Why I Am An Open Theist | Open Theism Series | Part 1 | Jesse Morrell

[@B-mang]

This has helped me answer so many objections I've had from hearing catholic people preach about original sin and the inability to choose to NOT sin (as it's in our very nature) that it has greatly drawn me closer to the Bible like never before because open theism makes so much SENSE it's unbelievable how intuitively right it feels. How can I be created as a predetermined sinner and be banished to hell??? How can I have free will yet NOT be able to overcome sin?? Now I understand the bible so much more, thank you for this video.

[@bibletheology]

Someone asked, "Jesse, does God foreknow If you (or me) will be ultimately saved?" God knows if you are presently saved or not but the fact that names have been written into the book of life after creation and the fact that names can be blotted out of the book of life shows that it is not a foregone conclusion but an ongoing development.

[@a.k.7840]

This is evidence against the Calvinistic doctrine of Preservation of the Saints in my opinion. I do believe that no one can take your salvation from you, however you can give up your salvation which fits nicely with the Bible and with what Mr. Morrell has stated here.

[@kirilhristov9024]

Repent from your heresies Jesse

[@sanctifiedbytruth4364]

I've seen implication in scripture of taking someone's name out of the book of life like when Moses asked God to blot him out for the sake of the Israelites, and in Revelation when Jesus said to him who overcomes I will not blot his name out of the book of life, but where are the verses that say someone was added or actually removed after creation. I believe in Conditional Security but confused about the whole book of life thing.

[@NoahHolsclaw]

the open theist god is weak compared to the all-powerful god of the bible

[@rayjacobs1146]

@@kirilhristov9024- Amen Kiril!

[@Bigchickens]

“declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,'” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭46:10‬ ‭ESV‬‬

[@rob5462]

Yep, greed God has pre-ordained the end from the beginning that all things will be recapitulated in Christ (Eph. "That, He should be the head of all things"). However, the text you quote has nothing to say of the myriads and myriads of events between the beginning and that end. More Calvinistic logical fallacies drawn from Biblical texts.

[@Avzigoyhbasilsikos]

@@rob5462 aren't u a Calvinist

[@rob5462]

@@Avzigoyhbasilsikos no not at all

[@goalking7778]

@@rob5462 Rob i think i agree with you but I just want to check. What you mean is that God knows the end from the beginning, how He wanted to do the work of salvation and His profecies because He himself would make them to happen?

[@bearistotle2820]

@@rob5462 It's not just Calvinists who have a problem with this idea.

[@wpankey57]

A really good introduction to Open Theism. I was an Arminian but now I lean toward Open Theism. It makes more sense and has lots of Biblical support.

[@tubulartopher]

I'm a *semi-open theist.* I believe that God, being all knowing, is able to see the infinite possibilities that are not certanties while at the same time seeing that man's curiosity and cognitive progression leads them inevitably into phases or "eras", which are certainties. The length of these eras or when they begin or end is dependent on the choices us humans make. The era in which Jesus comes back is something God in heaven knows, however the day and time is dependent on the choices humanity makes in our free will. That's my view at least. Through Christ I'm open to hearing everyone's thoughts and perspectives.

[@Hambone3773]

Ever watch the science of probabilities within large groups? It's not determinism but it's eerily close.

[@tubulartopher]

@@Hambone3773 I have! I agree that it shows many parallels to determinism.

[@BandyAndysExcellentEssays]

Listening to Jesse on open theism reminds me of Acts 6:10 "And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke."

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

Open theisms easy to resist. Its a great logic thought experiment to come up with God in this manner, Open theism. Its simple not the God as he has described himself in the bible. Just a God fashioned after ones own reasoning, like any Greek or Roman thelosophy attempting to aim at the truth but falling apart from what we'd call Christianity as revealed in the Bible.

[@emilesturt3377]

I used to be an Open Theist... now I'm back to the "Arminian position"... The problem is in all this, is that we are tending to view God as a big man Who's "looking forward through history"... I'm convinced that, from both Scripture and logical necessity, God is both outside and inside time. It is ALL before Him and present to Him. For sure Scripture reveals God giving us very real options as He "descends" to our level (we have to acknowledge "anthropomorphism's to some degree within the texts) "blessings or cursings", "life and death", which show that our free choices are truly free and not "determined"; yet we can't, or should not, imprison Him within our perception of time / reality, and in doing so, probably creating another "idol" of our imagining. Cataphatic and Apophatic Theology need to be kept in balance... In short, we cannot definitively KNOW that Open Theism is true, so it's unwise to put all ones theological eggs in that basket (though it's an interesting possibility)

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

Calvinist = Big God, knows it all. Arminian = God is subject to man's will. Open Theist = God is a man with the same limits.

[@ohiobluegrass1507]

Player A: Wins a game of chess because they knew in advance every move their opponent was going to play. Player B: Wins a game of chess without knowing what moves their opponent was going to make but is able to react and anticipate. Which of these two is more impressive? I’d say B.

[@jasensargent6176]

“If freedom is an attribute of the infinite One, a world of contingencies is logically inevitable...The moment you bind him with universal necessities you annihilate his freedom.” - Divine Nescience and. Foreknowledge by L.D. McCabe

[@mresab1997]

Nonsense. Agency is generative, not deterministic. Contingencies are necessary for logical structure, but they by no means confound the generative nature of volition. It’s not causation, it’s generation. It’s orthogonal to the time-like track and projects ONTO timelines.

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

lulz

[@mikefoht2738]

Thank you for not being like so many provisionists who leave open the possibility that the flood of Noah's time could have been a localized flood. This is a truly heretical view of scripture and cannot be forced into the text of scripture. So many apologetics guys think they are so smart in attacking Calvinism and yet they have this huge plank of unbelief in their own eye. I just watched your show on the early church fathers quotes on free will and that was really encouraging as well. God will not always strive with man and he gives us enough rope to repent or hang ourselves. It seems like it is going to be a real long rope but in comparison to what awaits us it is but a breath of time. I am also encouraged that you do open air ministry work. Keep up the good work.

[@campparsonssundayschool7844]

How does the belief or disbelief in OT: 1 Bring me closer to Jesus? 2 Make me a better disciple of Jesus? 3 Help me to be an overcomer?

[@Miskeen-33]

Helps you understand the nature of God, explains the fall and loving nature of God, and explains apparent contradictions in the bible

[@isaacmathews4693]

Great arguments which are based on good reasoning, logic, and theological/doctrinal consistency - according to biblical passages. *SALUTE!*

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

Great logical arguments, a God fashioned after ones own mind.

