Open Theism

[Comingfrom]

What is Open Theism?​

by Matt Slick | Dec 9, 2008 | Minor Groups & Issues, Open Theism
Open Theism, also called openness and the open view, is a theological position dealing with human free will and its relationship to God and the nature of the future. It is the teaching that God has granted to humanity free will and that in order for the free will to be truly free, the future free will choices of individuals cannot be known ahead of time by God. They hold that if God knows what we are going to choose, then how can we be truly free when it is time to make those choices – since a counter choice cannot then be made by us, because it is already “known” what we are going to do. In other words, we would not actually be able to make a contrary choice to what God “knows” we will choose thus implying that we would not then be free.

In Open Theism, the future is either knowable or not knowable. For the open theists who hold that the future is knowable by God, they maintain that God voluntarily limits His knowledge of free will choices so that they can remain truly free. Other open theists maintain that the future, being nonexistent, is not knowable, even by God. Gregory Boyd, a well-known advocate of Open Theism says,

But open theists would not say that God is weak or powerless. They say that God is capable of predicting and ordaining certain future events because He is capable of working in the world and bringing certain events to pass when the time is needed. Therefore, God could inspire the Old Testament writers to prophesy certain events, and then He could simply ensure that those events occurred at the right time.
Furthermore, open theists claim that they do not deny the omniscience of God. They, like classical theologians, state that God is indeed all-knowing. But they differ in that God can only know that which is knowable and since the future has not yet happened, it can not be exhaustively known by God. Instead, God only knows the present exhaustively, including the inclinations, desires, thoughts, and hopes of all people.
In Open Theism God can make mistakes because He does not know all things that will occur in the future. According to them, God also takes risks and adapts to the free-will choices of people. They claim biblical support for their position by citing scripture where God changes His mind (Exodus 32:14), is surprised (Isaiah 5:3–7), and tests people to see what they will do (Genesis 22:12).
Finally, Open Theism tends to portray the God of orthodoxy as distant, controlling, and unyielding while promoting the God of openness as involved, adapting, loving, interacting, and caring for humanity.

Orthodox Christianity​

Historic Orthodox Christianity states that God knows all things, even the entirety of the future, exhaustively. 1 John 3:20 says, “…for God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.” Likewise, Peter said to Jesus in John 21:17, “…You know all things; You know that I love You…” God’s sovereignty is clearly taught in scripture, and His sovereignty is tied to His omniscience. Orthodox Christianity teaches that God is very loving, very involved, and even condescends to our level and interacts with us in a manner that we can understand. This means that we will see what appears to be instances of God changing His mind, testing, and adapting. But, this is all due to God’s working with creatures who have limited vision, short life spans, and are sinners. God must work on our level since we cannot work on His.

God and time​

The question about God’s knowledge of the future is very important because it deals with the actual definition of God’s nature in relation to the nature of the future. Is God all-knowing about the future or not? Is God existing in the future or not? Is God limited to the present or not? The answers to these questions reflect the very nature and scope of God’s existence. The open theists are pushing a description of God that reduces God from knowing all things, past, present, and future, to not knowing all things in the future. God’s omnipresence is also in jeopardy in Open Theism, since some open theists deny the existence of the future and thereby deny the omnipresence of God in the future.

Conclusion​

My opinion is that openness is a dangerous teaching that undermines the sovereignty, majesty, infinitude, knowledge, existence, and glory of God and exalts the nature and condition of man’s own free will. Though the open theists will undoubtedly say it does no such thing, it goes without saying that the God of Open Theism is not as knowledgeable or as ever-present as the God of orthodoxy.

​

Right at the end of the Bible, we are told (reminded) to not seal God's sayings in the Bible.

And He saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
Revelation 22: 10

And I just read and was pondering on the meaning of this verse in Jeremiah;

Thus saith the Lord;
If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath,
I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord.
Jeremiah 31:37

It is my opinion that believing you know is the "dangerous" thing, that produce the "forbidden" fruit.
And that we should open to Him.

And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding;
that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.
Luke 12:36

 

[Arial]

It is my opinion that believing you know is the "dangerous" thing, that produce the "forbidden" fruit.
And that we should open to Him.

