Theology Club: What is Open Theism?

[godrulz]

So you believe that the future is partially unknowable by God?



So is God inside or outside of time?

The future is partially unknowable by an omniscient God because it may or may not actualize in any given way. There is an element of uncertainty until contingent choices make the potential future into the fixed past through the actual present.

Time is not a thing or place. God is not in or outside the concept of duration/sequence/succession. Time is an aspect of the eternal God's experience. He does not experience all reality in one timeless simultaneity (traditional, philosophical, wrong 'eternal now' view). Rather, He experiences endless time/duration without beginning, without end. This impacts the issue of exhaustive foreknowledge (takes away the specious God sees future loop hole).

 

[Bright Raven]

The future is partially unknowable by an omniscient God because it may or may not actualize in any given way. There is an element of uncertainty until contingent choices make the potential future into the fixed past through the actual present.

So are you saying that man has the ability through his own choices to override the will of God? Help me out here.

 

[surrender]

So are you saying that man has the ability through his own choices to override the will of God? Help me out here.

Hmmm...man does a lot of things God would rather they not do. If there's something that God has settled, though, man can't thwart God's will to accomplish it.

 

[godrulz]

So are you saying that man has the ability through his own choices to override the will of God? Help me out here.

Luke 7:30; Matthew 23:37, etc.

God's will is not always done. It is possible to act contrary to God's will (I Thess. 4). God sovereignly chose to not be the only factor in the universe. He created significant others with a say so to have a reciprocal love relationship. He is omnicompetent, not omnicausal. He does not always get His way (some perish and go to hell, contrary to His desires, will, intentions), etc. Man fell, contrary to His will or intentions.

God has the ultimate say so, but clearly millions reject and undermine His will/highest good (hence sin, evil, death, hell, etc.).

He could have made deterministic robots, but He did not. He desires relationship, not hyper-control (cf. human parents). This comes with mitigated risk, grief to His being, etc.

So, any unsettled or unknowing issues are a result of the type of creation He voluntarily actualized and limitations are self-imposed or inherent, but not a ultimate problem for an intelligent, powerful God.

EDF offers no providential advantage since God could not change the fixed future even if He wanted to. It is also problematic for a choice to be known as a certainty before the individual exists to bring about the choices.

If you are clinging to speculative 'eternal now' to try to retain EDF, it will not work if the view is wrong (wrong assumptions lead to wrong conclusions).

 

[godrulz]

Hmmm...man does a lot of things God would rather they not do. If there's something that God has settled, though, man can't thwart God's will to accomplish it.

Yes, God unilaterally declares some things and will bring them to pass by His ability (not FK) according to Is. 46 and 48. We cannot extrapolate this to all things/EDF.

So, the First and Second Coming of Christ are predictable and certain in advance as well as future judgments, lake of fire, etc.

Which team will win the Superbowl every year is another matter from eternity past.


Did God really know I would type this trillions of years agolsterwiyqiy-i450hj40hj4040hjhjropkhj06kiu4-q646ui j46i46hi? No (random, not foreseeable).

 

[Desert Reign]

How is it possible for God to “waste” time? That seems to give the impression that if God exerts His mental energy on one thing, His mental energy is lacking on another thing.

I wouldn’t think it’s as if God has to “try” to see more than is realistic; He simply does.

Thanks for the input, Surrender, and I hope my responses are not too wordy for your taste. It is an enjoyable discussion.

If you believe that the universe as a whole is fundamentally open then the possibilities for the future cannot be finite. What does it mean, then, to say that possibilities are infinite? And if the possibilities are infinite then the mind that can hold all of them must surely be infinite too.

But that is hardly a realistic view of either the world or of God, since infinite is tantamount to indescribable. This, I feel, is doing nothing really different to the dualists who say that God is ineffable, not subject to logic, existing in an eternal now and so on, where, in order to accommodate God into their worldview, they must define him out of time and hence out of existence altogether.

In a nutshell: the openness of the universe prevents its future being completely broken down into discrete possibilities.

Looking at it still another way. If I'm a being that does nothing but walk forward along a road, when I come to a junction I must choose to go left or right. That's easy. The observer can envision all the possibilities for my future.

But when I am given an unexpected holiday, the possibilities for how I will spend my time are not limited to discrete possibilities like left and right. What I will do is completely open to my imagination. I could do things that have never been thought of before, or for which no words exist in any language (I'd have to invent some though). To deny this is to deny that the world is truly open. Possibilities are not objective things that can be counted and communicated, they are simply the creations of the open mind.

The same thing can be said of knowledge generally: what we know is not some objective thing. If it were, it would be possible to ascertain the total amount of knowable things in the universe. Knowledge itself is also open - it is created by freewill beings. That is why my openness theology is encapsulated in the following:

God knows whatever he needs to know, is as powerful as he needs to be and is wherever he needs to be.