[@rajsella9969]

God can know anything or everything. But he chooses not to know according to his wishes

[@your_name_here2158]

I just finished the video. I must say I am still skeptical. I'm not a predestination believer. But I would be a free will-Prophecy believer. Meaning I believe that certain events are immovable, but that we do affect how they shake out. But I am willing to change if I see evidence and am convinced. You've given me much to think about. In the meantime, Please pray for me to have discipline and keep studying His Word. Shalom

[@dianehelena]

My first exposure to the subject of Open Theism was when I viewed this video a few years back. I had never heard of the concept. Your arguments are very thorough and thought-provoking. Subsequently, I have seen a lot more on the subject by other open theists. I hadn't given it much further thought until recently when I came across an article by someone named John M. Frame. Amongst other things, he says the following: "How then should we understand God’s “relenting?” For one thing, God states as a general policy in Jer. 18:5-10 that if he announces judgment and people repent, he will relent; similarly if he pronounces blessing and people do evil. In other words, relenting is part of God’s unchanging plan, not a change forced on him by his ignorance." Hmmm.

[@richardbarton6146]

just became a open Theist! I totally agree and see it from Genesis to Revelation. I dont see any inconsistency in this..and scripture interprets scripture.

[@DukeOfMarshall]

I enjoyed the video and how it was presented. However, where is part 2?

[@Brian_L_A]

The neglected third leg of open theism. Excellent presentation Jesse! Some open theologians are lacking for sure, but your teaching in this video is superb. You have well introduced two legs of open theism, logic and the Bible. I have no problem there. However, there is yet another strong indicator of open theism that makes for a complete case. It is quantum physics. To be brief, each microscopic item, from a molecule, down to an atom, down to a sub atomic particle, has utter randomness to it. Even if you could somehow know the precise location and velocity of an atom (that alone is impossible) you could not determine precisely where it will be the next instant nor its velocity then. Now this matters in the real world due to the properties of chaos. Chaos has two characteristics, randomness, and attractors. The best example is the temperature of the weather. The precise temperature of each minute of each day is hard to predict. And as you go forward into the future, you simply cannot with any certainty know the temperature. There are attractors though. One is it is hotter in the day than night, another is it is hotter in the summer than winter. So you will have a pretty good handle on things to at least some level, but never could you know the exact temperature any appreciable distance into the future, despite how much you know of the present. For, there is inherent randomness in even atoms so eventually this unpredictability will work its way out into the real world. This also is known at the butterfly effect. For even the flight of a butterfly across a field will cause minute changes in the weather that days later, will amplify and result in a different weather than if the butterfly didn't fly across that field. Now scientists have measured human brain waves. And guess what? They are chaotic too. Therefore, even our thoughts, our actions have a spontaneity, a non predictable element to them. Why is this? So God can know us as persons. With free will and independence of actions that even He can not fully predict. This is how He can have fellowship with us. Does all this randomness and unpredictability show a limited God? No, rather it is a fantastic creation of His, so that even with an all-knowing God, He can still have a spontaneous, real relationship with creations. It is apparent that God knows all. The Bible makes it clear that He has a perfect knowledge of the past and present. Normally, you would think that God would then be able to predict all the future due to His unlimited intelligence and knowledge of the present and past. But, no, we see that God purposely designed utter randomness into the tiniest imaginable bits of reality to make the Universe and his people refreshing and interesting to Him. We are not robots that He would know all future actions of. So we can see that God created this Universe and us people for his glory and pleasure. Remember, open theism is not centered around mankind's free will or God's limited knowledge of the future, but rather centered about God.

[@estebanmondragon6726]

A brief commentary: the classical Arminian theology believes in the infinite possibilities of the future but, as God is infinite, he also knows the probability of those possibilities. And, as all the probabilities in the infinite are certainties, he can know all the certains possibilities. The philosophy of Leibniz is the best example of this idea

[@Miskeen-33]

Not true

[@emersonphillips1095]

G-d gives us the opportunities of possibilities but G-d is certain of the future, the book of Revelation is a testament to his foreknowledge. G-d warned Ninevah of the inevitable destruction but he gave them an alternative through Jonahs obedience, ultimately G-d knew what they would choose.

[@josiahgil]

I'm not an open theist or calvinist, but I do find a major flaw in this idea of open theism. When Jesus forsaw peter denying him (which is a sin), then according open theism it was predestined, and therefor gods will to have Peter deny Jesus, meaning that Peter was forced to sin. Just because God forsees all things, doesn't mean he predestined all things.

[@ErrolWilliams]

Hi Jesse. Many thanks for an inspirational video. Just a note on the scripture that you quoted in Genesis 22:12. It was not God that said, " Now I know that you fear God", it was the angel of the Lord. 11 But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!”“Here I am,” he replied. 12 “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”

[@TuuPaapiiElCooloh]

The Angel of the Lord is Pre-Encarned Jesus. Genesis 19:24 Exodus 3 Judges 13:22 etc

[@Nardiso]

Man thank you a lot! I've been looking to know about open theism for months, but all I could find is people saying that this is diabolic. I really need to bring this to Brazil. Do you want some help with translations? I could do this for free.

[@marlak1104]

Leonardo, stick with the conservative fundamental preachers. Bruce Ware is an excellent Theologian who explains why Open Theism is rubish. By the way God's not open to heresy He hates it.

[@Doriesep6622]

shut up telling people what to do read and think. You are rubbish

[@bobbyadkins6983]

It is diabolical.

[@Bamifun]

It seems that Open Theism is intolerant of mystery and uncertainty, thus God has to be demoted to the level of man with respect to the breath and depth of His knowledge. I suppose that’s necessary to give a sense of comfort that a finite mind might completely understands the infinite.

[@thepracticalinvestor2386]

@@Bamifun That’s not the reason people support open theism. Open theism is supported because it fundamentally makes the idea of free will truly free and it absolves God of being the creator of evil since creating humans who you know will not accept Jesus, are going to be evil and will be damned to eternal punishment is in itself evil. It’s like if you created a robot that you knew was going to kill someone but you do nothing to stop it, you are at fault since you knew that the robot would do that but you did absolutely nothing. In open theism, you wouldn’t know exactly which path the robot would take meaning that even if you knew of a possibility of the robot killing someone, you wouldn’t be responsible since the robot truly made a free choice and he could’ve gone a different way.

[@89bavaro89]

I'm a former Calvinist and interested in open theism. I don't get (@circa8min) you talk about that a Calvinist wouldn't agree God knows possibilities and options. But I would say, as my Calvinist self, God does know all options but he also knows ones concomitant desires and context perfectly so would know with certainty what one WILL choose. One has the option to eat the cookie or not. God knows, if you DO eat, that you WOULD eat before, but also knows the option to not eat (and all of its contingent possibilities). So, as with your "stick& branch" diagram, the Calvinists, as far as I see it, would also look like a branch but all possible but not chosen possibilities would be a dotted line and the chosen possibility bring solid. If course this is simplified to two options.

