Exhaustive Foreknowledge

[Van]

People pushing unbiblical doctrines post claim after claim without reference to where the claims are substantiated in scripture.
Does God constrain our behavior, such as when He does not allow some to believe? Yes. So we are not bound only by our sinful nature, but by all the constraints of the purview God provides. Soil #1 in Matthew 13 had lost the ability to understand the gospel, due to the practice of sin, but Soils 2, 3 and 4 were also sinful but had not lost the ability to understand the gospel.

Scripture says God's knowledge is beyond our ability to fully grasp or measure, but it does not say or suggest it is infinite. That claim arose from a poor translation. (Psalm 147:5 - compare the KJV to the ESV) Scripture says God knows all about the thing or things in context, but does not say God knows all about everything, since He remembers no more forever our forgiven sins. God does declare some things that will happen in the future, and then He fulfills those declarations by making what He declared happen by intervention.

 

[JesusFan]

People pushing unbiblical doctrines post claim after claim without reference to where the claims are substantiated in scripture.
Does God constrain our behavior, such as when He does not allow some to believe? Yes. So we are not bound only by our sinful nature, but by all the constraints of the purview God provides. Soil #1 in Matthew 13 had lost the ability to understand the gospel, due to the practice of sin, but Soils 2, 3 and 4 were also sinful but had not lost the ability to understand the gospel.

Scripture says God's knowledge is beyond our ability to fully grasp or measure, but it does not say or suggest it is infinite. That claim arose from a poor translation. (Psalm 147:5 - compare the KJV to the ESV) Scripture says God knows all about the thing or things in context, but does not say God knows all about everything, since He remembers no more forever our forgiven sins. God does declare some things that will happen in the future, and then He fulfills those declarations by making what He declared happen by intervention.

Were all prophetic events fixed in the future to happen then, or can God change them when her gains "further knowledge?"

 

[Van]

Were all prophetic events fixed in the future to happen then, or can God change them when her gains "further knowledge?"

Comprehension seems beyond the capacity of the chronic poster. Did I say or suggest prophetic events were simply the declaration of parts of a fixed future? Nope. Does God change events to bring about His prophetic events? Yes. When God responds according to a conditional covenant, i.e. God relents due to human repentance, does that mean God changed? Nope!!!!!!

 

[JesusFan]

Comprehension seems beyond the capacity of the chronic poster. Did I say or suggest prophetic events were simply the declaration of parts of a fixed future? Nope. Does God change events to bring about His prophetic events? Yes. When God responds according to a conditional covenant, i.e. God relents due to human repentance, does that mean God changed? Nope!!!!!!

Did any prophecy given to us in the Bible require God to update it and modify it based upon Him now having further insight and understanding?

 

[Silverhair]

Did any prophecy given to us in the Bible require God to update it and modify it based upon Him now having further insight and understanding?

​

God's foreknowledge would say no. Remember God is omniscient so knows all things. His foreknowledge indicates that He knows all the free will choices man will make. He did not have to determine what those choices would be in order to foreknow what they would be.

If God had to determine all the choices man would make then that would remove all responsibility for those choices from the man as the man could not override what God had determined that he do.

So while God foreknows all that will happen He does not have to cause it to happen.

 

[JesusFan]

​

God's foreknowledge would say no. Remember God is omniscient so knows all things. His foreknowledge indicates that He knows all the free will choices man will make. He did not have to determine what those choices would be in order to foreknow what they would be.

If God had to determine all the choices man would make then that would remove all responsibility for those choices from the man as the man could not override what God had determined that he do.

So while God foreknows all that will happen He does not have to cause it to happen.

But he can at anytime choose to determine and causes what comes to pass

 

[Silverhair]

But he can at anytime choose to determine and causes what comes to pass

Then that would negate His foreknowledge. Remember it is your calvinism that says he determined before creation all things that would happen so no changes allowed.

According to your calvinism He has even determined that I write just what I have written.

But since that is not the God we see in scripture your calvinism has to be wrong.

 

[DaveXR650]

But he can at anytime choose to determine and causes what comes to pass

Then that would negate His foreknowledge. Remember it is your calvinism that says he determined before creation all things that would happen so no changes allowed.

