Open Theism Stirs Controversy on College Campuses
- Thread starter Christine
- Start date
I think lighthouse's generalization is hasty. God no doubt anticipates and plans many things in advance. If there is a sudden contingency like a car accident that could not be predicted years before it actually happened, then God could respond on a dime. God can think infinite thoughts all at once, knows the past and present perfectly, is omnipresent and omnicompetent. "A few moments before he does it most of the time" is not standard Open Theism. It is speculative and unsupportable from a proof text. Each thought, act, feeling, decision of God or man needs to be judged on its own. If someone suddenly gets hit by a car, God responds at that moment. If a church is planning an evangelistic outreach (or the incarnation), God can orchestrate and work in hearts further in advance.
Predestination and foreknowledge require precise word studies. "God's strategy in human history" (?Forster) exegetes this well. The study would get technical. Be aware that a superficial definition from Strong's does not flesh out the full biblical doctrine.
Re-read what I said. I said that God, most times, does not know what He's going to do, until a few moments before He does it. What I mean by that is that God, most times, makes up His mind right before the event. That's all I meant. Maybe I'm off, and it's "sometimes" instead of "most times," but I still stand by my premise.
And godrulz gives a great expansion on the premise I have presented. I agree with his post, completely.
As for the "Sozo-ite" remark, I am a Christian. I follow no man. But Sozo has taught e a lot, and I agree with his presentation of the gospel. I may not agree with all of his methods, but I agree with most. And when I do not agree with his method, I agree with the thought behind it. And if you are referring to my brashness, it has nothing to do with Sozo.
erethnereh
New member
The future could be open and God could still be all knowing, but His openess would require Him to create new knowledge as time progresses. (Assuming knowledge is a creation of God, which means at a certain point God knew everything, there was nothing to know. The other way to avoid this dillemna is if knowledge is a part of God, but this view also has it problems as we know evil has no part with God.) This new knowledge presumably coming into being as soon as a person makes a free willed decision, each coming to their knowledge of the event at the same time. The contradiction with the Bible, I think, is that it says God is changeless. But verses in the Bible suggest otherwise: that only God's divine attributes remain changeless. In this respect, then, God's complete and full knowledge could be. His actual knowledge body could change whenever so He wants.
Strong immutability says that God is absolutely changeless in every respect. This is more Platonic than biblical (the Unmoved Mover).
Weak immutability recognizes that God is changeless in His character and attributes, but that He changes in His relations, experiences, thoughts, emotions, actions, and knowledge.
God is dynamic and responsive, not static and meticulously controlling.
Weak immutability recognizes that God is changeless in His character and attributes, but that He changes in His relations, experiences, thoughts, emotions, actions, and knowledge.
God is dynamic and responsive, not static and meticulously controlling.
Chileice
New member
Please excuse my absence from this thread for so long, but I have been reading with interest. I also believe there is a tension between biblical passages that we can't fail to notice. If one reads Isaiah 40 and following chapters, it is obvious God is able to foreordain. Yet other passages alluded to such as the crowning of Saul and God's later change of heart show something different. What you say here (and in other places), Godrulz, sounds good on the surface, but how are YOU or I able to say what God foreordains and what he doesn't?
Sure, it's easy to say he foreordained the crucifixion, but was it easy for the people of Jerusalem to see God's foreordaining hand when they were being starved out in a terrible seige before the fall of Jerusalem? The book of Lamentations is a testament to the horrors of such a time. Did God foreordain that? In retrospect most of us would say he certainly knew ahead of time it was going to happen. There were many prophecies warning the people they would be taken captive, the temple would be destroyed, etc. Was God surprised by the WAY it happened? Or was the WAY and TIMING also part of His plan, or did it just take Him by surprise?
On some global scheme whay you say is probably how I live my life. It is a practical way to get a handle on ambiguity... but does it work? And how do you KNOW the winner of the 2010 Superbowl isn't foreordained. Maybe that very event will unleash a chain of stuff that leads to the end times, for all we know. Is there ANY event that is totally trivial? Who would have thought that the assasination of some archduke in Sarejevo would have unleashed the whole First World War? Who could have guessed that the same fighters the US so staunchly supported against the Soviet Union would turn around and be America's worst enemy? Afghanistan, for God's sake.
So where do we draw the lines between what God foreordains and what just takes Him by surprise? I would really like to know so that I could get a handle on what you are proposing.