[@Hambone3773]

I had the same thought. It wasn't a good example of how an open theist could falsely accuse a Calvinist if denying God's knowledge. It would be better to argue that a God who predetermines everything literally has no thinking to do.

[@Lisa58999]

You are answering so many questions I have had all my life. Thank you.

[@route2033]

You better go study elsewhere this man is deceived and deceiving others

[@dennisdante]

Murphy Itzyue explain, because this judgment is a dumb judgment.

[@MoonPhaze5]

I love this!!! Great teaching!!! Thank you brother! God bless you!

[@fiveSolas879]

He is a false teacher. The Bible doesn't teach what he's spewing. He is a heretic

[@jivenji17]

ilkin engin i guess jessie should have stayed as a criminal selling dope to children if thats what u mean

[@dennisdante]

ilkin engin dont hate! He can’t do anything about it, God made him that way!

[@PastorBillwillard2147]

In the case of Jonah when God said that Nineveh would be destroyed in 40 days Jessie that was contingent upon their repentance at the preaching of Jonah. Yet I still believe He knew the outcome.

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

@Jonathan Singleton Exactly. Open theism, the extra bible thought experiment to come up with a God fashioned after ones own mind. The result of being obsessed with humans having the most powerful will to mold God into less than.

[@williammarinelli2363]

Jonah said Nineveh will be destroyed in 40 days. Then Jonah had a hissy fit when they repented in spite of a message with no mercy extended.

[@bibletheology]

A CONSISTENT believer in free will has to believe in Open Theism because the omniscience or knowledge of God must perfectly correspond to the nature of reality. And to say that we have a free will so that the future has alternative possibilities and yet God foreknows all future events as certainties, is to say that the knowledge of God does not correspond to the nature of reality. It means that God does not know the future as it really is.

[@tofryx]

bibletheology Hi there! A very interesting video I think. Good job! I have heard this claim before, both from you and James White. I don´t see that inconsistency though. Maybe you can expand on it? First let me tell you how I think about these things so you can respond to me; In the Bible it says that God knows the end from the beginning. I would take that to mean that God is outside of time, as aware of what is going to happen as He is of the things that has already happened. In that view, God can see all possible outcomes, including what people will choose and what the consequences of those choices are, and therefore know exactly what will happen. He knows the future, not because He determined the choices, but because He knows all choices that will be made. I think you would agree that after choices are made, only 1 line will remain of the web. The other options are excluded as choices are made. In the end only 1 line will remain, what actually happens. If God knows the end from the beginning He will know what will happen, but the choices that led there were made by free will. I saw your comment below to Richardfriend48. If God sees all from the beginning, He can also foresee what will happen if and when He intervenes in history. He could know it as a certainty that you would be in a car accident if He does not intervene and also for a certainty that you will live if He does intervene. And He knows what He will do, so He knows what will happen. Just as He said to Saul that if He had obeyed He would have established Him forever. But God knew Saul would not obey and already prophecied that the Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah. If calvinists were right, this statement from God would be dishonest; God had decreed His downfall and there were never a possibilty for Sauls obedience. If open theists are right, then God could not have known for certain Saul would fall, making the earlier prediction uncertain. I realise that this is a very complicated matter and I hope I have not misrepresented your view.

[@RichardFriend48]

+bibletheology That is ridiculous! What you said makes no sense! The simple answer is that we have a free will, and God knows the choices we will make, so therefore fully knows the future. Why do you unnecessarily limit the knowledge of God, as if He is not Almighty and All Knowing? Open theism is false and really unnecessary. For what reason would you believe such a doctrine? Of what value is there to limit the foreknowledge of God, when the scriptures do NOT.

[@regankennemore2435]

What do you say to Revelations 17:8?

[@RichardFriend48]

+Thomas Fryxelius Excellent and humble response!

[@MattieMay]

God exists outside of time. He does not need our rules. God knows all possible futures (from our standpoint), and God knows the beginning, the middle, and the end (from His standpoint) simultaneously, because God exists outside of time. We have free will, but to say that God doesn't know what we are going to do places limits on God.

[@bibletheology]

Someone said, "God gives Hezekiah not just a few more years to live, but specifically 15 more years. If God did not know the future, how could He know that it would be exactly 15 years?" I wrote back: God did know the future in that regard because He was the one who predestined or planned it. It wasn't open to Hezekiah's free will so it wasn't "open." God appointed Him 15 years. In Open Theism, there is both openness and determinism. The future is partially open and partially settled. What God has fixed is fixed and what God has left open is open. What God has fixed He knows as fixed and what God has left open He knows as open.

[@Hambone3773]

"He didn't want man to sin. But he knew it was possible." - more like inevitable. A probability factor of 99.9999⁹%

[@codyhelscel9570]

I think we Catholics are kind of in between those two views. We believe in free will and that God is outside of time & space. God knows past, present and future in one moment. It's also why the fallen Angels can't sort of dig their way out of Hell or turn back. They are created differently than humans. One chance is what they had. Also, just because God knows the future doesn't mean he caused it. We Catholics totally agree we have free will.

[@michaelrsaia]

Hi Jesse, Mike Saia here. You say that God said something twice, but it was actually three times: Jeremiah 7:31; 19:5; 32:35 “And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, and it did not come into My mind.” “and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, a thing which I never commanded or spoke of, nor did it ever enter My mind;”“And they built the high places of Baal that are in the valley of Ben-hinnom to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I had not commanded them nor had it entered My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.” Sorry if this is a repeat of something someone else said.

[@bibletheology]

Yes I knew about Jeremiah 7:31 but because it said "neither came it into my heart" (KJV) I didn't include it in my reference. But looking at it now, it is the same Hebrew word as in the other ones so it should be.

[@patrckhh20]

"God does not foreknow all future events." How could anyone even take this seriously? Try all you want, Jesse Morrell, to dress up your de-goding of God with fancy philosophical tricks, but it will never hide the fact that you believe God to be no different than man.

[@cmdaniels1986]

CalvinistOnACouch remember when God said in the Garden: "Adam, where art thou"? According to Open Theism, Adam successfully hid from God.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

Chad Daniels CalvinistOnACouch The reason Christians believe that Omniscience must include knowledge of the future has much to do with the Greek philosophy of Plato. The church has largely adopted the idea that God is outside of "time" and that He created "time" along with the creation itself. This lines up with the philosophers' false Greek gods who were far removed from mankind. Our God is not like this at all. He is shown to be "patient" at times in the Word. If we escape the false teachings of the Greek philosophers regarding time, we will stop allowing it to taint our understanding of the nature of God. Time is not a "thing" to be created. Einstein treated time as a physical object that can "warp", "dilate", and be traveled through both forward and backward. Time is not a "thing" nor is it a "creation". It is linear only and is merely the observance of the series of events within a living soul's perception. Time is a pre-requisite for it's own creation. In other words......time would have to exist in order for there to be a "point in time" for it to come into existence. This is impossible. Therefore, God is omniscient but has in His omnipotence, desired to create free- will beings. The future actions of free will beings is not part of a creation that can be known because the actions are moment by moment....created by the free will being. God knows the things that He plans to literally make happen and that's what prophecy is. The crucifixion proves this undoubtedly. It is a point in history where the Son took on a human nature. Did the Son of God always have a human nature? No. will He continue to have both the nature of God and man for all eternity? Yes. This shows that God operates "in time" just as we do.

