God knows all things

Posted by Ricky Grimsley in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

How can a God who knows all things change his mind. Does not this conversation show that God listened to Moses and decided to do something different that his original idea?
Exodus 32:10,14 KJVS
[10] Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. [14] And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:31 PM]
Yes, Open Theism is more biblical, coherent than alternate views.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:34 PM]
The described above is not really Open Theism. Open Theism is an Attack on the Atonement and considered heresy by some for being “hyper-Arminians” http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/is-open-theism-heretical/

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:38 PM]
This is a motif that can be taken at face value if one does not hold to tradition that is not truth: http://reknew.org/2015/04/doesgodchangehismind/

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:39 PM]
Hezekiah and Jonah also illustrate this: http://reknew.org/2008/01/isnt-god-changing-his-mind-an-anthropomorphism/

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:40 PM]
To the open theist, God is limited by time. The Bible teaches that God created time: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1: 1). It could only have been “the beginning” if time started at that point. Einstein’s theory of relativity also posits that time is a physical property of our universe. If there were no matter, there would be no time. Since there is matter then there is time.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:40 PM]
http://reknew.org/2012/07/qa-how-can-prayer-change-gods-mind/

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:40 PM]
Open theists often construct a straw man to knock down at this point. They claim that God cannot look down the passages of time to see what an individual will freely choose to do. This straw man betrays their misunderstanding of God’s nature. God is not “in time” as we are. He transcends time. He is not part of His creation like the pantheist declares. He is outside of it (transcendent) but can intervene when and where He chooses. Since God is not physically bound to the universe, He is not affected by time. As such, God does not need to “look down the passages of time” to see the future. He sees the entire timeline at the same moment.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:48 PM]
No, God is not limited by time like it limits us. He has endless time and is also omnipresen/omnipotent. We have limited time and are finite. It is an aspect of the personal God’s experience, not a limitation. The incarnation was more limited because of His body, not because of time, per se.

Gen. 1 does not talk about the creation of time, but the creation of unique measures of time (sun, moon, stars). Duration/sequence/succession is the nature of eternity, not Platonic, Augustinian timelessness.

Einstein confused time and space, speculated about 4th dimensions. His stuff appliers to subjective perceptions of time, minute effects of gravity on clocks, theories about speed of light that could never apply to man, etc. Time is a philosophical concept, not a material thing. Time marches on unidirectionally with or without matter, clocks, people.

You have foreknown choices being actualities instead of possibilities trillions of years before agents supposedly exist and freely make choices. This is incoherent and would mean the agent is not free, but fatalistically fixed.

You also use spatial analogies (in/out of time) for durative issues. Einstein was also wrong to blur distinctions between past/present/future. Endless time is found in Scripture and is not pantheistic?!

Eternal now is Greek philosophy and many Christian philosophers, etc. defend A vs B theory of time.

If you are not familiar with the wealth of literature on this subject, various views, technical arguments, etc., you should not be so dogmatic. You have wrong assumptions leading to wrong conclusions.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:48 PM]
If Boyd and his fellow open theists are correct, it will be very easy for Satan to make God a liar. When the “man of sin” (Antichrist) comes on the scene Satan could inspire him to act contrary to what Revelation says about him. Rather than beheading those who refuse to worship him and receive his mark (Revelation 20: 4), Antichrist could put them in the electric chair. This would nullify biblical prophecy and in turn, make God into a liar.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:54 PM]
You are assuming a specific interpretation on details in a book that has much figurative stuff. There is no end to speculation and interpretation of the book of Revelation because much of it is general vs specific. Minute details are not the issue as much as broad things that God can providentially be woven into future history. If it was black and white, there would not be endless views and interpretations on eschatology or any given verse within these views by various proponents.

Your view is problematic. Objections to Open Theism can be handled, even if not perfectly. This is true of any doctrine that we can establish parameters for without having every answer for every issue. Prophecy is an objection, but not all prophecy is unconditional or predictive (e.g. Jonah).