The exact details are somewhat speculative. Most things do not take God by surprise. His infinite knowledge of the past, present, and future possibilities/contingencies (not actualities/certainties until they become an object of knowledge in reality) and His responsive, creative, omnicompetence give Him a sovereign perspective far beyond our finite limitations. The Bible does say God expected one thing and was grieved when something else happened (Israel, grapes, vine, etc.).
It takes a greater Being to 'control' a world with infinite contingencies and genuine freedom, than one that is meticulously controlled, known, and foreordained in every detail.
Many prophecies are general (including Revelation). There is no need to know or predestine every detail to fulfill a prophecy. God can guide and orchestrate an outcome without having every detail a specific way. There is more than one way to skin a cat or one road to a destination. It does not usually matter what every insect and every grain of sand does to fulfill broad prophecy.
e.g. Judas fulfilled prophecy, but it did not necessarily have to be the one born Judas. If he would have remained faithful, another person could have been the fulfillment. The 1967 Israeli war was won against odds. God's hand was in it, but He did not have to control every gun on every side to achieve victory for Israel. He did not have to control what everyone ate or when they slept or which foot they put in front of another.
Chaos Theory postulates that the flap of a butterfly wing causes a hurricane somewhere else in the world. There are limitations to this theory. It makes too much of an isolated event that does not have a direct cause-effect relationship. Not every detail in the universe must be controlled for God to have the victory in the end. In fact, there are casualties along the way. Missionaries get raped, children are killed, but truth and justice triumph in the end.
The first step is to properly exegete all relevant Scriptural passages. It seems some show a closed future in some areas (not explicit what God predestines), while others show God responding to an open future. We can then wrestle with practical and experiential implications of a partially open future (e.g. prayer can genuinely change things; evangelism is not just an academic exercise...the elect are not already chosen and limited, etc.).
It takes a greater Being to 'control' a world with infinite contingencies and genuine freedom, than one that is meticulously controlled, known, and foreordained in every detail.
Many prophecies are general (including Revelation). There is no need to know or predestine every detail to fulfill a prophecy. God can guide and orchestrate an outcome without having every detail a specific way. There is more than one way to skin a cat or one road to a destination. It does not usually matter what every insect and every grain of sand does to fulfill broad prophecy.
e.g. Judas fulfilled prophecy, but it did not necessarily have to be the one born Judas. If he would have remained faithful, another person could have been the fulfillment. The 1967 Israeli war was won against odds. God's hand was in it, but He did not have to control every gun on every side to achieve victory for Israel. He did not have to control what everyone ate or when they slept or which foot they put in front of another.
Chaos Theory postulates that the flap of a butterfly wing causes a hurricane somewhere else in the world. There are limitations to this theory. It makes too much of an isolated event that does not have a direct cause-effect relationship. Not every detail in the universe must be controlled for God to have the victory in the end. In fact, there are casualties along the way. Missionaries get raped, children are killed, but truth and justice triumph in the end.
The first step is to properly exegete all relevant Scriptural passages. It seems some show a closed future in some areas (not explicit what God predestines), while others show God responding to an open future. We can then wrestle with practical and experiential implications of a partially open future (e.g. prayer can genuinely change things; evangelism is not just an academic exercise...the elect are not already chosen and limited, etc.).
erethnereh
New member
If God was completely changeless then he would neither be able to speak nor be able to walk, much like a rock. These things, He obviously does, so the passages in question, including the reference to Him being the Rock, must only be talking about God's attributes, I think. Still, that doesn't answer whether God is in time or outside of time, only that God sequences what He does at specific intervals.
If God is outside of time, however, then time is a creation of God, and so I believe there exist some point, outside of time, when God existed without time existing.
Cheilice, God's prophetic knowledge can be explained by God knowing certain aspects of the future. But the rest of the future, that which is unknown, would simply not be part of knowledge. Since God is the one giving these free willed choices to men, He knows what He will do given each man's choice, He knows every possible free will path through the future. But if the exact path is unknowable--being that people havn't made their choices yet--then this path is not knowledge, I think.
Middle knowledge is one theory relating to possibilities (? William Lane Craig; Molinism). This is a complex subject with some philosophical speculation in addition to revelation.
Time is not a thing or space that can be created. The only sense that time had a beginning was our earth history vs divine history and the unique measure of earthly time with sun and moon/day and night. It still existed since duration, fellowship, communication existed within the triune God. Time is sequence, duration, succession. It can be measured in various ways. Time must be an aspect of any personal being (will, intellect, emotions, change).
The 'eternal now' idea of God is Greek philosophy. God is not timeless. Eternity is an endless duration of time with no beginning or end. It is not timelessness (Hebraic view). Timelessness is incoherent in light of personal reality.
