Theology Club: The Open/Closed Conundrum.

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I don't mind the label Open Theist and I'd willingly use it to describe myself, but...

...I get the impression that much of what we might present as Open Theists of God changing things, could easily have been planned by God a long time ago. Thus, while the freedom God has to act or not act remains unquestioned (by me), the chances that what He does being uncertain or contingent might be essentially zero.

And, for the life of me, I can't think of a good example to better describe this right now. :noid:
 

Sherman

I identify as a Christian
Staff member
Administrator
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I label myself Open Theist, because there are numerous instances in the bible where Israel disappointed God. God had expectations for them, but they did not live up to them. Isaiah 5:1-7 illustrates how Israel disappointed God.

Now will I sing to my wellbeloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard. My wellbeloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill:
And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein:and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes.
And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.
What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore,when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?
And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down:
And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned, nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.
For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I don't mind the label Open Theist and I'd willingly use it to describe myself, but...

...I get the impression that much of what we might present as Open Theists of God changing things, could easily have been planned by God a long time ago. Thus, while the freedom God has to act or not act remains unquestioned (by me), the chances that what He does being uncertain or contingent might be essentially zero.

And, for the life of me, I can't think of a good example to better describe this right now. :noid:
There is certainly no uncertainty about it. God planned for all contingencies, even though much of it was according to generalities; which we know because God told some of His prophets that He never expected certain specific things to happen even if He did expect the possibility of the root cause: rebellion against Him.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I don't mind the label Open Theist and I'd willingly use it to describe myself, but...

...I get the impression that much of what we might present as Open Theists of God changing things, could easily have been planned by God a long time ago. Thus, while the freedom God has to act or not act remains unquestioned (by me), the chances that what He does being uncertain or contingent might be essentially zero.

And, for the life of me, I can't think of a good example to better describe this right now. :noid:
Yet how could a closed theist explain the examples of when God changes His mind? In other words... He planned to do something a long time ago... but then based on circumstance changed His mind and didn't do it?

I don't think there is any rational or logical answer to that in a closed view theology.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Me too. But I find it too easy to imagine that what looks like contingency was accounted for long before it happened.

Can God be surprised by a man's decision? I think yes. But it would have to be some pretty extraordinary circumstances.

Anyway... :think:
 

Shasta

Well-known member
If God is confined solely to the present then He cannot foreknow anything only make projections based on His past experience and His assessments of present conditions. Some things He would be fairly certain of perhaps to the extent of 99%. This level of certainty might include natural events. For instance He would be able to predict when an asteroid would strike Mars because He can see it moving in space. Whether or not the same asteroid will strike earth is another matter since it might be that free agents (if they were aware of the impending catastrophe) might be able to prevail upon Him to change its course. The same might be said of what He Himself would do, if the decision He makes is unilateral and is not conditioned on the choices of people.

The decisions men will make and the outcome cannot be absolutely known, only predicted. God might be able to make a good estimate based on His “profile” of them but the likelihood of these predictions are highly uncertain even when a persons MO has been very consistent. The certainty of what men will do becomes less and less accurate the further into the future such projections are made. This is because as time passes a single unpredictable free agent interact with countless other equally unpredictable The possible choices man might make increases exponentially with the passage of time passes. It is like an expanding chaos system. Therefore the Lord who cannot foreknow can only forecast like the weatherman. It is hard enough for the weatherman to predict what the weather will be in the short run. It is impossible for them to know today what the weather will be like tomorrow or in 2000 years.

Open Theism’s denial of foreknowledge is falsifiable, however. If there is an occasion where God absolutely knows what men will choose to do in the distant future then God has the attribute true foreknowledge. The following is such an example. When the disciples asked Jesus when He was coming back The Master said that no one not even He that day and hour This was a secret known only by the Father. If Open Theism were true even the Father could not know anything so specific as the day and hour. God could for whatever reason pick a day and hour. He could say that the Son of Man will return to earth 6/6/2066 at 6:66 am CST. The probability of this happening would be 100% as long as His prediction was not conditioned upon the acts of free agents. This, however, is not the case.

One of the signs that immediately precedes His coming is the is the so called Great Falling Away. Now there have been many times in history when the Church has gone through tribulations and in those times many departed from Christ but THIS particular time of tribulation and apostasy would differ from all others in intensity and pervasiveness.

Matthew 24:10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but he who stands firm to the end will be saved (NIV)

2 Thessalonians 2*Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2*not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3*Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness (the antichrist) is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4*He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
.
“Falling away” is a human choice which according to Open Theism God cannot predict; especially that far in advance. I suppose it could be argued that God could ensure that the siapostasy would happened around the scheduled event by withdrawing His influence and let the Devil have his way. This is inconsistent with the character of God is good and desires that all men come to repentance. One would suppose that He would do everything possible to prevent this. Who knows? Perhaps if God sent another Jonah the world would repent as did the Ninevites and the judgment would be averted. God can, after all, change His mind.

