Open Theism

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
hedrick,

Did Elihu make a true statement about God?

“Hear this, O Job;
stop and consider the wondrous works of God.
15 Do you know how God lays his command upon them
and causes the lightning of his cloud to shine?
16 Do you know the balancings of the clouds,
the wondrous works of him who is perfect in knowledge.... (Job 37:14-16 ESV).
Oz
Two responses:
1) Elihu does not represent God's view. He is rebuked by God in the end.
2) Open theism maintains the omniscience of God. God knows everything. The future doesn't exist, and no one, even God, can know something that doesn't exist. "perfect in knowledge" is too general a statement to be evidence for either side on this.
 
Upvote 0

Pneuma3

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
1,637
382
✟54,054.00
Faith
Christian
Here is an article I wrote awhile back, it will be in 4 posts, hopefully some will read it all.

According to the pagan Platonian/Augustine belief, God has exhaustive foreknowledge. This means God knows everything that will happen from eternity past and therefore all scripture that shows God changing His mind is nothing more than anthropomorphisms.


The purpose of this article is to expose the pagan Platonian/Augustine belief for what it is, a pagan view of Gods omniscience. If it can be shown by scripture that God does in fact change His mind all those who hold to this pagan view must re-evaluate all that they believe that stems from this pagan view for if they do not they will continue to have an askew view of our heavenly Father.


Anthropomorphism is the attribution of a human form, human characteristics or human behavior to nonhuman things, e.g. deities in mythology and animals in children's stories.


Now I am not denying there are anthropomorphisms in the scripture, however to state all scripture that shows God has human attributes are nothing more than an anthropomorphisms is to take away from God's own attributes.


Man was made in the image and likeness of God. Thus what scholars call human attributes (anthropomorphisms) attributed to God is really Godly attributes being shown in man. They simply have it backwards.


So does God really change His mind? Or is every scripture that shows God changing His mind just an anthropomorphism?


"Like all metaphors, anthropomorphisms must connect with reality at some point if they are to communicate anything meaningful. Expressions like "the right hand of God" or " the eyes of the Lord" for example, communicate something of God's strength and knowledge. But if indeed it is an anthropomorphism, what does the concept of God changing His mind communicate? If God in fact never changes His mind, saying He does so doesn't communicate anything truthful; it is simply inaccurate". Greg Boyd.




Let's look at some scriptures where God is said to change His mind.



2 Kings 20:1-6



In those days was Hezekiah sick unto death. And the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz came to him, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Set thine house in order; for thou shalt die, and not live. 2 Then he turned his face to the wall, and prayed unto the LORD, saying, 3 I beseech thee, O LORD, remember now how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight. And Hezekiah wept sore. 4 And it came to pass, afore Isaiah was gone out into the middle court, that the word of the LORD came to him, saying, 5 Turn again, and tell Hezekiah the captain of my people, Thus saith the LORD, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will heal thee: on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the LORD. 6 And I will add unto thy days fifteen years; and I will deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of Assyria; and I will defend this city for mine own sake, and for my servant David’s sake.



Now if God knew from eternity past that Hezekiah would pray and God would add 15 years to his life was God not lying when He told Hezekiah he would die and not live?


What we do see here is that prayer can actually CHANGE Gods mind. And if God cannot change His mind, prayer means absolutely nothing and did absolutely nothing for Hezekiah.


Our obedience or disobedience can and will change Gods mind.


If God did not change His mind and this is just an anthropomorphism what truth is this anthropomorphism trying to convey?





Jonah 3:4-10

4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. 6 For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. 7 And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: 8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. 9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? 10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.


Here we see that God told Nineveh that they would be overthrown in 40 days, we see Nineveh repenting of their sins and we see God changing His mind and not doing that which He said He would do.


Was God lying when He said He would overthrow Nineveh? According to the pagan Platonian/Augustine view God must have been lying because according to the pagan view God cannot change His mind; for if God changes His mind then He could not know everything that will happen from eternity past.


So here again we see God changing His mind because Nineveh repented of their sins.


If God did not change His mind and this is just an anthropomorphism what truth is this anthropomorphism trying to convey?




Jeremiah 26:2-3

2 Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD’S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD’S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word: 3 If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings.


Jeremiah 26:13

13 Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; and the LORD will repent him of the evil that he hath pronounced against you.




Jeremiah 26:19

19 Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him at all to death? did he not fear the LORD, and besought the LORD, and the LORD repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus might we procure great evil against our souls.


Here we see God telling the cities of Judah that if they amend their ways and obey His voice that He (God) would repent of all the evil that He proposed to do unto them if they did not amend their ways.


Now if God foreknew from eternity past that the cities of Judah would repent then was God not lying or deceiving the cities of Judah when God said He purposed to bring evil upon them?


So here again we see that when we amend our ways and obey His voice God will change Him mind and relent of that which He said He purposed to do.