Time is not a limitation on God. He is also omnipresent/omnipotent and can do more than one thing at once.
Time is not a thing or space that can be created. The only sense that time had a beginning was our earth history vs divine history and the unique measure of earthly time with sun and moon/day and night. It still existed since duration, fellowship, communication existed within the triune God. Time is sequence, duration, succession. It can be measured in various ways. Time must be an aspect of any personal being (will, intellect, emotions, change).
The 'eternal now' idea of God is Greek philosophy. God is not timeless. Eternity is an endless duration of time with no beginning or end. It is not timelessness (Hebraic view). Timelessness is incoherent in light of personal reality.
Time is not a limitation on God. He is also omnipresent/omnipotent and can do more than one thing at once.
Chileice
New member
Godrulz,
I see what you are saying that God has the power to respond to events like no other and what hereandthere (backwards) is trying to say: basically that God has a contingency plan for every human choice. But how do you deal with pàssages like the following from Isaiah 44:
Jerusalem to Be Inhabited
24 "This is what the LORD says-
your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb:
I am the LORD ,
who has made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,
25 who foils the signs of false prophets
and makes fools of diviners,
who overthrows the learning of the wise
and turns it into nonsense,
26 who carries out the words of his servants
and fulfills the predictions of his messengers,
who says of Jerusalem, 'It shall be inhabited,'
of the towns of Judah, 'They shall be built,'
and of their ruins, 'I will restore them,'
27 who says to the watery deep, 'Be dry,
and I will dry up your streams,'
28 who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd
and will accomplish all that I please;
he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,"
and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid." '
Was this an "after-the-fact" ^^prophecy^^ or was this in reality God orchestrating the very future of Israel including the players who would be involved in it? I would really be interested in hearing how you deal with specific passages, so let's take this one as an example. How does open theism or middle knowledge or some blended theology deal with passages like this? How do YOU guys deal with it?
I see what you are saying that God has the power to respond to events like no other and what hereandthere (backwards) is trying to say: basically that God has a contingency plan for every human choice. But how do you deal with pàssages like the following from Isaiah 44:
Jerusalem to Be Inhabited
24 "This is what the LORD says-
your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb:
I am the LORD ,
who has made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,
25 who foils the signs of false prophets
and makes fools of diviners,
who overthrows the learning of the wise
and turns it into nonsense,
26 who carries out the words of his servants
and fulfills the predictions of his messengers,
who says of Jerusalem, 'It shall be inhabited,'
of the towns of Judah, 'They shall be built,'
and of their ruins, 'I will restore them,'
27 who says to the watery deep, 'Be dry,
and I will dry up your streams,'
28 who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd
and will accomplish all that I please;
he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,"
and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid." '
Was this an "after-the-fact" ^^prophecy^^ or was this in reality God orchestrating the very future of Israel including the players who would be involved in it? I would really be interested in hearing how you deal with specific passages, so let's take this one as an example. How does open theism or middle knowledge or some blended theology deal with passages like this? How do YOU guys deal with it?
Predictive prophesy can include information about individuals, nations, or cities. Even if some specific things are known as settled by God, this does not mean that every detail about the future is settled in God's mind.
Arminian simple foreknowledge is problematic in that the future is not there to 'see'. It simply does not exist as an object of knowledge.
Calvinistic predestination/foreknowledge is problematic in that it negates free moral agency, responsibility, accountability (God becomes the source of evil, contrary to His nature).
There is a difference between proximal knowledge (past and present comparitively recent) and distal knowledge from eternity past. God does not have to decree details trillions of years ago. He can see history unfold and predict with high probability general trends. In the case of naming Cyrus 150 years before birth, this may be an example of the rare exception where God 'suspends' free will to ensure that the individual would be called Cyrus (cf. Jesus and John the Baptist named before birth). 2 Chron. 36:22 "...the LORD MOVED the heart of Cyrus...to make a proclamation..."
Is. 44:24-28 God declares His sovereignty and distinction from false prophets. The false prophets said Jerusalem would not be inhabited. God ensured that it would be inhabited and predicted it as such (cf. Is. 46:10, 11 "I will do all that I please...What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that I will do"= prophecy fulfilled based on God's ABILITY, not His supposed 'foreknowledge').
God's influences, persuasion, omnicompetence can ensure what He predicts will come to pass. It normally stops short of being coercive. We have to be aware of conditional prophecies that may or may not come to pass depending on man's response. Some prophecies appear predictive on the surface, but are actually conditional (Hezekiah).