[@cmdaniels1986]

contemplate Question.... did God know that the lamb would be slain from the foundation of the world? Question, did God know who would betray Christ before it happened? Question, did God know the method that would be used to kill his son? Open theism, is a blasphemy to the all knowing, all power God.

[@ewallt]

In each of the views, Calvinism, Arminianism and Open Theism, God foresees exactly the same thing. The difference is one of classification, where the first two views would say there’s one definite future which God sees, and the other futures are counterfactuals or middle knowledge, whereas Open Theists would say the whole caboodle is the future.

[@wittwfiii]

Thank you brother, very well done presentation.

[@TrustinJC]

There is a big difference between God knowing what will happen in the future and God causing it to happen. Since God is not bound by time, he is able to know today every event that will transpire in the future. Knowing this however, does not take away from man having freewill. So just because God knows what we will do in every situation does not mean he interfers with our freewill. The problem between the two theologies is rooted in a poor understanding of time, and God's ability to step outside of it. If I had a time machine, I could go 30 years into the future and then say with absolute certainty that my daughter will do such and such a thing on such and such a day. Knowing this though does not mean that I predestined her to do it and that she had no choice in doing it.

[@bibletheology]

TrustinJC The whole idea of "stepping out of time" would itself be a succession of events, a chronological sequence of action, and would therefore ITSELF require that God experiences time. Where would God find the time to step out and in to time? If God were outside of time, He could not step into time, because such would be a "before" and "after" which requires time. God knows the future, not because He steps out of time and takes a peak, but because He predestines future events, knows the hearts of men, and the plans of the devil. But He doesn't know all the future with certainty because it is not all fixed. If God simply knew the future because He was outside of time, He wouldn't make any plans or predetermine anything at all, because He would already know what He Himself was going to do before He had a chance to decide it.

[@MattieMay]

Fascinating discussion. I'll but in with my 2-cents... Both the Bible and science (I think) agree that both space and time have a beginning. So prior to that beginning there is only the infinite totality of God, the creator. There is no space or time, just God, who is infinite. So God must then exist outside of - or dimensionally infinitely higher than - all time as well as space. As for God knowing what God is going to do before he decides to do it, that's a good time-travel paradox, and difficult to wrap my mortal, finite, 3-dimensional mind around, but God is not subject to the same rules as we are. Also, it doesn't seem right to place limits (such as our crude, linear perception of time) on God. It's interesting also to contemplate time as having far more dimensionality than we realize. When we look through telescopes, we have the capability of seeing far into the past and watching events that have already happened in the cosmos *as they are happening*. That's pretty amazing in itself, so why could God not be able to look forward, past our present, considering that He is right there at the beginning of time, and possibly time itself is far more relative and flexible than we perceive it as. Anyway, I'll shut up, but I couldn't help interjecting. :)

[@TrustinJC]

tweck99999 Some good points, and well argued.

[@dustinleitch2587]

+tweck99999 The Bible does not say time has a beginning. It never shows or states that God created time. In fact, if God is outside of time then he is static and cannot act, or create. Because creation itself is a before and after sequence which requires time. God did not create time, time is a consequence of existence in general. Therefore, time has always existed along with God.

[@MattieMay]

Wow, that is really fascinating! I'm going to have to think on that. Okay, I've thought on it!! :) :D So if God created everything but didn't create time... Wouldn't saying that God is bound by human mathematical concepts be too limiting? God is not material in nature and therefore isn't bound by any kind of temporal or human construct that we can imagine. If God can see time from beginning to end, which an omniscient being, I would say, must... then wouldn't it stand to reason that God exists outside of temporal reality as we understand it? Jesus Himself says in Matthew 19:26 "...with God all things are possible." Which I would take to mean that things impossible for humans (in the context, it is being "perfect" so that one can enter Heaven) are possible for God. So God doesn't need time in order to create. It may be something that we humans don't understand, but then we are temporal, mortal creatures. When Paul, in Corinthians, is instructing us to look to Heaven rather than worldly things, he clearly compares the temporal to the eternal, which would suggest that God exists outside of temporal reality: "While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal."

[@JCHarrison91]

How do you reconcile Open Theism with Judas' betrayal and Peter's denial? Both were known by God before they occurred...

[@jivenji17]

They are determined. Over and over again, including in this lecture open theism acknowledged that the future is partly undetermined and some determined like Jesus sacrifice, Judas and Revelation scene

[@Hambone3773]

God made it so by timely manipulations.

[@michellemassacre999]

Wow... great video brother. I started by asking myself about a week ago, if God changed His mind, and now I end up here. Well, glory to God. :)

[@emersonphillips1095]

G-d was telling Jonah and the world that rebellion WILL destroy you, that is a fact and an absolute. Unless your heart is hardened like Pharaoh than your destruction is sure.

[@scotthix2926]

I am so glad Israel did not decide to return to Egypt to be enslaved. That would have spelled disaster for God’s plan. I am so glad that Bethlehem did not get destroyed by Babylon even though it is only 10 miles away.

[@SHANE-fu5hc]

ive been thinking about much of this for about ten years , i felt like i was one of the only ones, now i have resources to explain further on some of my beliefs.. t.y Jesse

[@DMeloMan]

Bible verses that defeat open theism: Isaiah 42:9 “Behold, the former things have come to pass, Now I declare new things; Before they spring forth I proclaim them to you.” Matthew 26:34 Jesus said to him, "Truly I say to you that this very night, before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times." 1 Peter 1:20 "For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world," Romans 8:29 "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;" Ephesians 1:4-5 "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself," Acts 4:28 "to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur." Revelation 13:8 "everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain." Plus all the prophesies in the bible wouldn't hold up under open theism

[@dustinleitch2587]

+DMeloMan All of the prophesies in the Bible did not hold up. Don't you read your Bible?

