Does God know all things that are, have been, and will be?

[Lon]

Natural theology negates revelation. Natural theology is the opposite or antithesis of Revelation. Natural theology sees God as the opposite of this moving, changing world of time and concludes that God cannot communicate or reveal himself because that would by definition and logic require movement, change, and time in God.

--Dave

No, all of what God reveals is in sync, not opposition. "The heavens declare the glory of God..." "...His...qualities are known by what has been made so that no man has excuse..."
Besides, you argue similarly on other points such that this isn't consistent theology from you. You present logical arguments as well.

I'm using scripture in order to figure out what God can and cannot do instead of natural theology which presupposes "pure actuality".
--Dave

As with AMR, I disagree. I AM is actualized. "I'm going to be/become" is potentiality.

Which of these is actually God's scripture revelation to us (rhetorical)?
Which of these is actually a philosophical assertion (rhetorical)?

 

[DFT_Dave]

No, all of what God reveals is in sync, not opposition. "The heavens declare the glory of God..." "...His...qualities are known by what has been made so that no man has excuse..." Besides, you argue similarly on other points such that this isn't consistent theology from you. You present logical arguments as well.

As with AMR, I disagree. I AM is actualized. "I'm going to be/become" is potentiality.

Which of these is actually God's scripture revelation to us (rhetorical)?
Which of these is actually a philosophical assertion (rhetorical)?

The "I Am" is a present tense statement from God to Moses that the voice he is hearing is from the same God as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God could not say "I was" because that would imply that he no longer is. God could not say "I will" because that would imply he was not yet at that time. Jesus said in the present tense to those who said they had Abraham as their father, "I am before Abraham", also because he could not say, "I was", or "I will be", for the same logical reason.

Exodus 3:4 RSV
When the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here am I."

Exodus 3:6 RSV
And he said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.

Exodus 3:11 RSV
But Moses said to God, "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and bring the sons of Israel out of Egypt?"

Exodus 3:14 RSV
God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"

Exodus 3:15 RSV
God also said to Moses, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you': this is my name for ever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations.

This is a good example of where Greek philosophy has been incorporated into Biblical Theology. The "I Am" is clearly understood to mean that God is saying "I Am the Lord your God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." There is nothing in this statement that says God is the timeless, immovable, and changeless "pure actuality/Unmoved Mover" conceived by Aristotle.

Potentiality is not just "coming to be". Aristotle defined four kinds of change that he saw in nature that explain "potentiality".

"Change of what a thing is is simple coming-to-be and perishing; change of quantity is growth and diminution; change of affection is alteration; change of place is motion."4 He also said everything in nature "changes from being potentially to being in actuality; a thing changes, for instance, from being potentially white to being actually white."5​

When we talk about God's potentiality we mean his potential for "doing things", his creativity, not his being, God is not "coming-to-be". God's potentiality is infinite/unlimited in thought and in power. We are finite/limited in thought and power. God is free to think, and do, what ever and however much he wants, when he wants. He is not limited to doing one thing at a time, but he is not doing all that he can possibly do all at once, that would produce "absolute chaos".

--Dave

 

[Lon]

The "I Am" is a present tense statement from God to Moses that the voice he is hearing is from the same God as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God could not say "I was" because that would imply that he no longer is. God could not say "I will" because that would imply he was not yet at that time. Jesus said in the present tense to those who said they had Abraham as their father, "I am before Abraham", also because he could not say, "I was", or "I will be", for the same logical reason.

Exodus 3:4 RSV
When the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here am I."

Exodus 3:6 RSV
And he said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.

Exodus 3:11 RSV
But Moses said to God, "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and bring the sons of Israel out of Egypt?"

Exodus 3:14 RSV
God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"

Exodus 3:15 RSV
God also said to Moses, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you': this is my name for ever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations.

This is a good example of where Greek philosophy has been incorporated into Biblical Theology. The "I Am" is clearly understood to mean that God is saying "I Am the Lord your God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." There is nothing in this statement that says God is the timeless, immovable, and changeless "pure actuality/Unmoved Mover" conceived by Aristotle.

Potentiality is not just "coming to be". Aristotle defined four kinds of change that he saw in nature that explain "potentiality".

