Open Theism

[Pneuma3]

Well, given that LXX is a Greek translation of the Old Testament, why not go with the original hebrew which is translated as, "
Your eyes could see me as an embryo, but in your book all my days were already written; my days had been shaped before any of them existed."
Tehillim (Psa) 139:16 CJB

What is the day/time allotted to man to live?

And what do you do with ALL the scriptures I gave showing God tests us so that HE will KNOW and that HE searches our hearts?

As I said in my first post in this thread Gods static foreknowledge is what HE will do, everything He had planned before the foundation of the world will come to pass without exception and nothing can stay His hand.

Yet where man is concerned via his freedom of choice God's foreknowledge is NOT static but is ever moving to search and test man to see what man will do.

This imo is why we see scriptures that talk about Gods static foreknowledge and other scriptures that talk about God testing and searching to find out things.

We just need to discern which is which.

 

[Pneuma3]

I am purposefully over simplifying this to show why 'it takes more intellect to compute an outcome' when you add in 'zillions of more variables' with every micro second - vs a universe where all our actions are known far in advance.

In other words: It would be 'simpler' for God if 'everything' was predetermined in advance.

Agreed. the belief that Gods foreknowledge is always static sounds just like theistic evolution which believes that God gave all the laws of the universe and then just sits back and watches it all unfold, thus imo there would be no need for God to ever to come into the world and visit man in any shape or form for we could all just evolve into what was statically foreknown without anymore help from Him.

 

[Radagast]

In terms of the Calvinism - Pelagianism spectrum, this is pretty much the same position taken by classic Arminianism.

Open theists limit both the omnipotence and omniscience of God. They say that God cannot know our future actions until we take them (this also implies that God is in time).

This goes well beyond classic Arminianism, and many classic Arminians condemn it.

But open theists believe that limiting the omnipotence and omniscience of God is the only consistent way of having libertarian free will.

For a good exploration of these ideas from several sides (including the open theist side), see Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views (InterVarsity Press, 2009).

 

[zelosravioli]

Open theists limit both the omnipotence and omniscience of God. They say that God cannot know our future actions until we take them (this also implies that God is in time).

This goes well beyond classic Arminianism, and many classic Arminians condemn it.

But open theists believe that limiting the omnipotence and omniscience of God is the only consistent way of having libertarian free will.

For a good exploration of these ideas from several sides (including the open theist side), see Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views (InterVarsity Press, 2009).

Your theology puts limits on God. Sure God could predetermine every single action for the next zillion billion years, I guess He could. But wouldn't 'that' be limiting Himself?

It is not 'limiting' if God chooses to choose what He wants to do - and when He wants to.

Why would God limit Himself and every action to some predetermined scripted thing for eternity and eternity - Why would God subject all humanity and everything in the Universe to a predetermined existence, just to appease the Calvinists misunderstanding of election?

We say God seems to exhibit choice in the scriptures, and that seems evident in life and it appears to be more logical.

I'm not doing this just to prove libertarian free will, it just comes out of a natural logical process and natural reading of scripture. I'm sorry but I dont have a pair of reformed view tinted reading glasses.

 

[Radagast]

Your theology puts limits on God. Sure God could predetermine every single action for the next zillion billion years, I guess He could. But wouldn't 'that' be limiting Himself?

No.

I'm not doing this just to prove libertarian free will, it just comes out of a natural logical process and natural reading of scripture. I'm sorry but I dont have a pair of reformed view tinted reading glasses.

This isn't a "bash the Calvinists" thread, it's a "what is open theism?" thread.

And I'm not sure you even read my post.

 

[ghtan]

Open theists limit both the omnipotence and omniscience of God. They say that God cannot know our future actions until we take them (this also implies that God is in time).

This goes well beyond classic Arminianism, and many classic Arminians condemn it.

But open theists believe that limiting the omnipotence and omniscience of God is the only consistent way of having libertarian free will.

For a good exploration of these ideas from several sides (including the open theist side), see Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views (InterVarsity Press, 2009).

Hi there!
Please explain how OT limit God's omnipotence. I'm not aware of that and would appreciate clarification. Btw, I've read that book and it made me even more convinced about OT.
It is true that many Arminians condemn OT. But the problem for Arminians is that they do not have a good explanation for how God knows the future and yet man has libertarian freedom (which Arminians believe). That is why Arminians are more prone to switch to OT than Calvinists are.

