Does God know the future?

[nancy]

Clete, foreknowledge is not causal. Just because God observes what events occur does not mean he causes us to choose the paths he bserves us to choose any more than if watching a game has any affect on the outcome of the game.

 

[Clete]

First off, Nietzsche hated being associated with Hitler and the Nazis. Nazis manipulated his writings to make it seem anti-semetic and pro Nazi propaganda. Hitler may have been a fan of Nietzsche, but it was because people misused his writings.

No doubt this is at least partly true.

I'm not saying I agree with ER, nor am I saying it is Christian, nor am I saying I could confirm it. Another reason why it isn't a great parallel is that I don't believe Nietzsche even believed in it, but people are split on that.

One might wonder why you even brought it up then.

All I really tried to do is talk about it in a different way. I realize that there are problems with believing God knows the future, but I also see problems with God not knowing the future. To be honest, I don't completely see the consequences of believing God knows the future or he doesn't. Now I don't know you or how you live your life, but I really don't think that we live our lives much differently as far as making choices. I believe that God knows the future, but that really has no practical impact on my life.

The truth always has consequences as do falsehoods. Nearly everything that we do and believe in our Christian lives has to do with what we believe about who God is and what sort of world He has created. Getting this stuff right could possibly be the most important subject that there is aside from the subject of salvation itself, and the questions we are discussing here impacts on that issue as well.

Do you feel that you would live differently if you believed God knew the future? Or do you believe that because you are an open theist that your life is so much different because you are free to choose instead of being locked into the path God foresaw?

Kevin

An interesting question. The answer is basically no I wouldn't because my belief is in accordance with the truth of reality. In other words, those who disagree with me on these issues are forced to live their lives as though they did agree with me. No Calvinist, for example, knows who is and who is not elect and so lives as though there is no such thing as a predestined group known as "the elect". In effect they live their lives exactly as though Open Theism were the truth of Scripture (which of course it is). Their very lives testify that they have bought a lie.

Further, I think that issues of this nature are somewhat intuitive to those who don't come to these issues with preconceived ideas about what the answers should be. People I've met who where either not Christians at all or who had only recently became a Christian have been astonished to learn that most Christians totally believe in the idea that God exists outside of time and that He predestined every single minute detail of every event in all of history past present and future. They are incredulous when told that there are many who believe that such is the very gospel itself. In fact, one person I was telling about Calvinism simply thought I was pulling his leg; that I was making this stuff about predestination and the TULIP doctrines up. He didn't say so directly but I very much doubt that he would have ever become a Christian in the first place had he been witnessed to by a strong 5 point Calvinist. He just would have thought that Christianity was silly and ridiculous and obviously not true.

And while Arminian theology (exhaustive foreknowledge rather than predestination) yields a theology which is greatly more reasonable than Calvinism does, that's only true because it is closer to the truth than Calvinism is and so they reap the benefits of that additional measure of truth. Likewise, if my theology is that much closer to the truth than Arminianism, then I will reap even greater benefits, both theologically and practically.

And finally, there is one last point I would like to make and it will perhaps be the most direct answer to your question. I was a hard core 5 point Calvinist for most of my Christian life and so I can tell you from experience that it does indeed make a gigantic difference in almost every aspect of the Christian life. Simply put, Open Theism has made God much more real to me, very much more real indeed. I realize now that God is a real person with real emotions that I can really hurt. As a Calvinist I believed all such things to be "figures of speech" but that couldn't be further from the truth. He really does love ME. He doesn't just love everyone, He both knows and loves ME personally and wants very much to have a genuine personal relationship with ME, not just "man kind" or some other nebulous thing like that.
God is real, Christianity is real, this life we are living is real and the things we do have real consequences that are eternal and that we are personally responsible for. I'm not just some cog in God's fancy watch works that He has running for some unknown purpose that is above my finding out. No, on the contrary, God created man kind so that He might love them and that they might return that affection. That is THE reason you exist, for God to love you and for you to love God.
Both Calvinism and Arminianism obscure this vital fact by destroying what it means to love. I have to choose to love someone. If I do not, or cannot choose, then love is meaningless. For me to choose there has to be a choice; there has to be alternatives. This is why God placed the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden. It was to give Adam and Eve a choice, without which their love for God would have had no meaning.