 

[surrender]

Thanks for the input, Surrender, and I hope my responses are not too wordy for your taste. It is an enjoyable discussion...

You're quite welcome for the input. I doubt you could be too wordy for my taste. What you’ve shared is a little over my head. I think I have an idea of what you’re trying to communicate, but I question whether the available possibilities are infinite since all of the possibilities are simply potentials of finite beings. I don’t know if I believe that finite humans can create infinite possibilities. In theory, yes, but I don’t know if it’s true in practice. And as you say, even if they are infinite, surely the mind of an infinite God could “hold all of them,” so to speak. Truth is, even if possibilities are infinite and God has created a world such that He couldn’t “hold all of them,” He is infinitely resourceful and powerful so surely He needn’t “hold all of them” in order to accomplish all He sets out to do. And, so, I very much like your encapsulation.

 

[Desert Reign]

You're quite welcome for the input. I doubt you could be too wordy for my taste. What you’ve shared is a little over my head. I think I have an idea of what you’re trying to communicate, but I question whether the available possibilities are infinite since all of the possibilities are simply potentials of finite beings. I don’t know if I believe that finite humans can create infinite possibilities. In theory, yes, but I don’t know if it’s true in practice. And as you say, even if they are infinite, surely the mind of an infinite God could “hold all of them,” so to speak. Truth is, even if possibilities are infinite and God has created a world such that He couldn’t “hold all of them,” He is infinitely resourceful and powerful so surely He needn’t “hold all of them” in order to accomplish all He sets out to do. And, so, I very much like your encapsulation.

Surrender,

Glad you like my encapsulation. In one respect I wonder if you have understood me. I'm not saying that God is infinite. I'm saying that if you say that God knows every possibility then he is perforce infinite. But since he cannot be infinite then the argument about possibilities must be wrong. If we can only make choices from a limited range of possibilities, then we are not open beings and extending the concept, the universe is not open either. Openness doesn't just mean that the future could follow one of a number of possibilities. It means that the future is fundamentally unpredictable. It is its own man, so to speak.

To say that something is infinite is exactly to say that it cannot be described. Infinite means having no limits. To say that God is infinite is not saying anything concrete about God at all because it doesn't say what God is being distinguished from. And so for us too.

If it is true that we can only choose from a limited set of possibilities, then surely a God as wise as ours would be able to predict from those possibilities which one we would select? But no. Rather, the reason why the universe is open is because our actions cannot be predicted with certainty at all. That is what openness means.

One more thing: if what is actual is merely the one possibility that becomes real out of the many that God knew about, then the life that we live, the things in the world are no more valuable than the other things that are possibilities. This devalues the meaning of the real world. It is the fundamental unpredictability of the world that enables responsibility to arise.

 

[surrender]

I'm saying that if you say that God knows every possibility then he is perforce infinite.

Isn’t God infinite in that His knowledge and wisdom are infinite? Isn't He infinite also because He is the only one who is inherently immortal?

If we can only make choices from a limited range of possibilities, then we are not open beings and extending the concept, the universe is not open either.

I’m not saying our range of possibilities is limited. I’m saying our ability to tap into an infinite number of possibilities is limited because we are finite.

It means that the future is fundamentally unpredictable.

But finite beings aren’t unpredictable to an infinite God. Could not God fathom every possible thing we could fathom?

To say that God is infinite is not saying anything concrete about God at all because it doesn't say what God is being distinguished from.

Isn’t God infinite in the way we are finite?

Rather, the reason why the universe is open is because our actions cannot be predicted with certainty at all.

But I’m not saying our actions are predicted “with certainty,” I’m saying our actions are predicted as possibilities.

if what is actual is merely the one possibility that becomes real out of the many that God knew about, then the life that we live, the things in the world are no more valuable than the other things that are possibilities.

I don’t understand. They’re valuable because they are brought into actuality.

 

[Nang]

The past is fixed and no longer. It does not exist except in memory.

The present is actual/real.

The future is not yet, anticipatory, partially open/unsettled/unknowable.

Two main views of time/eternity are A (presentism) vs B (eternalism) theory, endless time vs timelessness.

Unless one is aware of the strengths and weaknesses of various views, I would not be too dogmatic. Modal logic, for e.g., is relevant to this debate, but few of us have a clue (myself included).

The future is unknown to creatures, but the future is totally known and decreed by the Creator, for the future is meant to reveal and accomplish the sovereign will of God.

How can, or should, the creature say that the Creator does not know and control the future that will accomplish His very will and good purposes?

:bang:

 

[Bright Raven]

Simple truth, God is omniscient. Either He is or He isn't.

 

[surrender]

Simple truth, God is omniscient. Either He is or He isn't.

God is omniscient.

omniscient:
1. having infinite knowledge or understanding
2. having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/omniscient?s=t

omniscience: the capacity to know everything there is to know
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omniscience

omniscient:
1. having infinite awareness, understanding, insight
2. possessed of universal or complete knowledge
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/omniscient

 

[Nang]

An omniscient being cannot have exhaustive definite foreknowledge of future free will contingencies.