@Silverhair. Calvinism, like free will theology has a range of things it says. Basic Calvinism says that some things God determines directly that they will be because he will directly cause them to happen. Other things Calvinism says are known to God as things that will happen as a result of creatures acting freely and events unfolding as they will under the natural course of nature. Those things God allows or prevents or modifies as he sees fit. Because of that all things are said, in that sense, to be ordained or decreed.

Decreed is not too strong of a word because once in God's mind that is the way it will be so to speak, it is now going to happen which means it will not happen any other way. Therefore the future can be said to be set or determined by God - yet God allowed true free will decisions by men to occur. You can accept that and still believe that man is acting according to his own free will.

To go so far in free will theology, so that you won't even accept the determinism as I have outlined above requires that man's free will be the ultimate and overriding determinate cause of everything. And this requires, whether you like it or not, that God have no true ability to predict the future in any way because the fact is any man at any time and anywhere during the unfolding of the future could forever alter the future by his actions. This has to be so if your autonomous free will really is the proper explanation of things.

To constantly go after a supposed inconsistency in Calvinism while ignoring this glaring discrepancy in free will theology is absurd. William Lane Craig, who obviously is not a Calvinist knows this which is why he is intrigued by Molinism or middle knowledge. You are left with some kind of magical way God can infallibly know what the final choice of a free will will be without having any oversight or sovereignty over the choice. This is impossible. To say that God is outside of time and sees all would work except if you truly believe that there is not such thing as prophesy or future at all - it is all "now" in reality. There is no evidence that that works either, apologies to CS Lewis.

Your free will theology is not really a theology at all. It is what we as humans start with. With no concept of future or sovereignty or prophetic pronouncements by a deity, just the fact that your deity has enough raw power to in some sense get his way. That is a good place to start in societies where the idea of abstract thoughts are new in themselves but it is ridiculous to do like some groups are doing today and acting like something so primitive is somehow closer to the truth of God when in reality it is only closer to the truth of man's development of a concept of God. God was making unalterable prophetic pronouncements about man by the 3rd chapter of Genesis. It is up to you as a believer of the sovereignty of man's free will to explain how God could do that without having some real time sovereignty that actually works, rather than just magically somehow "seeing" the future. A future which by your own demand must be totally random.

 

[JesusFan]

@Silverhair. Calvinism, like free will theology has a range of things it says. Basic Calvinism says that some things God determines directly that they will be because he will directly cause them to happen. Other things Calvinism says are known to God as things that will happen as a result of creatures acting freely and events unfolding as they will under the natural course of nature. Those things God allows or prevents or modifies as he sees fit. Because of that all things are said, in that sense, to be ordained or decreed.

Decreed is not too strong of a word because once in God's mind that is the way it will be so to speak, it is now going to happen which means it will not happen any other way. Therefore the future can be said to be set or determined by God - yet God allowed true free will decisions by men to occur. You can accept that and still believe that man is acting according to his own free will.

To go so far in free will theology, so that you won't even accept the determinism as I have outlined above requires that man's free will be the ultimate and overriding determinate cause of everything. And this requires, whether you like it or not, that God have no true ability to predict the future in any way because the fact is any man at any time and anywhere during the unfolding of the future could forever alter the future by his actions. This has to be so if your autonomous free will really is the proper explanation of things.

To constantly go after a supposed inconsistency in Calvinism while ignoring this glaring discrepancy in free will theology is absurd. William Lane Craig, who obviously is not a Calvinist knows this which is why he is intrigued by Molinism or middle knowledge. You are left with some kind of magical way God can infallibly know what the final choice of a free will will be without having any oversight or sovereignty over the choice. This is impossible. To say that God is outside of time and sees all would work except if you truly believe that there is not such thing as prophesy or future at all - it is all "now" in reality. There is no evidence that that works either, apologies to CS Lewis.

Your free will theology is not really a theology at all. It is what we as humans start with. With no concept of future or sovereignty or prophetic pronouncements by a deity, just the fact that your deity has enough raw power to in some sense get his way. That is a good place to start in societies where the idea of abstract thoughts are new in themselves but it is ridiculous to do like some groups are doing today and acting like something so primitive is somehow closer to the truth of God when in reality it is only closer to the truth of man's development of a concept of God. God was making unalterable prophetic pronouncements about man by the 3rd chapter of Genesis. It is up to you as a believer of the sovereignty of man's free will to explain how God could do that without having some real time sovereignty that actually works, rather than just magically somehow "seeing" the future. A future which by your own demand must be totally random.