If God did not change His mind and this is just an anthropomorphism what truth is this anthropomorphism trying to convey?




Joel 2:13-14

13 And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the LORD your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil. 14 Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the LORD your God?


How can that which is one of Gods praiseworthy attributes be nothing more then an anthropomorphism? Are we to take all the other attributes in this scripture as an

How can that which is one of Gods praiseworthy attributes be nothing more than an anthropomorphism also?






1 Samuel 23:7-13

7 And it was told Saul that David was come to Keilah. And Saul said, God hath delivered him into mine hand; for he is shut in, by entering into a town that hath gates and bars. 8 And Saul called all the people together to war, to go down to Keilah, to besiege David and his men. 9 And David knew that Saul secretly practised mischief against him; and he said to Abiathar the priest, Bring hither the ephod. 10 Then said David, O LORD God of Israel, thy servant hath certainly heard that Saul seeketh to come to Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake. 11 Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hand? will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard? O LORD God of Israel, I beseech thee, tell thy servant. And the LORD said, He will come down. 12 Then said David, Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul? And the LORD said, They will deliver thee up. 13 Then David and his men, which were about six hundred, arose and departed out of Keilah, and went whithersoever they could go. And it was told Saul that David was escaped from Keilah; and he forbare to go forth.



Here we see David asking God a couple of questions.


David: will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard?


God: He will come down.


David: Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul?


God: They will deliver thee up.


Sounds good, right? Looks like God foreknew what would happen, right?


Kind of makes it look like the pagan Platonian/Augustine view might be correct after all, right?


Except NONE of these things happened. And they did NOT happen because David packed up and departed out of Keilah.


This does NOT show God was wrong, it shows that David changed that which would have happened if he had of stayed in Keilah.



So then if David by his actions changed what God said would happen does that not show that OUR actions can also change what God said would happen?


Does it not show that OUR repentance, prayer etc. can and does change Gods mind?


Does it not show that if we ask God about things that will happen that WE can actually CHANGE the outcome?


This sets of scriptures that look like they might be in support of the pagan Platonian/Augustine view actually show forth the complete opposite.



It is my hope that those who believe in this pagan Platonian/Augustine view of Gods omniscience, which is that God foreknows all that will happen from eternity past, will re-evaluate all that they believe that stems from this pagan view of God, if they do not they will never come to see the Father as He truly is.


Does God change His mind? Or is the pagan Platonian/Augustine belief that God cannot change His mind correct?


So far, the scriptures point out in fact that God can and does change His mind. Therefore, all those who believe God does not change His mind have to make an argument from silence.


Let's look at a few more scriptures that show God does indeed change His mind, thus showing the pagan Platonian/Augustine view that many hold, to be in error.



Genesis 6:5-7

5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.


Here we see because the thoughts of the hearts of men was only evil that God repented/changed His mind that He had made man on the earth. Mans evil heart grieved the loving heart of God.


Now if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct these scriptures make no sense. Can God really truly be grieved in heart if God knew from eternity past that man's hearts were going to be evil continually? And if God did not change His mind and this is just an anthropomorphism why was the world that then was destroyed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zelosravioli
Upvote 0

Pneuma3

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
1,637
382
✟54,054.00
Faith
Christian
Exodus 32:7-14

7 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves: 8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. 9 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: 10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. 11 And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? 12 Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. 14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.



Here we see God thought to do evil to his people and consume them. We see the power of intercessory prayer and we see God repenting/changing His mind of the evil that He thought to do to His people.


Now if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct and God's repenting here is just an anthropomorphism than Moses intercessory prayer on the behalf of God people is basically did nothing.





1 Chronicles 21:15

15 And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and as he was destroying, the LORD beheld, and he repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed, It is enough, stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD stood by the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite.


Here we see God destroying Jerusalem via and angel and as the angel was destroying Jerusalem God repented of the evil and told the angel to stop destroying.


Now if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct and God repenting here is just an anthropomorphism then God never stopped the angel from destroying Jerusalem.






1 Samuel 15:11

11 It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night.


1 Samuel 15:35

35 And Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death: nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul: and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.


Here we see that God set up Saul to be king but repented/was sorry that He had made Saul king.


Now if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct and God repenting here is just an anthropomorphism then God was not truly sorry that He made Saul king.




Jeremiah 15:6

6 Thou hast forsaken me, saith the LORD, thou art gone backward: therefore will I stretch out my hand against thee, and destroy thee; I am weary with repenting.


Here we see God's people have forsaken Him and gone backwards that God say He will destroy them. And the reason God gives for doing this is because He is weary of repenting/changing His mind.






Jeremiah 26:12-13

12 Then spake Jeremiah unto all the princes and to all the people, saying, The LORD sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye have heard. 13 Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; and the LORD will repent him of the evil that he hath pronounced against you.


Here we see that God pronounced evil unto His people because of their ways. We see that if they amend their ways and obey Gods voice that God will repent/change His mind of that which He had pronounced against them.


