OPEN THEISM BY JOHN SANDERS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 лют 2023
- Complete videos are available on the St John's Timeline, which was relaunched in Autumn 2021. It comprises of over 200 full videos with improved subtitles from leading philosophers and theologians. You can subscribe for £22 (£15 concessions) per year. Institutional subscriptions are also available. stjohnstimeline.org/
Open Theism, and I am very new to this, appeals to me because God becomes active. His benevolence, love and hesed are not pre-fixed. He participates in the affairs of humans, both as provider and director. This falls right in line with how he is characterized in the Bible...engaging, responding, revealing, withholding...even out-witting the rebels who would throw it all in disarray.
Lord, bless this humble journey towards you and may we never assume to understand your ways that are not ours.
A very good summary of open theism. I debated for a long time with pastors on the problems with foreknowledge. Calvinism just seemed evil in terms of the character of God, but it was consistent within itself, and Arminianism had too many logic flaws, and it always thought that if foreknowledge is true Calvinism is the only logically consistent option. A well executed and concise summary of the position.
Knowing the future and causing it are not the same. Jesus knew Peter was going to deny Him three times. He didn't cause Peter to do it. Judas was prophesied about in the Psalms. Don't you believe in the prophecies in the Bible?
@@bobbyadkins6983 believe in prophesies but I also think there is a reason they are vague. There are a lot of prophesies that is not fulfilled die to things changing. With exhaustive foreknowledge hope do you account for that? I don't think you see the argument that if there is linear foreknowledge that means my son that I will commit teen years from now was already set in place before my parents where born. Free will no longer exists.
@@HansJansenRSA please read my comment again. This didn't do away with Peter's freewill. It just proved Jesus knew what he was going to do.
@@bobbyadkins6983 I understand your comment but I fear that you do not understand mine, and maybe that is ok.
@@bobbyadkins6983This isn’t the issue, but is a common misconception. The issue is not one of causation but of logic.
Open Theism is a more robust, explanatory, less problematic, biblical, coherent free will relational theism than the alternative models of providence (Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Process Thought).
Well done, Dr. Sanders. Theological (biblical) and philosophical (coherent).
Bravo! Amen and amen!
It’s nothing of the sort. It has massive problems giving a consistent, coherent account of the ontology of time. It reads the bible like a fundamentalist when encountering passages it agrees with, and like a liberal when it doesn’t. It rots away at any meaningful theology of the cross, reducing it to a mere reaction. And it is pastorally disastrous, with no actual good news for those experiencing suffering and pain, valourising both from one side of its mouth whilst decrying them from the other.
I will, however, grant that it is more consistent from its premises than molinism or Arminianism; open theism is truly Calvinism’s mirror. However, panentheistic process theology is MUCH more consistent than open theism again - especially the popularised kind touted by Boyd et all.
This is the most sound idea of monotheism, and I would probably be an open theist myself, if I were a monotheist and not a polytheist.
You're a polytheist? Ew
@@dubbelkastrullI think he meant a Trinitarian? 3 gods in 1? Who knows.
@@joshuab2437
That wouldn't be trinitarianism.
The trinity does not teach that there are 3 distinct Gods.
I'm just waiting for the Calvanists to arrive. 🍿 🍿 🍿
Or indeed, anyone within the reasonable bounds of orthodoxy.
@lectorintellegat
You think separating foreknowledge from determinism is reasonable?
This is really interesting, but just one suggestion. Try not to end every sentence by whispering. You start every sentence with a normal volume, but then gradually end every sentence in s sort of whispering mumble. It makes it hard to listen to without constantly adjusting volume. Just trying to help you make better videos on the future. Love the topic.
I'm sure this has been explored, but I wasn't really hearing it here. Could open theism know the future in that God is able to bring about his desired outcomes through controlling the present where desired. Thus, born in Bethlehem, raised after 3 days ... this can all be believed in as certain because of God's ability to control the present to bring certain prophesies to come about?
"The Lord opened Lydia's heart to respond to Paul's message!"
Acts 16:14
When did God decide to open Lydia's heart!
From all eternity!
Why does God open some hearts and not others so they will respond to the gospel?
Nobody knows but God is not arbitrary.
"First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and then to the Gentiles, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and demonstrate their repentance by their deeds!"
