RobE
New member
Well, if knowing future free will choices is possible; then I think we have proof that they are compatible. Wouldn't you agree, Patrick?
Your Friend,
Rob Mauldin
ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Well, if knowing future free will choices is possible; then I think we have proof that they are compatible. Wouldn't you agree, Patrick?
Your Friend,
Rob Mauldin
patman
Active member
Hello there patman! I don't think we have discussed anything before
You say that God didn't create the future but go on to say that some parts of it are settled and others are open. As I said to godrulz, God may have plans, but if his plans involve creatures with libertarian free will then there is no certainty to them and the future cannot be said to be settled, even in part. If you are a dispensationalists, you believe that God has changed the "plot" a couple of times already, so ultimately nothing is really settled but contingent.
I would say that things are a bit more complex than that. With regards to temptation, the verse you cite tells us that we cannot accuse God for our failure to fulfill his precepts. But it doesn't means that God does not allows us to be tempted. Indeed, St. Paul states:
1 Corinthians 10:13
"Let no temptation take hold on you, but such as is human. And God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able: but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it."
So, while God does not directly tempts us, he allows certain evils and temptations to fall upon us. But not to the extent that we can blame it on him for placing an impossible burden upon us. Only to such an extend that our failure is of our own doing and our success is thanks to his grace. This is what we see happening to Job when God allows Satan to temporarily ruin his life:
Job 1:8-12
"And the Lord said to him: Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a simple and upright man, and fearing God, and avoiding evil? And Satan answering, said: Doth Job fear God in vain? Hast not thou made a fence for him, and his house, and all his substance round about, blessed the works of his hands, and his possession hath increased on the earth? But stretch forth thy hand a little, and touch all that he hath, and see if he blesseth thee not to thy face. Then the Lord said to Satan: Behold, all that he hath is in thy hand: only put not forth thy hand upon his person."
Here we see that God permits evil things to happen even to the faithful and that he has plans that involve allowing evil. After all, God himself says:
Isaiah 45:7
"I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things"
This doesn't means that God is the direct cause of evil, he is not, that is contrary to his nature. Rather, it means that God is in charge of his creation and that there is no good that he does not directly causes and no evil that he does not permits for the sake of some higher good. God brings good out of the evil that he permits and he permits this evil because some greater good would not obtain if he did not allow the evil that takes place. When it came to Job, we see:
Job 42:12
"And the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning."
After all the trials Job ended up being far more blessed than he was in the beginning. Another instance where God brings good out of evil we see in Genesis:
Genesis 50:20
"You thought evil against me: but God turned it into good, that he might exalt me, as at present you see, and might save many people."
Thus we see that God's plans for the future involve allowing certain evils to obtain. See Luke 21:8-13 for a vivid illustration of this. All this doesn't makes God the cause of evil, by no means (after all evil is not a something but a lack of something, it is the lack of a necessary good not some positive quality). It doesn't anymore than it makes the openist god the cause of evil because he knew someone would crash a plane into the WTC days before it happened and still allowed it. Why did he allow it to happen? My answer is that some greater good would not obtain had he prevented it. A good which I admit I don't know of, but I don't believe that respecting the free will of creatures is it and I find that particular defense rather unsatisfactory myself. But if God does not knows the future and we have libertarian free will, then God simply cannot know to what degree we can be tempted and could in fact allow us to be temped more than we are able to bear. Unless God knows the future, he cannot be certain that some greater good will come about out of the evil he permits.
This also raises another issue. We see in Scripture that God kills entire nations, including women, babies, and people of all ages as a form of justice against said nation. Now, for classical theists this does not presents a problem. The question “but how does God knows that these people would not repent and become believers at a later date?” is easily answered given God’s exhaustive foreknowledge. But how do the openists answer this question? How does God know that a four year old whom he killed when judging an entire nation would not turn out to be his most devout follower? How, in fact, would killing an entire nation as a form of judgment be just if God simply doesn't knows exactly how all people will eventually end up?
One answer may be that these people were already set in their ways and that there was no turning back. However, if we have libertarian free will, then these people are not necessarily set in their ways as they are not constrained in their acts by their nature or impulses so they can, at any time and no matter the circumstances or their state, choose to do good. This does not seems to sit well with God judgements.
Evo
Hi Evo,
Nice post. Let me first point out that the passage form Luke 21 also says this:
Luke 21:32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.
Luke 9:27 I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.
Matthew 16:28 I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.