This shows that if we amend our ways and obey Gods voice that even the evils that God had pronounced against us will cause God to change His mind and not do that which He had pronounced.


Thus obedience and disobedience can and does change Gods mind.


Now if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct that God does not change His mind then obedience or disobedience to God means nothing and thus making no sense of these scriptures.


Look at it this way, we too were once lost and without Christ in this world and the wages of our sins was death. So if the wages of sin is death and God did not change His mind concerning us, then the wages of sin is still death for those who are not of the commonwealth of Israel.




Now there is one set of scriptures that those who believe in the pagan Platonian/Augustine view use to show that God does not change His mind and they take this one scripture about God not repenting and literal and not as an anthropomorphism. But why is this one scripture that states God should not repent be anymore literal then all the scriptures that state God does change His mind?


How can those who believe the pagan Platonian/Augustine view justify taking this scripture as literal when the abundance of scripture tell us that God does indeed changes His mind though our prayers, obedience and disobedience? The answer is they can't. They have NO justification to take this scripture as literal over the abundance of the contrary scriptures.


They only do this because of their preconceived idea that the pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God is the correct view.


Let's look at that set of scriptures.



Numbers 23:18-21

18 And he took up his parable, and said, Rise up, Balak, and hear; hearken unto me, thou son of Zippor: 19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? 20 Behold, I have received commandment to bless: and he hath blessed; and I cannot reverse it. 21 He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel: the LORD his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among them.



God's promise throughout scripture is that if we obey His voice that we are guarantied His blessing. Thus if God does not behold iniquity or perverseness in us we have His promise that blessing is assured.


And this promise of blessing, based on our obedience to His voice, God will not repent/change His mind of.


However Balak wanted God to curse that which He had promised blessing to. Basically Balak wanted God to bow to his will and curse Israel.


But God through Balaam basically said I have promised blessing to those who have no iniquity or perverseness and I am not a man that I should lie or change my mind concerning that which I have promised.


Balaam said God hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel. Therefore God refused to change His mind and curse Israel.


This does not mean God never changes His mind, what this shows is that if we walk in total obedience to God, God will not change His mind.


However as scriptures show, that if God's people forsake Him and do evil in His sight God and God sees their iniquity and perverseness God will repent of the good that He thought to do unto them and do evil instead.


So instead of backing up the pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God, this set of scriptures actually proves the pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God to be in error.

For it shows that the only reason God refused to change His mind was because He saw no iniquity or perverseness in Israel.


So as we can see according to the abundance of scripture, if taken in context, God does indeed change His mind and that change of mind comes about by the obedience or disobedience of man. The potter does indeed respond to the movement of the clay.



Hopefully what I have presented here has taken seed in some of those who hold to the pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God, and they can know see that God does indeed change His mind.


If not hopefully, the second installment of anthropomorphisms against the pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God concerning God's exhaustive foreknowledge will be of help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zelosravioli
Upvote 0

Pneuma3

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
1,637
382
✟54,054.00
Faith
Christian
The pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God states that God cannot change His mind, God has exhaustive foreknowledge and that God is in meticulous control of all things that happen on the earth.

As I have already shown that God can and does in fact change His mind this part of the thread will deal mostly with exhaustive foreknowledge ( foreknowledge of all things from eternity past) and meticulous control of God.

So let's look at some scriptures and see if God has exhaustive foreknowledge and is in meticulous control of all things.


Genesis 2:19
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam tosee what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.


Here we see God is curious to see what names Adam would give unto each animal.
So if God had exhaustive foreknowledge God would have known the names of each animal Adam would have called them.

Deuteronomy 8:2
2 And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.

Here we see God gives commandments to test people so that He (God) will know what is in the peoples hearts, whether they will keep His commandments or not.

So if God was a meticulously controlling God and had exhaustive foreknowledge then would God not have known what was in the peoples hearts? Would He not have just controlled the people to keep His commandment or not? Why test us if God already knows the outcome?

Now it has been suggested by others that God tests us so that we will know what is in our hearts. They liken it to a teacher with a student, the teacher knows the answer to the questions asked and wants to see if the student knows the answer also.

However there is a very large problem with this view. And the problem is, that is NOT what the scriptures actually say. The scriptures actually tell us that God tests us so that HE WILL KNOW. Those who believe it is so we will know are simply rewriting the scriptures so that they will line up with their pagan Platonian/Augustine view of God.

There are many scriptures that show God searches things out so that He (God) will know. There are at least three different methods (probably more) by which God searches things out. Testing, asking questions and physically coming to see for Himself.

Let's look at a few of them.

Genesis 3:9-13
9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? 12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Remember God says in Deuteronomy 8:2 that he tests us so that He will know whether we will keep His commandments or not.

I don't think anyone will argue that fact that Adam and Eve were being tested in the garden, for according to Deuteronomy 8:2 that is the reason for the commandment "thou shalt not eat". God was testing Adam and Eve to see if they would keep His commandment or not.