This makes no sense to me, and I do not see your post relating to the OP.

 

[Arial]

It means that no matter what move creation makes, God can make a move to counter it.
And God need not know in advance every single move creation will actually make in order to do so.
His plan covered all possible moves creation could choose to make.

But He does know every single move creatures will make because He knows everything. It says in Psalms that He knows our thought before we even have them.
Psalm 139:1-4 O Lord, you have searched me and known me! You know when I sit down and when I rise up; you discern my thought from afar. You search out my path and my lying down and are acquainted with all my ways. Even before a word is on my tongue. behold O Lord, you know it all together. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there were none of them.

The prophecy concerning Cyrus before he was even born in Is 45, preferably in other than the KJV for it mistranslates calamity as evil, if you go by the structure of Hebrew poetry. That is a powerful chapter on the sovereignty of God, and a warning about striving with our Maker.

 

[Sissy]

But He does know every single move creatures will make because He knows everything.

He knows everything that is possible in thought or deed and He can react to anything done in thought or deed.
God could not change His mind about anything if every detail done was set in stone because He knew it before it happened.
And we know from scripture that there were times He did change His mind.

 

[shroom]

But He does know every single move creatures will make because He knows everything. It says in Psalms that He knows our thought before we even have them.
Psalm 139:1-4 O Lord, you have searched me and known me! You know when I sit down and when I rise up; you discern my thought from afar. You search out my path and my lying down and are acquainted with all my ways. Even before a word is on my tongue. behold O Lord, you know it all together. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there were none of them.

The prophecy concerning Cyrus before he was even born in Is 45, preferably in other than the KJV for it mistranslates calamity as evil, if you go by the structure of Hebrew poetry. That is a powerful chapter on the sovereignty of God, and a warning about striving with our Maker.

If you're interested, here is a Youtube playlist of teachings on Open Theism. Most of the segments are 10-13 minutes long.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL26wBwzo4McrshkuD4uJxGrE8u6mDELjN

This segment specifically addresses Psalm 139:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ntbVNAG8bE&t=25s

 

[Arial]

If you're interested, here is a Youtube playlist of teachings on Open Theism. Most of the segments are 10-13 minutes long.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL26wBwzo4McrshkuD4uJxGrE8u6mDELjN

This segment specifically addresses Psalm 139:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ntbVNAG8bE&t=25s

I only watched the second one. To watch the first and respond to it would require taking notes and then delving into it point by point and I haven't the time.

The first thing on Psalm 139 the speaker goes straight to what I said in a previous post. Dismissing common translations to substitute with ones that he can make fit what he wants to present. Yet he does not give any evidence that these translations are more accurate. He completely dismisses Davids words to God as being what David really sees and believes of God as flattery before he asks God to kill the wicked. He humanizes every aspect of the Psalm and in doing so blinds the eyes to see the glory and majesty of what God is revealing of Himself in the Psalm through David's words. Then gives lip service to the glory by demonstrative hand movements and facial expressions, all the time smiling as though it were all a big joke. I wonder how he would go about demolishing Is 45. Because that is what he did with Psalm 139---demolished it. Why would anyone do that? He should be ashamed of himself.

And even if those verses about being formed in the womb refer to the gestation period it changes nothing and would not mean it is only expressing God's plan for bones to form. It is expressing something about God and who He is. He says that fits Hebrew poetry but the meaning he gives it completely separates it from the rest of the Psalm according to Hebrew poetry.

 

[shroom]

I only watched the second one. To watch the first and respond to it would require taking notes and then delving into it point by point and I haven't the time.

The first thing on Psalm 139 the speaker goes straight to what I said in a previous post. Dismissing common translations to substitute with ones that he can make fit what he wants to present. Yet he does not give any evidence that these translations are more accurate. He completely dismisses Davids words to God as being what David really sees and believes of God as flattery before he asks God to kill the wicked. He humanizes every aspect of the Psalm and in doing so blinds the eyes to see the glory and majesty of what God is revealing of Himself in the Psalm through David's words. Then gives lip service to the glory by demonstrative hand movements and facial expressions, all the time smiling as though it were all a big joke. I wonder how he would go about demolishing Is 45. Because that is what he did with Psalm 139---demolished it. Why would anyone do that? He should be ashamed of himself.

