Assessing the Necessity of Open Theism 2

[kenblogton]

Assessing the Necessity of Open Theism: 2- respecting Omniscience and Free Will
According to John Sanders Open Theism website, http://www.opentheism.info/, “the only wise God has chosen to exercise general rather than meticulous providence, allowing space for us to operate and for God to be creative and resourceful in working with us. It was solely God’s decision not to control every detail that happens in our lives. Moreover, God has flexible strategies. Though the divine nature does not change, God reacts to contingencies, even adjusting his plans, if necessary, to take into account the decisions of his free creatures…. Finally, the omniscient God knows all that can be known given the sort of world he created…. We believe that God could have known every event of the future had God decided to create a fully determined universe. However, in our view God decided to create beings with indeterministic freedom which implies that God chose to create a universe in which the future is not entirely knowable, even for God. For many open theists the “future” is not a present reality-it does not exist-and God knows reality as it is…. Our rejection of divine timelessness and our affirmation of dynamic omniscience are the most controversial elements in our proposal and the view of foreknowledge receives the most attention.”
At the Theos.org website, mattrose provided the following clarification regarding the Open Theism viewpoint on omniscience:
“John Sanders
"God's knowledge of the future contains knowledge of what God has decided to bring about unilaterally, knowledge of possibilities, and those events which are determined to occur... God is not caught off guard." (From "Perspectives on the Doctrine of God" page 199)

Greg Boyd
"The only reality that exists for God to know concerning our future action is the possible directions we may take." (From his book which is literally titled "God of the Possible" page 66).

Clark Pinnock
"God knows all the possibilities and is, therefore, never caught off-guard." ("Most Moved Mover" page 103)”

