The Narrow Path Ministries

"Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes." (Matthew 11:21)

I know this topic is way too big to be agreed upon using just one verse, but when I read this verse it seems to refute both Calvinism (God determined every single event) and Open Theism (God can't know the future because of free will choices). To me this verse indicates that God is aware of different possible "realities" based upon choices that are made by men. Am I reading too much into this, or taking this verse too literally?

It certainly seems that God knows of many possible outcomes that are determined, at least in part, by mans choices.

I don't think it does Jeff. From what I understand, Open Theism says that God knows all possible choices.

So what's your take on the fact that God knew if He had done those works, they would have repented.

Is that also saying God chose not to have them repent?

Just a couple of thoughts

Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes." (Matthew 11:21)





Good try but there are plenty of "if's" in the bible and none of them bother Calvinists. They may claim it's just a way for God to communicate to us in a way we can understand. Open Theism can say that God still can predict things in the future because even though the future is unknowable God can still cause things to happen in the future when he wants to.

Thanks everyone for your input on this. I was under the impression that open theism states that God cannot know the future because of the variable of free will choices. If it teaches that God knows all possible outcomes including the one that will actually happen, then I guess I am an open theist and didn't know it! I'm going to have to do a little more study into open theism to make sure I really understand it...

I was under the impression that open theism states that God cannot know the future because of the variable of free will choices





God can't know (according to OT) but he can intervene and cause things to happen. There are a couple of verses in Isaiah that say that, sorry i don't have it handy right now.

Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes." (Matthew 11:21)

Any thoughts on this? It appears Jesus is saying that, had Tyre and Sidon seen the things that those in Chorazin and Bethsaida saw, they would have repented... no?

I assume most would agree that God did not invade anyone's freewill in Chorazin and Bethsaida.

What is your take on this? It appears that God knew how to get those in Tyre and Sidon to repent without invading their freewill. But it also appears that He chose not to show them the things that would cause them to repent.

Any thoughts?

That's to you Jeff... or whoever else.

On Open Theism -

The kind Greg Boyd advocates says (something like, this is my paraphrase) -

"Imagine you're playing chess with God. In this scenario, God, according to Arminianism, has a blueprint wherein He knows every move that will happen during the game. He doesn't make you make your moves. He just knows what they will be. In this same scenario, God, according to Calvinism, not only knows every move in advance, but makes-you-make your every move. Open theism in such a chess game, sees God as knowing-in-advance all possible moves and has a ready made response for each move that could potentially be taken. In other words, God's knowledge is much more highly exhaustive than in Arminian or Calvinistic models."

Greg Boyd describes it as "God's infinite knowledge" wherein God has a ready made response to millions of variables. Whichever "move" anyone makes: God is ready with a response.

A (or THE) key for Boyd is that he sees all future possibilities as having ontotological reality. That is, any and all future possibilities are seen and known as real in the mind of God, though they may never happen.

Here's a link to a Greg Boyd video presentation on "Openness Theology" -
http://tinyurl.com/2e973wy

Thanks!

Hello Bro Rick!

So if the grandkids may visit on Sunday, and we fry chicken and make potato salad on Saturday, we are prepared whether they come or not. We got chicken if they show up, and we eat chicken if they don't; we are ready either way. And we still do not know what they will decide to do.

But God knowing every possible outcome would not enable Him to foresee which outcome would actually occur. He would not be foreseeing the future; he would just be infinitely ready for whatever free agents decide to do.

Now if Boyd had said God knows every possible outcome, knows all possible variables that might affect the outcome and exactly how a free agent will respond to the sum total input of those variables, perhaps Boyd might be onto something. And maybe not.

God bless, Homer

Hi Homer, You wrote:Hello Bro Rick!

So if the grandkids may visit on Sunday, and we fry chicken and make potato salad on Saturday, we are prepared whether they come or not. We got chicken if they show up, and we eat chicken if they don't; we are ready either way. And we still do not know what they will decide to do.

Likening this to what Boyd says about God's infinite knowledge; God knows all possible potentialities for this Sunday. He sees all variables in advance as real--as perfectly as if they were certainties (going back to God's exhaustive knowledge).

Illustration from my life -
I recently applied for a job and got an interview. I really wanted the job and could "see myself doing it." In my mind it was an ontological possibility, something that could become real. But I didn't get the job. So this illustration emphasizes my limited knowledge which, unlike God's, is infinite or exhaustive.

But God knowing every possible outcome would not enable Him to foresee which outcome would actually occur. He would not be foreseeing the future; he would just be infinitely ready for whatever free agents decide to do.

Now if Boyd had said God knows every possible outcome, knows all possible variables that might affect the outcome and exactly how a free agent will respond to the sum total input of those variables, perhaps Boyd might be onto something. And maybe not.

Hmmmm....

Excerpted from Boyd's second vid (power point) -

An Alternative Perspective
God's Sovereignty Incorporates Flexibility
The Open View of the Future (note Boyd doesn't say "of God")
1. God knows all things
2. All things includes future possibilities
--> Some of reality (past, present, and future) is definite and perfectly known by God as such
--> Some of reality (some of the future) is indefinite (possibly this and possibly that) and perfectly known by God as such
(Thus) Possibilities are Ontologically Real
3. God Settles Whatever He Chooses Ahead of Time and Opens Up Possibilities Ahead of Time to Whatever Extent He Chooses
4. God is Infinitely Intelligent and Can Therefore Anticipate Each Possibility as Perfectly As If It Was a Certainty

At this point Boyd (6:40) takes a break to go into how so many do not seem to be able to grasp the above.

Thanks, Homer!
(I know I'm somewhat off-topic here, but thought to add some stuff from Boyd)....