Signs are intended to indicate that something is ahead not that it might be. If a road sign says “bridge out” I would expect that if I kept driving I would find it to be so. If the Army Corps of Engineers had removed the threat and left the sign up then the sign is misleading. In the same way if any of the “signs” Jesus mentioned did not take place all that was written of them would be abrogated along with any certainty that Jesus would come on a specific “day and hour.” Within the paradigm of Open Theism end time events are one of many possible futures in a world that does not and may never exist. He might as well have said the signs MIGHT happen.
 

Shasta

Well-known member
There is certainly no uncertainty about it. God planned for all contingencies, even though much of it was according to generalities; which we know because God told some of His prophets that He never expected certain specific things to happen even if He did expect the possibility of the root cause: rebellion against Him.

The fact that God has to calculate ahead of time what indicates that He is predicting. He can make make contingency plans (Plan A, Plan B, Plan C....) but the fact that there are so many possibilities makes the future HIGHLY uncertain.

What you are describing is very close to traditional doctrine of foreknowledge that the early Church held to. God foreknows but does not necessitate what men will choose. Foreknowledge is not the same thing as predestination. God gives everyone a chance to cooperate with Him foreknowing they will do He already factored in even their rebellion into His plan. The tapestry of His plan is one we have woven with Him.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Open Theism’s denial of foreknowledge is falsifiable, however. If there is an occasion where God absolutely knows what men will choose to do in the distant future then God has the attribute true foreknowledge.
There has to be more than one occasion, doesn't there?

If it can be shown that God absolutely knows the future, definitively, then the OV is shown to be false.

The following is such an example. When the disciples asked Jesus when He was coming back The Master said that no one not even He that day and hour This was a secret known only by the Father. If Open Theism were true even the Father could not know anything so specific as the day and hour. God could for whatever reason pick a day and hour. He could say that the Son of Man will return to earth 6/6/2066 at 6:66 am CST. The probability of this happening would be 100% as long as His prediction was not conditioned upon the acts of free agents. This, however, is not the case.
This doesn't work. No one can change God's mind on the date except God, especially since He is the only One who knows. Thus it is possible for Him to know specifically without the OV being false. Since the OV doesn't say God can't know any future event for certain.

The fact that God has to calculate ahead of time what indicates that He is predicting. He can make make contingency plans (Plan A, Plan B, Plan C....) but the fact that there are so many possibilities makes the future HIGHLY uncertain.
What makes you think there are that many possibilities?

Hint: There aren't.

What you are describing is very close to traditional doctrine of foreknowledge that the early Church held to. God foreknows but does not necessitate what men will choose. Foreknowledge is not the same thing as predestination. God gives everyone a chance to cooperate with Him foreknowing they will do He already factored in even their rebellion into His plan. The tapestry of His plan is one we have woven with Him.
Not at all what I believe. God cannot foreknow what we will do if it isn't already determined by something.

Exactly.
 

2COR12:9

New member
Originally Posted by Shasta :
If Open Theism were true even the Father could not know anything so specific as the day and hour.
I've heard the opinion of this being a statement revealing that the Father will know when the time is right, based upon certain requirements reaching fulfillment. So there is a day and an hour, except that day and hour is yet to be determined, and will be by the Father alone when the time is right. Which could possibly be akin to when He sent Christ; not to deter that the Father planned to send Him, just that He was waiting for the most ample opportunity to introduce Him into history? Of course I can't say this is true, though I can't really find a reason to disagree with this theory either.
 
Last edited:

2COR12:9

New member
The fact that God has to calculate ahead of time what indicates that He is predicting. He can make make contingency plans (Plan A, Plan B, Plan C....) but the fact that there are so many possibilities makes the future HIGHLY uncertain.

What you are describing is very close to traditional doctrine of foreknowledge that the early Church held to. God foreknows but does not necessitate what men will choose. Foreknowledge is not the same thing as predestination. God gives everyone a chance to cooperate with Him foreknowing they will do He already factored in even their rebellion into His plan. The tapestry of His plan is one we have woven with Him.
This doesn't flow well with the view of the future being open, for if God foreknew someone was not going to do something that He asked them to do, then when scripture says He reacts with regret or remorse that it turned out a certain way, it would not be a genuine reaction if He had already foreknew or ordained how that person would react before He asked them to do something. It makes God appear disingenuous. It's like you rigging a lottery so you would win, or by clairvoyance knew the winning numbers, and then acting surprised when you've won.​
 

Pneuma

New member
I see things a little differently I guess.

