Well it has taken me hours to read all forty pages of this thread - quite exhausting. It is a particularly interesting discussion to me because I have never read or heard about Open View before. But I am very familiar with it - it coincides quite nicely with my own personal discoveries in Scripture. Please excuse me if along the way I cover some old ground.
First, I found it rather interesting to find quite a number of years ago that Calvinism, and by extension Arminianism, came about as a result of the debates with the Gnostics in the early centuries of the Church. The Gnostics insisted that knowledge was the key to salvation and God. The Gnostics contended that for a person to be saved they had to "know", and in order for God to be God He had to "know". Because the early Church Fathers had an argument for the first assertion, salvation by grace through faith, they stuck to their guns. But they had no argument for the Gnostics contention of the necessity of God to know everything, so they conceded to it, and the perfect foreknowledge doctrine was born.
Absolute foreknowledge and predestination: Causal predestination intimates foreknowledge. I think we can all agree on that. But absolute foreknowledge does not necessarily intimate causal predestination. It is however, inextricably linked to predestination just the same. In order for something to be foreknown it of necessity must be predestined to happen, because if it is not predestined to happen, it cannot be foreknown (a circular argument that works). This precludes all choice, either by the participants in the events that are predestined and foreknown, or for an outside observer (God). So in both cases, causal predestination and resultant predestination, freewill change is removed from both participants and observer. Therefore, man has no free will, and when relating to man God has no free will for change either, because all is predestined.
It seems to me that the foundation of the whole argument is based on God's relationship with creation. If as is contended by the traditional views, an eternal now God is outside of time, indeed created time, and can view all events of all time, then perfect foreknowledge and absolute predestination logically follow. But if God did not in fact create time, but instead it is actually a "divine experience" in the sense that God is inside of time just as creation is inside of time, then perfect foreknowledge and absolute predestination are ruled out. Note, some foreknowledge and predestination are allowable, as I will now explain.
Omniscience in the terms of a God within time must be defined as an awareness of all events of the present. Also God would have a perfect memory of the past. Finally, God can project all possibilities into the future. Nothing can happen that God has not discerned as a possibility. Free will allows for many possible outcomes for any present tense event, but no result can surprise God in the sense that He would not have projected the possibility. Additionally, some things God can foreknow to happen, and thus are predestined to happen. There are three possible ways that God can foreknow a future event. 1. He determines to cause the future event Himself. 2. All possibilities end with the same result. And 3. is a combination of the first two where he directs events to select only possibilities that result in the desired event. The reason that God can follow all possibilities to their conclusions is the law of sowing and reaping. It is a law like the law of gravity - an event that is observed under certain circumstances without fail. The only exception to an "observed law" is when other laws supercede it, as when birds fly. It is the same with the law of sowing and reaping. Whatever is sown must be reaped, so in a sense, everything that will happen in the future is predestined to happened, based on the law of sowing and reaping. But there is also the law of free will, which may supercede the law of sowing and reaping. The law of free will however, is not an observable law, but a determinate law based on an entity's decisions. Hence the uncertainty of future events influenced by the determinate law of free will, and so not all future events can be foreknown where free will is involved.
Earlier in the thread the two verses in second Timothy and Titus were entered as evidence that God created time. "Before the ages of time" (Pro chronos aionios) This is an incorrect understanding and translation. Ages in Scripture always denotes specific blocks of time. An age is simply a defined amount of time, not time itself, these verses are simply stating that grace and the hope of eternal life were promised before the ages (blocks of time as defined in Scripture), not before time began.
Just to throw a wrench in the discussion about, "if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me", in John 12:32 Jesus said, "if I am lifted from this earth". So there is scriptural confirmation connecting Jesus and the word "if".
As far as the verses discussed concerning the foundation of the world, well their meanings are easily cleared up by examining the word katabole (foundation). It is made up of two words, kata and bole. Kata means down, and bole means throw. Or downthrow. In the society of that day, to throw something down (katabole) was to consider it broken, spoiled or of no use. The translated word "foundation" is inaccurate and misleading, (purposefully I believe). The proper translation would be, "from the overthrow of the world".
Why did God create man? To have a love relationship. And to have a love relationship it must be freely reciprocal. And there is something about a love relationship that demands spontaneity. To receive a benefit it must be spontaneous. Think about two parents and a child. The first time that child walks is a delight to the parents. The first time the child say momma is also a delight. Though expected and anticipated it is never foreknown. If it was the spontaneity would cease and so would the delight. God wants to delight in us. This cannot be done with perfect foreknowledge. He created us to delight in us. We are created in his image - freewill beings with the ability to be spontaneous.
