Omniscience

[Guest shiloh357]

Quote

For that to happen, it would mean that at some point in history, God ceased being God.

Are you saying that God has never experienced rejection in the hearts of man ?

No. My point is that God experiencing rejection is not equivilant to Him experiencing what it is like nont to be God.

By "not" accepting God into ones life and refusing to walk in obedience to his will simply means that "God does experience what it is like not to be God in their lives."

But that is not what I am talking about. That is not germain to this conversation at all.

What I am referring to is God ceasing to be God in the absolute sense. I am saying that God has never experienced NOT being God at all.

God is omniscient knowing everything without limits he knows all.

But that doesn't mean that omniscience requires God to have complete experiential knowledge. God knows all that sin and can be known in the universe. It doesn't mean that God has had every experience that can be experienced in the universe.

[nebula]

As I was thinking about this yesterday - I was pondering how there are Scriptures that indicate God knows the future - but the Scripture never states how He knows, just that He does - and yet there are Scriptures that indicate God had to search a matter out (i.e. the test of Abraham).

I had previously been in a discussion with a friend about the differences between Hebraic thought and Hellenistic thought.

And I realized that this whole attempt we have of rationalizing God out, make sense of His nature and His power, create a descriptive box to put Him in . . . is our attempt to bring God down to the level of our minds.

Hello! God is bigger than our minds and our rationalizations, and any attempts to fit Him into our rationalization is to put our minds above Him.

Sorry, but He is greater than anything we can figure out. And if you miss feeling a sense of facing a Being that is too vast to wrap your mind around, you are missing out on who He is.

So to create a definition of "omniscience" with definable borders and tagging God with this label is in essence bringing God down to the rational plane and keep Him here. You can't do that!

Why can't we just marvel and wonder at God having abilities (and knowledge and means of knowing) we can never comprehend.

[godrulz]

name='Believer112' timestamp='1311898218' post='1701763'

name='shiloh357' timestamp='1311721352' post='1700925'

Tell me this...

The omniscience of God. Do you think it means that God has all possible knowledge (which would include all propositional and all experiential knowledge)? Or would it include only propositional knowledge?

1 John 3

²⁰For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things.

I'm going to take this scripture by faith. God created a tree of knowledge (good and evil), so if He can create knowledge He is all knowing. Humans trying to figure out what God knows is like monkeys trying to figure out how we build cars.

You are not using faith, but presumption. The context shows that he knows all things in relation to something specific, our hearts (present knowledge; past knowledge). Other principles/passages/thinking would bring in limitation as to the extent of his future knowledge. Your view cannot be based on one verse out of context that contradicts other verses/concepts (where God does not know the future exhaustively).

[godrulz]

Time is not a created thing. Who said duration/sequence/succession must have a beginning?! Endless duration/time is eternal. Like love, time as a concept is an aspect of God's triune relations (cannot think, act, feel without duration). God is uncreated with no beginning and end. This does not mean He is timeless, whatever on earth that means for a personal being.

Scripture portrays God acting in sequence on every page of Scripture. Creation is not co-eternal with God and Jesus is still not on the cross in an eternal now timeless simultaneity. Ps. 90:2 does show a before and after creation. This is meaningless if things are timeless. Rev. 1:4 uses tensed expressions about God (past, present, future) with no hint of philosophical timelessness. In Revelation, several passages talk about time in heaven/eternity (half hour, years, etc.). Duration, change, sequence, etc. is all about time. This is an aspect of His experience, not a limitation at all.

This is interesting.....

I think I see where you are coming from.

Are you, for instance, suggesting that God's foreknowledge is less "crystal ball knowledge" (to use human terminology) and more "I will bring it to pass" and therefore because what God WILLS must always OCCUR, then he knows what will come to pass because he knows what He wills WILL happen - if you follow me!