[@DMeloMan]

Dustin Leitch Counterfactuals

[@dustinleitch2587]

+DMeloMan here is just one although I could literally fill pages with unfulfilled prophesies. You should really make a better effort to understand those with whom you disagree before you go popping off like a fool. For example, Jeremiah prophesied that Jehoiakim would die a dishonorable death. It is said that no one would mourn for him and that his corpse would be dragged around and thrown outside the gates of Jerusalem, left unburied to decompose in the sun (Jer. 22:18-19, cf. 36:30). Not only this, but it was prophesied that no descendent of his would sit on the throne (Jer. 36:30-31). As it turned out, however, Jehoiakim received a proper burial and his son succeeded him as king (2 Kg. 24:6). What are we to make of this? -

[@billjohnson3702]

+Dustin Leitch In 598 BC Nebbacanezer laid siege for a 2nd time in Jerusalem which lasted 3 months. During this time Jehoiakim died and his body was throne was throne outside the city walls to convince the invading armies that he was dead. He was then buried beyond the gates of Jerusalem "with the burial of an ass" (Jeremiah 22-18,19 & 36-30) He was succeeded by his son Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) (Coniah) & (Jechonias Mat. 1-11) who reigned for 3 months & 10 days.........After he was disposed of as king by Nebacanezer his uncle Zedekiah was appointed king, who was yet anther son of Josiah and Jehoiakim's brother. Eleven years later Zedekiah was blinded and placed into Babylonian captivity until his death.. Prophesied by God in Jeremiah 32-4,5. Verified in Jeremiah 52:4-11 .... In accordance with Jeremiah the prophet Coniah, Jer.22-28 aka (Jeconiah). will have no man of his seed sit upon the throne of David. The definition of seed here is to mean all of his FUTURE descendants. This "IS" 100 % historically true. However it is prophesied that Jesus will be given the throne of David. How can this be. David had 2 sons by Bathsheba that lived (Solomon & Nathan the prophet). Matthew chapter 1 is Joseph's decentness through Solomon and Luke 3 is Jesus natural seed line through the prophet Nathan. Joseph adopted Jesus so there was no actual seed but rather kingship by the law of adoption.................. The gospel of Matthew> "Jesus King of the Jews", the gospel of Luke> "Jesus the Son of man", and the gospel of John> "Jesus the Son of God" ......the gospel of Mark> "Jesus the lowly servant".....

[@dustinleitch2587]

Jeremiah prophesied that the body of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, would be desecrated after his death (Jeremiah 22:18-19, Jeremiah 36:30-31). However, his death was recorded in 2 Kings 24:6 where it says that "Jehoiakim slept with his fathers, and his son reigned in his stead.". This is a familiar Bible expression that was used to denote a peaceful death and respectful burial. David slept with his fathers (1 Kings 2:10) and so did Solomon (1 Kings 11:43). On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 36:5-6 states that Nebuchadnezzar came against Jehoiakim, bound him in fetters, and carried him to Babylon. Judging from the treatment Zedekiah was accorded when the Babylonians bound him and carried him away to Babylon (Jeremiah 52:9-11), one might justifiably argue that his body probably was desecrated after his death. Jeremiah, however, predicted that Jehoiakim's own people would be his desecraters, that his own people would not accord him lamentations appropriate for a king, that his own people would cast his body "out beyond the gates of Jerusalem".

[@FutureNotFixed]

In an updated response to dear brother Kerrigan Skelly's 'Why I Am Not An Open Theist', I will confine my comments in this thread to his 'Philosophical' reasons why he is not an open theist (yet). His reason is a straw man argument where he cites as examples from life and Scripture several things which Open Theists readily admit to and therefore do not constitute a reason to reject an open future. His reasons focus on specific examples from human experience (which we know to be sequential) where certain knowledge of the future produces responses of grief and regret. Open Theists do not have a problem with certain foreknowledge in specific cases. The problem is with exhaustive certain foreknowledge and the difference is a huge gulf of difference. Instances of specific certain foreknowledge being consistent with the existence of grief in anticipation does not constitute a valid reason to reject the open view. His reason is insufficient to dismiss arguments against exhaustive foreknowledge. He does not address how we are able to freely make a choice contrary to a course of choosing that is eternally foreseen. Brother Skelly then applied his claim that certain foreknowledge is consistent with grief to Genesis 6 with the flood. But he just barely mentions it and moves on. I would stop him at this passage because if Skelly as a father foresaw with certainty that his own child would commit a specific sin under a specific situation at a specific time, would Skelly attempt to instruct his child thereby putting forth efforts with the expectation to CHANGE the course of the future? All efforts imply the expectation to change the future as far as it is believed to be changeable. Would Skelly attempt to improve the quality of life for a dying relative? Of course! Why? Because we all assume (that's not a bad word) that we can change the future as far as the power we do have. Brother Skelly simply ignores or dismisses that fact. In an open cosmology it is possible for God and angels and man to have specific cases of certain foreknowledge of many events. But in the closed system it IS closed precisely because the certain foreknowledge is EXHAUSTIVE. In a closed system one who sees everything happening with certainty does not feel the grief nor reasonably put for efforts to change the future. In a closed system, in an Arminian one, God saw the violence on the earth in Noah's time but could not make any further efforts to either prevent or to stop the sins of mankind. Brother Skelly wants to retain that God does indeed feel, which is a good reason for Skelly to believe the future is partly open, but such a God cannot exercise freedom to do contrary to the course of what he foresees himself doing. Such a God had the power to prevent such sin as filled the earth in Noah's time, but could only grieve about it until He saw Himself repenting for having made man on the earth and destroying everyone with a flood of global proportions. So we come to the million dollar question for Arminians. In spite of God's grief over what he certainly foresees man choosing, why doesn't God make any efforts other than the ones he certainly foresees himself doing? Why didn't he stop the Vegas massacre? Are you saying he COULD have stopped it, or have let the shooter die in his mother's womb or something, but didn't stop it because God had a purpose allowing it? A plan for it? Once you put a PLAN for allowing or permitting a sin, you have predestination come into play for EVERY sin going back to Lucifer's fall. It's such a slippery slope. How does arguing like that differ substantially from a Calvinist who claims that God doesn't damn the non-elect, rather he chose to predestine the elect because of grace and nothing else? There is no difference between saying God chose not to elect some to salvation and that God chose not to prevent some certain sin because he had a plan for it?