Acts 26:20
[From all eternity!]
Wrong. Nobody is chosen before eternity. Ephesians 1:4 and Acts 13:48 do not mean what you think those verses are saying.
Lydia was already a worshipper of God before God opened her heart. Lydia satisfied God's condition.
"Nobody knows"?
Read these verses
1 Chronicles 28:9; 2 Chronicles 15:2; Proverbs 8:17; Jeremiah 29:13; Isaiah 55:6
God makes Himself known to those who seek Him
This is the most biblically and philosophically consistent position.
So when Jesus says so that scripture may be fulfilled. He was just guessing?
To fulfill the Scripture means 'so that the purpose of the Scripture can be fulfilled'. The primary purpose of the Scripture is to instruct in righteousness (Psalm 119, 2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Perhaps the verse you are looking for is "so that prophecy can be fulfilled". Divine prophecy is God's given plan in advance that He Himself will cause to happen.
God is an Open Theist Interventionist. The relationship between God and humans is like a boss and employees. The boss delegates tasks to the employees in which the outcome of the tasks are not decided by the boss, however the boss at anytime can take over the tasks of the employees. Sometimes God uses incompatibilist intervention to cause prophecies to happen.
God is powerful. He causes prophecies to happen.
Nothing catches God off guard. Nothing takes God by surprise.
Did you get that from the Bible?
@@dubbelkastrull We can't do anything with Him enabling us, giving us the power to do so. Nothing can happen without His power. The Bible prophesied what certain ones would do and it came to pass. How could God know some things some people would do and not all things that all people would do? And if God can predict what people will do, how could He not also be able to predict all other things that would happen as well? There's lots of scriptures that tells of God's ability to predict the future. Not one unconditional prophecy will ever fail.
@bobbyadkins6983
Yeah scripture says some things are prophesied to happen, not all things.
@@dubbelkastrull So you think God only knows of some things that are going to happen but not all?
@bobbyadkins6983
God knows what can be known.
If the future is not determined, then there is not matter of fact of how it is "going to happen".
My position is that God is always free, but if the future is settled and He knows all His future thoughts and choices He is unable to do otherwise, meaning that He’s not free.
?
@@bobbyadkins6983 , Alright, again. If you know everything that is going to happen tomorrow you can only do what you know you are going to do. That is NOT freedom, that's bondage. If our preferred doctrine shackles God we can know it is wrong.
@@garyh2100 God is perfectly free to do whatever He wants. Just because He knows in advance what He is going to do doesn't change the fact that it's exactly what He would have done even if He didn't know in advance. He's not in bondage. He does what He pleases and when He pleases. Knowing in advance doesn't change His desires. He always does what is right. He never does anything wrong. That's not being in bondage either.
@@bobbyadkins6983 I completely agree that "God does what He pleases, when He pleases." That right there is prima facie evidence that the future is not settled
@@garyh2100 You are going on human reasoning instead of the Bible. God is not in bondage because He knows what He is going to do in advance. You are in bondage in trying to make sense of it with your finite human brain.
What a deterministic denial of determinism. 😂
This really denies God's foreknowledge of future. Calvinism is on one false end, then is open theism. How on earth can you take prophecy seriously in this belief? If God is merely making educated guesses about most future events, that undermines biblical truth of God knowing everything in the future. Everyone needs to understand that God's foreknowledge is not causative. God does respond and react with human beings but He can also know what will happen for certain, 100% accuracy.
I do know folks have answered this before but Jesus said Peter WILL deny Him. There is no way open theism is true
Nicko. You non-Open Theists always use arguments like this, not realizing you believe that God is too stupid and weak to deal with the free will of mankind.
The exact relationship between the future and God is explicitly stated in Isaiah 46:
11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.
Here God says He can speak of a future event, then bring it to pass. God did not predetermine the event would happen on its own, neither is this a knowledge claim, that God knows the future. Rather it explicitly says that God brings things to pass by His actions.
Back to Peter. Do you not know that God knew every word, thought, and deed of Peter over his entire life? If you had that kind of knowledge, you could probably have made that prediction too. Note God was also active in the night, causing roosters to crow and prompting maidens to ask questions. The maiden could even have been an angel in disguise.
Do you worship God? Or that massive crystal ball you imagine Him to have?