That is not in any way to detract from the conditions that sometimes accompany God's will in relation to humanity. He has given humanity freedom to choose and does not IMPOSE his will on us. Although I must admit that I get stumped right here because humanity's freedom to choose and God's will seem to be at odds with one another. He WILLS all men to be saved, but we know that because we have freedom of choice not all men will be saved. So in that instance, God does not "bring to pass" His will. Hmmm......

Also, if there is a concept of "it is finished" as Jesus said from the cross, then there cannot be an eternal "now". Perhaps such misunderstanding is what gives us the R.C. Mass - the continual re-offering of Jesus' sacrifice on the cross.

Or have I entirely misunderstood the thrust of your reasoning and am just tying myself up in knots?

You are on the right track, but still combining contradictory views to some degree. Arminian simple foreknowledge is not explainable, just assumed (begging the question). It is like a crystal ball where God sees the future (prescience) like a person watching a bank robbery unfold (hence free will retained). The problem is that the future is not there to see yet. It is a blank if one attempts to look at it. It is becoming reality moment by moment. If it is there to see, then the free agents are not actualizing it (contingencies may or may not happen and are not settled/certain until the choice is made by the agent). This would also lead to the future being fatalistically fixed, so the providential God could not change it even if He wanted to (it would make His foreknowledge false). The reason your head is spinning is because you are being forced to accept a traditional view that is not coherent and does not make sense and cannot be explained. The same happens when we watch back to the future sci-fi shows (time travel is a logical absurdity).

Is. 46 and Is. 48 says exactly what you have concluded. The reason God can declare and know some vs all of the future is because of His ability to bring it to pass (vs crystal ball). Read the chapters carefully. It is about ability, not foreknowledge (idols don't have ability). It is also wrong to assume because God declares specific prophecies like the First and Second Coming of Christ and judgments that He is fixing and predestining all things, including what you eat and wear (nope).

So, Open Theism affirms the predestination/foreknowledge verses, but ALSO the unsettled/open verses (which the closed view must make figurative to retain their flawed view). There are two motifs that will lead to no head spinning: God settles/predestines/knows some of the future, but other aspects involving creaturely freedom, He leaves open/unsettled, and thus known as possible/probable vs actual/certain (until choices made in the present).

The potential future becomes the fixed past through the present. Eternal now is the wrong view. Endless time, time being unidirectional, etc. will lead to the right view.

God's will can be resisted/rejected (Lk. 7:30; Matthew 23:37). Calvinism is wrong to make God omnicausal instead of omnicompetent, to elevate hyper-sovereignty and to deny libertarian free will.

Molinism is another possibility, but middle knowledge, etc. is highly philosophical, incoherent, essentially deterministic despite the claims to support free will.

www.opentheism.info

[Guest shiloh357]

It is like a crystal ball where God sees the future (prescience) like a person watching a bank robbery unfold (hence free will retained). The problem is that the future is not there to see yet. It is a blank if one attempts to look at it. It is becoming reality moment by moment. If it is there to see, then the free agents are not actualizing it (contingencies may or may not happen and are not settled/certain until the choice is made by the agent).

That is a very flawed analogy. It assumes that God is just as blind about the future as we are. The biggest problem is the effect this has on Bible prophecy. In the Scriptures we find prophecies about events that will transpire NOT because God is causing them to come about but because of purely human agency. God is not limited in knowledge of time as we are. Your view has God just as surprised about unexpected events as we are.

If God's view of the future is as limited as ours, then God has no power to make any guarantees about how things will turn out. God often prophecies what His response will be to what humanity will do. If we take the view that man has absolute free will to make choices and God has non ability to see into the future and know what those choices will be. Furthermore, God would have no way of knowing what our future actions will be. That would not only apply to us on personal level (like what college one will eventually choose to attend) but also on a large poltical scale. How can God predict just how bad the nations will get and how He will judge those nations if He has no idea what kinds of choices world leaders will make?