Unless one holds to very high Calvinism, hyper Calvinism, then God has not just been a fatalistic Deity, or preplanned and determined directly and caused all that will happen. as that makes us little robots always just doing as our programmer created us to be doing all of the time.

And would make God into loving to watch humans just wag war, kill, rape main etc, basically makes out God to be actually Satan

 

[JesusFan]

Then that would negate His foreknowledge. Remember it is your calvinism that says he determined before creation all things that would happen so no changes allowed.

According to your calvinism He has even determined that I write just what I have written.

But since that is not the God we see in scripture your calvinism has to be wrong.

The Holy Spirit made sure all that the Apostles wrote in the canon of the NT books were inerrant, and yet did not dictate to them as mere robots!
And only extreme high Calvinists hold to God determining directly and causing all things, read some Calvinistic Systematic Rheology to show that Humans do make what they desire decisions to do, even while God fully Sovereign still

 

[Silverhair]

Unless one holds to very high Calvinism, hyper Calvinism, then God has not just been a fatalistic Deity, or preplanned and determined directly and caused all that will happen. as that makes us little robots always just doing as our programmer created us to be doing all of the time.

And would make God into loving to watch humans just wag war, kill, rape main etc, basically makes out God to be actually Satan

If you do not like the God that calvinism presents then you should hold to the God we actually see in scripture. The one that has given man an actual free will. I do find it odd that calvinism wants man to be held responsible for his sins yet say he can not make the choice to turn from those same sins and trust in God.

The reality is that man either has a free will or he does not. And since God holds man responsible for the choices he makes then we see that God is showing us that man has a real free will not the imaginary free will of calvinism.

 

[Silverhair]

The Holy Spirit made sure all that the Apostles wrote in the canon of the NT books were inerrant, and yet did not dictate to them as mere robots!
And only extreme high Calvinists hold to God determining directly and causing all things, read some Calvinistic Systematic Rheology to show that Humans do make what they desire decisions to do, even while God fully Sovereign still

Then they are admitting that man has a free will. Yet they then say man does not really have one such that he can trust in God.

That is rather odd as trusting in His son so one could be saved is the reason God sent His son in the first place. So if God did not give man a real free will, which even the lesser calvinists claim, then He was being disingenuous when He said He desired all to come to Him so as to be saved.

Will say one thing for calvinists, they do have a odd way of understanding scripture.

 

[Silverhair]

@Silverhair. Calvinism, like free will theology has a range of things it says. Basic Calvinism says that some things God determines directly that they will be because he will directly cause them to happen. Other things Calvinism says are known to God as things that will happen as a result of creatures acting freely and events unfolding as they will under the natural course of nature. Those things God allows or prevents or modifies as he sees fit. Because of that all things are said, in that sense, to be ordained or decreed.

Decreed is not too strong of a word because once in God's mind that is the way it will be so to speak, it is now going to happen which means it will not happen any other way. Therefore the future can be said to be set or determined by God - yet God allowed true free will decisions by men to occur. You can accept that and still believe that man is acting according to his own free will.

To go so far in free will theology, so that you won't even accept the determinism as I have outlined above requires that man's free will be the ultimate and overriding determinate cause of everything. And this requires, whether you like it or not, that God have no true ability to predict the future in any way because the fact is any man at any time and anywhere during the unfolding of the future could forever alter the future by his actions. This has to be so if your autonomous free will really is the proper explanation of things.

To constantly go after a supposed inconsistency in Calvinism while ignoring this glaring discrepancy in free will theology is absurd. William Lane Craig, who obviously is not a Calvinist knows this which is why he is intrigued by Molinism or middle knowledge. You are left with some kind of magical way God can infallibly know what the final choice of a free will will be without having any oversight or sovereignty over the choice. This is impossible. To say that God is outside of time and sees all would work except if you truly believe that there is not such thing as prophesy or future at all - it is all "now" in reality. There is no evidence that that works either, apologies to CS Lewis.