How can it be that humankind has freedom of choice (Many times in the Bible, God exhorts people to choose to follow God, e.g., Deuteronomy 30:19-20.), when God is said to know all. From the Open Theism website description and the email interaction between Sanders and Christopher Hall, a proponent of Classic Theism, which was recorded in the May 2001 Christianity Today, under the title “Does God Know Your Next Move?,” it can be seen that the three main areas of contention between these two viewpoints are God’s immutability, including His immanence and impassability, His omniscience in light of humankinds’ freedom of choice, and His goodness given the existence of evil. Posting 1 dealt with immutability and impassability, and posting 3 will deal with goodness.
Sanders raises this type of issue in his exchange with Hall cited above. Hall notes that the Open Theism view allows for God to make mistakes, a view which he terms “flawed.” However, Hall does not propose an alternative view which addresses these Open Theism issues. Saunders raises valid questions on this topic.
Again, from the Classic Theism viewpoint, it is error to say that God is not omniscient. The Bible tells us that God is all-knowing (e.g., Genesis 15:13-14; Exodus 9:13-16, 12:40; Psalm 139: 16; Psalm 147:5; Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32; Hebrews 4:13.). God has nothing to learn or to discover; He experiences no surprise in what happens. Also, God tells people in the Bible that they are free to choose their own way of life, and God repeatedly urges them to choose God’s way (e.g., Deuteronomy 30:19-20; Joshua 24:14-16.). But if God knows all, then, on the surface of it, it would seem that God knows the choices we’ll make before we make them, so we’re not really free to choose, because the God who designed and made us did it with our life choices fully predetermined! To resolve these issues requires an amplified alternative rendering, within the context of Classic Theism, of the notion “God knows all.”
The Classic Theism understanding of God’s omniscience is that God knows the life path choices of each person from prior to their birth until their death (see Psalms 139:13-16.). If this is so, then peoples’ freedom of choice is more apparent than real. Some Classic Theists have argued, similarly to Saunders, that with respect to human choice, the omniscient God is akin to a cosmic meteorologist, only forecasting how people will behave. But omnipotent Creator God is also the cosmic weather-maker, not merely the omniscient weather-forecaster. If God has made people knowing full well how they would behave, including sinful behaviour, then people do not have freedom of choice! It would appear that Open Theism addresses a weakness inherent in Classic Theism by claiming that God only partially knows the future. It does so as a way of preserving human freedom of choice and God’s goodness. This Classic Theism weakness exists because of limitations in our human conception of God’s knowledge, or, more accurately, His foreknowledge.
Classic Theism conceives of God as foreknowing the one life path that each and every human takes. Yet Scripture frequently articulates more than one course of action from which people can choose in both the Old and the New Testaments, and exhorts people to make the godly choice (For instance, Proverbs: 5:21 says “For a man’s ways are in full view of the Lord, and he examines all his paths.” and 16:9 states “In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps.” This means that our life “paths” or “steps” – the choices available to us – are established by God, but the “ways” or “course” we take – our actual choices – are determined by our decisions. Similarly, Jeremiah 6:16 states “This is what the Lord says: ‘Stand at the crossroads and look; …ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls.’” See also Matthew 6:19-24.). After the choice is made, of course, there is only one life path direction up to that point, but prior to that choice being made, and after it, there are multiple life path choices available to each person. I term this the Multiple Life Path Foreknowledge view of God’s omniscience. In human hindsight and from a time-based perspective, the Single Life Path model of God’s omniscience makes sense. However, from the perspective of eternal divine foresight and humankinds’ free will, the only reasonable model of God’s omniscience is Multiple Life Path Foreknowledge. This view preserves both God’s omniscience and humankind’s freedom of choice. A department store analogy provides intuitive support for this model.
Imagine you are at a moral choice point in your life. You have a number of possible choices that you can make. Now relate this to a shopping excursion in a department store. There are many items from which you can choose. All of the choices are real possible choices for you. You make your choices and leave the remaining items behind in the store – real items which you could have chosen, but decided against. It is similar when you make a moral choice. You can choose from a variety of options ranging from completely good to totally evil. God knows all the choices that are available to you – choices which He preordained at Creation. All of these choices are real. None of your choices can surprise God, because God knows them all in the eternal now. But God allows you the freedom to make that choice for yourself in time – a choice that God has not predetermined for you – a choice for which you are accountable!
The decision tree represents an analogy with more similitude for multiple life path omniscience than a department store shopping excursion. The omniscient God foreknows the multiple choice-filled life decision tree for every person who might ever be conceived from the time of Creation until the Second Coming – an incredibly awesome omniscient God of possibilities!
With this understanding of omniscience, we can accommodate the apparent inconsistencies, cited in posting 1 under Immutability, both of God’s immanence in the face of a future that has not yet occurred, and in His answer to prayer, suspending of punishment in the face of repentant behaviour, and giving choice of punishment for sin. If we look at the three choice situations, we see these are real choices divinely ordained and foreknown by the omniscient God. They are part of those peoples’ multiple life path possibilities.
So God’s immanence with respect to the future that has not yet occurred in time is made clear. The Multiple Life Path model of omniscience, which is equivalent to the Open Theism position, lets us appreciate that God foreordains all possible choices for every human at Creation. As noted earlier, human hindsight suggests the Single Life Path model for God’s omniscience, but divine foresight commends the Multiple Life Path Foreknowledge model.

Conclusion 2
Open Theism exposes shortcomings in Classic Theism, for which we can be thankful. I believe the reason for these errors is our temporal nature. It biases our viewing God’s omniscience from a human hindsight, rather than a divine foresight, perspective. This bias will be with us until we are ushered into Eternity. However flawed is the Open Theists’ proposed handling of the dilemmas of God’s immutability, impassability, and goodness, it provide a solid catalyst for a Classic Theism resolution. The first posting dealt with immutability and impassability. In posting 3, I’ll deal with God’s goodness.
I believe all the original insights in this posting were divinely inspired.

Ken Tunstall, PhD.
Retired Management Consultant, Student of the Bible, Lay Apologist

[mattrose]

This doesn't make any sense to me

God fore-ordains all possible choices?

If true, most of what God fore-ordains never comes to pass! It seems like in an attempt to protect God from open theism, you've made God an abysmal failure, no? What's more, I don't think the idea even solves the issue it sets out to resolve. If you're trying to protect God's knowledge of the future... and you do it by saying God knows all possible futures... does that mean God still didn't know which exact future would come about? If God does NOT know the exact future, you may as well become an open theist. If God DOES know the exact future you'll choose, you're back to the same problem you had in the first place

I am just trying to give my personal reaction to what you have written. I'm sure others would find your thoughts more agreeable.