It is interesting how this plan did change, isn't it? Jesus did not return to that generation, the kingdom of God did not come, and none of the events in Luke 21 happened to their fullness, because Jesus has not yet returned. They never saw him return in the clouds.
These verses are scary to non-open theists. They have to go to great lengths to "explain them away."
But anyway, that isn't what we were talking about.
You said a lot of things I agreed with. But as an Open Theist, I cannot agree that you can come to those conclusions and keep your settled theology.... You said God does not cause evil but allows it. I agree. But you also said "Unless God knows the future, he cannot be certain that some greater good will come about out of the evil he permits."
Why not? Why does the lack of utter and complete future knowledge prevent a being as powerful and supreme as God from bring good from evil?
I don't know the future, and I seem to be pretty functional despite myself. I am sure the same can be said for you. Do we really need to know every event of our future prior to its happenings to do good things? If we can do good things without advanced future knowledge, why can't God? He is super smart, his intelligence cannot be measured. He is powerful enough to create the stars with but a word. Why should a thing as small as the future be a hurdle to him?
It isn't. Time is not the master or God.. God is the master of it. And despite what the future shows or what it doesn't show, God can handel it because he can do as he pleases.
We have hope in God because he is righteous and faithful to bring good about. No future knowledge required. This hope is settled. Meaning it will happen.
The explanation "The future is partly settled" is shaping out to be a confusing one. When I say that, I mean "God has plans he will not change." Even though at other times, he is willing to change his plans, there are certain plans he will bring about with certainty.
Psalm 40:5
Many, O LORD my God, are the wonders you have done. The things you planned for us no one can recount to you; were I to speak and tell of them, they would be too many to declare.
Jeremiah 18:8
and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned.
Jeremiah 29:11
For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.
Jeremiah 18:11
"Now therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in Jerusalem, 'This is what the LORD says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan against you. So turn from your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions.'
Jeremiah 26:3
Perhaps they will listen and each will turn from his evil way. Then I will relent and not bring on them the disaster I was planning because of the evil they have done.
God is always planning. Why plan when he is supposed to already know? And why change plans if they are already determined? I think it is because God allows us to shape the future along with him, but will soon step in to give us a new creation as he promised, and us christians will have a joyful home in heaven.
patman
Active member
We can't put a blanket statement on free will agents and say all future actions are known just because a few are.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Matthew 16:28 KJV. Matthew 17:1-9 KJV. 2 Peter 1:16-18 KJV.
patman
Active member
Matthew 16:28
28Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Where is the kingdom? All I see is the body.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Peter got a preview of the Kingdom with Jesus, Moses, Elijah. 2 Peter 1:16-18 KJV. Obviously, not the 2nd coming, but nevertheless a "coming" according to Peter.
Preterists love Matthew 16:28 also...
patman
Active member
Daniel makes it in clear words as well. We are still waiting on that 70th week...
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
No doubt. :thumb:
I did not know the details of my children and their lives when I was 5 years old. It has no bearing on my love and knowledge of them now that they are born.
God did not specifically know me before creation, but He knew He would love all people once they came into existence. He put natural process in place, so our genes determine physical aspects. He was supernaturally involved in our spirits at conception, I imagine (unless procreation even births that reality by God's creative design).
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
How can you be certain of that?
themuzicman
Well-known member
God created with commandment and penalty. Judgment for that penalty requires free will to be able choose not to do wrong. Free will is incompatible with exhaustive and definite foreknowledge. Without EDF, there is no certainty about which individuals will come to be in the distant future.
Muz
Muz
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Are you 100% certain it's impossible to have both?
My birth involves contingency. Simple foreknowledge or EDF with determinism are not defensible. I am certain based on my certainty that EDF and future free will contingenies are incompatible and a logical contradiction not supported by revelation.
Psalm 139 The omniscient, omnipresent God knows me from conception, not from trillions of years ago (cf. Jeremiah proof text).
themuzicman
Well-known member
I am. When the lights go on for you, you will also be certain.
I tried for months to figure out 'eternal now'/EDF, etc. The reason I could not was because it was incoherent and not supported in Scripture. Now I can watch the time travel science fiction movies and figure them out: they are irrational.
I am.
Not only is exhaustive foreknowledge incompatible with free will (logically), it's also incompatible with God's word.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
themuzicman
Well-known member
The proof is simply the logic based representation of what is intuitive.
Muz
Muz
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Interpret that for me in layman's terms?
It's really simple....
If exhaustive foreknowledge exists..... NOTHING can ever happen that isn't contained in that knowledge. Therefore no agent is free to do anything other than what is contained within that foreknowledge.
- Status