Your free will theology is not really a theology at all. It is what we as humans start with. With no concept of future or sovereignty or prophetic pronouncements by a deity, just the fact that your deity has enough raw power to in some sense get his way. That is a good place to start in societies where the idea of abstract thoughts are new in themselves but it is ridiculous to do like some groups are doing today and acting like something so primitive is somehow closer to the truth of God when in reality it is only closer to the truth of man's development of a concept of God. God was making unalterable prophetic pronouncements about man by the 3rd chapter of Genesis. It is up to you as a believer of the sovereignty of man's free will to explain how God could do that without having some real time sovereignty that actually works, rather than just magically somehow "seeing" the future. A future which by your own demand must be totally random.

After reading this a couple of times what I see is that, for you, it all comes down to God has to determine all things because if man had a real free will that God could know nothing.

Have you forgotten He is omniscient, He foreknows all the free will choices that man will make and because He does He can actually tell us what is going to happen in the future. WLC is wrong when he runs to molinism. That would require God to have to learn new things and be surprised by what man does.

What I see with most of the "calvinist's" on this board is that they agree with free will to sin but just can not accept the fact of free will to turn to Christ. Even you have pointed out that many of the old time calvinists said man had to choose to trust in Christ or be lost.

You say that free will theology is not really theology but that is what we see in scripture. Where calvinism came from is not in doubt, Augustine drew from his pagan philosophy and incorporated it into his Christian views. This in turn was carried forward by calvin and as we see it is still presented to this day.

 

[DaveXR650]

After reading this a couple of times what I see is that, for you, it all comes down to God has to determine all things because if man had a real free will that God could know nothing.

Have you forgotten He is omniscient, He foreknows all the free will choices that man will make and because He does He can actually tell us what is going to happen in the future. WLC is wrong when he runs to molinism. That would require God to have to learn new things and be surprised by what man does.

Look, I have no problem if you want to say God knows all our free choices and leave it at that, with no attempt at explaining how that could be. As long as you have no problem with a Calvinist saying God decrees everything yet does not violate man's free will. I'm serious. That is fine and we are not required to figure all this out.

What I notice is that you demand that you be allowed to state your beliefs, with no attempt at explanation, yet demand that Calvinists explain the mystery that they hold to your logical satisfaction. All I am pointing out is that a free will theology has unreconcilable inconsistencies, which apparently is OK with you while at the same time you won't accept that in Calvinism.

 

[Silverhair]

Look, I have no problem if you want to say God knows all our free choices and leave it at that, with no attempt at explaining how that could be. As long as you have no problem with a Calvinist saying God decrees everything yet does not violate man's free will. I'm serious. That is fine and we are not required to figure all this out.

What I notice is that you demand that you be allowed to state your beliefs, with no attempt at explanation, yet demand that Calvinists explain the mystery that they hold to your logical satisfaction. All I am pointing out is that a free will theology has unreconcilable inconsistencies, which apparently is OK with you while at the same time you won't accept that in Calvinism.

The explanation for free will is the bible. Is God omniscient or not? Can He have total foreknowledge or not?

See Ephesians 1:13, Romans 10:9-11, John 3:18, Romans 10:13. If man does not have a free will than what do these and other verse like them mean?

Why would God do this if all those to be saved were already picked out before creation. Romans 10:21

If as you say "God decrees everything yet does not violate man's free will" you will have to explain how man can have a free will when everything is decreed by God? Can man override the decreed will of God? If so then that is not the God we see in scripture.

I have seen many calvinists make the claim that free will has many inconsistencies that can not be reconciled. Care to expand on that and point our a few.

Of course I have a problem with a Calvinist saying God decrees everything yet does not violate man's free will. That is a totally illogical concept. But you and other calvinists do not seem to have a problem living with that inconsistency.

If you are comfortable with it then carry on as it would seem that God has decreed/determined that you think that way.

We will continue to disagree on this but it is an in family one.

 

[DaveXR650]

If as you say "God decrees everything yet does not violate man's free will" you will have to explain how man can have a free will when everything is decreed by God? Can man override the decreed will of God? If so then that is not the God we see in scripture.

As I explained above, God decrees everything and yet man has a free will. You are demanding that a Calvinist has to satisfy you as to how that works or as you would say, Calvinism is false and inconsistent. I say you also cannot explain how God can truly predict something that involves human activity and will occur in the future without guaranteeing the event will indeed occur by either actually or potentially exercising his sovereignty. There is no other way to predict the future if it involves men. The fact is that in both cases we agree on what is happening. That being that God is sovereign, God will work out things according to his promises, and man has a free will. But it's also true that you can't explain how that works any better than a Calvinist. Just saying God knows everything won't do because your definition of free will requires that a man must be able to change his mind and do the other all the way up until the time of the actual predicted event.