Thus we see the searching questions God asked of Adam and Eve.

This simply is not compatible with an meticulously controlling exhaustive foreknowing view of God. For if God was in meticulous control and had exhaustive foreknowledge God would never have to test us or search us.

What those questions God asked of Adam and Eve show us is the searching out of our hearts.


Genesis 22:12
12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

Here we can see God again using a test so that He (God) will know something about an individuals heart.

This scripture does not say so the Abraham will know what is in his heart as the teacher student scenario suggests. If emphatically states NOW I (GOD) KNOW.

God wanted to see if Abraham would withhold his only son from Him (God).

So if God is a meticulously controlling exhaustive foreknowing God this test of Abraham means nothing, for God would have foreknown from eternity past that Abraham would not withhold anything from Him.



Genesis 18:16-32
16 And the men rose up from thence, and looked toward Sodom: and Abraham went with them to bring them on the way. 17 And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do; 18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him. 20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; 21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know. 22 And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.
23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? 24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? 25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? 26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. 27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes: 28 Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it. 29 And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty’s sake. 30 And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there. 31 And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty’s sake. 32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten’s sake.

Here we see another method of God searching things out. That being God literally coming down to see for Himself.

Here we see because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah was great and God had heard that cry God comes down to see if the cry is the same as what He had heard. And the scripture expressly states if not, I will know. So how did God find out if the cry was according to what He had heard? By going down and seeing, and only after His eyes beheld their sins did He say I WILL KNOW.

Now if God is ameticulously controlling exhaustive foreknowing God why did He have to go down to Sodom and Gomorrah to see if they sinned? Surely and exhaustive foreknowing God would not have to literally go down or send His servant down to see if S&G sinned or not.

This set of scriptures also show God changing His mind at each intersession made by Abraham, thus showing intercessory prayer can and does change Gods mind.


Exodus 4:7-9
7 And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh. 8 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. 9 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.

Here we see God telling Moses about three signs or three miracles he Moses was to perform so that people would believe him.

No big deal right? Except in the first two cases God said IFthey will not believe.

How can an exhaustively foreknowing God not know that the first two signs would fail? How come God gave three signs if God believed that each sign might be enough? And if God foreknew He would need all three signs why tell Moses IF they will not believe?

Exodus 13:17
17 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt:

Here we see God lead the people not through the land of the Philistines because He (God) said lest peradventure the people when they saw war would run back to Egypt.

If God has exhaustive foreknowledge why would God state that? Surly an exhaustive foreknowing God would know whether or not the people would turn back to Egypt if they saw war or not.


Exodus 16:4
4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

Here we see again God testing His people to see if they would obey His law or not.
Surly an exhaustive foreknowing God should have already known this.


1 Chronicles 28:9
9 And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind: for the LORD searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.

What we see here is that the Lord searches all hearts.

So if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct that God knows all hearts from eternity past why do the scriptures state that He searches all hearts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zelosravioli
Upvote 0

Pneuma3

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
1,637
382
✟54,054.00
Faith
Christian
2 Chronicles 32:30-31
30 This same Hezekiah also stopped the upper watercourse of Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side of the city of David. And Hezekiah prospered in all his works. 31 Howbeit in the business of the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, who sent unto him to enquire of the wonder that was done in the land, God left him, to try him, that he might know all that was in his heart.

Here again we see that God tries men in order that HE MIGHT KNOW all that is in men's hearts.

This shows a total rejection to the teacher/student scenario that the teacher already know the answer and is asking in order to see if the student knows the answer.

So if God must try men in order to know men's hearts how is the pagan Platonian/Augustine view correct in its understanding that God knows all hearts from eternity past?


Psalm 139:23
23 Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts:

Here the Psalmist prays that God would search him to know his heart and try him to know his thoughts.

Again showing the pagan Platonian/Augustine view to be incorrect. For if God know all hearts and thought from eternity past God need not search and try men so that He (God) can find out what is in men's hearts and thoughts.



Isaiah 5:1-4
Now will I sing to my wellbeloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard. My wellbeloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill: 2 And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. 3 And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard. 4 What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

Here we see that God thought His vineyard would bring forth grapes because of all the blessing He gave unto His vineyard. But alas the vineyard brought forth wild grapes instead.

So if the pagan Platonian/Augustine view is correct and God foreknew that His vineyard would bring forth wild grapes why does God seem so shocked about the outcome?

And if God is in meticulous control of every event in this world and is the ultimate cause of the vineyard bringing forth wild grapes, how is it He (God) does not seem to know that which He controlled to bring forth wild grapes brought forth wild grapes?



Jeremiah 17:9-10
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? 10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

Here we see the Lord saying He searches the heart and tries the reins to give every man according to his ways and the fruit of his doing.

So if God searches and tires man in order to give every man according to his ways and the fruit of his doing how can the pagan Platonian/Augustine view a exhaustive foreknowing , meticulously controlling God be correct?