"Change of what a thing is is simple coming-to-be and perishing; change of quantity is growth and diminution; change of affection is alteration; change of place is motion."4 He also said everything in nature "changes from being potentially to being in actuality; a thing changes, for instance, from being potentially white to being actually white."5
​

When we talk about God's potentiality we mean his potential for "doing things", his creativity, not his being, God is not "coming-to-be". God's potentiality is infinite/unlimited in thought and in power. We are finite/limited in thought and power. God is free to think, and do, what ever and however much he wants, when he wants. He is not limited to doing one thing at a time, but he is not doing all that he can possibly do all at once, that would produce "absolute chaos".

--Dave

I took one class on philosophy (did well but hated it). I've had 50 classes on bible and theology. I can list the scriptures but I think the open view spends too much time in philosophy and not enough time in scripture (note that it is 'think,' I've no idea).

Mal 3:6 For I am Jehovah, I change not. Because of this you sons of Jacob are not destroyed.

Psa 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting You are God.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday and today and forever.

 

[DFT_Dave]

I took one class on philosophy (did well but hated it). I've had 50 classes on bible and theology. I can list the scriptures but I think the open view spends too much time in philosophy and not enough time in scripture (note that it is 'think,' I've no idea).

Mal 3:6 For I am Jehovah, I change not. Because of this you sons of Jacob are not destroyed.

Psa 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting You are God.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday and today and forever.

I have made a very important distinction between God's being/character/nature and his activity, what he does/has done/will do.

There exists a chronology/sequence of what God has done, is doing, and will do.

The major chronology of events for God are:
1. The creation of the world
2. The flooding of the world by water.
3. The incarnation of Christ
4. The future day of judgment and the return of Christ.

Mal 3:6 and Heb 13:8 are about God's character/nature, and all open theists agree with you that it does not change.

Psa 90:2 says that God existed before he formed mountains and created the world. "From everlasting" is his past that has no beginning and "to everlasting" is his future that will have no end.

<------------FROM EVERLASTING / TO EVERLASTING-------------->

This obviously means God has a past and future of things he has done and will do. "Thou art God" means that he was God in the past and will be God in the future. I guess we could say that God's being is timeless and his activity and interaction with the world are in time. That would not be a contradiction because we are talking about two different aspects of God, a distinction I have already made.

I have studied theology, philosophy, eastern mysticism, and theory of evolution over a long period of time. My web site is basically outlines from which I hope I will eventually produce a book, but it's been taking me so long that I fear it won't be finished until either just before or shortly after I'm dead.

Read Aristotle's Metaphysics, books 11 and 12. Read Plato's Timaeus and compare them to Augustine's Confessions. You can see from these topics on my website that I have done my home work.

http://www.dynamicfreetheism.com/Theism.html

http://www.dynamicfreetheism.com/Augustine.html

http://www.dynamicfreetheism.com/CSLewis.html

If you have noted anywhere that I have been inconsistent with my view please show me where, I need to look at that. There have been times when I have made an argument from something I did not believe but was not very clear about that and had to explain it to others who I confused. I do value your insights.

--Dave

 

[Lon]

I have made a very important distinction between God's being/character/nature and his activity, what he does/has done/will do.

There exists a chronology/sequence of what God has done, is doing, and will do.

The major chronology of events for God are:
1. The creation of the world
2. The flooding of the world by water.
3. The incarnation of Christ
4. The future day of judgment and the return of Christ.

Mal 3:6 and Heb 13:8 are about God's character/nature, and all open theists agree with you that it does not change.

Psa 90:2 says that God existed before he formed mountains and created the world. "From everlasting" is his past that has no beginning and "to everlasting" is his future that will have no end.

<------------FROM EVERLASTING / TO EVERLASTING-------------->

This obviously means God has a past and future of things he has done and will do. "Thou art God" means that he was God in the past and will be God in the future. I guess we could say that God's being is timeless and his activity and interaction with the world are in time. That would not be a contradiction because we are talking about two different aspects of God, a distinction I have already made.