[@enriquemoure2739]

this was a masterful presentation about the difference between contingent and certain events. this position makes man accountable for his behavior, which is a theme supported 100% by the Bible in both Covenants, Rom. 2:6; Psalm 62:12; Jer. 17:10; Prov. 24:11, 12; Matt. 16:27; 2 Cor. 11:15; 2 Tim. 4:14 how could God repay man for his behavior when it was Him Who predestined man's conduct in the first place????? Open theism is supported by HUNDREDS of Scriptures, makes biblical sense and glorifies God's impeccable integrity that forbids Him to behave like a scoundrel, the way Calvinists portray Him. in the insane asylum theology of Calvinism, God predestined every evil event that has taken place in the history of mankind, including the fall of Lucifer, Adam and Eve, the murder of Abel by his brother Cain, plus all the mass murders, rapes, prostitution, thefts, slanders, drunkenness, orgies, fornication, pedophile acts, abortions etc. etc. their view of God is a blasphemous defamation of His character. John Calvin taught that God forces men to commit wicked acts. anyone who agrees with this garbage can't be saved. and for those Calvinists who may say I am misrepresenting Calvin, here are Calvin's words: “The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as HE COMMANDS, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even FORCED to do him service” John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11 “I admit that in this miserable condition wherein men are now bound, all of Adam’s children have FALLEN BY GOD'S WILL.” John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 4 “But since he foresees future events only by reason of the fact that HE DECREED THAT THEY TAKE PLACE, they vainly raise a quarrel over foreknowledge, when it is clear that all things take place rather by his determination and bidding.” John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6 BTW Adam Clarke was also an open theist. read his commentary on Acts 2:23 question for you: why do u use the KJV? there are other Bibles that use the same Byzantine manuscripts as the KJV. the NKJV, KJV 2000, American KJV, WEB, JP Green's Literal Translation. we don't speak like that anymore. besides, God does not repent like man does. God is sinless. He changes His mind, He regrets and relents. I know u know that but your audience DOES NOT. many OSAS sin defenders use the obscurity of the KJV in this issue to teach repentance does not mean to abandon sins. "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not." Jonah 3:10 "Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it." NKJV "God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way. God relented of the disaster which he said he would do to them, and he didn't do it." WEB have u abandoned fellowship with Jed Smock? has Jed repented of his apostasy?

[@twistedtitan5485]

You said a mouthful amd i just want to touch on one part. God repented. And you fell in the trap of modern bibles by saying: God is sinless. Yes God is sinless without spot or blemish. But you need to read that verse in context 5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. God didn't repent because of sin God repented because of a decision that He made Repent means to turn away from something Repent is not synonymous with sin, but that is exactly what all the modern bible versions do. Look up in a KjV every time repent is used the majority of time it associated with a particular event or action... not with sinful behavior God bless

[@enriquemoure2739]

@@twistedtitan5485 did u read part of my comment which actually agrees with you? "God does not repent like man does. God is sinless. He changes His mind, He regrets and relents." KJV uses repent for both regretting and departing from sin in the OT. u are correct. however, in the NT repent, repentance, almost always means to feel sorry for one's sins and abandoning them except in Matt. 21:29, 32; 27:3; 2 Cor. 7:8; Heb. 7:21 where another Greek word METAMELOMAI is used which means regret, remorse. this is what Judas Iscariot felt, not real repentance METANOIA. Jesus quoted an OT passage to describe what repentance means. "The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." Matt. 12:41 this is the OT passage the Lord used to describe repentance when it refers to mankind, (I don't read the KJV but for your sake I will use it here) "And the word of the Lord came unto Jonah the second time, saying, Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee. So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey. And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown. So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, LET THEM TURN EVERYONE FROM HIS EVIL WAY AND FROM THE VIOLENCE THAT IS IN THEIR HANDS. Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? AND GOD SAW THEIR WORKS, THAT THEY TURN FROM THEIR EVIL WAY; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not." Jonah 3:1-10 repentance is an integral part of saving faith. Jesus included it in the Gospel, "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Luke 24:47 NKJV Jesus came to call sinners to repent, "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” Luke 5:32 "But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” Matt. 9:13 the apostles preached it, "Repent therefore of this your wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of your heart may be forgiven you." Acts 8:22 "Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent," Acts 17:30 "testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." Acts 20:21 "but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance." Acts 26:20 "Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?" Rom. 2:4 "For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death." 2 Cor. 7:10 "And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will." 2 Tim. 2:24-26 "The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." 2 Pet. 3:9 yes. repentance means to abandon sin. my point is WHY use a bible version that does not differentiate between God regretting, relenting or changing His mind from man repenting of his sins?

[@Sathvik_Adriel]

it's a sound unbiblical heresy mr.jesse. What a great explanation of lies. to take so much time is not so easy

[@christdiedforoursins8985]

I appreciate the lesson I'm not one to take theology views but most do get propagated so its hard to avoid them,but I know Jesus would not have prayed for another way in the garden of Gethsemane if he knew God could not make another way he prayed 3times.

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

Jesse said their are infinite possibilities. Its Calvinist that say there is only one way. Your reading the wrong bible or taking it out of context. God said there are infinite ways to him in Jesse's copy. All things are possible!

[@laurakosch]

Question: under open theism, where does prophecy fit in? How did God in His word fortell hundreds of events?

[@Bigchickens]

Laura Kakoschke Bc God ordains the future... “declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,'” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭46:10‬ ‭

[@Andy-tf2il]

Sometimes, we see prophecy as being settled and determined by God. Sometimes, we see God putting forth prophecies that are conditional in nature with opposing outcomes.

[@pateunuchity884]

Yes but wouldn’t this lead to an unstable prophetic word because of the influence of freewill beings? I’m sure you’re not saying God meticulously intervenes in these instances and interrupts their choice!?

[@featherrin3540]

probably it's something like, God's plan, something that is His pleasure to do and therefore He will make that come to pass no matter how hard it is. If humans disagree, then just scare them just like when God made Zakaria mute, by that the plans will come to pass

[@Hambone3773]

Prophecy is God telling you ahead of time a particular event he will manipulate into happening. The fact that the prophecies are fulfilled demonstrates his power moreso in addition to his vast knowledge.

[@bonniejohnson1518]

the bible presupposes "living theism" because God is alive, this is known as open theism in the modern era of lingo....all other theologies are known as dead theism, because they manufacture gods who cannot think, change, adjust to the circumstances at hand, show mercy, because they are dead and outside of time..(these gods are the figment of the bottomless pit of mans imagination, ie Plato) which has no life like Jeremiah said ie "dead theism"........ HOWEVER, what dosent change about God are His principles....be blessed Willie & Bonnie

[@rose500]

ince He can foretell the future, God certainly knows the future. Isaiah recorded these words about God: “Remember the former things long past, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, ‘My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure’” (Isaiah 46:9-10). God is the only One who can stand at the beginning and accurately declare the end.

