The belief “God having perfect complete foreknowledge” called Open Theism?

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Not sure I get this. You say in eternity there's no need to measure time. I mean what can this mean. In Rev we see saints in Heaven have experience which have sequence. Rev 6:10 This happens, that happens and then this. For example....maybe my illustration of what heaven is like is too earthly and compared to how we know things....but let's say we're in one place of heaven worshiping God. Yes we'd do that forever but things which take place in "real time" have duration. To put it simply we're worshiping at the throne of God but we also go over to a friends mansion for a time of fellowship. How could there not be some indication of the time arrived of each place. Wouldn't that be said to me a measuring of time?

What I meant was that we will not be bound by clocks. We can spend as long as we like doing stuff because there will be no limits.

 

[bling]

God did (as opposed to could have) create time. Modern, mainstream science indicates pretty clearly that at a finite point in the past, time, space, matter and energy came into being and formed the universe. Christian cosmology attributes this occurrence to God, the Uncaused Cause, the Creator of the Universe.

I've no idea what this means. Do you? We can posit all sorts of things about God, but without good grounds for doing so either from Scripture and/or from deductions made from the nature of the universe itself, we ought to be very careful about doing so.

God at the end of time would know historically all of man’s choices as pure perfect history. That historic information would be available to God at the beginning of time. ​

It seems now that you are thinking that God's knowledge of all things conforms to a linear progression of events, that He knows what He knows as a consequence of a retrospective self-communication of facts. But God knew before the universe existed (which means prior to the existence of time) all that would happen in it. (If there was ever any moment when God did not know everything perfectly, He would not be God.) It doesn't look, then, like God's knowledge of all events is communicated back to Himself from a future version of Himself. There was no future version of Himself before the universe existed, yet God still knew then all that would occur in the universe prior to creating it.

Why do you say: “There was no future version of Himself before the universe existed”. Does your universe include the Spiritual realm prior to physical universe we are in? I agree with that strong possibility?

I don't see that you've properly justified this retrospective communication of knowledge you say God has. Nothing in Scripture and nothing about what would make God, God, suggests to me He operates in the way you say He does here.

God at the end of time knows a everything, which includes all human actions as pure unchangeable history, but he always knew this.

If God obtains new knowledge, He is not truly omniscient and therefore not God. God's knowledge, then, of a person's life He has always known (and must always have known) - even before there was a universe.

Does God have the knowledge and power to create a being with truly autonomous free will over just one small choice or is that impossible for God?

It would be of use to you to read up on Molinism. It has some very interesting things to point out about counter-factuals, moments of knowledge (could, would and will), contingent truth and such that may help you refine your thinking in the areas of God's omniscience, foreknowledge and timelessness.

I do not think Molinism is correct.

To assert that, because God knows the future He has determined it, is to make a basic error in modal logic. Foreknowledge does not necessitate causation.

Agree

 

[bling]

So am I correct to assume you're advocating a time travel of sorts? You say "communicates" to himself and that requires a process of at a certain "time" (if we might call it) not knowing something to a time where it could be said that he did know it all the time depending on how one looks at it or chooses to express it.

More none material things time traveling like information and spiritual things.

 

[Radagast]

No it does not, lots of atheist believe in special relativity without believing in determinism or the lack of free will.

If so, then they don't actually understand special relativity, although I notice Penrose has been explaining it in his books.

You also do not have to believe in an infinite number of universes.

Within the block universe of special relativity, that's the only way to rescue some kind of libertarian free will. And it's a very odd kind: in one universe you're predetermined to do A, and in another, you're predetermined to do B.

 

[Radagast]

Can you in one paragraph of words maybe describe what you're meaning. I understand about two observers one going near the speed of light to an earthly observer it looks like the other is going in slow motion and to the SOL observer (or near speed of light) the earth person appears speeding up but what do you mean "time is not absolute"?

Special relativity says that, depending on the motion of the observer, an event can be either in the present or in the past. There can be no universe-wide "present." There can only be a "block" of past, present, and future all together.