In addition, prayer would be pointless to a God who has no idea what the future will bring. If God is as blind to the future as we are, then it is possible that His promises should not really be taken for granted or fully trusted. What if there are future events that God has not prepared for that might jeopardize His ability to keep His promises? He has promised that one day sin will be eradicated and we will live with Him in a sinless eternity forever. But God doesn't really know since there might be unforseen circumcstances that were not accounted for in His plan, that might alter that plan.

The reason your head is spinning is because you are being forced to accept a traditional view that is not coherent and does not make sense and cannot be explained.

Well in all honesty, there is a lot about God that doesn't make sense to us. That it doesn't make sense to us, doesn't mean it is wrong. God doesn't have to make sense and cannot be defined and boxed in to a tight logical package. That is a flawed premise on your part. God is beyond our ability to make sense of Him. He has given us enough light to know Him but not to know all there is to know of Him or to even make sense out of what has been revealed.

Is. 46 and Is. 48 says exactly what you have concluded. The reason God can declare and know some vs all of the future is because of His ability to bring it to pass (vs crystal ball).

The problem is that not all of God's prophecies are about what He will bring to pass. In seme cases, He is telling us what people will devise and scheme on their own and how God will handle those schemes and choices. Jesus prophesied of the persecution His disciples would undergo and how that some would think that they are doing God a favor. God is not bringing about the persecution, but Jesus speaks of future events that will occur that are the result of free human agency.

It is also wrong to assume because God declares specific prophecies like the First and Second Coming of Christ and judgments that He is fixing and predestining all things, including what you eat and wear (nope).

He is not predestining what one eats or wears, but that is not outside His knowing.

So, Open Theism affirms the predestination/foreknowledge verses, but ALSO the unsettled/open verses (which the closed view must make figurative to retain their flawed view).

What verses would that be?

The Bible reveals a God who really does micromanage the universe. He knows every start by name. He keeps a running tally on the numbers of hair on our heads. He is aware of when the smallest sparrow falls to the ground. He is able to listen to and answer every one of the billions and billions of prayers being offered up to him at any given time. He is able to relate to each person as if they were the only one and the same time, He sustains every molecule of this universe and keeps everything running as it should. it is not at all far fetched that God is able to access the future in a way that is impossible to us. Open theism projects human limitations on to God. It assumes that what is not knowable to us is not knowable to God.

God's will can be resisted/rejected (Lk. 7:30; Matthew 23:37). Calvinism is wrong to make God omnicausal instead of omnicompetent, to elevate hyper-sovereignty and to deny libertarian free will.

I think we should let people know what libertarian free will is: A person is free to be able to make choices for good or evil equally based on free will ability in contrast to the Bible's teaching that man is in bondage to sin (Romans. 3:10-12; and Rom. 6:14-20; Ephesians. 2:1-3).

There are two motifs that will lead to no head spinning: God settles/predestines/knows some of the future, but other aspects involving creaturely freedom, He leaves open/unsettled, and thus known as possible/probable vs actual/certain (until choices made in the present).

Essentially, God chooses not to know any of our future choices. This is problematic. How can God elect to not know our future choices/decisions? If God doesn't know the choices we will make, how can He choose to not know it until it is made,as you say above? I mean that is a self-defeating premise. God would have to know of the choice to begin with in or to choose to not know it or as you say, leave that knowledge unsettled and open.

Open theism has been soundly refuted by many theologians and is really nothing but junk theology.

[Guest]

As I was thinking about this yesterday - I was pondering how there are Scriptures that indicate God knows the future - but the Scripture never states how He knows, just that He does - and yet there are Scriptures that indicate God had to search a matter out (i.e. the test of Abraham).

I had previously been in a discussion with a friend about the differences between Hebraic thought and Hellenistic thought.

And I realized that this whole attempt we have of rationalizing God out, make sense of His nature and His power, create a descriptive box to put Him in . . . is our attempt to bring God down to the level of our minds.

Hello! God is bigger than our minds and our rationalizations, and any attempts to fit Him into our rationalization is to put our minds above Him.