To me God knows the beginning and the end, and the end from the beginning. Thus God foreknows the end result. It is all the things that happen in-between the beginning and the end that is open.
 

Shasta

Well-known member
There has to be more than one occasion, doesn't there?

If it can be shown that God absolutely knows the future, definitively, then the OV is shown to be false.


This doesn't work. No one can change God's mind on the date except God, especially since He is the only One who knows. Thus it is possible for Him to know specifically without the OV being false. Since the OV doesn't say God can't know any future event for certain.


What makes you think there are that many possibilities?

Hint: There aren't.


Not at all what I believe. God cannot foreknow what we will do if it isn't already determined by something.


Exactly.

When a future event is contingent on the acts a free agents then the event may or may not occur. A free agent is not by definition bound to make the particular choices necessary to create that future scenario. For God to say at a certain date in the future rebellion and apostasy will be rampant like it never has been before He would be basing His statement on something He cannot know
 

Shasta

Well-known member
I've heard the opinion of this being a statement revealing that the Farther will know when the time is right, based upon certain requirements reaching fulfillment. So there is a day and an hour, except that day and hour is yet to be determined, and will be by the Father alone when the time is right. Which could possibly be akin to when He sent Christ; not to deter that the Father planned to send Him, just that He was waiting for the most ample opportunity to introduce Him into history? Of course I can't say this is true, though I can't really find a reason to disagree with this theory either.

If God has to wait until conditions are right before He does what He previously said He would do - then He is a mere opportunist but as long as we are involved we still might prevail upon Him to change His mind.
Besides I do not think it says a lot about His ability to fulfill any prophecy if He has to wait around for everything to be just right. We would not think much of anyone's ability to know what will happen if they wait until the last minute to "jump on the bandwagon." It would as if a weatherman claiming to have discovered the ultimate weather-predicting formula that will state when it will rain. How impressive would it be if he had to wait right until it looked like it was going to rain to announce: "It will rain tomorrow." Even then all he could say was there was a certain probability that it would occur.

Jesus said He Himself did not know the day and the hour of His coming. Had He left it there the Open Theology paradigm would not have been impacted because if the future is open we would not expect Him to. However, He said that the Father did know. He did not say the Father would know He said that He Father already knew.
 

Shasta

Well-known member
This doesn't flow well with the view of the future being open, for if God foreknew someone was not going to do something that He asked them to do, then when scripture says He reacts with regret or remorse that it turned out a certain way, it would not be a genuine reaction if He had already foreknew or ordained how that person would react before He asked them to do something. It makes God appear disingenuous. It's like you rigging a lottery so you would win, or by clairvoyance knew the winning numbers, and then acting surprised when you've won.​

The rigging the lottery would be Calvin.

The idea that God possessed complete foreknowledge of what men will choose but does not predestine them to make them was the view of the early Apostolic Church. The open future panentheistic doctrine, on the other hand is a novel idea in history. So between the two I feel myself inclined to see the merit of the views of the Church Fathers whom the apostles trained. I trust them more than I do the latter day novel ideas of such men as Boyd.

Knowing what men will do does not take away their freedom to choose. Within the context of time (where we live) God cannot treat us according to what we WILL do. What would that teach us about Him? It would be unjust for me to punish my child before he had actually done something wrong. Although I stand over my child like a giant and know far more than he does when I am dealing with him I must see things from his viewpoint and treat him according to how he is behaving in the moment. Even if I knew what he would do I would still need to present rewards and consequences to him that are contingent on his choices. I could not punish him for a crime he had not committed or I would not refrain from promising him things because I know he will refuse them.

Many times as a parent that is just the way it is; especially when our children are very young. If we watch Junior crawling to grab that expensive vase we might know very well he is going to pull it down and break it. When my boy does make wrong choices it makes me sad even if I knew what he would do ahead of time. From my view point I enjoyed being a father because my children had personalities and I could watch them explore a universe experience-by-experience that I, already knew.

God clearly acts within time seeing things as we do but His essential being is not temporal. Saying that brings a host of theological difficulties and requires a lot of reverse-engineering of scriptural interpretations. In becoming flesh He was able to enter time. It would be as if I the adult father were to take part of myself and make it into a baby so he could keep company with my other babies. I would remain the adult, outside baby world but able to see baby world as one of the community. Although, personally speaking, I would think having to become a baby with adult consciousness would be a fate worse than death. Maybe that is why Jesus said "how long will I be with you?" All our messy diapers.

When we are considering whether a teaching is true or not I do not think we should give any weight as to whether or not God would be excited, surprised, or entertained. I am not in a position to evaluate that. A two-year old does not know what makes their Father excited or entertained about them nor would they know how to improve their parents experience; especially if their parents lives were already full before they were born.
 
Top