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 2:02 PM]
God has staked His reputation on His ability to tell the future. In Isaiah 44 – 48 God proves to Israel that He is the only true God. Throughout this passage He refers to His ability to prophesy with one hundred percent accuracy. “I have declared the former things from the beginning…” (Isaiah 48: 3). The book of Revelation is almost entirely about future events; many of which will be fulfilled at least 1,900 years after they were first declared. If we serve a “God who risks” then He is extremely lucky at guessing the future. No, God does not take any risk when He foretells the future. He does not need to. He has perfect knowledge of every single free choice made by every single free being. He “knows” what will take place in the future. He does not guess.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 2:45 PM]
There is no providential advantage with exhaustive definite foreknowledge since God could not change the fixed future even if He wanted to (would make FK false). So, some say God saw that you were going to get killed, so He had you change your route, etc. This is nonsensical science fiction time travel, not sound thinking.

Is. 46 and 48 is claimed by Calvinists. The mistake is to extrapolate some things to all things. God can predict and bring to pass judgments on nations in that context. This does not mean He knows the outcomes of random lotteries from eternity past. So, Open Theism has two motifs in Scripture with some vs all of the future predestinated and known. The passage also undermines Arminianism because it talks about His ability to bring things to pass, not a supposed timeless prescience. Too many import their wrong paradigms into proof texts.

http://reknew.org/2008/01/how-do-you-respond-to-isaiah-469-11/

Ricky Grimsley [01/12/2016 2:46 PM]
If God exhaustively knows the future, then what is the point of anything. If we just the use the bible to decide this open theism wins easily. Unless open theism is correct there is no such thing as free will. If God already knows then the “choice” is made already. That means that prayer changes nothing. That means God

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 2:46 PM]
The open theist usually responds by saying that God knows some future events, just not all of them. He will bring certain events to pass but leave the other events up to the individuals to whom He has bestowed the ability to choose. In other words, certain events are predestined. They have to happen because God said they would but to accomplish these things God will have to override the free will of certain individuals. Here is the ultimate dilemma for the open theist. Their entire theology is based on man’s free will as opposed to the hyper-Calvinist’s view of predestination. Yet at the same time, they affirm the exact same thing they wish to get away from; namely, that God will force or coerce certain individuals to do what He wants [i.e. Antichrist will persecute true believers and Jews]. This fact alone destroys the viability of open theism since it is founded on a hopeless self-contradiction.

Ricky Grimsley [01/12/2016 2:52 PM]
You cant get away from some individuals being predestined. Did john the baptist have a choice. You have to live in the reality that all these things the bible says is true. God changes his mind, he learns, he has real emotion. He also predicts the future by making it happen. Notice the wording. Matthew 26:56 KJVS
[56] But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 2:56 PM]
Open theism creates other problems as well. A person’s view of God is extremely important. After all, if one misses the mark on the person and/or work of God, the rest of his theology will likely be askew. Robert Brow, a staunch supporter of open theology, wrote an article in Christianity Today in which he proposed “new explanations for biblical concepts such as divine wrath, God’s righteousness, judgment, the atonement – and just about every aspect of evangelical theology.” If this wasn’t bad enough ponder the following statement by Brow: “‘the cross was not a judicial payment,’ but merely a visible, space-time expression of how Christ has always suffered because of our sin.” This is a classic example of how a warped view of God distorts the rest of one’s doctrines. We would ALL benefit from Paul’s exhortation to the young evangelist Timothy: Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness…But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.” (2 Timothy 2: 15 – 16, 23 – 26).

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 2:59 PM]
Some of the above is correct, but overriding free will is not held by most Open Theists (if done, it is more compatibilistic and not relating to salvation/destiny). It is not hard to predict that the mob would turn on Jesus or that Peter would deny Jesus given the circumstances. You overestimate the help of timelessness or determinism and underestimate an omnicompetent God (intelligence, wise, omniscient, omnipotent, etc.) vs an omnicausal one. Great experts rely on ability and intelligence to respond to things and simply do not need foreknowledge (God would have it if it was possible with free will, but this is illogical like square circles). The two motifs are in Scripture, but you must make the openness them figurative without warrant.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 3:19 PM]
I have never heard of Brow and that does not mean OT support all of his views. Calvinists and Arminians also have various views on any given verse or doctrine (spectrum). Brow must be a minor player that most would not agree with (nor do his views flow out of basic Open Theism necessarily). 2 Tim. 2 is not about godly, capable debates among believers. There is a difference between false doctrines and pagan philosophy and robust Christian theology and philosophy.