Arminian simple foreknowledge is problematic in that the future is not there to 'see'. It simply does not exist as an object of knowledge.
Calvinistic predestination/foreknowledge is problematic in that it negates free moral agency, responsibility, accountability (God becomes the source of evil, contrary to His nature).
There is a difference between proximal knowledge (past and present comparitively recent) and distal knowledge from eternity past. God does not have to decree details trillions of years ago. He can see history unfold and predict with high probability general trends. In the case of naming Cyrus 150 years before birth, this may be an example of the rare exception where God 'suspends' free will to ensure that the individual would be called Cyrus (cf. Jesus and John the Baptist named before birth). 2 Chron. 36:22 "...the LORD MOVED the heart of Cyrus...to make a proclamation..."
Is. 44:24-28 God declares His sovereignty and distinction from false prophets. The false prophets said Jerusalem would not be inhabited. God ensured that it would be inhabited and predicted it as such (cf. Is. 46:10, 11 "I will do all that I please...What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that I will do"= prophecy fulfilled based on God's ABILITY, not His supposed 'foreknowledge').
God's influences, persuasion, omnicompetence can ensure what He predicts will come to pass. It normally stops short of being coercive. We have to be aware of conditional prophecies that may or may not come to pass depending on man's response. Some prophecies appear predictive on the surface, but are actually conditional (Hezekiah).
We're not. Unless He has already told us, i.e., the crucifixion.
God's warnings meant that He knew it would happen, if Israel didn't listen to Him. And He wasn't surprised when it happened, because He let it happen. But He was grieved when Israel didn't listen, which shows that He didn't know for certain it would happen, because He was hoping Israel would listen to Him.
This doesn't mean that God knew it either. Why must every major event be a part of God's plan? Why would the Super Bowl need to be part of it? DO you think God knew there would be a Super Bowl, before He created the Earth?
We don't draw the lines. We just know that He does, and that is all we need. We don't need to trust ourselves, and our knowledge. We need to trust Him.
STONE
New member
Regarding Eternity, First lets put down the idea that just because greeks or any other people or religion believes some principle it is automatically wrong. That will get us nowhere.
The Hebrews believed in other traditions that were false, therefore that could also be a dead end, right?
God does inhabit Eternity as timelessness; and also Eternity as an endless duration of time with no beginning or end as you say.
Let's not assume timelessness is incoherent because it is incoherent to you. As timelessness is incoherent to you, if you explain why we can look at the conflicts you see.
Either God inhabits a timeless eternity (whatever that means) or He inhabits an endless duration of time. These concepts are mutually exclusive, so it cannot be both ways.
My point about Greek philosophy is that false teaching has been adopted by the church due to philosophical influences rather than the revelation of Scripture.
Timelessness does not allow for thinking, acting, feeling, changing. It is incompatible with personality. God is personal and must experience succession, duration, sequence to be coherent and alive. Eternity does not have to have the earthly measures of time, but it is duration nonetheless.
Revelation 1:8 uses tensed expressions about God (past, present, future). This is the antithesis of timelessness. There is time in heaven/eternity (Rev. 8:1; 6:10; 22:2, 11).
J.R. Lucas: "A Treatise on Time and Space"
"Time is more fundamental than space...Some theologians say that God is outside time, but it cannot be true of any personal God that he is timeless, for a personal God is conscious, and time is a concomitant of consciousness (accompany). Time is not only the concomitant of consciousness, but the process of actualization and the dimension of change...Time is connected with persons...it is connected with modality, and the passage from the open future to the unalterable past; it is connected with change..."
"God and Time: 4 views" IVP ed. Ganssle (positions with responses)
i) divine timeless eternity Paul Helm
ii) eternity as relative timelessness Alan Padgett
iii) Timelessness and omnitemporality William Lane Craig
** iv) unqualified divine temporality Nicholas Wolterstorff
The last view seems most biblical and cogent. God experiences an endless duration of time (=eternity) with no beginning and no end.
Stone: What is your religious or philosophical background? Do you consider yourself an evangelical Christian?
I believe some things are mutually exclusive based on laws of logic and reasoning, theology, philosophy, etc.
Either Jesus is a created being or He is uncreated Creator. He cannot be both (incarnation is different than pre-existence). If something is A and non-B, then it cannot be A and B at the same time. A square circle is illogical. Just because God is God, does not mean absurdities become sensical in His realm. e.g. Can God create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it? Omnipotence does not mean that God can do self-contradictory things. The problem is with the illogical question, not a limitation in God's power (cf. God cannot create a square circle). 2+2=4 2+2 does not equal 9 in God's world.