[@donaldcoleman7569]

Blackrose yes but that verse doest take anything away from what jessie is teaching... the Lord does see the outcome of every possibility and he sees the end result of the sinful decision made by mankind.. but all jessie is saying is our decisions and futures aren’t written in stone but are open, on a personal basis.. notice the Lords prophecies never touch on individual as a whole.. of corse the lord did foretell of cyrus allowing the jews to return.. but never interfered with whether Cyrus would personally commit to God or not

[@sarahkuhn1154]

I never thought about open theism as a biblical plausibility until recently . I never believed in Calvinism but I was Armenian and then leaned toward Molinism but even Molinism doesn't solve the problem of evil or determinism . How can you have free will yet be determined ? William Lain Craig's explanations just don't quite make sense .

[@Miskeen-33]

Absolutely true

[@evAngeliis]

The only reservation I have is that Open Theism is labeled as a "new" theological doctrine. And as you know, anything "new" is usually wrong. Calvinism, "Substitution/Satisfaction Atonement", "Pre-Trib" and other such doctrines that have only existed for, at most, a millenia are false doctrines, and one of the telling factors is that they are "new" doctrines. What are your thoughts on this?

[@loganmeyer9283]

Anything new tends to be rejected. When calvinism was first brought into people's ideas a lot of people considered it heretical. It's the same thing with open theism. A lot of people consider it heretical.

[@rob5462]

Not really got the time to consider all that for you for me scripture is overwhelming in support of Open Theism. Something I do not have time to expound but think on it - Open theism is actually essential to a real and living relationship with God. If you are a disciple of Christ you're experiencing this and in practice are an Open Theist. One clear error you have there is your statement about Pre Trib. You may not know of historic pre-tribulation as taught in the 2nd century by Irenaeus i.e. one-time second coming not the secret rapture of modern pre-tribulation doctrine.

[@emersonphillips1095]

Sin leads to destruction, that is an absolute but if one humbles themselves and repents before G-d then G-d will repent from the coming destruction.

[@RichiePGD]

You also can't say God changed His mind if the future is settled and He knows it will happen with certainty. I have had arminians say that to me.

[@thundathunda4310]

Man, you knocked it out the park. Very effective presentation. No way around it. Bang up job my friend!

[@kyloken]

Jesse, I think we should debate this publicly.

[@PastorBillwillard2147]

If God does know all the Possibilities Jessie then God knows the outcome of those possibilities. A man may have many options as far as choices to be made those choice are without any Decree of God then God still knows with certainty the choice that will be made

[@Miskeen-33]

Why would he know the outcome of a possibility if there is no truth value established to said possibility? I mean he could know the likely outcome but your position doesn't make any sense.

[@gecg7393]

What ever YAHWEH as spoke is for our sake, for He creates the day everything there in. when man "creature" tries to put himself above God from the day bound creation, Ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth, putting the creature before the creator who gives everything, on the inside and outside, from the mind and the space the mind thinks in and the doors opened in the mind and the paths thereby, to the ground we are allowed to walk on, knowing not there being judged in there arrogant, self worship, high mindedness, inwardly and outwardly not giving the Glory nor even thanks to God, for God as no respect of persons for the flesh cannot please him, nor the mind set on the flesh to destruction. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

[@mysaviourjesus4134]

Look to Pslams 139,16. David prays hear to God, saying: Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them. How can this be true, when God dosen't now all future events?

[@evAngeliis]

I'm following a similar route to you Jesse. I had never heard of these ideas of Open Theism until I came across your material. Then I found quite a few others also hold to this position. It seems the most logical, and also the easiest to defend against. I do not know how it is possible to logically and coherently defend Future Certainty Knowledge without invoking the god of Calvinism. It does indeed seem that the future is open. Another reason that pushes me towards Open Theism is the inability of anyone who goes against it, to portray it correctly first of all, and then secondly, to show how it is not Biblically supported. The challenges that come up are either: It means your god doesn't know everything, and you cannot explain prophecy. Both of these are easily addressed as they are both strawmen. It is sort of like, if you believe free will, your Calvinist opponents will FORCE you into being an Open Theist, because otherwise you end up agreeing with one of their major schools of thought that drives their false system of error. It is like an Arminian, trying not to be Calvinist, but accepting Total Depravity (even in a modified way). Same error. As much as they have "protested" Calvinism, they are of the same false doctrines and are forced into the same incoherent theological positions. I'm being pushed into Open Theism by those who go against it, as it exposes the fact there is no good argument against it.

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

Its a way that sounds right in mans logical mind. Its probably wrong.

[@preacherjuanligas3327]

God knows everything

[@carlpeterson8182]

I think most calvinists believe that God knows all the things that could happen if different choices are made. Surely items are predestined but that does not limit God from knowing what would occur if choices were made differently. Also I believe that many Calvinists claim a belief in some sort of free choice but that this free choice is not incompatible with predeterminism. So your statements at minute 10 are not correct even if only one of the previous statements about God is true for Calvinists.

[@MoonPhaze5]

All we have is the present moment; moment by moment to be, as we are taught of the word, as acceptable in God's eyes. 1PETER 3:16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.

[@Hebrew42Day]

God knows the choices we make and even the outcome of those choices. [Isa 46:9-10 KJV] 9 Remember the former things of old: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else; [I am] God, and [there is] none like me, 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: How else could He _know_ with certainty that He would have needed to sacrifice the son from the foundation of the world? [Rev 13:8 KJV] 8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. This doesn't mean the gnostic view of determinism is correct. These are two sides of the same coin. God is sovereign _BECAUSE_ man has the ability to deny Him, even those that He's saved like Lot's wife. Lot's wife was delivered from destruction, but warned to NOT LOOK BACK. She ignored God's warning and looked back. God being just had to uphold His judgement of sin. Likewise with the atonement of Christ today. He gives us the free will to choose to obey God, or rebel. If we obey He accounts us as righteous from beginning to end. IF we rebel He will destroy us, and not wash away our sins. God knows who will in the end choose to follow Him and those who will not. He exists outside of time, He is infinite. If God existed in time, along with us - He could not be wherever 2 or 3 gathered in His name. He'd be limited by time and space. He's limited by neither one of those. Likewise, the Calvinist God is limited by time and space as well. Whatever will be, will be.

[@hannijazz3276]

Bible verses need to be interpreted. Any theologian is gonna laugh at you if you justify your position by quoting the Bible only. It's fine if your interpret these verses in this way, but don't be so eager to dismiss other interpretations as false ok?

[@neoturfmasterMVS]

@@hannijazz3276 False hermeneutics, dismiss this guy ;) There is only one correct interpretation, the goal is to obtain to that which is right and abandon folly.

[@RobertMOdell]

Jesse, a century ago, Einstein discovered there is no "cosmic clock". Therefore, the very idea of time is not even a constant to begin with, but a by-product of God's creation. Based on position and speed, events can happen in one order or opposite order. In fact, both space and time bend around a single constant - light. Light! Note: God said, let there be space and time? NO! God said let their be light! The rest of his creation is somehow built around the constancy of light, although we cannot understand how that really works even though we may know various properties of relativity. God not only is outside of time, but there IS NO UNIVERSAL TIME ! Time is instead something experienced in the physical world in a non-constant manner. Only light is experienced consistently in this physical world. Therefore, the future is open from the standpoint of our own observations. But God's standpoint is a mystery, since there is no single past and future from God's standpoint.