Of course I have a problem with a Calvinist saying God decrees everything yet does not violate man's free will. That is a totally illogical concept. But you and other calvinists do not seem to have a problem living with that inconsistency.

So like I said above that is our explanation and it is no less logical than your assumption that God can know ahead of time exactly what a man can do according to a free will decision when at the same time your definition of that free will contradicts this being possible - if the man truly can choose the other option or choose differently then it could mess up any ability to really "know" something ahead of time.

Everybody reading this should put on their thinking caps for a moment. How do we make predictions? Two ways. We have knowledge of set patterns and to the extent these things remain the same we use math. Thus we predict eclipses, tides and so on very accurately. The other way is that we know we can make what we predict happen. As humans we are limited but the closer the event we predict and the simpler the thing is we predict the more accurate our prediction is. I say I'm going to stand up in 5 minutes there is a 99.99% chance I'll be able to pull that off. If I say I'm going to do that 10 years and 22 hours from now the odds go way down because I'm a human and aged.

God, being much smarter (like in all-knowing) and much more powerful as well as being the creator still predicts things the same way because that is the way he has created reality to operate. So God also can predict an eclipse, and he could use math but what is really the big difference? He created the moon, the Earth and the Sun and so not only does he predict but he sovereignly made this happen as such.

Now in the case of a free will creature like men, God can indeed almost get perfect predictive ability by knowing a lot about how we operate. But the problem is that to some extent, it's because he made us as such. So there you have sovereignty intruding into Silverhair's idea of perfect free will that by definition cannot be infringed upon by anyone, even God, even though he's the creator. But even with that, the fact is like above, when something really matters, like if something has been promised to occur because God has said so, the only way still to 100% guarantee that it will happen as predicted is if God sovereignly makes it happen as such (at least to the extent of ensuring the free will decision indeed ends up being what it's supposed to be). And the problem with that is that is directly violates the supreme autonomy of the type of free will these guys demand in order to be real free will.

Bottom line is that this type of autonomous free will does not exist. We have free will, and lots of it, but it's impaired, messed up, and ultimately remains under the sovereignty of God.

 

[DaveXR650]

All you really need to remember is that "exhaustive foreknowledge" cannot be perfectly known without sovereignty and the ability to "make is so" also being present. The causal part of this, the power exerted, can vary depending upon man's free will decisions and secondary causes but God must remain as the giver of final permission for anything to be truly known ahead of time. The Calvinistic explanation of this in it's moderate form like it's listed in the confessions, is a reasonable and logical way to explain the concept of man's free will and God's sovereign right to unfold his plan for the universe.

Hyper-Calvinism won't work because it contradicts what God has revealed about his own nature in scripture in that he does not make people sin. Free will theology doesn't work because it does not take into account revealed scripture about how defective our free will is and also for the reasons we just explained, that a true freedom like they demand simply cannot be predicted if it is truly autonomous.

 

[Silverhair]

As I explained above, God decrees everything and yet man has a free will. You are demanding that a Calvinist has to satisfy you as to how that works or as you would say, Calvinism is false and inconsistent. I say you also cannot explain how God can truly predict something that involves human activity and will occur in the future without guaranteeing the event will indeed occur by either actually or potentially exercising his sovereignty. There is no other way to predict the future if it involves men. The fact is that in both cases we agree on what is happening. That being that God is sovereign, God will work out things according to his promises, and man has a free will. But it's also true that you can't explain how that works any better than a Calvinist. Just saying God knows everything won't do because your definition of free will requires that a man must be able to change his mind and do the other all the way up until the time of the actual predicted event.

So like I said above that is our explanation and it is no less logical than your assumption that God can know ahead of time exactly what a man can do according to a free will decision when at the same time your definition of that free will contradicts this being possible - if the man truly can choose the other option or choose differently then it could mess up any ability to really "know" something ahead of time.

God can and does indeed have total foreknowledge of what man in his free will will do. That does not infringe on mans free will as what man chose to do in his free will is what God in His foreknowledge knew that the man would do. You are describing Molinism which is,in my mind, a false theology.