I have studied theology, philosophy, eastern mysticism, and theory of evolution over a long period of time. My web site is basically outlines from which I hope I will eventually produce a book, but it's been taking me so long that I fear it won't be finished until either just before or shortly after I'm dead.

Read Aristotle's Metaphysics, books 11 and 12. Read Plato's Timaeus and compare them to Augustine's Confessions. You can see from these topics on my website that I have done my home work.

http://www.dynamicfreetheism.com/Theism.html

http://www.dynamicfreetheism.com/Augustine.html

http://www.dynamicfreetheism.com/CSLewis.html

If you have noted anywhere that I have been inconsistent with my view please show me where, I need to look at that. There have been times when I have made an argument from something I did not believe but was not very clear about that and had to explain it to others who I confused. I do value your insights.

--Dave

I may not be getting it. It seems here that you are supporting that God would be relational to, yet apart from His creation (and time) to me.

 

[godrulz]

God is relational, distinct from creation, transcendent, immanent, yet also experiencing sequence/succesion/duration (time). This is not unreasonable nor unbiblical.

 

[DFT_Dave]

I may not be getting it. It seems here that you are supporting that God would be relational to, yet apart from His creation (and time) to me.

Your being disingenuous with this response. You know what I'm saying, and you know it's not what your suggesting. Try again or tap out.

--Dave

 

[Lon]

Your being disingenuous with this response. You know what I'm saying, and you know it's not what your suggesting. Try again or tap out.

--Dave

Let's rehash point by point then:

I have made a very important distinction between God's being/character/nature and his activity, what he does/has done/will do.

I accept this as your premise with your two points following.

There exists a chronology/sequence of what God has done [bold is my emphasis], is doing, and will do.

The major chronology of events for God are:
1. The creation of the world
2. The flooding of the world by water.
3. The incarnation of Christ
4. The future day of judgment and the return of Christ.

Point one, I agree. God is relational to His creation. I've never said anything different.

Mal 3:6 and Heb 13:8 are about God's character/nature, and all open theists agree with you that it does not change.

To me, that's huge and indicates relational to, yet not bound by our sequence. It is impossible that He can be, given that there is nothing to measure, by any means. 'Unchanging' for a specific duration can be measured, but the eternal unchanging nature of God, (as you said just above "all open theists agree") is eternal/without duration/always.

Psa 90:2 says that God existed before he formed mountains and created the world. "From everlasting" is his past that has no beginning and "to everlasting" is his future that will have no end.

<------------FROM EVERLASTING / TO EVERLASTING-------------->

Agree, hence why I'm seeing agreement that He's relational yet not part of His creation nor subject to time duration since He has no beginning (no point to measure any kind of duration - impossible to apply).

This obviously means God has a past and future of things he has done and will do [bold emphasis mine]. "Thou art God" means that he was God in the past and will be God in the future. I guess we could say that God's being is timeless and his activity and interaction with the world are in time. That would not be a contradiction because we are talking about two different aspects of God, a distinction I have already made.

Which is what my point has ever been, right?

I may not be getting it. It seems here that you are supporting that God would be relational to, yet apart from His creation (and time) to me.

Your being disingenuous with this response. You know what I'm saying, and you know it's not what your suggesting. Try again or tap out.
--Dave

Why, if it genuinely seems to be an agreement, would I first ask if I wasn't missing something when it certainly looks like you are agreeing?

 

[DFT_Dave]

Let's rehash point by point then:

I accept this as your premise with your two points following.

Point one, I agree. God is relational to His creation. I've never said anything different.

To me, that's huge and indicates relational to, yet not bound by our sequence. It is impossible that He can be, given that there is nothing to measure, by any means. 'Unchanging' for a specific duration can be measured, but the eternal unchanging nature of God, (as you said just above "all open theists agree") is eternal/without duration/always.

Agree, hence why I'm seeing agreement that He's relational yet not part of His creation nor subject to time duration since He has no beginning (no point to measure any kind of duration - impossible to apply).

Which is what my point has ever been, right?

Why, if it genuinely seems to be an agreement, would I first ask if I wasn't missing something when it certainly looks like you are agreeing?