Jhn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know (i.e. to know intimately, to love) thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Clete, foreknowledge is not causal. Just because God observes what events occur does not mean he causes us to choose the paths he bserves us to choose any more than if watching a game has any affect on the outcome of the game.

I agree completely.

How does this impact my position?

 

[godrulz]

God knows some of the future as settled/certain, and some of the future as unsettled/possible/probable.

Omniscience means to know what is knowable. He correctly knows reality as it is: the future is open, the past is fixed, the present is now. He knows the past and present exhaustively, and the future as it is (possible vs certain except that which He purposes to bring to pass by His ability vs foreknowledge).

 

[kmoney]

Clete,

No doubt this is at least partly true.

I think it is more than partly true. There is a letter from Nietzsche about it.

One might wonder why you even brought it up then.

To show you the truth!!!!! haha

Further, I think that issues of this nature are somewhat intuitive to those who don't come to these issues with preconceived ideas about what the answers should be.

I can agree with that, and I would say I'm guilty of that. I have always believed that God knows the future and I'm sure the fact that I've always believed it does distort my judgement on some things, but I think the vast majority of people are guilty of that. I've belived it my entire Christian life and giving up that belief isn't going to come without a struggle

Likewise, if my theology is that much closer to the truth than Arminianism, then I will reap even greater benefits, both theologically and practically.

Didn't you say earlier that everybody is forced to live their lives the same way, so how do you gain practical benefits?

And finally, there is one last point I would like to make and it will perhaps be the most direct answer to your question. I was a hard core 5 point Calvinist for most of my Christian life and so I can tell you from experience that it does indeed make a gigantic difference in almost every aspect of the Christian life. Simply put, Open Theism has made God much more real to me, very much more real indeed. I realize now that God is a real person with real emotions that I can really hurt. As a Calvinist I believed all such things to be "figures of speech" but that couldn't be further from the truth. He really does love ME. He doesn't just love everyone, He both knows and loves ME personally and wants very much to have a genuine personal relationship with ME, not just "man kind" or some other nebulous thing like that.

That's great. I'm glad you were able to experience God in a new, more powerful way when you changed your theology, but I don't think open theology is necessary to feel the way you do.

God is real, Christianity is real, this life we are living is real and the things we do have real consequences that are eternal and that we are personally responsible for. I'm not just some cog in God's fancy watch works that He has running for some unknown purpose that is above my finding out. No, on the contrary, God created man kind so that He might love them and that they might return that affection. That is THE reason you exist, for God to love you and for you to love God.

I do not think God's foreknowledge takes this away.

Both Calvinism and Arminianism obscure this vital fact by destroying what it means to love. I have to choose to love someone. If I do not, or cannot choose, then love is meaningless. For me to choose there has to be a choice; there has to be alternatives. This is why God placed the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden. It was to give Adam and Eve a choice, without which their love for God would have had no meaning.

Again, I do no think that God knowing the future takes this away.

I honestly am not trying to be stubborn or anything like that. I simply do not see from your logical arguments that (God knowing the future) = (no free will).

However, I am not saying that I'm locked to my belief of God knowing the future. What I am saying is that so far the arguments have not swayed me at all.

What could sway me is more study of what the bible says on it which I plan to do. There are several things I am trying to study in the bible right now though so we'll see when I get to open theology... (that doesn't mean I am done with this thread, I will still respond)

I do though have a couple questions for you to try and understand your stance better....

What do you do with prophecies?
From what I remember open theists believe that God fulfills his prophecies by working with the wills of men and trying to lead them towards it. In my opinion that is awfully close to violating the free will that you claim only exists in open theology. Is this what you believe? I know that is probably an oversimplification, so can you explain more?

