ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[Lighthouse]

godrulz-
In reference to Hezekiah, it seems to me that God's mind wasn't made up. He had made a decision, but He had not decided that it would be final.

 

[Lighthouse]

I'm going to answer the same way I did to the opposite question.

Actually, it's a yes or no question. So you haven't actually answered either.

 

[elected4ever]

This is begging the question/circular reasoning. You are assuming that God knew the decision from eternity past, but your illustrations do nothing to prove it. In fact, modal logic and biblical passages can demonstrate the incoherence of foreknowing free will choices trillions of years before they are made.

What mechanism is there for God to know who will win the Superbowl in 2010 even before He created the universe? Simple foreknowledge is an assumption, not a coherent answer. God knows the past and present exhaustively, but knows the future as open and unsettled (except for the things He determines to settle by His ability...e.g. first and second coming of Christ).

In human logic you are correct but God is not a man that He should be thought of as a man.

 

[godrulz]

Then so be it. I could care less what you call me. I have been called worse with a lot more colorful language. It just bothers me that you have made God such a puny little god and assigned to Him the fallen human traits. God is the creator , not the created. he makes us as he wills not as you wish he would. This one thing I know for sure, God will get glory from the believer and the non believer because all things were created for his pleasure and not yours.

Classic Calvinism. Arminians and Open Theists also agree with the latter statements. Open Theists deny that their view limits God. We affirm that God is sovereign, omniscient, immutable, omnipotent, etc. but understand these concepts from a biblical perspective instead of one that is influenced by pagan philosophy that does limit God. Calvinism limits God's love and justice (TULIP), limits God as being incompetent to rule a universe with other free moral agents (must predestine everything instead of bringing His purposes to pass within genuine freedom of other creatures), etc.

Foreknowledge and free will are incompatible (incompatibilism). If God knows things exhaustively, then libertarian freedom is illusory (I appreciate that you cannot see this yet).

 

[godrulz]

Would the future be considered part of "all things?"

1 John 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.

The future is not a place or thing.

Likewise, when it says that NOTHING is impossible for God, this does not mean that He can do logically absurd/contradictory things like creating square rocks or making 2+2= 5 and 4 at the same time.

The context is that God knows our hearts. He knows all past and present things exhaustively. Open Theist texts show that some of the future is unsettled and unknowable. The future is different than the past and present. Blurring this distinction leads to incoherent concepts.

This is not a proof text to argue against Open Theism anymore that verses that say God sees things in the present can be extrapolated automatically to mean that He sees the non-existent future. When the future moves through the present into the fixed past, then and only then would an omniscient being see and experience the future (potential becomes actual). The issue is the nature of creation and the future that God freely chose for our universe. It is not about whether God is omniscient or not (we all agree that God knows all that is logically possible to know).

 

[Shalom]

Knowing something and being the author of it are two different things.

Did God plan it? Did he decide it for you first? Or does he just kinda know you so well that he knows what your going to do?

 

[godrulz]

There in lies the rub. The truth is, I did not know that I would not say no. My choice was my own.

Until you make the choice with your mind and will, it could go either way. There is an element of uncertainty until one choice precludes another. The future is known as probable, possible until it becomes certain after the choice.

Do you really believe that God knew exactly how our dialogue would progress even before the creation of the world? Can you explain how this is possible without our choices being caused or fixed so that they could be known/certain without any possibility of chosing among alternatives? :down:

 

[Lighthouse]

In human logic you are correct but God is not a man that He should be thought of as a man.

Who created logic? God, right? So how could human logic be different than God's logic. I agree that some of what humans call logic isn't really logic, but it is illogical, to both God and man, that God would know everything we will ever do and we still have the free will to choose otherwise.

Do you honestly believe that God knew Adam and Eve were going to fall? If so, why did He create them? Just so He could become a man and die for us? What would be the point? Wouldn't it make more sense to just forget it, since it wasn't going to work?

And why did Jesus say He was dying for all people for all time, if He knew who would and would not accept Him? Why did He die for people who would never accept Him? What sense would that make? There's no logic in it.

 

[elected4ever]

You are brilliant and on the right track. I used to try to rationalize the traditional view and wondered why it did not make sense. I now know I was wrong and had to search for a more biblical alternative (that is also supported by many evangelical theologians and secular philosophers).

Secular philosophers agreeing with you ought to at least give you pause that something is amiss.

 

[godrulz]

There's a difference between God knowing what you are going to do, and God making you do it.

Are you sure? How did God know what you were going to type before the world was even created? The future did not exist to know or see. The knowing of a nothing is a bald contradiction and not a limitation on omniscience (knowing all that is knowable...the future is not there yet to know).

 

[Clete]

The question isn't moot e4e. It's at the very heart of the whole debate. Without the ability to do otherwise there is no freedom and without freedom there is no responsibility for one's actions.

And I wasn't focusing on the wrong thing. You presented your wife's knowledge as being analogous to God's foreknowledge. I happen to agree that it is in fact analogous but not in the sense you are trying to make it work. God can know my actions before I make them in the exact same sense that my wife can know my future actions. She can know my actions because she knows me. But even as well as my wife knows me and my ways, she still gets it wrong sometimes because there are things which she cannot know.
It is the same with God. The only difference is two fold. First, God is far wiser than my wife and second, there is far less information that God cannot know. So with increased information and dramatically increased wisdom, God is able to know the future in much greater detail and with much better precision than is any mere man. But note that this position that I've just laid out preserves genuine freedom of choice. It does so because it allows for the fact that God created us in such a way that there are certain aspects of our will that cannot be known. That is not to say that God doesn't want to know or that if it were knowable that He couldn't figure it out but that God cannot figure it out because it is not rationally knowable.
Would you agree that God is capable of making the world in such a way? If not, please explain.