[kenblogton]

Reply to mattrose
You've understood correctly. God foreordains for people either one possible action or a range of actions. If God foreordains only one possible action, then all people's evil actions are foreordained by the God who created them so He is responsible for their evil actions - The good God causes evil, which makes no sense.
I believe God foreordains a choice of actions which will range from completely good to totally evil, most of which never come to pass, just like most items in the department store analogy don't get chosen. If people have free will, then we MUST have choices! That's the consequence of us not being robots but humans with free will.
If God only foreordains one choice at each decision point in their lives, then the fall of Adam & Eve and the evil behaviour of people in Noah's time were inevitable because they had no choice and that is what would make God an abysmal failure, because He made people knowing full well there were going to do evil! God knows all our possible choices, so He is never surprised by our actual choices, but He does not ordain our evil choices.
When I got the insight I realized there were 2 choices:
1. God knows everything you'll do, but inexplicably and mysteriously and by faith people have free will, which I believe is nonsense.
2. God knows all your possibilities, but not your actual choices.
kenblogton

[mattrose]

When I got the insight I realized there were 2 choices:
1. God knows everything you'll do, but inexplicably and mysteriously and by faith people have free will, which I believe is nonsense.
2. God knows all your possibilities, but not your actual choices.
kenblogton

But that's essentially what I believe... and I'm an open theist!

I wonder if maybe you are actually bothered more by process theology than open theism. In your first post you made it sound like they are kissing cousins, but actually, they are VERY different.

[kenblogton]

Hi mattrose
According to Open Theism as espoused by John Sanders, God does NOT know all your possibilities:
" the omniscient God knows all that can be known given the sort of world he created. The content of divine omniscience has been debated in the Christian tradition; between Thomism and Molinism for example. In the openness debate the focus is on the nature of the future: is it fully knowable, fully unknowable or partially knowable and partially unknowable? We believe that God could have known every event of the future had God decided to create a fully determined universe. However, in our view God decided to create beings with indeterministic freedom which implies that God chose to create a universe in which the future is not entirely knowable, even for God. For many open theists the “future” is not a present reality-it does not exist-and God knows reality as it is." This says that God does not know your real possibilities for the future. I say God knows all your future possibilities.
I believe the Open Theism view is unorthodox. There are no surprises for God - He knows ALL the possibilities, just not the actual choices. Open Theism implies these possibilities are not knowable, even for God.
Standard Classic Theism says In God's omniscience, you have one choice and God knows what it is. Multiple Life Path omniscience says you have many choices, and God knows them all. Open Theism says no one, not even God, knows all your possible choices - in other words, God is NOT omniscient!
kenblogton.

[mattrose]

Hi mattrose

According to Open Theism as espoused by John Sanders, God does NOT know all your possibilities:

" the omniscient God knows all that can be known given the sort of world he created. The content of divine omniscience has been debated in the Christian tradition; between Thomism and Molinism for example. In the openness debate the focus is on the nature of the future: is it fully knowable, fully unknowable or partially knowable and partially unknowable? We believe that God could have known every event of the future had God decided to create a fully determined universe. However, in our view God decided to create beings with indeterministic freedom which implies that God chose to create a universe in which the future is not entirely knowable, even for God. For many open theists the “future” is not a present reality-it does not exist-and God knows reality as it is."

This says that God does not know your real possibilities for the future. I say God knows all your future possibilities.

I don't think the quote says what you say it says. Sanders is saying that God COULD HAVE created a single-path world and known precisely what would happen, but God chose instead to create free people who could choose among multiple paths. There is nothing in the quote that says that God does not know the real possibilities for the future. He is only saying that God doesn't know the precise actuality of your future. I am fairly certain that he would agree that God knows all your future possibilities. And I'm even more certain that the quote doesn't suggest otherwise.

I believe the Open Theism view is unorthodox. There are no surprises for God - He knows ALL the possibilities, just not the actual choices. Open Theism implies these possibilities are not knowable, even for God.

