10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
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.
(This was from a discussion with an open theist advocate. It’s slightly modified for brevity and clarity to help with distinguishing the errors associated with open theism.)
God declaring ‘the end’ or ‘the things that are not yet done’, from ‘the beginning’, that is, ‘from ancient times’ is a general statement. The end or the things that are not yet done refer to more than a single event (v11) as you claim. But God's foreknowledge is not a passive 'crystal ball' session rather it involves his omnipotence.
Open theism and Hyper-Calvinism agree together in error that foreknowledge means determinism (no free will). Isa.46:10-11 refer to God's determinate counsel AND foreknowledge (Ac.2:23)- which are not the identical same thing.
Open Theism means God is ignorant and is 'crunching numbers' statistically speaking. Open Theism is a diminution of God's glory. In reality, God knows from the beginning even what people will think in the latter days. (Ezek.38:8, 10) But he doesn't make them think everything they think. (Jer.19:5, 32:35) You stay with a context first before letting other texts interpret it. The context has it 'the end’ is ‘the things that are not yet done’ from ‘the beginning’, that is, ‘from ancient times'.
Also, you should be careful to not speak irreverently about God (blaspheme) with statements as if "God could predict everything, and He would be pretty bored". Is he "bored" with himself in eternity past? And created out of a need for entertainment? God humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven. (Psa.113:6) Projecting your own presumed boredom onto God is not wise- Isa.55:8-9. Likewise, use caution with God's foreknowledge comparing it to human, so you don't end up with a god you see in the mirror, an empiricist and statistician.
Spend time proving your assumption 'foreknowledge means determinism' rather than asserting it as a foundation.
If God’s thoughts are new to himself and our thoughts are new to him, he cannot be said to know all his works from the beginning. (Act.15:18) Nor could be said to declare the end or the things that are not yet done from the beginning or from ancient times. (Isa.46:10) He cannot know how he will respond to us if he cannot know how we will act.
And in Open Theism His understanding would not be infinite. (Psa.147:5) His thinking would be from an infinite past set of new thoughts to the awaiting of an infinite set of future new ones. And without all contradiction, to traverse an infinite set is a contradiction.
To make the simple observation that in the verse, ancient times = the beginning. Ac.15:18- Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. James is saying 'Here is a fulfillment of prophecy, because God has foreknowledge from the beginning of creation.' If he knows what He will do, he must know what we will do.
Using your reasoning with the concept of 'infinite', they would not have understood 'everlasting' either. They would have been like the Mormons who define 'from everlasting' (Psa.90:2) as 'from a finite past'. However, the idea of eternity is declared night unto night. (Psa.19:1-2, Gen 15:5) The creation instructs all people everywhere at all times of his Eternal power and Godhead, so they are without excuse. (Rom.1:20)
We know this present moment that to traverse an infinite set is a contradiction. Thus, there is an absolute "the beginning of the creation". (Mk.10:6, 13:19). So, when Open Theists combine time and eternity together, they commit a demonstrable fallacy. So, again "Is he "bored" with himself in eternity past? And created out of a need for entertainment?"
Everyone "must call to mystery" eventually, as you say, even you. Do you know where you appeal to mystery in Open Theism? Again, prove that foreknowledge must mean determinism. As a simple analogy, I can watch a recorded ball game which has a fixed ending, yet all the plays and players were free.
Gen.22 doesn't contradict foreknowledge. God is outside of time and manifested within it (and to a greater degree in the incarnation). Within time he interacts with people dynamically acting and reacting. God can't judge people for what they potentially can or might do (that would be unjust) he can only reward them for what they actually do. The knowledge in 22:12 is as an actualized judgable work (Jam.2:21), not an unforeseeable, unpredictable act. (Compare Gen.15:13-16) Let the text say what it does. The beginning= ancient times. The end= things that are not yet done. This is literally what the verse states. You had to leave the text to make 'the beginning' NOT the beginning.
God can foreknow something that would occur potentially (They will deliver thee up- see the passage below) but doesn't happen if he intervenes (David escaped). So, foreknowledge doesn't mean the same thing as predestination.
1 Sam.23:10 Then said David, O Lord God of Israel, thy servant hath certainly heard that Saul seeketh to come to Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake.
11 Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hand? will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard? O Lord God of Israel, I beseech thee, tell thy servant. And the Lord said, He will come down.
12 Then said David, Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul? And the Lord said, They will deliver thee up.
v13 ...And it was told Saul that David was escaped from Keilah; and he forbare to go forth.
Your caricature of what I said regarding Gen 22 is closer to a straw man fallacy (slander) than a refutation. I did say "The knowledge in 22:12 is as an actualized judgable work (Jam.2:21), not an unforeseeable, unpredictable act." (Compare Gen.15:13-16 the same understanding applies here- God foreknows but does not judge it until it is manifested.) But to help clarify, God “inhabiteth eternity” (Isa.57:15), what you call "some imagined timeless void". But note the present tense of the scripture; and not ‘inhabited eternity past and will inhabit eternity future’. Time began with "the beginning of the creation" as previously stated. In the beginning (time) God created heaven & earth (space & matter). To combine time and eternity is a demonstrable infinite regress fallacy; one of the erroneous foundations of Open Theism.
I also pointed out that conceptions of infinity and eternity are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made, such as the innumerable stars which induce the idea of the infinite. (Psa.19:1-2, Gen 15:5, Rom.1:20)
I agree we need to carefully think through these things. Regarding Isa.46:10, I would think 'the beginning' coupled with 'the end' would be "the beginning of the world" (Ac.15:18). As previously stated, he knows what he will do because he knows what we will do. But even if you make it God declares the end of whatever from some obscure beginning of an unknown event, you are facing the same problem of foreknowledge. The LORD says "My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure"; his council employs his foreknowledge (Ac.2:23 as previously stated "which are not the identical same thing").
On Gen 22 again, we can't assume we are just "anyone on the face of the Earth... with no preconceptions of God". We have God's revelation of himself to work with. I'll grant you that if anyone who has no regard for God's revelation read just Gen.22 they will agree with you. But, the natural man cannot discern these things. Precept must be upon precept. (Isa.28:10) Since God's thoughts are higher than ours, we should consider them more deeply.
You should consider reversible claims before employing them. 'Nowhere in the Bible does it state that God DIDN'T create time.' "The beginning of the creation" is when time began. "from the beginning... have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth". (Isa.40:21) "from the beginning... and beforetime" (Isa.41:26) "the beginning of the world". (64:4) "in the beginning of his way, before his works of old... from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was". (Prv.8:22-3) To assume there were previous beginnings prior to "the creation" would need reasons while we do see “from everlasting, from the beginning”. The beginning preceded by everlasting. There must be an absolute beginning if we are in the present since you cannot traverse an infinite series of past events. It is a contradiction. In short, there must be an absolute beginning.
Therefore, God exists independent of time and not subject to it; rather it depends upon him. He is eternal and inhabits eternity as the I AM. My analogy holds because knowing the outcome does not prove the actions were not free. Actually, it proves the point that a known fixed outcome does not indicate determinism (refutes Open Theist assumption). Again, you must prove foreknowledge means determinism and not assume it. And again, irreverent statements like "God is a prisoner of His foreknowledge...He is helpless" should be rejected. Is God a prisoner of his nature? I trow not.
Comments