And finally, you said...

Then so be it. I could care less what you call me. I have been called worse with a lot more colorful language. It just bothers me that you have made God such a puny little god and assigned to Him the fallen human traits. God is the creator, not the created. He makes us as he wills not as you wish he would. This one thing I know for sure, God will get glory from the believer and the non believer because all things were created for his pleasure and not yours.

First of all I wasn't calling you a Calvinist in a pejorative way; I was simply stating the facts. Secondly, I have not assigned any traits to God that are not depicted in Scripture. You act as though we all sat around one Saturday after a football game and came up with a god we all felt like we could get along with. I can assure you that is not the case. If you can demonstrate where my beliefs are wrong by the Scripture and sound reason, I will recant them. And lastly, everything you said from "God is creator" on, I completely agree with. Does that surprise you?

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[godrulz]

You emphasis is own the wrong thing. It is not that my wife offered but that i chose. To me I could have said no in ether case. The fact is i didn't and that is the point. Free to make a choice.

Your choice was free, but the prescience (foreknowledge of it) of it was merely probable or possible, not certain/actual from all eternity. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. If you want exhaustive foreknowledge (not necessary for an omnicompetent God), then you must sacrifice genuine freedom. If you affirm free will theism, then you need to correctly distinguish possible from actual (known as such).

 

[Lighthouse]

Secular philosophers agreeing with you ought to at least give you pause that something is amiss.

Secular philosophers agree with you too. And some agree with Calvinists. There are secular philosophers that agree with many different views. That doesn't mean the view is wrong. If it did, then no one would be right.

Of course, I'm sure we can agree, only one view is correct out of the three.

 

[godrulz]

The question is moot. I can't put the clam chowder back in the can ether.

God knows the past and present perfectly. He knew when you ate the chowder. This becomes the fixed past and certain knowledge. Before eating, it was known as a possibility/probability. It is a huge assumption to think God saw you or the can before either came into existence. Man, not God, invented chowder. It was possible that our universe would have unfolded without someone making clam chowder popular. You may have died as a baby and never ate chowder. God knows reality as it is. Your birth, death, eating, bowel movements, nose picking, career choice, etc. were not foregone conclusions in the mind of the triune God trillions of years ago. There is nothing unreasonable or unscriptural about these concepts. Quit clinging to a simplistic, preconceived, traditional theology that is influenced by Greeks and Augustine. Think critically and Scripturally.

 

[godrulz]

Knowing something and being the author of it are two different things.

Sometimes, but not always.

 

[godrulz]

godrulz-
In reference to Hezekiah, it seems to me that God's mind wasn't made up. He had made a decision, but He had not decided that it would be final.

There could be a conditional aspect to it. God said he would die. God did not lie. This is what His intention was. God changed His mind in response to believing prayer. This shows that we were created for reciprocal vs unilateral relationships and that we are significant in our freedom, prayers, and influence. This is the type of creation God freely chose. Even if He decided it was final (my impression), it just shows how responsive God is to prayer (we agree the future is open, not fixed).

 

[God_Is_Truth]

The fact is Judas did repent

what makes you think he repented?

Jesus said that He picked Judas on purpose that Judas was a deceiver and He picked a deceiver to do a deceivers work.

what verse are you referring to? Jesus said that it would have been good if the person who betrayed him had never been born.

Matthew 26:24
"The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born."

Did Jesus love Judas? I think he did but that did not save Judas.

Jesus loved Judas. do you accept that Judas may have been saved and then fell away (became unsaved) ?

Why ? dare I say it , predestination from the foundation of the world. :shocked:

if that is so, why do we have Jesus saying it would have been good for Judas (the betrayer) to have never been born?

 

[godrulz]

In human logic you are correct but God is not a man that He should be thought of as a man.

Is 2+2=4 true for God and us, or just man?

God is not a man, but He reveals truth about His nature, character, and ways in language that we can understand. Why not take His self-revelation at face value. God has a history. This proves He is not timeless leading to the logical implosion of your views.

 

[godrulz]

Secular philosophers agreeing with you ought to at least give you pause that something is amiss.

Maybe they are not clouded by centuries of Augustinian tradition. It is a stumbling block to belief when we misrepresent God and His ways. It is logically incoherent to say God creates rocks too heavy to lift. If Christians claim God is omnipotent and can do this, then we lose credibility and the secular people are right. Exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies is in the same category. Credible theologians demonstrate that this is true from a biblical and secular point of view.

 

[godrulz]

Secular philosophers agree with you too. And some agree with Calvinists. There are secular philosophers that agree with many different views. That doesn't mean the view is wrong. If it did, then no one would be right.

Of course, I'm sure we can agree, only one view is correct out of the three.

Math is math for Christians and atheists. Godly philosophy and logic is not diametrically opposed to secular logic on every point. Logical fallacies are taught in Christian colleges and secular universities. They are principles inherent in our universe, not just in the Bible. Science is science. Chemical structures are the same for believer and unbeliever alike.