For surely a God who is an exhaustive foreknowing , meticulously controlling God would already know man's ways from eternity past and because He God is the controlling factor of men's hearts. Therefore God would not even need to search man for He is in effect controlling what man does and does not do.


Jeremiah 26:2-4
2 Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD’S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD’S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word: 3 If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings. 4 And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the LORD; If ye will not hearken to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you,

Here we see that the Lord is in doubt, but was hopeful that all His words that He spoke would turn every man from their evil way so that He (the Lord) could repent of the evil that He purposed to do unto them.

How can an exhaustive foreknowing , meticulously controlling God not know whether the people would turn from their evil ways or not? Surely if God was in meticulous control of mans every move He would have known whether or not they would turn from their evil ways or not.



Ezekiel 22:29-31
29 The people of the land have used oppression, and exercised robbery, and have vexed the poor and needy: yea, they have oppressed the stranger wrongfully. 30 And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none. 31 Therefore have I poured out mine indignation upon them; I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath: their own way have I recompensed upon their heads, saith the Lord GOD.


Here we see God searching for a man to stand in the gap but not finding one.

How can an exhaustive foreknowing , meticulously controlling God not know before hand that He would not find any one to stand in the gap?



Mark 12:1-11

And he began to speak unto them by parables. A certain man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge about it, and digged a place for the winefat, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country. 2 And at the season he sent to the husbandmen a servant, that he might receive from the husbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard. 3 And they caught him, and beat him, and sent him away empty. 4 And again he sent unto them another servant; and at him they cast stones, and wounded him in the head, and sent him away shamefully handled. 5 And again he sent another; and him they killed, and many others; beating some, and killing some. 6 Having yet therefore one son, his wellbeloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying, They will reverence my son. 7 But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours. 8 And they took him, and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard. 9 What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others. 10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner: 11 This was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?


Here we see God saying they will reverence my son. Yes this is a parable and some have said you cannot take a parable to far, thus God saying they will reverence my son is taking the parable to far. Those who state this have no grounds for stating such other then their pagan Platonian/Augustine view that God is an exhaustive foreknowing , meticulously controlling God.

But that is not how a parable works, a parable is used to show forth truth not hide truth.

Did God not actually send forth servants and the people actually beat and kill those servants?

If these things are true why should we stop there and say when God is speaking of His son that what God says is not true?

It is obvious from this parable that God believed that the people would reverence His son and as God believed this it show that God cannot be an How can an exhaustive foreknowing , meticulously controlling God.

Understanding the use of parables.


A parable is a “dark saying”
Jesus is the “light”
A parable by itself stays hidden in the “darkness”, but when the “light” comes, the parable is understood.
Therefore, when Jesus (who is the light) spoke in parables it was to bring into light that which was once in darkness.

Look at all the times in scripture Jesus spoke a parable and the Scribes and the Pharisees perceived that He spoke it of them. These were not humble men, but proud and haughty men and the parable Jesus spoke opened their eyes to the truth.

A parable is to bring to light that which was in darkness.

Matthew 13:34-35
34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: 35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

If this scripture is true then the thought that Jesus spoke in parables to hide the secrets CANNOT be correct.

A parable is something that is used to set side by side with the truth in order to illuminate the truth. It is not set side by side with the truth in order to hide the truth.

Jesus being the truth and the light can only speak truth and light, therefore He does not hide the light in a parable He uses a parable to illuminate the light.

So let’s set side by side the KJV and Young’s literal (YL) and see if we can understand if these parables were to illuminate or to hide the meaning.

KJV
Matthew 13:10-23
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

YL
10 And the disciples having come near, said to him, `Wherefore in similes dost thou speak to them?'

This is pretty plain; the disciples are asking Jesus why He spoke unto the multitudes in parables.

KJV
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

YL
11 And he answering said to them that -- `To you it hath been given to know the secrets of the reign of the heavens, and to these it hath not been given,

Jesus answer to the question is The Child of God knows the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven and to those who are without it has not been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus did not speak the parables so the child of God would know the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven, He spoke in parables so that those without could understand the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.

To put it in our everyday language

Why do you speak to them in parables? Because they do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus spoke the parables that they might know the mysteries, as the mysteries were already given to the child of God.

This is brought out more fully here

KJV
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

YL
12 for whoever hath, it shall be given to him, and he shall have overabundance, and whoever hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken from him. 13`Because of this, in similes do I speak to them, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor understand,

Jesus continues to explain why He speaks to them in parables.

The question is still why do you speak to them in parables.

Jesus answer is because they seeing do not see and hearing do not hear, nor understand.

To put it in our everyday language.

Why do you speak to them in parables? Because they do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven and because they seeing do not see and they hearing do not hear, nor understand.

Jesus is NOT saying He speaks in parables so that those seeing would not see and those hearing would not hear. He IS saying He speaks in parables because they do not see, hear or understand.