Antichrist....God prophecied about the end times and the antichrist....If God is going to bring this to pass by working with the wills of men, does that mean he is going to push someone towards playing the role of antichrist? If not, how does the AC become the AC?

how can we trust prophetic parts in the bible at all if God can only try to work with people on earth to bring those prophecies to pass? It seems we can't.

Lastly I'd just like to thank you for your time and thoughts on this topic.....

Kevin

 

[nancy]

It impacts your position because even if God knows the future perfectly, it doesn't affect us making future free will choices.

 

[Yorzhik]

Nancy, whatever cause exists upon which we choose something, isn't that cause also built upon another cause? In other words, whenever something happens, there is always a reason why (and God knows all the reasons, right?), and that reason why has a reason why (and God knows all those reasons too, right?), and that reason why has a reason why, and all the reasons have reasons all the back to creation? Isn't that correct?

 

[nancy]

Yorkitz, if what is why and when is where is how if?

The statement above makes as much sense as your post.

 

[Yorzhik]

Yorkitz, if what is why and when is where is how if?

The statement above makes as much sense as your post.

Okay. We'll start at the beginning.

Every choice we make has causes. Every cause is known by God, therefore God knows all our choices.

Is that correct?

 

[justchristian]

But what of free will. If our independant choices are nothing but casue and affect then free will is an illusion. No, I think what is amazing about free will is that in spite of everything we still have the independant choice to choose, esspecially to choose or not to choose God. Part of us, apart from our character, personality, hardships, everything that makes us us, is a will to choose in spite of everything. True we often default into choosing based on cause and effect. I recurringly choose not to touch a hot stove because I know it will hurt, but in spite of that knowledge, in spite of experience and knowledge being overwhelming causes to the contrary, I can still choose to touch that hot stove. We become the overwhelming cause, not things around us.

 

[Clete]

It impacts your position because even if God knows the future perfectly, it doesn't affect us making future free will choices.

Yes it does Nancy, but not because the knowledge causes those choices. I'll explain in my next couple of posts in a way that will hopefully make my position more clear.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Okay. We'll start at the beginning.

Every choice we make has causes. Every cause is known by God, therefore God knows all our choices.

Is that correct?

This is called 'Causal Determinism' and cannot be true and the Christian faith have any meaning whatsoever. Most people who subscribe to this belief will not go so far as to insist that God is subject to the same causality constraints but will not or cannot explain why if He is not subject to causality, and we are made in His image, that we must be.

Causality is indeed a powerful argument though because we seem to be able to demonstrate it in a laboratory. If you take the exact same amount of chemical and expose them to the exact same set of conditions, the resulting reaction will yield the exact same result every single time. It is important to point out however that this is not possible to accomplish. It’s just is not possible to get an exactly identical lump of sodium chloride dissolved into an exactly identical beaker of water. Even if you knew for sure that you had the exact same number of molecules of each substance, even one out of place electron on a single hydrogen atom is sufficient to call the experiment "different" and so such hypothetical situations do not exist in reality.

Further, even if such situations could exist we can know that the "causality principle" cannot apply to any situation in which a person with a free will is involved. We can know this because of another principle known as the ‘law of non-contradiction’. Causal Determinism is antithetical to free will, they are mutually exclusive and so to suggest that we have a free will in a rigorously causal universe is a logical absurdity. So if we could imagine a set of hypothetical twins who’s circumstances are exactly identical and who are faced with making the same decision, assuming that they do in fact have a free will, one twin can choose to do while the other chooses to do otherwise, causal factors not withstanding. It is my belief that it is the will itself that is the determining cause of such action on the part of our rebellious twin.

Further still, Causal Determinism is hostile to the Christian world view in many important ways, not the least of which is the fact that it renders concepts like love, justice, and morality meaningless. Love, as I mentioned in a previous post, must be chosen. If I do not choose of my own will to love someone then I do not love them at all. If my choices are determined by some causal chain of events then they are not chosen and love is nothing more than the result of a mindless precession of one cause after another. Love is meaningless in a universe where actions are not free. And if love is meaningless so is Christianity because Christianity is, by definition, the loving of God.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Again, I do no think that God knowing the future takes this [freedom] away.