The dynamic omniscience view denies that God has "exhaustive definite knowledge of future contingent events." The Bible contains texts in which predictions about the future come to pass as well as texts where the predictions do not come to pass. Any view needs to explain both sets of texts. I substantively address these texts in my The God Who Risks though I could not do so in this brief video introduction.
Jesus did not just say Peter would deny Him, He said Peter would deny Him thrice!!!!
@@oladimejimakinde5160
Jesus was not giving an unconditional prophecy to Peter. Rather Jesus was giving a conditional prophecy to Peter.
At the last supper, Peter told Jesus he wanted to follow and die together with Jesus. Jesus told Peter not to follow Jesus to the trial. God does not want this to happen. Imagine the theology confusion should Peter die together with Jesus at the cross. Some Catholics today believe Mary is a co-savior of mankind with Jesus.
When Peter insisted on going together with Jesus to die, Jesus gave an ultimatum to Peter along the line of "If you insist on following me when I told you not to, you will deny me (as God will override Peter)".
John 13:36-38
36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.
37 Peter said unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy sake.
38 Jesus answered him, Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.
At the last supper in John 13:36, Peter was commanded not to follow “YOU CANNOT FOLLOW ME”. But Peter insisted, so Jesus was sort of conveying “You will deny me 3 times if you disobey My command not to follow”.
In Luke 22:54, Peter disobeyed the command not to follow.
Luke 22:54
Then seizing him, they led him away and took him into the house of the high priest. Peter followed at a distance.
In Luke 22:56-61, the prophecy of denial is accomplished as God mind-controlled Peter to deny Jesus when Peter stubbornly disobeyed the command in John 13:36.
Without Peter following Jesus to the trial, the denial would not have happened. The prophecy of denial in John 13:38 is a conditional prophecy when all the data of John 13:36-38 and Luke 22:54-61 are put together.
Peter had a chance to avoid the denial had Peter obeyed Jesus' command not to follow Jesus to the trial
When God mind-controls, human responsibility is taken away. In Isaiah 10, God mind-controlled Assyria to attack Jerusalem. Then God found fault with Assyria and punished Assyria. God found fault with Assyria solely for their pride, God did not find fault with Assyria for attacking Jerusalem. In fact, God was upset that Assyria claimed credit for being able to successfully attack Jerusalem. When God mind-controls to actualize a plan, God takes the credit. God did not mind-control Assyria to be proud. God mind-controlled Assyria to attack Jerusalem. For the action of attacking Jerusalem, God did not find fault with Assyria because of the divine law of “the court must not punish anybody who was forced to do an action” Deuteronomy 22:25-27. Because God mind-controlled Assyria to attack Jerusalem, there is no human responsibility in this attack.
Likewise, God did not find fault with Peter for denying Jesus. God found fault with Peter for disobeying the command in John 13:36 "Don't follow Jesus to die". If God had permitted Peter to be a "hero" and allowed Peter to die by Jesus' side at the crucifixion, then that would have created a condition for a massive theological chaos. God mind-controlled Peter to deny Jesus, to avoid this chaos. This mind-control is also to teach Peter a lesson "If you want to make yourself look like a hero at the expense of My command, I will embarrass you".
7:32 bookmark
WOW. What an incredible way of making God sound so much less than what He is. The Bible teaches He is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think. Maybe this guy should go back and read all the prophecies of the Bible for a start and sincerely pray for understanding.
The fundamental issue is an ontological one involving the future. What is the future like? Is it settled? Or is it open?
@@ewallt God's foreknowledge doesn't do away with our free will. God knowing our free will choices we will make doesn't stop them from being free will.
@@bobbyadkins6983 This is misunderstanding the issue. The issue is a logical one, not one of causation. The issue is an ontological one, not an epistemological one, which is where the misunderstanding is. Is the future settled? That’s the issue. If it’s settled, then God knows it as such. If it’s unsettled, then God knows it as such. It’s not whether or not God knows, but what God knows.
Here's some scriptural support.
Verses - future is not completely set in God's foreknowledge.
Genesis 2:19 NKJV - Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam 👉to see👈 what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.