Either God is timeless in His being (whatever that means) or He experiences time.
God reveals Himself as personal vs inanimate or impersonal. Personal pronouns are used of Him. We are personal, created in His moral, spiritual, and personal image. A person has will, intellect, and emotions (act, think, feel). They are self-conscious. These attributes are ascribed to God. He fellowships, communicates, loves. He is not an impersonal force (it) or cosmic principle.
If He is personal, is He triune (yes) or solitary? Are there many gods or one God (yes)?
Wolterstorff's view resonates with reality and Scripture. The simplest reading of Scripture shows God experiencing history as it unfolds. He is the covenant God relating to His people in time. There is no hint of God being timeless except in philosophical speculation. Read the book to compare and contrast the main views. Then make up your own mind in light of Scripture and reasoning.
Eternity seems to be an endless succession of time (duration). God had no beginning (uncreated) and He will have no end. Eternity goes into infinity past and infinity future. The past, present, and future are real to God. He has a past, experiences the present, and does not live in the non-existent future. Time is not a thing or place. Time travel is an absurdity.
The alternate view (Augustine, C.S. Lewis, etc.) is that God experiences an 'eternal now'/timelessness. There is no explicit text to support this. It is speculative, tainted by pagan philosophy (which could be right, but not in this case, in my mind). The past, present, future are all at once in God's experience. This makes no sense. Music requires sequence to be intelligible. The triune God would need succession to fellowship, love, and communicate in eternity past. God can remember the past perfectly, knows everything about the present, and can project about future possibilities without being in the future.
I believe some things are mutually exclusive based on laws of logic and reasoning, theology, philosophy, etc.
Either Jesus is a created being or He is uncreated Creator. He cannot be both (incarnation is different than pre-existence). If something is A and non-B, then it cannot be A and B at the same time. A square circle is illogical. Just because God is God, does not mean absurdities become sensical in His realm. e.g. Can God create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it? Omnipotence does not mean that God can do self-contradictory things. The problem is with the illogical question, not a limitation in God's power (cf. God cannot create a square circle). 2+2=4 2+2 does not equal 9 in God's world.
Either God is timeless in His being (whatever that means) or He experiences time.
God reveals Himself as personal vs inanimate or impersonal. Personal pronouns are used of Him. We are personal, created in His moral, spiritual, and personal image. A person has will, intellect, and emotions (act, think, feel). They are self-conscious. These attributes are ascribed to God. He fellowships, communicates, loves. He is not an impersonal force (it) or cosmic principle.
If He is personal, is He triune (yes) or solitary? Are there many gods or one God (yes)?
Wolterstorff's view resonates with reality and Scripture. The simplest reading of Scripture shows God experiencing history as it unfolds. He is the covenant God relating to His people in time. There is no hint of God being timeless except in philosophical speculation. Read the book to compare and contrast the main views. Then make up your own mind in light of Scripture and reasoning.
Eternity seems to be an endless succession of time (duration). God had no beginning (uncreated) and He will have no end. Eternity goes into infinity past and infinity future. The past, present, and future are real to God. He has a past, experiences the present, and does not live in the non-existent future. Time is not a thing or place. Time travel is an absurdity.
The alternate view (Augustine, C.S. Lewis, etc.) is that God experiences an 'eternal now'/timelessness. There is no explicit text to support this. It is speculative, tainted by pagan philosophy (which could be right, but not in this case, in my mind). The past, present, future are all at once in God's experience. This makes no sense. Music requires sequence to be intelligible. The triune God would need succession to fellowship, love, and communicate in eternity past. God can remember the past perfectly, knows everything about the present, and can project about future possibilities without being in the future.
godrulz-
You might as well give up. Trying to communicate to STONE is like talking to a wall. Well, like banging your head against it, anyway.:bang:
You might as well give up. Trying to communicate to STONE is like talking to a wall. Well, like banging your head against it, anyway.:bang:
I do not know Stone. What is his background and reputation? I think it is reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt. He seems to be asking reasonable questions. It is difficult to move from a traditional position to one unfamiliar to the person. More information to make an informed decision is reasonable. When I first learned about an alternative view, I tried to rationalize and incorporate it in my old view. In time, I understood they were not compatible on every point. Then I changed my thinking and have found it confirmed positively since then.
If he is playing games and does not want to examine his own and others views, then it would be a waste of time.
You may say the same thing about me at times. I appreciate when others are patient in trying to understand and be understood.
The nature of time and eternity is not a salvific issue. We can be more flexible than with heaven-hell issues.