Ricky Grimsley [01/12/2016 3:39 PM]
I have never of brow either. The problem is this. I can argue that God learns and God changes his mind from scripture. All the other side can say is that it violates their version of God. I take all the scriptures into account. God awesomeness is displayed by him telling you what he will do and then doing it, not by creating robots or by setting some giant plan in motion and the punishing everyone for doing exactly what he always knew we would do. If god is not willing that any should perish…….but somehow we still do….then his plan is being violated. Was not jesus an open theist?Matthew 26:39 KJVS
[39] And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt .
Can we really believe that the son of god, the man on whom the spirit dwelt without measure, the body in whom all the fulness dwelt….didnt understand?

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 3:41 PM]
well, if you’ve never heard wouldn’t it be well proposed to read about it before discussing and subscribing to Open Theism?

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 4:02 PM]
I have studied Open Theism for decades. It is odd that Brow has not been on our radar. Using him to denigrate the prominent proponents or view is simply guilt by association or ad hominem. Can you link us some information about him or his writings so we can inform ourselves?

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 4:14 PM]
decades? – broader articulation of open theism did not begin till 1994

Brian Roden [01/12/2016 4:15 PM]
Which was 22 years ago. So a little over two decades. The plural is appropriate.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 4:18 PM]
must have began studying it right when it started; wonder what type of valid study tools were available right the way? also wondering why such important for our faith doctrine has been lacking in the first 20 centuries of church history only to be revealed to us today? 🙂

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 4:29 PM]
I have been Open Theist since 1980 (35 years). The view predates 1994 (McCabe 1800s, etc.). I have a chart with Open Theist proponents for centuries. It was not an issue compared to early Christological controversies. Novelty or antiquity is not proof or disproof of a view compared to Scripture.

28 Comments

  • Reply June 24, 2017

    Street Preacherz

    As a layman, I can only offer these words of the Lord Jesus,
    “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
    Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
    And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
    For me the question of what God knew and when is a little ridiculous. The important question is will he know you on that great day. When the souls of men will be called into account. Let the wise man consider his soul and standing before God. Trusting wholly in Jesus for he bears the scars of redemption in his hands.

  • Reply June 24, 2017

    Ricky Grimsley

    God knows all things as they are. Some are possibilities.

    • Reply June 24, 2017

      Street Preacherz

      Bless you brother

    • Reply June 24, 2017

      Ricky Grimsley

      How many times was the harvest based on obedience?

    • Reply June 24, 2017

      Street Preacherz

      I took the reference to seed time and harvest down. I’m content to trust in God.

    • Reply June 24, 2017

      Ricky Grimsley

      Of course we trust God. But you have to choose.

    • Reply June 24, 2017

      Street Preacherz

      I’m with you on that. I’m leaning on the everlasting arms myself. I cherish the fellowship here. I have no reason to start a “dust up.” Somethings mean more than others. Can’t wait to see Jesus face to face. That will be nice. Given a consecrated life of course… Don’t want no lies or ungodliness to come up just then! You know Jesus he’ll call you out on sin.

  • Tell us something that we don’t know Troy lol

  • So with all these religions Jehovah’s witness is, Catholics, Christians and lots more. which one is the right one and how do you know which Bible is the right one to read. how do you know that you’re even getting the right information when there so many religions.

    • Reply June 25, 2017

      Street Preacherz

      Do you have a pastor?

    • I don’t need a pastor I have the holly bible and I go to lots of churches. All I need is God and Jesus. So i don’t need a pastor in my life but I know lots.

    • I don’t have a religion. I just believe in God and Jesus so they are like my pastor;)

      But I really like a lot of your posts on fb Street Preacherz

    • Reply June 25, 2017

      Street Preacherz

      A good pastor is a gift from God. Eph. 4:7-14
      Even when try to tell you what to do. lol.

    • I just have not found a good pastor I guess.

    • Reply June 25, 2017

      Street Preacherz

      It’s important. Facebook may be less personal. You may feel safer. But it always better to walk before God in the order he has set. God will help you. Your influence for Christ will be better. Not finding fault. …just saying.
      I went to a meat and potatoes church for years. Good Bible teaching, prayer, they allowed for the moving of God’s Holy Spirit. Hymns and contemporary worship. A great church. One stretch of 6 months I was offended every Sunday. But I honored my commitments. It was tough. I had to pray through before and after every service!!! Maybe you can help and pray for God’s work. I mean specifically. A pastor a local church?

