinism. It makes sense. His issue seems to be that it limits God, but God is already limited in the worlds he could have created. Could he have created a world in which 2+2=5? Molinism apparently just limits the worlds God could have created in this same way but based on counterfactual information.

How then are you not guilty of the doctrine of double predestination?

Putting God in the category of mankind? I mean isn’t that literally the reason his revelation came through mankind, so that we could relate to it? Isn’t the Bible another form of God coming down to make relation with us and to help us to understand him more? In the same way Jesus coming was to save provide a way back to God, but also to relate to us in humanity?

But there is no good and evil without free will. We don't consider an animal killing its prey to be evil. So got can't create a universe with maximum good or evil without real free will. Also, God could maximize salvation by giving his free gift by revealing himself to everyone at the instant of death for them to accept. Also, salvation requires free will, because you have to accept Jesus. I honestly think that salvation, God's omnipotence, and free will are incomprehensible to humans. We should just refer to it as an indescribable mystery. How can a physical brain that is limited possibly comprehend the unlimited?

My genitors are not pro. They’re amateur.

How ironic that no scripture is mentioned in this clip until he mentions a verse that refutes his claim and he tries to dismiss it.