Jesus is bringing to light those things they do not understand.


KJV
14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

YL
14 and fulfilled on them is the prophecy of Isaiah, that saith, With hearing ye shall hear, and ye shall not understand, and seeing ye shall see, and ye shall not perceive, 15for made gross was the heart of this people, and with the ears they heard heavily, and their eyes they did close, lest they might see with the eyes, and with the ears might hear, and with the heart understand, and turn back, and I might heal them.


These scriptures are misunderstood by those who believe Jesus spoke in parables in order to hide His message.

Their understanding goes something like this.

Jesus hides the truth in parables so that the multitudes would NOT turn to Him, would not be converted and so could not be healed.

This understanding is in total disregards to what Jesus said why He spoke to the multitudes in parables. It is also in disregards to His purpose in coming into the world to save everyone in it.


What those scriptures are saying is that Isaiah prophesied that the multitudes in Jesus day would be hearing, and not hear, seeing, and not see because their heart had waxed gross. Jesus is saying because of these things, the heart waxing gross, the heavy ears, the closed eyes is the reason He had to speak to them in parables.

Why do you speak to them in parables? Because they do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven and because they seeing do not see and they hearing do not hear, nor understand.

This all comes to a head here the accumulation of what was said regarding the reason Jesus spoke in parables.

KJV
34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: 35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

YL
' 34 All these things spake Jesus in similes to the multitudes, and without a simile he was not speaking to them,35that it might be fulfilled that was spoken through the prophet, saying, `I will open in similes my mouth, I will utter things having been hidden from the foundation of the world.'

So the answer to whys Jesus spoke in parables is this.

Because they do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven and because they seeing do not see and they hearing do not hear, nor understand. I open my mouth in parables to utter things that have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

Jesus did not utter parables to keep hidden the secrets, but to illuminate the secrets that were hidden from the foundation of the world.


To finish off this thread I will post a few quotes from some early church fathers before the time of Augustine that show that the pagan Platonian/Augustine view of a meticulously controlling God was not that of the early church.




Origen in his day referring to the pagan belief of Plato's that whatever happens in the universe is regulated by God states


"This is incorrect; for we cannot say that transgressors follow the law of God when they transgress; and scripture declares that it is not only wicked men who are transgressors, but also wicked demons and wicked angels. When we say that the providence of God regulates all things we utter a great truth if we attribute to that providence nothing but what is just and right. But if we ascribe to the providence of God all things whatsoever, however unjust they may be, then it is no longer true that the providence of God regulate all things".



Justin Martyr states.


"But the angels transgressed this appointment. They afterwards subdued the human race to themselves and among men sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness. Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that the angels and those demons who did these things ascribed them to God himself, and to those who were accounted to be his very offspring".



Clement states


"This was the law from the first, that virtue should be the object of voluntary choice".


Athenagoras states


"Some free agents, you will observe, such as they were created by God, continued in those things for which God had made and over which He had ordained them; but some outraged both the constitution of their nature and the government entrusted to them".


Tatian states


"The Logos before the creation of men, was the Farmer of angels. And each of these two orders of creatures was made free to act as it pleased, not having the nature of good, which again is with God alone, but is brought to perfection in men through their freedom of choice, in order that the bad man may be justly punished but the just man be deservedly praised. Such is the constitution of things in reference to angels and men".



"When men attach themselves to one who was more subtle then the rest, having regard to being his firstborn, and declare him to be God, through he was resisting the law of God, then the power of the Logos excluded the beginner of folly and his adherents from all fellowship with Himself. And so he who was made in the likeness of God becomes mortal; but that first begotten one through his transgression and ignorance becomes a demon; and they who imitated him are become a host of demons, and through their freedom of choice have been given up to their own infatuation".


There are many more such quotes of the early church fathers that I could use, but these should suffice to show that the earliest father believed it was free will beings who are responsible for all the evils of this world and not as Augustine tells us that God has some greater purpose in regulating all evil.


God bless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zelosravioli
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Two responses:
1) Elihu does not represent God's view. He is rebuked by God in the end.
2) Open theism maintains the omniscience of God. God knows everything. The future doesn't exist, and no one, even God, can know something that doesn't exist. "perfect in knowledge" is too general a statement to be evidence for either side on this.

You mean God didn’t know about the crucifixion ahead of time, and the resurrection was just a quick fix?
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
You mean God didn’t know about the crucifixion ahead of time, and the resurrection was just a quick fix?
He knows his own plans. In my opinion he had to know from the beginning that people would sin, and dying for us was surely part of his plan from the beginning as well. I don't know how specific God's plans are. Did he always intend for the Romans to develop as they did, or was there a range of possibilities? I don't claim to know.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Two responses:
1) Elihu does not represent God's view. He is rebuked by God in the end.
2) Open theism maintains the omniscience of God. God knows everything. The future doesn't exist, and no one, even God, can know something that doesn't exist. "perfect in knowledge" is too general a statement to be evidence for either side on this.

hedrick,

You are ducking and weaving about God's foreknowledge - absolute foreknowledge. Are you an open theism believer?