Exodus 33:5 NKJV - For the LORD had said to Moses, “Say to the children of Israel, ‘You are a stiff-necked people. I could come up into your midst in one moment and consume you. Now therefore, take off your ornaments, 👉that I may know👈 what to do to you.’ ”
Jeremiah 18:11 NKJV - “Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the LORD: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and 👉devising a plan👈 against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.” ’ ”
Matthew 24:20 NKJV - “And 👉pray that your flight may not be in winter👈 or on the Sabbath."
Matthew 26:39 NKJV - He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, “O My Father, 👉if it is possible👈, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will.”
God's mind conforms univocally with what He has revealed in His Word. It's not locked in right now to seeing everything as "will be" or "is". God’s foreknowledge is dynamic and includes also the truth about what “might be” or “might not be”. This is called - dynamic omniscience.
1. Was God waiting to see what Adam would call the animals, to know what they would be called?
2. Was God waiting to see if Israel would take off their ornaments to know what He would do next?
3. Was God saying He was devising a plan which means making decisions in His mind not made before about the future.
4. Did Jesus affirm the disciples' prayer could effect the setting of the date of Jerusalem's fall, indicating Jesus' believed it might not yet be set?
5. Did Jesus pray about possible changes that could be made in God's will because He knew such changes were indeed possible?
The answer is an obvious "yes" to all those questions which are based on the clear meaning of those texts. If anyone thinks those texts don't clearly show those self evident implications it must be because they are biased against the idea of the future being able to work out more than one way.
********
The underlying issue in foreknowledge is if one is willing to believe that there are truly changes taking place in God's mind in His knowing a "before" that then becomes known as an "after" and a "might be" that then becomes known as either a "will be" or a "could have been".
Calvinism rejects that such change in God's mind exists before or after creation. Arminianism rejects that the idea of "before" creation means "before" and illogically accepts that changes in God's mind exist and don't exist at the same time. Molinism believes logically that some kind of change existed in God's mind before creation but which cannot happen now after creation.
Only Dynamic Omniscience offers the idea that God's mind corresponds with the truth and sequence revealed in His Word univocally. An event declared as "will be" was known only as "will be" in His mind. Once it happened, it became known as "fulfilled". Those declared as "might be" are only known as "might be". He will freely choose to cause or permit one "might be" to change in His mind to a "will be" and another "might be" into a "won't be/could have been".
The idea the future is limited to and locked in to working out only one way is a falsehood... or that changes happening in God's mind is imperfection is also a falsehood. God's Word counters clearly those falsehoods. And God's mind cannot believe falsehoods as truths.
Why would God say "Perhaps" if He wasn't confirming future possibilities do exist in His mind and that He was thereby denying that all is predestined? He would be lying to say "perhaps" if He already knew the outcome was opposite.
per·haps /pərˈ(h)aps/ adverb:
"used to express uncertainty or possibility."
4 Divine "Perhaps" in Scripture - Hebrew: אוּלַי֙ (see position of this word in brackets)
Jeremiah 26:3 NKJV - ‘Perhaps everyone will listen and turn from his evil way, that I may relent concerning the calamity which I purpose to bring on them because of the evil of their doings.’
Jeremiah 36:3 NKJV - “It may be [Perhaps] that the house of Judah will hear all the adversities which I purpose to bring upon them, that everyone may turn from his evil way, that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin.”
Ezekiel 12:3 NKJV - “Therefore, son of man, prepare your belongings for captivity, and go into captivity by day in their sight. You shall go from your place into captivity to another place in their sight. It may be [Perhaps] that they will consider, though they are a rebellious house.
Hosea 8:7 NKJV - “They sow the wind, And reap the whirlwind. The stalk has no bud; It shall never produce meal. If [Perhaps] it should produce, Aliens would swallow it up."
Was God uncertain? Yes, otherwise He is lying if He already knows what the outcome will be.
If I told you, “Perhaps my son will go to your church on Sunday”, while knowing for certain he and I will be going fishing, I would be lying to you. Right?
I believe the mind of God corresponds exactly and truthfully with His Word. His Word teaches clearly a future with some things set already to work out one way and many other things possible for Him and man to exercise free will concerning. His mind knows both the set things and the possible things as they presently are... and He knows them perfectly, set or not yet settled.
The thoughts in His mind also conform exactly to reality. The things once known as future by His predetermination now are known as past, after they happen. And the things once known as possible and undetermined now, after they happen, are now known as events that did happen or as counterfactuals that could have happened.