:doh:


He certainly can, when there are no such things as "future free will contingencies!"

 

[Nang]

Do you not believe that omniscience signifies that God is all knowing and completely wise. Doesn't He see the past, present and future and understand everything about situations, even the details we could not possibly discern? Doesn't He identify exactly what we need and how to provide it but also recognize how to best use our difficulties to build us up and mature our faith (Romans 8:28). Is not Luke 1:37, "Nothing will be impossible with God", simple truth?

This is exactly right, and exactly what OTers try to avoid acknowledging.

The introduction of ~possibles~ that God might not know about, or which might act to change God's mind, is similar to the Roman Catholic sect of Molinism, who like to speculate about such things . . . only in the attempt to retain belief in libertarian free will and claim the sovereignty of God at the same time.

It is an awkward, theological balancing act, to try to have it both ways, as Open Theists and Molinists and godrulz practice.

 

[Desert Reign]

Surrender:
I don't believe that God is in any respect deficient in terms of my understanding of him not being infinite. The issue for me is not that of God's nature but the nature of knowledge itself. I don't believe that knowledge consists of a set of objective facts that exist absolutely and which, if one knows all of them, one is omniscient. Knowledge is more of a personal interaction between the world and the observer. Because the world is real, knowledge can be shared. Thus I can say 'this is a tree' and you would have to agree with me. But I can also say 'this is a conifer' and you would also have to agree with me. And if I were to say 'This is a breath of fresh air' you might think I was a little strange but you wouldn't quite be able to disagree with me. It is only if I were to say something like 'this is a 1934 Rolls Royce Silver Ghost' that you would be right to disagree. The fact that you and pretty much everybody else would also disagree proves that the tree is real because the tree constrains what can be said about it.

If God is real, then he too is constrained by the real world. If this were not so, then God could not be a God of truth because truth would be meaningless without constraints to determine what was true and what was not.

Cheers,

DR

 

[godrulz]

The future is unknown to creatures, but the future is totally known and decreed by the Creator, for the future is meant to reveal and accomplish the sovereign will of God.

How can, or should, the creature say that the Creator does not know and control the future that will accomplish His very will and good purposes?

:bang:

Is. 46 and 48 shows that God is sovereign and does accomplish His will in the future. The way He knows these things is by His ability to bring them to pass vs prescience.

The error is to proof text a preconceived (wrong) view and try to go beyond the text to extrapolate and defend problematic exhaustive definite foreknowledge of future free will contingencies, determinism, decretalism, two will theories, etc. God simply does not preordain every detail of the future nor does He need to do so (or know so) in order to bring His purposes to pass.

Your view is highly problematic for love, relationship, freedom, responsibility, evil, etc.

You are proof that you cannot always teach an old dog new tricks. Like AMR, you know Calvinistic thinking, but that does not mean you are right.

 

[godrulz]

Simple truth, God is omniscient. Either He is or He isn't.

Simple truth. Calvinism, Molinism, Arminianism, Open Theism all fully affirm God's omniscience. You don't get this, so are not qualified to make a final, informed, dogmatic conclusion.

 

[godrulz]

:doh:


He certainly can, when there are no such things as "future free will contingencies!"

Yes, determinism could lead to EDF, but you simply cannot see how problematic and unbiblical that view is. Islam is deterministic, not Christianity (except Calvinistic error).

 

[godrulz]

This is exactly right, and exactly what OTers try to avoid acknowledging.

The introduction of ~possibles~ that God might not know about, or which might act to change God's mind, is similar to the Roman Catholic sect of Molinism, who like to speculate about such things . . . only in the attempt to retain belief in libertarian free will and claim the sovereignty of God at the same time.

It is an awkward, theological balancing act, to try to have it both ways, as Open Theists and Molinists and godrulz practice.

Molinism is more deterministic than free will theism. It also believes in EDF, unlike Open Theism and other views. Molinists reject Open Theism and argue against it. It is also a minority, confusing, philosophical view.

You have a wrong view of sovereignty (hyper) and free will (compatibilistic). You beg the question and are guilty of wrong assumptions=wrong conclusions.

 

[Lighthouse]

Do you not believe that omniscience signifies that God is all knowing and completely wise. Doesn't He see the past, present and future and understand everything about situations, even the details we could not possibly discern? Doesn't He identify exactly what we need and how to provide it but also recognize how to best use our difficulties to build us up and mature our faith (Romans 8:28). Is not Luke 1:37, "Nothing will be impossible with God", simple truth?

1. To have knowledge of something that object must exist. If the future does not presently exist then it cannot be known.
2. Omniscience, as defined by Calvinists and Arminians, is not presented in the Bible.
3. God even goes so far as to state there are present events of which He does not have knowledge, because He has chosen, in His sovereignty, to not be aware of all things.