Once again, I don't think you actually believe anything different from open theists here. You are just using the word 'surprise' a little differently. You're suggesting that God isn't surprised EVEN THOUGH He doesn't know the actual choices we will make. Open theists say that God can be surprised BECAUSE He doesn't know the actual choices we will make. But they don't mean surprised in the sense of shocked/caught-off-guard. They mean He genuinely didn't know we would choose THAT possibility until they chose it. I don't have to be ignorant of the possibility of a surprise party to still be surprised when it happens.

Standard Classic Theism says In God's omniscience, you have one choice and God knows what it is. Multiple Life Path omniscience says you have many choices, and God knows them all. Open Theism says no one, not even God, knows all your possible choices - in other words, God is NOT omniscient!
kenblogton.

I disagree. I think you have either misunderstood open theism or your definition of some word is a radical departure from the dictionary. Open theism, as I understand it, has no problem with the idea that God knows all possible choices.

But you don't have to take my word for it

John Sanders
"God's knowledge of the future contains knowledge of what God has decided to bring about unilaterally, knowledge of possibilities, and those events which are determined to occur... God is not caught off guard." (From "Perspectives on the Doctrine of God" page 199)

Greg Boyd
"The only reality that exists for God to know concerning our future action is the possible directions we may take." (From his book which is literally titled "God of the Possible" page 66).

Clark Pinnock
"God knows all the possibilities and is, therefore, never caught off-guard." ("Most Moved Mover" page 103)

In light of these 3 quotes, would you now agree that open theists DO believe that God knows future possibilities?

[kenblogton]

Reply to mattrose
Based on those quotes, I am pleased to say, I agree.
Thanks for expanding my knowledge of Open Theism.
I see the quote I cited from John Sanders website as implying that God does NOT know all the possibilities " in our view God decided to create beings with indeterministic freedom which implies that God chose to create a universe in which the future is not entirely knowable, even for God. For many open theists the “future” is not a present reality-it does not exist-and God knows reality as it is", so I appreciate your clarification.
kenblogton

[mattrose]

I see the quote I cited from John Sanders website as implying that God does NOT know all the possibilities " in our view God decided to create beings with indeterministic freedom which implies that God chose to create a universe in which the future is not entirely knowable, even for God. For many open theists the “future” is not a present reality-it does not exist-and God knows reality as it is", so I appreciate your clarification.
kenblogton

I think I can see how the quote could be interpreted that way

But I think by 'the future' he's referring specifically to the choices of free agents. The future is partially knowable (God knows what he will do, the possibilities, and whatever may be predetermined) and partially un-knowable (God doesn't know what particular possibility free agents will pick... even if he is nearly certain most of the time based on present omniscience).

God's knowledge is therefore perfect in the sense that He knows everything there is to know. Just like God's omnipotence has logical limits (He can't make 1+1=3 or a circle become a square while remaining a circle), omniscience has logical limits (He can't know to be true what is false or know a future that doesn't yet exist). It may be that you still disagree with open theism about the existence of the future (perhaps you believe God exists outside of time), but I think the beliefs that you seem to have will logically lead to the open theist conclusion at some point.

Thanks for the dialogue. I enjoyed reading your thoughts

[Paidion]

The future is partially knowable (God knows what he will do...)

I'm not even certain that God always knows what He will do. For what He will do is based in part on man's decisions.
For example, doesn't it seem that God thought He would bring disaster on Ninevah? For if He had KNOWN that He wouldn't bring disaster on them, and yet said that He would, He would have been lying, wouldn't He have? Why would He have prophesied through Jonah that He WOULD bring disaster on Ninevah if He had known that He wouldn't do so? (There is no indication that the prophecy was conditional. It seems that those who say so are reading into the text.)

Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it. (Jonah 3:10)

[mattrose]

The future is partially knowable (God knows what he will do...)

I'm not even certain that God always knows what He will do. For what He will do is based in part on man's decisions.

I have no problem with this. I think Sanders simply means that there may be some things that God is unilaterally going to do (irregardless of free will agents). Such future things could be knowable b/c God knows He's going to do them. How many such things there are is a matter of debate.