And God is certain that all the future possibilities are still possible. 😉
God had to say it that way because our minds don’t have the ability to understand that He actually knows everything before it happens, unless of course our minds have been renewed in which case we readily recognize that none of those verses actually mean what they say 😵💫😵💫😵💫
@@garyh2100yes, I've heard that response a lot. God, in their view, wasn't capable to explain Himself as clearly as today's "anointed" scholars who boldly say it's obvious He meant the opposite in some of those verses that contradict their theology! 🤔
Prayer is another one. Will God do something different than He otherwise would have done because we ask Him to? If the future is settled, our prayers can have no power in influencing God.
@@ewallt very true... God’s answers to prayer help mold the still flexible future that exists in God's mind!
Three great examples -
Isaiah 38:5 NKJV - “Go and tell Hezekiah, ‘Thus says the LORD, the God of David your father: “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely 👉I will add👈 to your days fifteen years."'"
… adding is a change in the plan.
Matthew 24:20 NKJV - “And pray that your flight may not be 👉in winter👈 or on the Sabbath.
… the date of the fall of Jerusalem and the flight from it was able to be altered by prayer.
Exodus 32:11,12,14 NKJV - Then Moses pleaded with the LORD his God, and said: “LORD, why does Your wrath burn hot against Your people….Turn from Your fierce wrath, and relent from this harm to Your people." So the LORD relented from the harm 👉which He said He would do👈 to His people.
...God changed His plan in answer to prayer.
James 5:16 NKJV - ...The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much.
@@brianwagner3651 Good examples. Psychologically, and in terms of having a relationship, it makes a huge difference if you can influence the other party to do things, and if you believe that’s the case. When we pray “nevertheless not my will, but thine be done” that’s a very important and meaningful statement if God will actually do what we ask Him to, as we’re saying in effect “This is what I want, and I know you’re inclined to do the things I ask for, but I realize I may be asking for something I shouldn’t (Hezekiah is an example), so please override my desires with your wise counsel as needed”, a mouthful, but that’s the idea one has if one believes God actually answers prayer.
Does God know all the future possibilities exhaustively? I guess you’re saying yes.
If God knew all possibilities exhaustively those possibilities would have originated in His mind prior to originating in the minds of the human actors. God is not the author of sin. Therefore, he did not foreknow the sins that happen, nor did He imagine a myriad of sins that do not happen.
This is an area of disagreement among Open Theists. Some believe God knows all possible futures exhaustively, which is the version I learned. It’s how Boyd describes it. But, as with other belief systems, there are differences of opinions regarding certain points. What all Open Thesists agree to is that the future is not settled, and that the fundamental issue is not one of epistemology but of ontology, which is to say, the reality of what the future is like is the fundamental issue.
My greatest problem isn’t with the reasonableness of this perspective, but rather the ostracism it would get me if I proclaimed it too openly.
It’s because it makes God into a creature.
… and who wants to be ostracized like Jesus?
You make God into your own image
If you think the future is alresdy existing un some sense today then you are already dead and buried in some placecand sense and beyond that
🤣🤣🤣🤯!!!
Open Theism is like the Easter bunny: kinda cool but doesn’t exist.
Calvinism (and the Biblical-Classical Synthesis from which it arises) is mere ontotheology and perforce idolatry. Read Franz Rosenzweig (_Star of Redemption_, e.g.) and Emmanuel Levinas (_Totality and Infinity_, e.g.). Christianity needs to look back to its roots in Judaism, which understands God as relational, and to reevaluate its spurious Hellenistic borrowings, which reduces God from a Who to a What.
@@karlsengupta7185 no one mentioned Calvinism. Repent of your heresy.
Open theism is an idea, just like any other theology. Ideas exist in people’s minds. Therefore, open theism does “exist.”
Whether or not it is true is the question. I happen to believe it is.
Good argument. 🙄
@@AuthorDanKent oh, you mean like, “look biblical language is always and ever literal so God CANT know the future!”
You mean that kind of argument, the one that open theism literally lives and dies on? The one that makes open theists read the bible like fundamentalists? The one that - if they’re consistent - would lead to a God with literal pinions and feathers?