 

[zelosravioli]

Open theists limit both the omnipotence and omniscience of God (1). They say that God cannot know our future actions until we take them (2) (this also implies that God is in time). This goes well beyond classic Arminianism, and many classic Arminians condemn it. (3) But open theists believe that limiting the omnipotence and omniscience of God is the only consistent way of having libertarian free will. (4)

This isn't a "bash the Calvinists" thread, it's a "what is open theism?" thread.
Every one of the 5 points in your post strongly suggest you hardly read any of the 11 pages of this thread. 'Bashing' calvinism... four of your points were 'bashing' open theism (1-4 above), all while these points were 'already addressed' in 'depth' in this thread (you could have responded to our definitions and points made already rather than making your simplistic accusations).

You are the one that brought in Arminianism, so I countered with Calvinism, as it sums up the classical reformed view of theism - which is exactly the view held by those who oppose our view of OTheism.

Again, my view might have some things in common with Arminianism, but I came to these conclusions with no leanings toward Arminianism

 

[Radagast]

Hi there!
Please explain how OT limit God's omnipotence.

Open Theists limit God's omnipotence in the sense that they say that many things are beyond God's control (specifically those things which are outcomes of human actions).

Similarly, they limit God's omniscience in the sense that they say that God cannot know our future actions.

But the problem for Arminians is that they do not have a good explanation for how God knows the future and yet man has libertarian freedom (which Arminians believe).

That may well be true. It's possible that Calvinism and Open Theism are the only two logically consistent positions.

But Calvinism and Open Theism certainly have radically different concepts of God.

 

[Radagast]

four of your points were 'bashing' open theism (1-4 above)

Well, no, I was simply stating (without criticism or value judgements) what Open Theism teaches, and I gave an unbiased reference work for those who wanted more detail (my definition was in fact based on the Open Theist chapter of that book).

You are the one that brought in Arminianism

Well, yes, because Open Theists are Arminians (but not always vice versa, because some Arminians condemn Open Theism).

Historically, Open Theism arose out of Arminianism, when a number of Arminian theologians felt that libertarian free will was incompatible with traditional Christian theism.

 

[Pneuma3]

Open theists limit both the omnipotence and omniscience of God. They say that God cannot know our future actions until we take them (this also implies that God is in time).

My view which is semi open does not limit either of those.

Open Theists limit God's omnipotence in the sense that they say that many things are beyond God's control (specifically those things which are outcomes of human actions).

Similarly, they limit God's omniscience in the sense that they say that God cannot know our future actions.

Nothing is beyond Gods control but that does not mean God has already controlled everything from eternity past. God works within this time frame to bring everything under His control.

I know many think Gods already in control of this earth but if so then the prayer Jesus taught us to pray is redundant for Jesus taught us to pray, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Obviously according to this prayer we can see Gods will is not YET being done on earth, but because of God static foreknowledge of what He will do we also know that in His time every thing He planned will come to fruition.

 

[ghtan]

Open Theists limit God's omnipotence in the sense that they say that many things are beyond God's control (specifically those things which are outcomes of human actions). Similarly, they limit God's omniscience in the sense that they say that God cannot know our future actions.
.

My understanding of OT is that God allows humans to make free choices and so in that sense he does not control humans. He can certainly make us do what he wants us to do, or stop us from doing what we want to do, but most of the time he does not because he does not micromanage. Does that limit God's omnipotence or is it simply the way he chooses to deal with man? I think it is the latter.

As for God not being able to know our future actions, it is simply that he does not know it with absolute certainty because he has given us freewill and freewill means humans are not completely predictable. But most of the time, he knows what we will do with a high degree (not absolute) of certainty because he knows us probably better than we know ourselves.

So I think you have a wrong idea of OT. If you say you are quoting from that book, please advise page and line numbers because I have that book so I can easily check.

 

[Pneuma3]

As for God not being able to know our future actions, it is simply that he does not know it with absolute certainty because he has given us freewill and freewill means humans are not completely predictable. But most of the time, he knows what we will do with a high degree (not absolute) of certainty because he knows us probably better than we know ourselves.

I believe God does know our future action, howbeit not from eternity past but because He search our hearts and know before we do something what that something is we will do. Thus he does have absolute knowledge of what man will do.

Even if God knows the choice man will make 30 seconds before man makes that choice it is still absolute foreknowledge of that choice.

Thus it is not Gods foreknowledge that is in question but rather mans understanding of what foreknowledge is. Many believe it must be from eternity past yet scripture tells me that God foreknows all things because He searches all thing out.

 

[ghtan]

I believe God does know our future action, howbeit not from eternity past but because He search our hearts and know before we do something what that something is we will do. Thus he does have absolute knowledge of what man will do.

