Replies

"but I personally love the fact that you now credit Milton with the founding of Open Theism, a view which was not to surface until 300 years after his death. Some guy, that Milton."

You know me, winston. I always revel in correcting historical error! This case is no different.

"Open Theism" is not new at all. It's simply a renaming of an old heresy, Socinianism.

The Socinians, however, and some of the Remonstrants, unable to reconcile this foreknowledge with human liberty, deny that free acts can be foreknown. As the omnipotence of God is his ability to do whatever is possible, so his omniscience is his knowledge of everything knowable. But as free acts are in their nature uncertain, as they may or may not be, they cannot be known before they occur. Such is the argument of Socinus. This whole difficulty arises out of the assumption that contingency is essential to free agency. If an act may be certain as to its occurrence, and yet free as to the mode of its occurrence, the difficulty vanishes. That free acts may be absolutely certain, is plain, because they have in a multitude of cases been predicted. It was certain that the acts of Christ would be holy, yet they were free. The continued holiness of the saints in heaven is certain, and yet they are perfectly free. The foreknowledge of God is inconsistent with a false theory of free agency, but not with the true doctrine on that subject.
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, I.5.8.D

Socinianism, of course was a heretical spliner group during the Reformation period (that means 50 to 75 years before Milton was born, if your name starts with a 'W'.)

OP, perhaps you can look into Milton's and/or Ralston's potential flirtation with Unitarianism (which Socinianism was the precursor to).

I'd look into it, but I am to take my daughter to the "Carousel Mall" shortly!

Jean

The Socinians, however, and some of the Remonstrants, unable to reconcile this foreknowledge with human liberty, deny that free acts can be foreknown. As the omnipotence of God is his ability to do whatever is possible, so his omniscience is his knowledge of everything knowable. But as free acts are in their nature uncertain,

Winston is a Wesleyan they do not generally believe ion Gods foreknowlege..it would interfer with free will too much..so most Wesleyans think God has decided not to see the future (kinnda like closing your eyes to be surprised). So open Thesism is like breathing to them

As my Nazarene Pastor once noted Foreknowledge = predestination

OP, perhaps you can look into Milton's and/or Ralston's potential flirtation with Unitarianism (which Socinianism was the precursor to).

Ralston's Elements were intended to be a 'judicious abridgement' of Richard Watson's Theological Institutes; or a View of the Evidences, Doctrines, Morals and Institutions of Christianity. Watson--and Ralston--both speak out strongly against Socinianism in their works (Ralston less so than Watson because the Socinians were less prevalent in America than in Britain, not to mention that they were dying out by that point, anyway). I don't know about Milton, but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt since Ralston quotes him favorably.

Winston is a Wesleyan they do not generally believe ion Gods foreknowlege..it would interfer with free will too much--Mom

Actually, Wesleyans believe in God's foreknowledge. They just recognize that foreknowledge does not equal predestination, that foreknowledge isn't causative.

Sorry about not getting the stuff on moral probation to you yesterday, Mom--I was out later than I expected, and I'm about to head out again, but I will make an effort to get that to you today.