And even if those verses about being formed in the womb refer to the gestation period it changes nothing and would not mean it is only expressing God's plan for bones to form. It is expressing something about God and who He is. He says that fits Hebrew poetry but the meaning he gives it completely separates it from the rest of the Psalm according to Hebrew poetry.

Thanks for your opinion. If you have time, and want to, watch the series. It will help you understand.

..or not.

 

[Arial]

He knows everything that is possible in thought or deed and He can react to anything done in thought or deed.
God could not change His mind about anything if every detail done was set in stone because He knew it before it happened.
And we know from scripture that there were times He did change His mind.

We know from scripture that there were times when from a human perspective (the only one we have, therefore the infinite God communicates with us in ways we can understand) it looks like God changed His mind. Maybe even as a teaching tool. We do not know what was going on in the mind of God. We should realize that if He knows all things, and plans all things, and governs all things, as He says throughout the Bible, there would never be any reason for Him to change His mind. Those times where it has that appearance are not places, we should be making doctrine out of. They are simply places we take up to argue doctrine.

 

[shroom]

We know from scripture that there were times when from a human perspective (the only one we have, therefore the infinite God communicates with us in ways we can understand) it looks like God changed His mind.

God did change His mind. At least a few times. He was sorry He had made man (Gen 6:4). He gave Hezekiah 15 more years of life after He had said Hez was about to die, but Hez prayed (Isa 38).

Maybe even as a teaching tool. We do not know what was going on in the mind of God.

The Bible tells us what was going on.

We should realize that if He knows all things, and plans all things, and governs all things, as He says throughout the Bible, there would never be any reason for Him to change His mind.

And yet He did...

Those times where it has that appearance are not places, we should be making doctrine out of. They are simply places we take up to argue doctrine.

They are valid examples of places in the Bible where God changed His mind.

 

[Arial]

Thanks for your opinion. If you have time, and want to, watch the series. It will help you understand.

..or not.

I don't need to understand everything about it. I have read quite a bit and not just from the opposing viewpoint but from theirs. I know enough to know where they are coming from and how destructive it is to a person's view of the revealed God. They make it sound very believable and enormously appealing to fallen man, but it will not stand up to careful scrutiny. They make God to be manlike but bigger and with more power and knowledge, whereas He is completely other than us. They will deny they do this till the cows come home, but that will not change the fact that it is indeed what they are doing.

 

[Arial]

God did change His mind. At least a few times. He was sorry He had made man (Gen 6:4). He gave Hezekiah 15 more years of life after He had said Hez was about to die, but Hez prayed (Isa 38).

I know the verses. It is the party line and is used to remove some of God's sovereignty and give it to us. We can only truly trust a God who does not change His mind. You ignore what I said about it as though it is not worth considering. As if the very nature of God were not under attack, or that it doesn't even matter.

The Bible tells us what was going on.

It tells us what happened. There is a difference.

They are valid examples of places in the Bible where God changed His mind.

They are valid examples of places in the Bible that it stated to us in that way. It is the character and nature of God's self-revelation that determines whether or not God changes His mind. The focus in these passages is put on entirely the wrong thing.

 

[shroom]

I know the verses. It is the party line and is used to remove some of God's sovereignty and give it to us. We can only truly trust a God who does not change His mind. You ignore what I said about it as though it is not worth considering. As if the very nature of God were not under attack, or that it doesn't even matter.

^^ Spoken like a true Calvinist. That's not an insult, but a statement of fact. You are a firm adherent to Reformed theology.

It tells us what happened. There is a difference.

It tells us God was sorry He had made man, and it tells us He gave Hezekiah 15 more years after Hezekiah prayed. Why can't you simply accept it for what it says?

They are valid examples of places in the Bible that it stated to us in that way. It is the character and nature of God's self-revelation that determines whether or not God changes His mind. The focus in these passages is put on entirely the wrong thing.

The Bible is clear that God has changed His mind. It's Reformed theology that says He doesn't, or can't.