Your statement is: "God knows everything. The future doesn't exist, and no one, even God, can know something that doesn't exist".

That is contradicted by Psalm 139:4 (NASB), 'Even before there is a word on my tongue, Behold, O Lord, You know it all'. For further biblical support of God's foreknowledge, see Thiessen 1949/1979:81-82.

The father of open theism, Clark Pinnock, questioned: "Where is the biblical support for key features of conventional theism, for example the dogma of divine unchangeableness, or the assumption of timelessness and impassibility, or the doctrine of all-controlling sovereignty, or the notion of exhaustive foreknowledge?" (Pinnock, Most Moved Mover: A Theology of God's Openness, 2001:62)

Surely, he knows the Scripture used by traditional, evangelical theology to support God's exhaustive foreknowledge! See the material in the Thiessen reference above.

Pinnock states: "Everyone agrees that God is omniscient and knows everything that any being could know. He knows everything that has existed, everything that now exists, and everything that could exist in future” (Most Moved Mover 2001:99-100).

That sounds like conventional, evangelical theology and all is OK biblically?

That is until I read: "But no being, not even God, can know in advance precisely what free agents will do, even though he may predict it with great accuracy. My assumption is, and the Bible seems to share it, that exhaustive foreknowledge would not be possible in a world with real freedom" (Most Moved Mover 2001:100).

So he does not agree with God's exhaustive foreknowledge (omniscience). In that publication, he provided no biblical support for such a view. Psalm 139:4 (NIV), 'Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely'.

Your view that open theism supports God's omniscience is refuted by Pinnock himself.

From the human view, God's knowledge of the future is foreknowledge, but not from God's perspective "since He knows all things by one simultaneous intuition. He foreknew the future in general (Isa 46:9-10; Dan 2 and 7; Matt 24 and 25; Acts 15:18)...." (Thiessen 1949/1979:81-82).

Oz
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

zelosravioli

Believer
Supporter
Mar 15, 2014
449
168
Northern California
✟146,160.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Open theists deny God’s omniscience because they can see that, along with his omnipotence, it implies absolute predestination. Unfortunately, the denial of omniscience leads to the collapse of virtually the whole of Christian theology. (lesliedellow post #153)

Open theism 'agrees' that God is Omniscient.
God is Omniscient and knows everything that 'could' happen - and thats what we believe.
God is Omniscient, He knows everything about everything that 'is' and everything that 'exists'.

But the 'future' does not yet exist.
And Omniscience does not 'require' knowing about what doesn't yet exist.

So the future is not 'actually' seen - yet God 'can' perceive, plan, cause, bring to pass, the future events - so in other words, we believe: God has 'foreknowledge' of what will happen in the future.

These two different perspectives of 'knowing' the 'future' should be understood for non-Openists to grasp the Open-Theist argument. Many Non-Openists 'assume' the future has happened (or that God see's the future). It isn't necessary for Calvinists to believe so, but their argument is often argued from that perspective; See your post #156 below:
"... God must have foreseen and approved of his destiny from the outset.."

Might you explain what you mean by foreseen?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

zelosravioli

Believer
Supporter
Mar 15, 2014
449
168
Northern California
✟146,160.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
God creates Mr X.

God is omniscient, so he knows what Mr X’s eternal destiny will be.

God is also omnipotent, so if he wished Mr X’s eternal destiny to be something other than what he foresees, he could create Mr X with a different history in front of him.

Therefore, whether Mr X is destined for heaven or hell, God must have foreseen and approved of his destiny from the outset.
I believe:
God gives us a choice, but God still makes the final choice.
(or retains His options of His final choosing)
Yet God 'promised' eternal life if 'you' choose to believe.
Thus; Mr X has the choice to choose his eternal destiny.
But this is only because' of Gods 'promise' to us.

So does God know if Mr X will choose A or B?
God 'allows' Mr X to choose A or B.
God 'knows' Mr X will choose A or B.
God can 'determine' whether Mr X chooses A or B.
God can 'cause' Mr X to choose A.
God can 'cause' Mr X to choose B.

Maybe you see a paradox between 'allowing' freewill decisions and 'causing, I see God 'both' causing 'and' allowing. And it only seems like a paradox because of 'our' limited knowledge and perspective, not Gods. I see a greater paradox in a doctrine that does 'not' 'allow' these freewill decisions.

I believe God has made neutral beings that are capable of choosing and yet God may also know what they will choose before so. There are other factors and angles that cause decisions, and Gods 'anticipation' of these decisions do not necessitate that there is only 'one' option or outcome. Who knows what other Omniscient variables exist that could account for Gods knowing and yet allowing freewill decisions.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
He knows his own plans. In my opinion he had to know from the beginning that people would sin, and dying for us was surely part of his plan from the beginning as well. I don't know how specific God's plans are. Did he always intend for the Romans to develop as they did, or was there a range of possibilities? I don't claim to know.