Even if God knows the choice man will make 30 seconds before man makes that choice it is still absolute foreknowledge of that choice.

Thus it is not Gods foreknowledge that is in question but rather mans understanding of what foreknowledge is. Many believe it must be from eternity past yet scripture tells me that God foreknows all things because He searches all thing out.

Humans with libertarian freewill can change their minds at the last moment. So I would still say there is no absolute certainty until the action is done, only at most a high degree of certainty. Furthermore, many decisions are not important enough for us to decide early, e.g. what will I have for lunch? Or what colour shirt will I wear today? We may even vacillate at the last moment. In such cases - which are many - absolute certainty is even less possible.

 

[Radagast]

My understanding of OT is that God allows humans to make free choices and so in that sense he does not control humans.

As for God not being able to know our future actions, it is simply that he does not know it with absolute certainty because he has given us freewill and freewill means humans are not completely predictable.

I would accept that as a summary of Open Theism (and an implication of the last point is that God is in time, and He does not actually know what we will do until we do it).

On this Open Theist view, God is obviously very limited compared to God as seen by Calvinism (according to which God foresees everything and controls everything) and even compared to God as seen by classical Arminianism (according to which God at least foresees everything).

The situation with Calvinism is actually much like Open Theism in reverse. Open Theism rescues libertarian free will by limiting God's omniscience and omnipotence. Calvinism rescues God's full omniscience and omnipotence by limiting free will (only allowing compatibilist free will, not libertarian).

I'll leave it for another thread to discuss which view is the most Biblical.

 

[Radagast]

Humans with libertarian freewill can change their minds at the last moment. So I would still say there is no absolute certainty until the action is done, only at most a high degree of certainty.

The uncertainty would snowball when you think about my reaction to your reaction to his reaction and so forth.

Much of what we do is in reaction to other people's choices. If those are uncertain, our reactions will be even more uncertain, and the uncertainty would build up.

 

[Radagast]

I believe God does know our future action, howbeit not from eternity past but because He search our hearts and know before we do something what that something is we will do. Thus he does have absolute knowledge of what man will do.

Even if God knows the choice man will make 30 seconds before man makes that choice it is still absolute foreknowledge of that choice.

But if you believe that, haven't you already thrown out the principle of libertarian free will? What does it matter exactly how far in advance God's foreknowledge is?

 

[Pneuma3]

Humans with libertarian freewill can change their minds at the last moment. So I would still say there is no absolute certainty until the action is done, only at most a high degree of certainty. Furthermore, many decisions are not important enough for us to decide early, e.g. what will I have for lunch? Or what colour shirt will I wear today? We may even vacillate at the last moment. In such cases - which are many - absolute certainty is even less possible.

That is why I gave the 30 second example, it could even be 10 or 5 or 1 second which is still foreknowledge of the event. An example of that can be seen in scripture where just before abe plunged his knife into Isaac God stopped him and said NOW I KNOW.

So like I said it is not Gods foreknowledge that is in question but man understanding of foreknowledge.

 

[Pneuma3]

But if you believe that, haven't you already thrown out the principle of libertarian free will? What does it matter exactly how far in advance God's foreknowledge is?

How does that throw out freewill? Are you under the impression that because God foreknows something that it absolutely has to come to pass?

 

[zelosravioli]

But if you believe that, haven't you already thrown out the principle of libertarian free will? What does it matter exactly how far in advance God's foreknowledge is?

What does it matter exactly how far in advance God's foreknowledge is?
Exactly, what difference does it matter how much foreknowledge God has at all, 'if' as you state here:
... as seen by Calvinism (according to which God foresees everything and controls everything) (post #234)

If as you say God controls everything - why would God even have to 'foresee' anything (as in the future) ?

You wouldn't say; 'God is controlling everything in the future' - He must be controlling everything in the 'now' then, right?

Why would God have to 'foresee' the future of what He is doing - isn't that saying God has to 'check' with the future to 'see' if what He does comes out correctly... etc.. that does not make sense.

We say God 'can' control everything in the 'now' (thus the whole God must be outside of time hypothesis is not really necessary).

 

[Radagast]

How does that throw out freewill? Are you under the impression that because God foreknows something that it absolutely has to come to pass?

Well, yes. Things can only come to pass as God foresaw them. Otherwise God's foreknowledge would have been wrong.

This was actually why Open Theism was invented -- the realisation that you can't have both foreknowledge and libertarian free will.

And you misquoted me. I said "libertarian free will," not "free will." Obviously even Calvinists can have free will of the compatibilist kind.