 

[Radagast]

God at the end of time would know historically all of man’s choices as pure perfect history. That historic information would be available to God at the beginning of time.​

​

Theology is not something that you can just invent on your own. Your views are rather unorthodox.

 

[aiki]

God at the end of time would know historically all of man’s choices as pure perfect history.

Is this the only way God knows them? As history? Or, as I suggested to you, did He possess all possible knowledge about humanity before the universe even existed? The latter idea seems much more in keeping with an omniscient God than the idea that He must move through time to the end of human history in order know it. As a truly omniscient Being, God should possess all knowledge in such a way as to never be ignorant of anything. He should always know everything whichever point of time He's in - and when He existed without time, too.

Why do you say: “There was no future version of Himself before the universe existed”.

Well, before the universe existed, there was no time and so no future, present or past. Just a single, timeless moment. How, then, could God have had a future self? And inasmuch as God is a Spirit, why do you think He would have versions of Himself existing at each point along the line of time? That is how we popularly conceive of material beings, like ourselves, within time, but why should what may be true of us in this regard also be true of God?

Does your universe include the Spiritual realm prior to physical universe we are in?

I think before the universe existed, there was no heavenly realm in which God existed, no Satan, no angels, and no heavenly throne; there was just God, a disembodied Mind (or something like it), timeless, formless and powerful beyond all imagining. I know of nothing in Scripture that would defeat this view. Creation, as far as I can see, includes what we would call the spiritual realm, though the spiritual realm existed prior to the fashioning of the earth and humanity. But if the spiritual realm is part of Creation, then it began to exist a finite time ago (at the beginning of the cosmos) when time itself began.

Why do I think the heavenly realm must be a part of the created universe? Because it is populated by created beings who live in a particular place and do things. This requires, space, time, matter and energy - all of which did not exist prior to the beginning of the universe. Angels have distinct, material forms (cherubim, serpahim, archangels, demons, etc; they posses wings, and eyes, have voices and wield swords), they act in time, speaking, praising God, warring, protecting the saints and so on. The angels exert power, and affect the physical world in tangible, energetic ways. All of these things cannot be without time, space, matter and energy.

God at the end of time knows a everything, which includes all human actions as pure unchangeable history, but he always knew this.

I agree with you.

Does God have the knowledge and power to create a being with truly autonomous free will over just one small choice or is that impossible for God?

As I told you in my last post, I hold to a soft libertarian view of human freedom. This means that I believe there are moments of genuine free choice that humans have but, as they make choices in those moments, they become increasingly set (or, hardened) into a particular line of thinking and behaviour that over time restricts their freedom. Molinists refer to these moments of genuinely free choice as "will-setting moments."

I do not think Molinism is correct.

Okay. I've been studying it for a few years now and, if I had to choose between Molinism and Calvinism, I'd choose Molinism in a hot second. I used to be Calvinist, though not a high one, holding rigidly to TULIP. I would not ever return to Calvinism. How would you describe your soteriological view?

Much of what you seem to be trying to shape in your first post sounds vaguely like Molinism which is why I suggested it to you.

 

[DreamerOfTheHeart]

(staff edit ) please just show me where I being Open Theism. Just tell me: OK (consistent) or Not OK to believe, (if you say Not OK it would be wonderful to know why):

Normally I would just ask questions but here is what I support at this point in my spiritual growth:

1. Time is relative, God could have created the existence of time for humans, and God is not limited by man’s time.

2. God exist outside of human time, yet exist simultaneously within human present time.

3. God communicates with man in words that fit man’s understanding like the four corners of the earth, the sun rising and setting, and the future for God. In other words, God does not convey the idea of time being relative for God or God being outside of time.

4. There is no reason for time to not be: totally relative to God.

5. God knows what is happening in some distant Galaxy (billion light years away) at the same time knowing what is happening on earth.

6. Just as God knows simultaneous what is happening throughout space instantly, God would also know what is happening throughout time in the Space Time Continuum.

