Posted on 02/02/2002 5:55:06 AM PST by LarryLied
It wasn't the usual news headline: "Scholars Vote: God Knows Future."Thus did Christianity Today magazine summarize an Evangelical Theological Society convention that climaxed a doctrinal dispute which has been brewing for years among evangelical Protestants. At issue is whether God has total knowledge of the future or somewhat limited knowledge.
The movement known as Open Theism or Openness Theology is attacking, among other things, the classical belief in God's "omniscience" (all-knowing nature) and complete "foreknowledge" of the future. It cites the Bible to underscore God's vulnerability, limitations and responsiveness to human events and claims that traditional belief stems from ancient Greek philosophy more than from Scripture.
It's intriguing that nowadays such Protestant challenges to orthodoxy come with more vigor and originality from Bible-based evangelicals than from old-fashioned liberals.
The evangelical meeting chastised Open Theism with this resolution:
"We believe the Bible clearly teaches that God has complete, accurate and infallible knowledge of all events past, present and future, including all future decisions and actions of free moral agents."
The vote on that was 253 "yes" and 66 "no," with 41 abstentions, but the magazine said most of the "no" voters and abstainers didn't disagree with the substance but disliked targeting colleagues.
However difficult, this is no dry doctrinal debate. It affects how we understand prayer, providence, why evil things happen in this life and the nature of individuals' moral freedom. Those seeking to explore the fight should note four new books:
The latter book is the best place to start. A quick glance:
- Most Moved Mover: A Theology of God's Openness (Baker) by Clark Pinnock of Canada's McMaster Divinity College in Hamilton, Ontario, the latest Open Theism manifesto.
- No Other God (Presbyterian & Reformed) by John Frame of Reformed Theological Seminary, who is anti-openness.
- God's Lesser Glory (Crossway) by another anti-openness thinker, Bruce Ware of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
- Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views (InterVarsity Press), edited by James K. Beilby and Paul Rhodes. This anthology features open theist Gregory Boyd of Bethel College and three critics: William Lane Craig of Talbot School of Theology; Paul Helm of Regent College, Vancouver; and David Hunt of Whittier College.
Boyd and other openness thinkers say God can't know the future perfectly and that he changes his mind in response to human events; they cite Bible passages that speak in those terms. Confusingly, Boyd insists he believes that God is "omniscient" after all.
Jeremiah 18:1-11, an example cited by Boyd and friends, has God telling the prophet to observe a potter fashioning clay and says that if Israel turns from its wicked ways, "I will repent of the evil that I intended to do."
Helm says that while openness thinkers stress Bible passages about God's dialogues with humanity, their opponents cite other passages that teach "all things" aspects of God such as omniscience and that stress his awareness of the future and his unchanging nature.
"Neither side is going to convince the other by swapping texts," Helm concludes. He believes that sinners need promises from God they can utterly rely on. Open theology, he asserts, is too shallow concerning biblical truth about sinful humans' need for redemption and God's power to provide it.
Works for me.
An omniscient God that created the universe in all of its intricacies shouldn't have trouble following a few million decisions, even extrapolated as they are. Unless, you are suggesting that God is really a limited God, rather than a limitless God? That would be a sad suggestion, indeed.
What? You mean all of those highly paid missionaries ensconced in safe luxury hotel suites in the most glamorous places in the world aren't there for the money? /gentle sarcasm
Seriously, I am amazed that anyone would suggest Christians are "in it for the money." We seek God because our soul compels us to.
Have you heard the atheists' answer to this? Even if there is no God, we would invent one because mankind needs one so much. A biology prof "enlightened" me to this philosophy. I don't know the source, but apparently it is trendy among liberal atheists who feel drawn to God and need some reason to explain away the attraction.
By saying prove that time exists, I mean where is the ruler in hand that measures an inch of time?
OUR GOD IS AN AWESOME GOD
HOLY,HOLY,HOLY, IS OUR GOD!!!
This is something I have never experienced myself, I love being alive, I love my family, my friends, my hobbies are a joy to me that never wanes. Even more than all of those gifts, even far more than all those gifts, I love God, my relationship with Him is unique and uniquely made for my personality, as is everyone else's and it gives me great comfort and joy to know that it is never ending.
God has taught me alot of lessons, such as, you are the same person no matter what financial situation you find yourself in, your joy should not depend on your bottom line. More satisfaction is found in one's relationship with God than with any other human you will ever meet. That loving God fills you up and overflows into the lives of those around you. That your failings are even more hateful to you yourself than to God at times because He will forgive you, while many times you can't forgive yourself, to name a few, a very few lessons learned.
God has made no secret of the fact that our time line dimension will end, time has an end, it was given to us as a marker but it only exists in our present flesh form and it will eventually be done away with and we will live forever in the present. So be happy, you have pleanty of time to write that great American novel, or finish that oil painting, or take up the piano.
Here in Florida we have a wonderful missionary organization called Hope Seeds. They provide seeds and agricultural support to missionaries and mission teams around the world. It is one of those many missionary organizations no one pays much attention to but which does much good.
To us, yesterday 'was', to God yesterday 'is'
To us, tomorrow 'will be', to God tomorrow 'is'.
Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
Bump for Hope Seeds.
Hmm, let's say 3000 years ago someone predicted a "man" would come amongst us claiming to be god -- was he predicting Jesus or Jim Jones? Seems to me he could claim his prophecy was fulfilled to believers of either. So it all seesm pretty darn subjective. Not exactly compelling proof, if you know what I mean.
Ha ha ha, that's the same reasoning queers use to explain away homophobia -- and just as lame.
Oh really? I wasn't aware that Jim Jones was born in Bethlehem.
You really have to take the whole fabric of the prophesy into account. It was quite specific. But, then again, your analysis was rather subjective.
May I timidly ask what the purpose is in praying for God's will? Isn't the point of prayer to attempt to affect the outcome? I don't understand praying for God to do whatever he was going to do anyway.
The more specific the prediction, the easier it is to fool the flocks by matching the requirements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.