No, we're not agreeing. God's unchanging nature "endures", and he "acts" sequentially/chronologically/in time from point 1 to point 4.
1. The creation of the world by God
2. The flooding of the world by God.
3. The incarnation of Christ.
4. The future day of judgment by God and the return of Christ.

We have a starting point for God's activities. We don't have or need a beginning point for God's existence, and you are correct that we need a beginning in order to have time for God, and that would be a beginning point of activity, "behold I do a new thing", "In the 'beginning' God created the heavens and the earth".

Do you think God creates the world, floods it with water, sends Christ to earth, judges the world with fire, all at the same time?

--Dave

 

[Nick M]

Mal 3:6 For I am Jehovah, I change not. Because of this you sons of Jacob are not destroyed.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday and today and forever.

Did Jesus come to earth get crucified for sin, be raised from the dead in a resurected body?

 

[Lon]

Do you think God creates the world, floods it with water, sends Christ to earth, judges the world with fire, all at the same time?

--Dave

Did Jesus come to earth get crucified for sin, be raised from the dead in a resurected body?

Why am I still getting this question? Both of you know exactly what my answer is because I've repeatedly given it. It is bewildering to me that you both jump back to this line of thinking because it doesn't have anything to do with my assertions. Dave, I'm especially troubled this comes from you.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Why am I still getting this question? Both of you know exactly what my answer is because I've repeatedly given it. It is bewildering to me that you both jump back to this line of thinking because it doesn't have anything to do with my assertions. Dave, I'm especially troubled this comes from you.

I don't recall your answer, what past post can I find it, or just sum it up here.

--Dave

 

[Lon]

I don't recall your answer, what past post can I find it, or just sum it up here.

--Dave

"Relational to, unrestricted by"?
So of course my answers:

Did Jesus come to earth get crucified for sin, be raised from the dead in a resurected body?

Yes.
But it isn't when He was created (he wasn't created).
Comparative to the time-line we are asking about, He is relational to (interacting with) it, but has other things going on with Him besides our specific linear duration.

Do you think God creates the world, floods it with water, sends Christ to earth, judges the world with fire, all at the same time?
--Dave

No.
He relates to our time, it isn't His only time because clearly it is at least bi-durational with no beginning but even that assumes a starting point in which to check time going in both directions.

Dave, it doesn't matter which you want to time. Start the stopwatch now (you don't need two). Now realize, no matter what you are trying to time, you are never going to get to forever in either direction and you are simultaneously looking both ways. When you stop your watch, you have a record of something you timed not just from one direction, but two.

 

[DFT_Dave]

"Relational to, unrestricted by"?
So of course my answers:

Yes. But it isn't when He was created (he wasn't created). Comparative to the time-line we are asking about, He is relational to (interacting with) it, but has other things going on with Him besides our specific linear duration.

No. He relates to our time, it isn't His only time because clearly it is at least bi-durational with no beginning but even that assumes a starting point in which to check time going in both directions.

Dave, it doesn't matter which you want to time. Start the stopwatch now (you don't need two). Now realize, no matter what you are trying to time, you are never going to get to forever in either direction and you are simultaneously looking both ways. When you stop your watch, you have a record of something you timed not just from one direction, but two.

"Relational to us, unrestricted by time"

You are saying, in my words, God is timeless and interacts with us in time. How can God, outside of time and space, relate to us, inside of time and space? If God enters or interacts with time and space, by definition and logic, he is not timeless and spaceless. A timeless spaceless God suffers "impassability", we cannot leave time and space and he cannot pass through it. God cannot be "timeless" and "in time", at the "same time".

Your statement violates the law of identity (defining what a thing is), the law of non-contradiction (a thing cannot be and not be at the same time and relationship), and the law of the excluded middle (a thing is either this or that).

A truly timeless God also suffers "impassibility". "Aristotle regarded change as inconsistent with perfection, he concluded that God could not be affected by anything outside himself. Furthermore, God engages not in feeling, but thinking, and he himself is the object of his contemplation. God is thus unaffected by the world in any way." http://www.iep.utm.edu/god-west/#SH3h

The "classic synthesis" of Greek Philosophy and Biblical Revelation defies logic and creates an "irrational faith".