He apparently knew the future well enough to be able to put words into the mouths of the prophets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Open theists deny God’s omniscience because they can see that, along with his omnipotence, it implies absolute predestination. Unfortunately, the denial of omniscience leads to the collapse of virtually the whole of Christian theology. (lesliedellow post #153)

Open theism 'agrees' that God is Omniscient.
God is Omniscient and knows everything that 'could' happen - and thats what we believe.
God is Omniscient, He knows everything about everything that 'is' and everything that 'exists'.

But the 'future' does not yet exist.
And Omniscience does not 'require' knowing about what doesn't yet exist.

So the future is not 'actually' seen - yet God 'can' perceive, plan, cause, bring to pass, the future events - so in other words, we believe: God has 'foreknowledge' of what will happen in the future.

These two different perspectives of 'knowing' the 'future' should be understood for non-Openists to grasp the Open-Theist argument. Many Non-Openists 'assume' the future has happened (or that God see's the future). It isn't necessary for Calvinists to believe so, but their argument is often argued from that perspective; See your post #156 below:
"... God must have foreseen and approved of his destiny from the outset.."

Might you explain what you mean by foreseen?

You can claim to believe anything, if you redefine words to fit in with what you believe. In 1 Kings 22.20 God apparently had no difficulty in predicting the death of Ahab at Ramoth Gilead.

All through the Bible God is making accurate predictions about a future he apparently does not know
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

zelosravioli

Believer
Supporter
Mar 15, 2014
449
168
Northern California
✟146,160.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
You can claim to believe anything, if you redefine words to fit in with what you believe. In 1 Kings 22.20 God apparently had no difficulty in predicting the death of Ahab at Ramoth Gilead.

All through the Bible God is making accurate predictions about a future he apparently does not know
Are you saying God can't 'cause' these things to come true, as in "bring it to pass"?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

zelosravioli

Believer
Supporter
Mar 15, 2014
449
168
Northern California
✟146,160.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The text says God asks for a spirit to go up and 'entice' Ahab to go into battle.

God brought about the events - nothing here says, or even implies, that God sees the future. Only that He either knows how Ahab will respond to the enticing, and or brings it to pass i.e. guides the arrow ...
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
That is contradicted by Psalm 139:4 (NASB), 'Even before there is a word on my tongue, Behold, O Lord, You know it all'.
This is poetry. It is trying to say that God knows the author completely. It really only says that God knows his words before he speaks them. This is not a statement that God knows everything that everyone will do for all of history.

I checked a number of translations. The NASB is unusual. Most are more explicit that God knows your words before you speak them. So are the two commentaries I checked.

This is proof-texting at its worst.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
He apparently knew the future well enough to be able to put words into the mouths of the prophets.
The prophets in general are speaking of God's intentions rather than predicting. Most of their predictions are fairly short-run. They are saying that God is about to use a certain nation to do something. In most cases it wouldn't have been hard to predict that Israel / Judah (or in some cases other nations) was about to be attacked, but it wasn't really a prediction. It was explaining that God was using that nation to discipline Israel.

There are also longer-term visions, of the restoration of Israel, and through them the whole earth. I believe all open theists believe that God has sufficient control to make things happen, although the specifics of exactly how they happen may not be known.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: zelosravioli
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
To answer a previous question. I think open theism is plausible from a Scriptural point of view, but I'm not prepared to say I'm sure of it.

In general I'm skeptical about replacing OT assertions about God's power and knowledge with metaphysical concepts like omniscience, omnipotence, and particularly impassibility.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ghtan

Active Member
Nov 9, 2014
52
9
Malaysia
✟11,167.00
Country
Malaysia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
To answer a previous question. I think open theism is plausible from a Scriptural point of view, but I'm not prepared to say I'm sure of it.

In general I'm skeptical about replacing OT assertions about God's power and knowledge with metaphysical concepts like omniscience, omnipotence, and particularly impassibility.

Might Jesus' admission that he did not know the date of his return be one scriptural proof that God need not know the future exhaustively, since Jesus was fully God as even non-open theists would agree?
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Are you saying God can't 'cause' these things to come true, as in "bring it to pass"?

On the contrary:

“God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:” (Westminster Confession of Faith)

Orthodox Christianity has the merit of being self consistent, you see?
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
To answer a previous question. I think open theism is plausible from a Scriptural point of view, but I'm not prepared to say I'm sure of it.

In general I'm skeptical about replacing OT assertions about God's power and knowledge with metaphysical concepts like omniscience, omnipotence, and particularly impassibility.

“Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:” (Isaiah 46:10)

God doesn’t seem to have any qualms about asserting his own omniscience. The thing about sitting light to the Bible is that you can make of God anything you like.
 
Upvote 0