7. God exist throughout time, so His existence at the end of time could “communicate” within Himself to His existence at the beginning of time.

8. History is fixed; nothing can change what has already happened. Even If God wanted to destroy the first Adam and Eve and start over with a second Adam and Eve there would always have been a first Adam and Eve, even if God was the only being to know of them.

9. God’s existence at the end of man’s time would know historically everything that happened throughout human existence.

10. The whole history of humans would be “communicated” back to God at the beginning of time as pure history from God’s existence at the end of time.

11. God from the beginning of human time (when every that was) knows all human future as pure history, so God knows all human’s future.

12. Since God’s existence at the end of human time and knows everything humans did historically, it cannot be changed and God “communicating” that history to Himself at the beginning of time means nothing can change in human existence from the way it “did” happen for God’s existence at the end of time.

13. The moment God decides to make a particular human (which can be at the beginning of human time) that human has a future know as history by God’s existence at the end of time.

14. If God decides never to make a particular human (there could be a virtual infinite number of these) than that never to exist human has no future and thus no history to be known by God.

15. Just because the history of a made choice is known, including a choice already made by God, does not mean that choice was not an autonomous free will choice. We cannot proof a former historic choice was not an autonomous free will choice, just because we now know historically what was chosen.

16. Again, just because God at the end of time knows all human choices as historical, does not mean some of those choices were not autonomous free will choices.

17. It also logically follows: if the existence of God at the end of time communicates to himself at the beginning of time all human history as set in stone, does not mean some human choices made could not be autonomous free will choices by the human.

18. If God is never ever going to produce a specific individual with ability to make just a very few autonomous free will choices, God would not know exactly the choices that specific individual would make if he/she were made, but would only know all the possible choices. That never to be made individual has no future to be known and if the limited choices are truly to be that individual’s autonomous free will choice there is no way to know, unless that individual is going to be made. God would know human seemingly free will choice that are the result of the person’s environment and genes (programming) which are most of what we consider to be free will choices (like the flavor of ice-cream on choses on a specific day), but those are not the choices which matter.

19. Once you agree to the concept of God being outside of time (existing throughout human time) and the definition of autonomous free will, all my ideas logically follow.

Please help me to understand where I am being illogical or not believing God knows man’s future perfectly.

You need to make a statement about what you are arguing. Some kind of summary. Your points are confusing your self. This appears to be because you are not wanting to come out and say what your conclusion is, as you do not believe it is defensible.

Looks like something about free will. It is not a very difficult subject. People make it difficult.

There is free will, but there also is not free will. Those who are slaves to sin, are not free.

Those who are 'freed by the Son', are truly free.

But, those who are chosen to salvation are chosen. They are the elect.

They are the elect, because they are the 'nothings of this world'. Because they are the 'nothings of this world', they look for something other then the world.

Those who are not elect are 'somethings of this world'. So, they do not look to something other then the world. They are happy with the world, and reject the message of the Kingdom.

Both groups believe as they do, because people believe according to their preferences.

God sets their preferences.

'God chose the nothings of this world, to shame the strong, and show that God made all'.

If you are arguing, 'why does God blame me for my sin, then 'woe is the pot who says to the potter, 'what are you making!''

 

[bling]

If so, then they don't actually understand special relativity, although I notice Penrose has been explaining it in his books.



Within the block universe of special relativity, that's the only way to rescue some kind of libertarian free will. And it's a very odd kind: in one universe you're predetermined to do A, and in another, you're predetermined to do B.

I like Penrose.

 

[bling]

Theology is not something that you can just invent on your own. Your views are rather unorthodox.

You should not have a problem with God at the end of time knowing everything historically?

 

[bling]

Is this the only way God knows them? As history? Or, as I suggested to you, did He possess all possible knowledge about humanity before the universe even existed? The latter idea seems much more in keeping with an omniscient God than the idea that He must move through time to the end of human history in order know it. As a truly omniscient Being, God should possess all knowledge in such a way as to never be ignorant of anything. He should always know everything whichever point of time He's in - and when He existed without time, too.

