What Did God Know, and When? Exploring the Different Views of God’s Foreknowledge

By Nat Crawford

We say things like, “God is all-knowing,” and “Nothing surprises God.” And we mean it. But when we start pressing into the details—what does God know? When did He know it? How does His knowledge relate to our choices?—things get more complex, fast.

The doctrine of God’s foreknowledge deals with how God knows the future, and especially how that knowledge interacts with human freedom and divine sovereignty.

And just like creation or end-times views, Christians have offered different explanations over the centuries.

In this article, we’ll walk through the four major views on God’s foreknowledge:

• Classical Arminianism

• Calvinism (Reformed Theology)

• Molinism (Middle Knowledge View)

• Open Theism

We’ll explore what each view teaches, where it draws its biblical support, and what the practical implications are. And as always, we’ll conclude with what I personally believe is the most biblically faithful way to understand God’s knowledge and our responsibility.

1. Classical Arminianism: Foreknowledge Based on Future Free Choices

Key idea: God knows all things—including the future—because He exists outside of time and can “see” what free creatures will choose.

In the Arminian view, God’s foreknowledge is passive but perfect. That means God doesn’t determine what will happen, but He sees it all in advance. He knows every decision we will freely make, and based on that foreknowledge, He can carry out His will.

For example, when Romans 8:29 says, “Those whom He foreknew, He also predestined…,” Arminians interpret that as God foreseeing who would respond to Him in faith, and then predestining those individuals to salvation.

Biblical support used:

• Romans 8:29

• 1 Peter 1:2 ("elect according to the foreknowledge of God")

• God's patience in 2 Peter 3:9 ("not wishing that any should perish")

Strengths:

• Preserves human freedom and moral responsibility.

• Upholds God’s omniscience.

• Avoids making God the author of sin.

Challenges:

• Critics say it makes God’s decisions reactive instead of sovereign.

• God’s decree seems dependent on human action, not divine will.

• Some argue it makes prophecy and divine planning fragile or uncertain.

2. Calvinism: Foreknowledge as Foreordination

Key idea: God knows the future because He sovereignly ordained it from eternity past.

In the Reformed view, God’s foreknowledge isn’t just “looking ahead”—it’s causal. He knows what will happen because He decreed what will happen. Nothing comes to pass unless God has willed it.

This includes salvation. Calvinists believe that God chooses (elects) people for salvation not based on anything they will do, but solely according to His own will and good pleasure. That means His foreknowledge is tied to His decree—it’s not observational; it’s sovereign.

Biblical support used:

• Ephesians 1:11 (“He works all things according to the counsel of His will”)

• Romans 9:16 (“So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God…”)

• Isaiah 46:10 (“Declaring the end from the beginning… saying, ‘My counsel shall stand’”)

Strengths:

• Strong emphasis on God’s sovereignty and glory.

• Provides deep assurance for believers.

• Fits with many biblical texts that describe God’s active governance of history.

Challenges:

• Raises serious questions about human freedom and responsibility.

• Critics struggle with the implications for the problem of evil.

• Can be seen as making God the determiner of every sin or rejection of Him.

3. Molinism (Middle Knowledge View): God Knows What Free Creatures Would Do

Key idea: God knows not only everything that will happen, but everything that could and would happen under any circumstance.

Molinism, developed by Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina, attempts to bridge the gap between Calvinism and Arminianism. It teaches that God possesses three types of knowledge:

• Natural knowledge: all necessary truths (e.g., 2+2=4, God is good).

• Middle knowledge: what any free creature would do in any possible circumstance.

• Free knowledge: what God decrees to actually happen.

So God, using His middle knowledge, creates a world in which every person freely makes the decisions He knew they would make—without violating their freedom, and still accomplishing His perfect will.

Biblical support used:

• 1 Samuel 23:11–13 (David asks if the people of Keilah will hand him over, and God says yes—even though it never happens)

• Matthew 11:21 (Jesus says Tyre and Sidon would have repented if they had seen His miracles)

• Acts 2:23 (Jesus was delivered up “by the definite plan and foreknowledge of God”)

Strengths:

• Preserves both divine sovereignty and human freedom.

• Gives a strong explanation for how God can plan with foreknowledge of free choices.

• Supports a logical structure for God’s providence without making Him the author of sin.

Challenges:

• The concept of “middle knowledge” isn’t directly spelled out in Scripture.

• Critics say it relies too heavily on philosophical reasoning.

• God’s will can still appear to be reactive to hypothetical human choices.

4. Open Theism: God’s Foreknowledge is Dynamic, Not Exhaustive

Key idea: God knows everything that can be known—but the future, being made up of truly free choices, isn’t fully knowable.

Open Theism is the most controversial view on this list. It argues that if people are truly free, then the future isn’t fixed—and even God doesn’t know it exhaustively. God knows every possibility, and He responds in real time as humans make choices.

In this view, God is still perfectly wise and powerful, but He is open to the unfolding of history and adjusts His plans accordingly. They say this makes God’s relationship with us more personal, more loving, and more engaged.

Biblical support used:

• Genesis 6:6 (“The LORD regretted that He had made man on the earth…”)

• Exodus 32:14 (God “relented” from the disaster He said He would bring)

• Jeremiah 18:7–10 (God says He will change His mind based on people’s responses)

Strengths:

• Emphasizes relational aspects of God.

• Takes the language of God’s regret, change, and interaction seriously.

• Stresses the meaningfulness of prayer and obedience.

Challenges:

• Denies God’s exhaustive foreknowledge, which contradicts much of Scripture.

• Undermines prophecy and confidence in God’s plans.

• Ultimately diminishes God’s sovereignty and omniscience.

Open Theism is generally rejected as unorthodox by most evangelical theologians.

So What Do We Do With All This?

The Bible is clear:

• God knows the end from the beginning (Isa. 46:10).

• He never learns anything new (Heb. 4:13).

• His plans cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2).

• And we are accountable for the choices we make (Rom. 14:12).

Where faithful Christians differ is in how all of that fits together.

Why This Matters

This isn’t just a theological debate—it’s about how we trust God.

• If God is sovereign and all-knowing, you can rest when life feels uncertain.

• If He ordains all things, nothing—including suffering—is wasted.

• If He knows you fully and still loves you, the gospel becomes even sweeter.

God isn’t scrambling to adjust to your next move. He’s not wringing His hands in heaven. He knows. He sees. He’s already there.

So trust Him. Obey Him. Walk by faith in the One who holds the future—not just because He sees it… but because He wrote it.