Originally Posted by DFT_Dave
Do you think God creates the world, floods it with water, sends Christ to earth, judges the world with fire, all at the same time?

"No. He relates to our time. Comparative to the time-line we are asking about, He is relational to (interacting with) it, but has other things going on with Him besides our specific linear duration."--Lon​

Just what "other things" does he have going on if not "everything all at once"? If not "everything all at once" then you are saying there is time in God when he does some things "before" and "after" he does "other things".

Welcome to "Open Theism", we are glad to have you with us. I knew it would only be a matter of "time".

Dave-- :cheers: --Lon

 

[DFT_Dave]

Comparative to the time-line we are asking about, He is relational to (interacting with) it, but has other things going on with Him besides our specific linear duration.

Isaiah 43:15 I am the Lord, your Holy One, the Creator of Israel, your King.” 16 Thus says the Lord, who makes a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters, 17 who brings forth chariot and horse, army and warrior; they lie down, they cannot rise, they are extinguished, quenched like a wick: 18 “Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. 19 Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert."

Isaiah 46:8 “Remember this and consider, recall it to mind, you transgressors, 9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, 10 declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’ 11 calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of my counsel from a far country. I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have purposed, and I will do it. 12 “Hearken to me, you stubborn of heart, you who are far from deliverance: 13 I bring near my deliverance, it is not far off, and my salvation will not tarry; I will put salvation in Zion, for Israel my glory.”

Isaiah 48:3 “The former things I declared of old, they went forth from my mouth and I made them known; then suddenly I did them and they came to pass. 4 Because I know that you are obstinate, and your neck is an iron sinew and your forehead brass, 5 I declared them to you from of old, before they came to pass I announced them to you, lest you should say, ‘My idol did them, my graven image and my molten image commanded them.’ 6 “You have heard; now see all this; and will you not declare it? From this time forth I make you hear new things, hidden things which you have not known. 7 They are created now, not long ago;"

Isaiah 48:17 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: “I am the Lord your God, who teaches you to profit, who leads you in the way you should go. 18 O that you had hearkened to my commandments! Then your peace would have been like a river, and your righteousness like the waves of the sea; 19 your offspring would have been like the sand, and your descendants like its grains; their name would never be cut off or destroyed from before me.”

It sure looks like God does things "linear", from the past to the present, just like we do. God says he has a future of things he has not yet done. God even says things could have been different for Israel, had they obeyed.

--Dave

 

[Binyamin]

God operates outside of the barriers of time that we operate under. That is part of the creation that is in order for humainity.
I would assert that it is now, however, even though God knows all things that are going to happen.

I also believe completely in free will and find it throughout Scripture. Because it's known by Him doesn't necessarily mean it's caused by Him.

 

[Joe Lang]

I also believe completely in free will and find it throughout Scripture. Because it's known by Him doesn't necessarily mean it's caused by Him.

This should be clear to all

 

[godrulz]

God operates outside of the barriers of time that we operate under. That is part of the creation that is in order for humainity.
I would assert that it is now, however, even though God knows all things that are going to happen.

I also believe completely in free will and find it throughout Scripture. Because it's known by Him doesn't necessarily mean it's caused by Him.

Exhaustive definite foreknowledge is not compatible with libertarian free will.

The proof of this takes more than a post, but it is out there.

 

[Binyamin]

Exhaustive definite foreknowledge is not compatible with libertarian free will.

The proof of this takes more than a post, but it is out there.

Respectfully, as an Open Theist you believe that God actually doesn't know the future?

So with that opinion how in the world could God fortell it through prophecy?

Ps 139:16
"Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them."

 

[godrulz]

Respectfully, as an Open Theist you believe that God actually doesn't know the future?

So with that opinion how in the world could God fortell it through prophecy?

He does not know it exhaustively, because the future is at least partially open/unsettled.

Is. 46 and 48 show that God settles some of the future by His ability, but it cannot be extrapolated to prove prescience nor that God settles all of the future. Prophecy deals with specific things, not every mundane and moral choice in the universe. God can influence, orchestrate fulfillment of prophecy. Prophecy can also be conditional, so God responds according to the choices that are not settled/foreknown.