Do you first agree with: “God at the end of time knowing everything Historically”?

No problem with God having knowledge of all possibilities prior to even considering the making of anything.

I never suggested: “God moves through time” since God is simultaneously at the beginning and end of time.

Well, before the universe existed, there was no time and so no future, present or past. Just a single, timeless moment. How, then, could God have had a future self? And inasmuch as God is a Spirit, why do you think He would have versions of Himself existing at each point along the line of time? That is how we popularly conceive of material beings, like ourselves, within time, but why should what may be true of us in this regard also be true of God?

Why could there not be a separate sequencing of events in the Spiritual realm, but God not be limited by that time or maybe he limits Himself?

I think before the universe existed, there was no heavenly realm in which God existed, no Satan, no angels, and no heavenly throne; there was just God, a disembodied Mind (or something like it), timeless, formless and powerful beyond all imagining. I know of nothing in Scripture that would defeat this view. Creation, as far as I can see, includes what we would call the spiritual realm, though the spiritual realm existed prior to the fashioning of the earth and humanity. But if the spiritual realm is part of Creation, then it began to exist a finite time ago (at the beginning of the cosmos) when time itself began.

Why do I think the heavenly realm must be a part of the created universe? Because it is populated by created beings who live in a particular place and do things. This requires, space, time, matter and energy - all of which did not exist prior to the beginning of the universe. Angels have distinct, material forms (cherubim, serpahim, archangels, demons, etc; they posses wings, and eyes, have voices and wield swords), they act in time, speaking, praising God, warring, protecting the saints and so on. The angels exert power, and affect the physical world in tangible, energetic ways. All of these things cannot be without time, space, matter and energy.



I agree with you.



As I told you in my last post, I hold to a soft libertarian view of human freedom. This means that I believe there are moments of genuine free choice that humans have but, as they make choices in those moments, they become increasingly set (or, hardened) into a particular line of thinking and behaviour that over time restricts their freedom. Molinists refer to these moments of genuinely free choice as "will-setting moments."



Okay. I've been studying it for a few years now and, if I had to choose between Molinism and Calvinism, I'd choose Molinism in a hot second. I used to be Calvinist, though not a high one, holding rigidly to TULIP. I would not ever return to Calvinism. How would you describe your soteriological view?

Much of what you seem to be trying to shape in your first post sounds vaguely like Molinism which is why I suggested it to you.

I believe God provided mature adults with very limited autonomous free will really only to allow humans to fulfill their earthly objective is needed.

 

[bling]

You need to make a statement about what you are arguing. Some kind of summary. Your points are confusing your self. This appears to be because you are not wanting to come out and say what your conclusion is, as you do not believe it is defensible.

Looks like something about free will. It is not a very difficult subject. People make it difficult.

There is free will, but there also is not free will. Those who are slaves to sin, are not free.

Those who are 'freed by the Son', are truly free.

But, those who are chosen to salvation are chosen. They are the elect.

They are the elect, because they are the 'nothings of this world'. Because they are the 'nothings of this world', they look for something other then the world.

Those who are not elect are 'somethings of this world'. So, they do not look to something other then the world. They are happy with the world, and reject the message of the Kingdom.

Both groups believe as they do, because people believe according to their preferences.

God sets their preferences.

'God chose the nothings of this world, to shame the strong, and show that God made all'.

If you are arguing, 'why does God blame me for my sin, then 'woe is the pot who says to the potter, 'what are you making!''

I will have to address you later when I have time.
So you believe all humans start out without free will and only have free will after they are saved?

 

[DreamerOfTheHeart]

I will have to address you later when I have time.
So you believe all humans start out without free will and only have free will after they are saved?

It is more complex then that.

But, you can dive in right away, by me stating, this is absolutely true: 'people believe what they want to believe, based on their preferences'.

This is integrally relevant to what I am stating.