I honestly am not trying to be stubborn or anything like that. I simply do not see from your logical arguments that (God knowing the future) = (no free will).

Because of the definition of the term "freedom" or "free will".
To be free means (in this context), having the ability to do or to do otherwise.

Would you agree with that definition or not?

However, I am not saying that I'm locked to my belief of God knowing the future. What I am saying is that so far the arguments have not swayed me at all.

What could sway me is more study of what the bible says on it which I plan to do. There are several things I am trying to study in the bible right now though so we'll see when I get to open theology... (that doesn't mean I am done with this thread, I will still respond)

I do though have a couple questions for you to try and understand your stance better....

What do you do with prophecies?

Which ones? The ones that came to pass or the ones that did not?

From what I remember open theists believe that God fulfills his prophecies by working with the wills of men and trying to lead them towards it. In my opinion that is awfully close to violating the free will that you claim only exists in open theology. Is this what you believe? I know that is probably an oversimplification, so can you explain more?

God works with and around and even in opposition to the will of man. Prophecy is not prewritten history, as many Christians believe. If it were then there wouldn't be as many unfulfilled prophecies in the Bible as there are. I can go into this more if you like but for now I think it would serve to clarify the debate if we tried to keep things as simple as possible. I will say though that God doing what He does to bring something to pass does not "violate the free will" of a person any more than you do when you work with the people around to get something accomplished.

Antichrist....God prophesied about the end times and the antichrist....If God is going to bring this to pass by working with the wills of men, does that mean he is going to push someone towards playing the role of antichrist? If not, how does the AC become the AC?

There is no shortage of people who would love to be the antichrist. For Satan to find a volunteer would not be difficult nor would it involve the removal of anyone's free will.

how can we trust prophetic parts in the bible at all if God can only try to work with people on earth to bring those prophecies to pass? It seems we can't.

You can trust God because He's God. Since when is a perfect record on predicting the future a prerequisite for trust? If you have such a prerequisite you're in trouble because there are several prophecies that God made in the Bible that just flat out did not come to pass. You can still trust God though because when a prophecy of God's doesn't come to pass it is because of a very good, very righteous reason. Jeremiah 18 is a terrific place to start if you're interested in what those reasons might be.

Lastly I'd just like to thank you for your time and thoughts on this topic.....

Kevin

You're very welcome! This is probably my favorite subject and so I could talk about this from now on probably. I appreciate your intellectual honesty. Attitudes like yours make this a much more interesting and fun conversation to have.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[fool]

Is the book of life already written?
Is it already bound?
How many pages?
can God write in the margins if he runs out of room?

 

[godrulz]

Is the book of life already written?
Is it already bound?
How many pages?
can God write in the margins if he runs out of room?

There is some openness to this book. Rev. 3:5 If we overcome, our names will not be erased from the Book of Life. If we do not overcome....?

 

[Clete]

Is the book of life already written?
Is it already bound?
How many pages?
can God write in the margins if he runs out of room?

This question isn't really being asked and would be off topic if it were being asked.

If you want to contribute something substantive to the discussion, I invite you to do so. Otherwise, I invite you to leave.

 

[fool]

There is some openness to this book. Rev. 3:5 If we overcome, our names will not be erased from the Book of Life. If we do not overcome....?

overcome what?
seems like that says being in the book is the default

 

[fool]

This question isn't really being asked and would be off topic if it were being asked.

If you want to contribute something substantive to the discussion, I invite you to do so. Otherwise, I invite you to leave.

that statement isn't really being made and would make no sense if it was.

as far as on topic goes my question is the only one that need be answered to settle the debate

 

[intro2faith]

Fool,

Names are continually being written in the Book of Life. Whenever someone gets saved, their name is written in it.

 

[fool]

Fool,

Names are continually being written in the Book of Life. Whenever someone gets saved, their name is written in it.

what do you think about what Godrulz said?
let's do a hypothetical
a baby dies shortly after birth
dosen't get a chance to hear about Jesus
which book is he in?