Now in the case of a free will creature like men, God can indeed almost get perfect predictive ability by knowing a lot about how we operate. But the problem is that to some extent, it's because he made us as such. So there you have sovereignty intruding into Silverhair's idea of perfect free will that by definition cannot be infringed upon by anyone, even God, even though he's the creator. But even with that, the fact is like above, when something really matters, like if something has been promised to occur because God has said so, the only way still to 100% guarantee that it will happen as predicted is if God sovereignly makes it happen as such (at least to the extent of ensuring the free will decision indeed ends up being what it's supposed to be). And the problem with that is that is directly violates the supreme autonomy of the type of free will these guys demand in order to be real free will.

Where I see your error is that you continue to view free will through the lens of Molinism, that my free will actions come as a surprise to God. But again you forget God's foreknowledge. God knows all that will happen because He is omniscient, which is another thing that you seem to overlook. It seems that in your rush to defeat free will you rush past God.

Did God have to make Pharoah harden his heart or did he know that he would do so, did He have to make the Jewish leaders want to get rid of Christ or did He know that they would want to do so to protect their position? God can predict with perfect accuracy what will happen because He has perfect foreknowledge of what man will freely do. Why do you have such a hard time understanding foreknowledge and omniscience.

Bottom line is that this type of autonomous free will does not exist. We have free will, and lots of it, but it's impaired, messed up, and ultimately remains under the sovereignty of God.

How does the sovereignty of God mess up the free will that He has given to man? What the God given free will messes up is the calvinist determinism/decrees.

 

[Silverhair]

All you really need to remember is that "exhaustive foreknowledge" cannot be perfectly known without sovereignty and the ability to "make is so" also being present. The causal part of this, the power exerted, can vary depending upon man's free will decisions and secondary causes but God must remain as the giver of final permission for anything to be truly known ahead of time. The Calvinistic explanation of this in it's moderate form like it's listed in the confessions, is a reasonable and logical way to explain the concept of man's free will and God's sovereign right to unfold his plan for the universe.

Hyper-Calvinism won't work because it contradicts what God has revealed about his own nature in scripture in that he does not make people sin. Free will theology doesn't work because it does not take into account revealed scripture about how defective our free will is and also for the reasons we just explained, that a true freedom like they demand simply cannot be predicted if it is truly autonomous.

Actually you have misstated that. God knows via His exhaustive foreknowledge what man will do in his free will. There is no learning what man has done and then adjusting for it as you seem to think. That is Molinism not biblical free will.

The run to secondary causes just takes you back to God controlling all things which logically would include all sin. Now I know that many calvinists work hard to get away from that but the foundation of calvinism requires it. The reality is that moderate calvinists are just calvinists in name only not in reality. They just can't come to admit it to themselves that calvinism is wrong.

Dave how many times have you said that Owen has said man must believe or be lost?

 

[DaveXR650]

God knows via His exhaustive foreknowledge what man will do in his free will. There is no learning what man has done and then adjusting for it as you seem to think. That is Molinism not biblical free will.

You still have not answered how God has exhaustive foreknowledge. The future cannot be reliably predicted without either using probability or by making it happen the way you predicted. Unless you attempt to answer that you are just stating your conclusion. Molinism is not the answer because it assumes that God is always reacting rather than sovereignly ruling. But Molinism at least shows an awareness that there must be some explanation of how God knows the future if man really has an autonomous free will.

The run to secondary causes just takes you back to God controlling all things which logically would include all sin.

I don't run to secondary causes. They truly are part of God's sovereignty. A soldier draws his bow and takes an impossible chance shot. God used that to kill Ahab as he said. God could have directly smote him but used a secondary cause.

All I am saying is that the soldier had to take that shot. It simply had to be. Yet, he totally wanted to and was not a robot. God's sovereignty and man's free will.

How does the sovereignty of God mess up the free will that He has given to man? What the God given free will messes up is the calvinist determinism/decrees.

It need not. If man obeys the known will of God there is no evidence from scripture that God will abuse his will and there is evidence God is very pleased when a man does that. Calvinism has a low opinion of man's will and nature and thus it concludes that without God's intervention none of us would be saved. Those discussions are of a different sort. All we are concerned with here is how God can know the future choices of men and yet these same men always possess an autonomous free will that could have done the opposite. Something has to give.