The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Middle Knowledge as explaining Foreknowledge

I ran into an aritcle in PCANews where it quotes some leading SBCs as being concerned about the increasing influence of Calvinism within the denomination. <br><br>One of the men quoted, said this: <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]"I believe that God's predestination or election is based on the fact that he does know everything, unlike the openness theologians would try to tell us," Patterson says. <br><br>"[God] knows before we were ever born who will and who will not respond to the gospel message," he says, "and it is on the basis of his foreknowledge that election takes place -- not on the basis of some arbitrary decision on God's part to create some to damn them." </font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Some have said this understanding of foreknowledge falls into the Middle Knowledge concept. If this is so, can someone explain the concept. And, would it be proper to label the majority of SBs as endorsers of Middle Knowedge. <br><br>Although they hold dear the teaching of man having free-will in responding to the Gospel, how can they say that God knows before they are born. I do not wish that this thread become a whipping boy of those who hold that; but rather, I would like to understand their reasoning as they are learned men of God. .

Here is a thread already started on that topic.

John,<br><br>The Arminian concept/definition of foreknowledge cannot be construed as being that which is taught by those in the Openness camp because according to Craig and others, God can only "know" that which already exists. Future events are unknown to God, so they say. As illogical as the Arminian doctrine of Predestination based upon "foreknowledge", (aka: prescience) is, the Openness view is by far much worse and blasphemous.<br><br>In His Grace,

Joe, thanks for the link. <br><br>I should have paid closer attention to the threads underneath. I was offline at the time of the original post on the topic. <br><br>Still a question or two. <br><br>Does the quote from the article appear to come from the 'middle knowledge' perspective? <br><br>Is that the predominant view in the SBC?<br><br>

"Is that the predominant view in the SBC?" Hmmm...<br><br>Due to the nature of the SBC’s structure, there is an entire continuum of belief regarding predestination from Arminianism to Five Point Calvinism. All that is required to be called an SBC church is some adherence (even this is loose) to the Baptist Faith and Message. There are many great SBC churches that are strongly Reformed in their doctrine.<br><br>The number of Reformed SBC Churches is growing and the Hierarchy doesn’t like it. Why? Well, we are wandering into the arena of my ‘gut’ feeling…but here goes. <br><br>Reason 1. The SBC lives and dies by the Cooperative Program (the principle mechanism by which money is funneled from the local churches to the SBC coffers.) To maintain the broadest base of giving, it is important that the SBC never be seen as taking an ‘extreme’ position. Many see Reformation theology as extreme in its soteriology and so is avoided. This minimizes the ruffling of feathers, and keeps as many churches as possible in the SBC fold. Is this a cynical view? You bet it is.<br><br>Reason 2. The SBC’s largest structures are the Home Mission Board and the Foreign Mission Board. These two entities wield great power in the SBC. The basis of these boards is evangelism. Not just any evangelism, but revivalist evangelism. Since the predominate thinking among SBC church members regarding Reformation Theology is the old saw “if you believe in Predestination then you don’t believe in missions and evangelism”, any leaning in this direction is avoided<br><br>Reason 3. Power: Pure and simple. The growing Reformed movement represents a threat to those that are currently in positions of authority within the church. If/When reformation takes place in the SBC, they will be out of a job. Cynical? That’s me!<br><br>These reasons are based on many years of dealing with Dr. Patterson and the SBC board. <br><br>I could go on and on how historically, the SBC IS reformed in its theology. Instead, I’ll direct you to a great site that will answer most of your questions.<br><br>http://www.founders.org<br><br>I’m not sure if I answered any of your questions or used it as a springboard to vent. But there is it. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/megashout.gif" alt="megashout" title="megashout[/img]<br><br>