  • Reply June 25, 2017

    Ira Huth

    Vincent Christina Young That is a very good question and if asked is important to answer. There is several points that can be given here. And as I feel lead to answer. I’m sincerely asking the Holy Spirit with contrite heart for guidance and help. I said contrite heart because we are all in a corruptible, mortal human sinful state. With still being in a Spiritual Warfare between good, evil, right, wrong, light, darkness, truths or false. So it is important to think and act in anything we say and do by walking in the Spirit and not our human flesh daily. When we start having a strong daily intimate realtionship with the Holy Spirit. We start having more of a heart and image of Jesus. Then the Fruit of the Spirit along with the Gifts of the Spirit starts operating giving us divine wisdom, confidence, discernment ect..
    So operate in the Spirit with a right heart and motives. Along with studying and researching the Word ( ancient history ) showing yourself approved unto God as a workman, rightly dividing the word of truth. Not relaying on a man or a religious denomination/Church. Taking a chance that what is being said is taken out of context. Or is just profane, vain babblings, that will increase more ungodliness and not the truth. Look at the original ancient Greek and Hebrew text for yourself. Remember God is not the author of confusion, but Satan and his forces is. And he tries to use all of us to cause confusion and sometimes succeeds. That is why it is so important we all have a strong Spiritual life. We our all part of the Body of Christ and one day he will rule and rain over us. Till then we have to study and show ourselves approved unto God so we know we our part of the right Body.
    I like what Paul said to the Corinthians.
    But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
    2 Corinthians 11:3 KJV
    http://bible.com/1/2co.11.3.KJV
    God is not the author of confusion.

  • I agree with you Street Preacherz

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Street Preacherz

    Before he hung the first star in the sky He knew the day and hour our Lord would give his life a ransom for the souls of men.

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Vincent Christina Young Take your time with reading the discussion. Did you know that Ricky Grimsley and other reps of open theism do not believe God knows all even the unknown and the nonexistent?

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Ricky Grimsley

    Thats because we have embraced the truth.

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Ricky Grimsley

    Wow. All is fated. Sound like calvinism to me.

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Well Vincent Christina Young basically open theism believes that God does not know some things

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Ricky Grimsley

    Thats the what the bible says. Otherwise, why does God test us?

  • So Troy Day your saying God dose not know everything?

  • Reply June 26, 2017

    Ricky Grimsley

    Troy Day believes that God knows every detail of everything from before creation. However, i believe the bible tells a different story.

  • Reply July 15, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Simple Just like that

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

God knows all things

Posted by in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

How can a God who knows all things change his mind. Does not this conversation show that God listened to Moses and decided to do something different that his original idea?
Exodus 32:10,14 KJVS
[10] Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. [14] And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:31 PM]
Yes, Open Theism is more biblical, coherent than alternate views.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:34 PM]
The described above is not really Open Theism. Open Theism is an Attack on the Atonement and considered heresy by some for being “hyper-Arminians” http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/is-open-theism-heretical/

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:38 PM]
This is a motif that can be taken at face value if one does not hold to tradition that is not truth: http://reknew.org/2015/04/doesgodchangehismind/

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:39 PM]
Hezekiah and Jonah also illustrate this: http://reknew.org/2008/01/isnt-god-changing-his-mind-an-anthropomorphism/

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:40 PM]
To the open theist, God is limited by time. The Bible teaches that God created time: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1: 1). It could only have been “the beginning” if time started at that point. Einstein’s theory of relativity also posits that time is a physical property of our universe. If there were no matter, there would be no time. Since there is matter then there is time.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:40 PM]
http://reknew.org/2012/07/qa-how-can-prayer-change-gods-mind/

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:40 PM]
Open theists often construct a straw man to knock down at this point. They claim that God cannot look down the passages of time to see what an individual will freely choose to do. This straw man betrays their misunderstanding of God’s nature. God is not “in time” as we are. He transcends time. He is not part of His creation like the pantheist declares. He is outside of it (transcendent) but can intervene when and where He chooses. Since God is not physically bound to the universe, He is not affected by time. As such, God does not need to “look down the passages of time” to see the future. He sees the entire timeline at the same moment.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:48 PM]
No, God is not limited by time like it limits us. He has endless time and is also omnipresen/omnipotent. We have limited time and are finite. It is an aspect of the personal God’s experience, not a limitation. The incarnation was more limited because of His body, not because of time, per se.

