I've just watched the interview on "Closer to Truth" with WLC about How Could God Know the Future.
I usually agree with WLC on almost everything, but this is one thing where I really oppose him.
I just find middle knowledge unnecessary, as someone who believes in free will. Under Simple Foreknowledge, God knows the future, but does not cause it; that seems as more than a simple enough answer. But when you add in MK, you put God in a situation where he has to place people in certain situations where he knows they'll be damned, which seems like unnecessary baggage. Moreover, MK doesn't seem to be any more metaphysically, or biblically true then simple foreknowledge, and seems to limit free will, even if oh so slightly. It places you only two steps away from determinism.
Moreover, under this view, God planned that Adam and Eve would sin (and in the case you take more of a metaphorical view of the story, he planned that we would fall from him), which raises serious problems.
Lastly, why can't God bring about a world where all men accept him. I ask this because in MK, God brings about the world where the maximum amount of people are saved; but isn't it conceivable that God can bring about a world where all are saved?
It just seems to bring up unnecessary questions that simple foreknowledge answers, and comes off as two sides of the same coin with predestination.
Craig’s forum has been rather narrow-minded in failing to notice the other religions. There are competing stories out there, and being born among Christians doesn’t amount to insulation from the truth. One has to wonder whether God was weak, to allow such competition, but to wonder this requires a mind that can see goodness in the other religions. Why can’t the God of a world give one consistent story, to all of the nations?
In this instance every conjecture made is overturned by bringing in the Hindu story, that the souls are evolving from animals to angels (or demigods). If this is so, then God is the guide, not the transformer. The Buddha said it is upon man to sweat along the path, and Jesus did not offer another option, although Paul thought he’d take one anyway. Jesus was nothing if not vague, and even Hindus teach He appeared over here and over there.
All these stories can be unified, but not before a hostile and greedy race. In general Jesus allowed the cheap option, for the sake of certain temporary gains in early civilization. One might suppose the full truth being revealed, to be part of the glory of the Second Coming. God did not make some souls inferior; all souls start inferior. Souls cannot be made another way. To offer salvation before purification amounts to enshrining devils.
God cannot be accepted, when His truth and presence are rejected. Jesus said He would find many saying, “Lord, Lord,” thinking they knew Him when they actually hated Him. The story of salvation or damnation from a conscious choice is the lynchpin of Christianity, but it’s formulaic and reality seldom answers to formulas. It’s a lot harder to believe Jesus is Lord than Christians have heard. They really will not like His way of life.