First, I found it rather interesting to find quite a number of years ago that Calvinism, and by extension Arminianism, came about as a result of the debates with the Gnostics in the early centuries of the Church. The Gnostics insisted that knowledge was the key to salvation and God. The Gnostics contended that for a person to be saved they had to "know", and in order for God to be God He had to "know". Because the early Church Fathers had an argument for the first assertion, salvation by grace through faith, they stuck to their guns. But they had no argument for the Gnostics contention of the necessity of God to know everything, so they conceded to it, and the perfect foreknowledge doctrine was born.
Absolute foreknowledge and predestination: Causal predestination intimates foreknowledge. I think we can all agree on that. But absolute foreknowledge does not necessarily intimate causal predestination. It is however, inextricably linked to predestination just the same. In order for something to be foreknown it of necessity must be predestined to happen, because if it is not predestined to happen, it cannot be foreknown (a circular argument that works). This precludes all choice, either by the participants in the events that are predestined and foreknown, or for an outside observer (God). So in both cases, causal predestination and resultant predestination, freewill change is removed from both participants and observer. Therefore, man has no free will, and when relating to man God has no free will for change either, because all is predestined.
It seems to me that the foundation of the whole argument is based on God's relationship with creation. If as is contended by the traditional views, an eternal now God is outside of time, indeed created time, and can view all events of all time, then perfect foreknowledge and absolute predestination logically follow. But if God did not in fact create time, but instead it is actually a "divine experience" in the sense that God is inside of time just as creation is inside of time, then perfect foreknowledge and absolute predestination are ruled out. Note, some foreknowledge and predestination are allowable, as I will now explain.
Omniscience in the terms of a God within time must be defined as an awareness of all events of the present. Also God would have a perfect memory of the past. Finally, God can project all possibilities into the future. Nothing can happen that God has not discerned as a possibility. Free will allows for many possible outcomes for any present tense event, but no result can surprise God in the sense that He would not have projected the possibility. Additionally, some things God can foreknow to happen, and thus are predestined to happen. There are three possible ways that God can foreknow a future event. 1. He determines to cause the future event Himself. 2. All possibilities end with the same result. And 3. is a combination of the first two where he directs events to select only possibilities that result in the desired event. The reason that God can follow all possibilities to their conclusions is the law of sowing and reaping. It is a law like the law of gravity - an event that is observed under certain circumstances without fail. The only exception to an "observed law" is when other laws supercede it, as when birds fly. It is the same with the law of sowing and reaping. Whatever is sown must be reaped, so in a sense, everything that will happen in the future is predestined to happened, based on the law of sowing and reaping. But there is also the law of free will, which may supercede the law of sowing and reaping. The law of free will however, is not an observable law, but a determinate law based on an entity's decisions. Hence the uncertainty of future events influenced by the determinate law of free will, and so not all future events can be foreknown where free will is involved.
Earlier in the thread the two verses in second Timothy and Titus were entered as evidence that God created time. "Before the ages of time" (Pro chronos aionios) This is an incorrect understanding and translation. Ages in Scripture always denotes specific blocks of time. An age is simply a defined amount of time, not time itself, these verses are simply stating that grace and the hope of eternal life were promised before the ages (blocks of time as defined in Scripture), not before time began.
Just to throw a wrench in the discussion about, "if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me", in John 12:32 Jesus said, "if I am lifted from this earth". So there is scriptural confirmation connecting Jesus and the word "if".
As far as the verses discussed concerning the foundation of the world, well their meanings are easily cleared up by examining the word katabole (foundation). It is made up of two words, kata and bole. Kata means down, and bole means throw. Or downthrow. In the society of that day, to throw something down (katabole) was to consider it broken, spoiled or of no use. The translated word "foundation" is inaccurate and misleading, (purposefully I believe). The proper translation would be, "from the overthrow of the world".
Why did God create man? To have a love relationship. And to have a love relationship it must be freely reciprocal. And there is something about a love relationship that demands spontaneity. To receive a benefit it must be spontaneous. Think about two parents and a child. The first time that child walks is a delight to the parents. The first time the child say momma is also a delight. Though expected and anticipated it is never foreknown. If it was the spontaneity would cease and so would the delight. God wants to delight in us. This cannot be done with perfect foreknowledge. He created us to delight in us. We are created in his image - freewill beings with the ability to be spontaneous.
I believe you have brought in some spectacular insights into our discussion. :thumb: I appreciate it very much. As for your statement