Gen. 1 does not talk about the creation of time, but the creation of unique measures of time (sun, moon, stars). Duration/sequence/succession is the nature of eternity, not Platonic, Augustinian timelessness.

Einstein confused time and space, speculated about 4th dimensions. His stuff appliers to subjective perceptions of time, minute effects of gravity on clocks, theories about speed of light that could never apply to man, etc. Time is a philosophical concept, not a material thing. Time marches on unidirectionally with or without matter, clocks, people.

You have foreknown choices being actualities instead of possibilities trillions of years before agents supposedly exist and freely make choices. This is incoherent and would mean the agent is not free, but fatalistically fixed.

You also use spatial analogies (in/out of time) for durative issues. Einstein was also wrong to blur distinctions between past/present/future. Endless time is found in Scripture and is not pantheistic?!

Eternal now is Greek philosophy and many Christian philosophers, etc. defend A vs B theory of time.

If you are not familiar with the wealth of literature on this subject, various views, technical arguments, etc., you should not be so dogmatic. You have wrong assumptions leading to wrong conclusions.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 1:48 PM]
If Boyd and his fellow open theists are correct, it will be very easy for Satan to make God a liar. When the “man of sin” (Antichrist) comes on the scene Satan could inspire him to act contrary to what Revelation says about him. Rather than beheading those who refuse to worship him and receive his mark (Revelation 20: 4), Antichrist could put them in the electric chair. This would nullify biblical prophecy and in turn, make God into a liar.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 1:54 PM]
You are assuming a specific interpretation on details in a book that has much figurative stuff. There is no end to speculation and interpretation of the book of Revelation because much of it is general vs specific. Minute details are not the issue as much as broad things that God can providentially be woven into future history. If it was black and white, there would not be endless views and interpretations on eschatology or any given verse within these views by various proponents.

Your view is problematic. Objections to Open Theism can be handled, even if not perfectly. This is true of any doctrine that we can establish parameters for without having every answer for every issue. Prophecy is an objection, but not all prophecy is unconditional or predictive (e.g. Jonah).

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 2:02 PM]
God has staked His reputation on His ability to tell the future. In Isaiah 44 – 48 God proves to Israel that He is the only true God. Throughout this passage He refers to His ability to prophesy with one hundred percent accuracy. “I have declared the former things from the beginning…” (Isaiah 48: 3). The book of Revelation is almost entirely about future events; many of which will be fulfilled at least 1,900 years after they were first declared. If we serve a “God who risks” then He is extremely lucky at guessing the future. No, God does not take any risk when He foretells the future. He does not need to. He has perfect knowledge of every single free choice made by every single free being. He “knows” what will take place in the future. He does not guess.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 2:45 PM]
There is no providential advantage with exhaustive definite foreknowledge since God could not change the fixed future even if He wanted to (would make FK false). So, some say God saw that you were going to get killed, so He had you change your route, etc. This is nonsensical science fiction time travel, not sound thinking.

Is. 46 and 48 is claimed by Calvinists. The mistake is to extrapolate some things to all things. God can predict and bring to pass judgments on nations in that context. This does not mean He knows the outcomes of random lotteries from eternity past. So, Open Theism has two motifs in Scripture with some vs all of the future predestinated and known. The passage also undermines Arminianism because it talks about His ability to bring things to pass, not a supposed timeless prescience. Too many import their wrong paradigms into proof texts.

http://reknew.org/2008/01/how-do-you-respond-to-isaiah-469-11/

Ricky Grimsley [01/12/2016 2:46 PM]
If God exhaustively knows the future, then what is the point of anything. If we just the use the bible to decide this open theism wins easily. Unless open theism is correct there is no such thing as free will. If God already knows then the “choice” is made already. That means that prayer changes nothing. That means God

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 2:46 PM]
The open theist usually responds by saying that God knows some future events, just not all of them. He will bring certain events to pass but leave the other events up to the individuals to whom He has bestowed the ability to choose. In other words, certain events are predestined. They have to happen because God said they would but to accomplish these things God will have to override the free will of certain individuals. Here is the ultimate dilemma for the open theist. Their entire theology is based on man’s free will as opposed to the hyper-Calvinist’s view of predestination. Yet at the same time, they affirm the exact same thing they wish to get away from; namely, that God will force or coerce certain individuals to do what He wants [i.e. Antichrist will persecute true believers and Jews]. This fact alone destroys the viability of open theism since it is founded on a hopeless self-contradiction.