Sorry, but He is greater than anything we can figure out. And if you miss feeling a sense of facing a Being that is too vast to wrap your mind around, you are missing out on who He is.

So to create a definition of "omniscience" with definable borders and tagging God with this label is in essence bringing God down to the rational plane and keep Him here. You can't do that!

Why can't we just marvel and wonder at God having abilities (and knowledge and means of knowing) we can never comprehend.

Hallelujah~!

He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

The LORD lifteth up the meek: he casteth the wicked down to the ground. Psalms 147:4-6

[godrulz]

As I was thinking about this yesterday - I was pondering how there are Scriptures that indicate God knows the future - but the Scripture never states how He knows, just that He does - and yet there are Scriptures that indicate God had to search a matter out (i.e. the test of Abraham).

I had previously been in a discussion with a friend about the differences between Hebraic thought and Hellenistic thought.

And I realized that this whole attempt we have of rationalizing God out, make sense of His nature and His power, create a descriptive box to put Him in . . . is our attempt to bring God down to the level of our minds.

Hello! God is bigger than our minds and our rationalizations, and any attempts to fit Him into our rationalization is to put our minds above Him.

Sorry, but He is greater than anything we can figure out. And if you miss feeling a sense of facing a Being that is too vast to wrap your mind around, you are missing out on who He is.

So to create a definition of "omniscience" with definable borders and tagging God with this label is in essence bringing God down to the rational plane and keep Him here. You can't do that!

Why can't we just marvel and wonder at God having abilities (and knowledge and means of knowing) we can never comprehend.

Hallelujah~!

He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

The LORD lifteth up the meek: he casteth the wicked down to the ground. Psalms 147:4-6

This shows that God has infinite wisdom and can think intelligently to the nth degree. It also is consistent with Him knowing the past and present exhaustively. It does not prove or disprove the issue of exhaustive definite foreknowledge of future free will contingencies. There is not verse that says that God knows all of the future because it is not a logical statement in a non-deterministic universe.

[godrulz]

Shiloh, like other anti-Open Theists you show that you misunderstand and misrepresent the view. I have given food for thought and disagree with your responses. You underestimate the greatness of God (in a non-Calvinistic view) and understanding of Open Theism by making your first statement that God is as ignorant of the future as we are. This is not true in reality nor as academic Open Theism teaches. To call a biblical, coherent view 'junk' shows your lack of engagement with this important debate. Assuming that Arminian or Calvinistic views are the only views worth interacting with is myopic.

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh, like other anti-Open Theists you show that you misunderstand and misrepresent the view.

I am only going off your comments. I am going with the information you supply and am responding to you. I don't misunderstand the view. I understand perfectly what you are saying and you are wrong.

You underestimate the greatness of God (in a non-Calvinistic view) and understanding of Open Theism by making your first statement that God is as ignorant of the future as we are.

I did not say God is as ignorant of the future as we are. I said that your analogy presents God as being as ignorant of the future as we are. It is Open Theism and teaches that God does not know what our choices will be any more than we do. That is not my position though.

To call a biblical, coherent view 'junk' shows your lack of engagement with this important debate.

No, it is accurately reflects the value of Open Theism. To call it "biblical" is a joke. The truth is that you have provided very little Scripture and what you have provided you cannot even exegete properly. Open Theism is not biblical In fact, it really borders on heretical, as it puts incredible limits on what God can know.

[godrulz]

There are philosophical truths not dealt with explicitly by Scripture that are relevant to the debate. Open Theism's strength is its hermeneutic and biblical basis (your view must make many verses figurative that can be taken at face value if you change the view). Some issues will not be resolvable by a proof text and relate to paradigms (determinism vs free will, etc.). We agree that God is sovereign, but the evidence favours providential sovereignty, not meticulous control (esp. relating to problem of evil).

www.gregboyd.org exegetes many proof texts and objections. It is not fair to say there is no biblical support for it just because I am not regurgitating 30 years of my research on a non-academic forum.