Ricky Grimsley [01/12/2016 2:52 PM]
You cant get away from some individuals being predestined. Did john the baptist have a choice. You have to live in the reality that all these things the bible says is true. God changes his mind, he learns, he has real emotion. He also predicts the future by making it happen. Notice the wording. Matthew 26:56 KJVS
[56] But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 2:56 PM]
Open theism creates other problems as well. A person’s view of God is extremely important. After all, if one misses the mark on the person and/or work of God, the rest of his theology will likely be askew. Robert Brow, a staunch supporter of open theology, wrote an article in Christianity Today in which he proposed “new explanations for biblical concepts such as divine wrath, God’s righteousness, judgment, the atonement – and just about every aspect of evangelical theology.” If this wasn’t bad enough ponder the following statement by Brow: “‘the cross was not a judicial payment,’ but merely a visible, space-time expression of how Christ has always suffered because of our sin.” This is a classic example of how a warped view of God distorts the rest of one’s doctrines. We would ALL benefit from Paul’s exhortation to the young evangelist Timothy: Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness…But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.” (2 Timothy 2: 15 – 16, 23 – 26).

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 2:59 PM]
Some of the above is correct, but overriding free will is not held by most Open Theists (if done, it is more compatibilistic and not relating to salvation/destiny). It is not hard to predict that the mob would turn on Jesus or that Peter would deny Jesus given the circumstances. You overestimate the help of timelessness or determinism and underestimate an omnicompetent God (intelligence, wise, omniscient, omnipotent, etc.) vs an omnicausal one. Great experts rely on ability and intelligence to respond to things and simply do not need foreknowledge (God would have it if it was possible with free will, but this is illogical like square circles). The two motifs are in Scripture, but you must make the openness them figurative without warrant.

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 3:19 PM]
I have never heard of Brow and that does not mean OT support all of his views. Calvinists and Arminians also have various views on any given verse or doctrine (spectrum). Brow must be a minor player that most would not agree with (nor do his views flow out of basic Open Theism necessarily). 2 Tim. 2 is not about godly, capable debates among believers. There is a difference between false doctrines and pagan philosophy and robust Christian theology and philosophy.

Ricky Grimsley [01/12/2016 3:39 PM]
I have never of brow either. The problem is this. I can argue that God learns and God changes his mind from scripture. All the other side can say is that it violates their version of God. I take all the scriptures into account. God awesomeness is displayed by him telling you what he will do and then doing it, not by creating robots or by setting some giant plan in motion and the punishing everyone for doing exactly what he always knew we would do. If god is not willing that any should perish…….but somehow we still do….then his plan is being violated. Was not jesus an open theist?Matthew 26:39 KJVS
[39] And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt .
Can we really believe that the son of god, the man on whom the spirit dwelt without measure, the body in whom all the fulness dwelt….didnt understand?

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 3:41 PM]
well, if you’ve never heard wouldn’t it be well proposed to read about it before discussing and subscribing to Open Theism?

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 4:02 PM]
I have studied Open Theism for decades. It is odd that Brow has not been on our radar. Using him to denigrate the prominent proponents or view is simply guilt by association or ad hominem. Can you link us some information about him or his writings so we can inform ourselves?

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 4:14 PM]
decades? – broader articulation of open theism did not begin till 1994

Brian Roden [01/12/2016 4:15 PM]
Which was 22 years ago. So a little over two decades. The plural is appropriate.

John Kissinger [01/12/2016 4:18 PM]
must have began studying it right when it started; wonder what type of valid study tools were available right the way? also wondering why such important for our faith doctrine has been lacking in the first 20 centuries of church history only to be revealed to us today? 🙂

William Lance Huget [01/12/2016 4:29 PM]
I have been Open Theist since 1980 (35 years). The view predates 1994 (McCabe 1800s, etc.). I have a chart with Open Theist proponents for centuries. It was not an issue compared to early Christological controversies. Novelty or antiquity is not proof or disproof of a view compared to Scripture.

Be first to comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.