[@jamesvanderhoorn1117]

+RobertMOdell I'm with you on time, space and light. I don't get the last two sentences though.

[@RobertMOdell]

+James van der Hoorn Putting it another way, God is outside of time, yet there is no single "time line" for him to observe.

[@SELAHPAUSE]

One scripture that the Calvinist will use is that God works out everything after the counsel of his will they will beat you with that Scripture

[@pimpsarefilthy]

SELAHPAUSE I’m not a Calvinist . What does that mean then?

[@fiveSolas879]

u do realise uve just admitted defeat, by apealing to SCRIPTURE, the foundation of Gods truth revealed to man.

[@Andy-tf2il]

@@fiveSolas879 Incorrect. He was referring to the misuse of a particular Scripture by Calvinists, not whether or not Scripture is the absolute standard of truth.

[@rayjacobs1146]

There are MANY other scriptures to beat Arminians with!

[@Andy-tf2il]

It says all that God accomplishes is “according to his counsel and will,”. Not, however, that all that takes place is God’s accomplishment in accordance with his counsel and will. The Bible is is clear - much of what takes place in this world is not God’s will. Undoubtedly, God detests sin and the suffering, but in all things - including evil things - God is at work to further his sovereign purpose as much as possible. All that God accomplishes is consistent with “his counsel and will” which Paul specifies as centering on acquiring a people for himself who “have obtained an inheritance…in Christ.”

[@TimBarr-e8p]

If it's true that God desires all men to be save as Scripture teaches then it must actually be possible. But if God already knows who will and will not be saved then God's desire to see all men be saved then God is certainly being IRRATIONAL. This would be like a person watching last years world series knowing that team A won but hoping that team B would prevail. That is an IRRATIIONAL ACT. I hold that it is IMPOSSIBLE for God to be IRRATIONAL. Therefore God does not know who will or will not be saved in an exhaustive sense.

[@aaronmonteiro2163]

Jesse do you ever consider debating James White, sooner or later on this issue? I am not a Protestant neither Calvinist nor Open Theist with me being committed to the Catholic Church so yes I am a believer in God infinite knowledge of all truths and untruths. But I just thought it would be an interesting to see an exchange between you and James White. Have you ever extended such an invitation to him to join you on the public forum?

[@rickmendez1139]

Question: If the future is totally open, how does the father know the day and hour of Christ's second coming? Wouldn't it be different possible days and hours contingent upon our choices?

[@donaldcoleman7569]

Rick Mendez jessie never said all things are open, but he said “ not all future events are predetermined “ listen again

[@wardflowers8371]

Just reading (not representing a view) anyone who is the "the primary cause of the action" could know when they were going to do it.

[@pimpsarefilthy]

Dubya- yeah but that has to fit in with other sequence of events such as Jesus birth was caused by god but that sequence of events was exactly 14 generations of his blood line meaning that history and future events all revolve around the one who is predetermining prophecy. Our moves now today is setting the stage for armegedon so our free will choices are accounted for when the father says he knows the day and hour

[@RichiePGD]

It means the Father is in control of when the day and hour will be, not that He can see when it will be for certain. Compare to Acts 1:6-7

[@Jonathan-mr8pz]

That would be one of the predetermined events like The crucifixion etc

[@hillarysudeikis2264]

Just because we have free will it does not mean God doesn’t know the future of everything otherwise prophecies like when The Lord told king Saul he’d die wouldn’t be true now would they? There is a difference between a warning and a prophecy. Warnings do not negate God’s foreknowledge of everything as a matter of fact warnings prove God’s foreknowledge. Why does it have to be either calvinism or open theism? Why can’t it be free will and God’s omniscience?

[@bonniejohnson1518]

many prophecies didn't come true in the bible...they are known as conditional prophecies...God said the kingdom would remain in Saul's family forever, but that prophecy failed...

[@AnHebrewChild]

ERROR at 7:00 Calvinists do not deny God's exhaustive knowledge of all contingencies and possibilities. The Calvinist affirms this. You may find some self-identified Calvinists who will not affirm it, but to represent Calvinists as denying this is an error. Calvinism posits that God comprehends all possible realities, based upon any and all alterations of contingencies, singular or aggregated (which is the infinite knowledge as articulated by open theism), _but also_ asserts that God foreknows precisely which of all these possible combinatory contingencies will infallibly come to pass, by means of his inscrutable foreordination. For a fair representation of Calvinism in its most robust form, I'd refer those interested to Jonathan Edwards' Freedom of the Will Yale Press. This book could be titled "Calvinism: Steel Manned." Even if you're certain you'll disagree, anyone who wishes to be thoroughly-versed on these matters of contingency, volition, freedom, divine knowledge should read it. And you should leave yourself _open_ to some of Edwards' arguments anyways ;) NOTE: I am NOT a Calvinist but studied it in depth for many years as I once classified myself as reformed, attended Orthodox Presbyterian & Dutch Reformed churches, and read more of Calvin, Edwards, Owen, Vos, and the rest of them than anyone would believe if I told them. I should say, this is not the place to argue whether all of the layers of reformed doctrines on God's exhaustive knowledge logically hold together _and_ can be supported biblically. That is another question and not the purpose of this comment. But the truth is, the statement made at around 7:00 is factually in error. ~ Side note: Each of these theological camps, seems to me, are given to misrepresentations of all the others. They all also show an eagerness to charge opposing doctrinal systems of heresy, based upon what they perceive as necessary logical _implications_ of the opposing camp's view, not of the opposing view as it is articulated by its proponents. This also is unfair or, at very least, uncharitable. Any fair-minded observer, regardless of the system they happen to hold, should be honest enough to admit this.

[@jamesvanderhoorn1117]

God IS reality. Everything happens according to His will. We do not determine anything. Choosing between alternatives is the way our mind works, but every choice we make is just things happening to us. It is the future unfolding. It is God revealing Himself. We are prisoners of our ignorance and delusion. We are free in who we really are.

[@joeltunnah]

James van der Hoorn, then why pray, or even worship God at all?

[@jamesvanderhoorn1117]

Because we want to.

[@biblebasics100]

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: God surely planed salvation and the coming of Christ before the creation of man and if Jesus was to meet every prophecy then it had to be planned by a fantastic mind...the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem oh sorry to late you missed that one but ok we will weave it in some how! ( I am not a Calvinist by the way bro) Just finding the teaching not sitting quiet right! Hope this example is helpful..God bless

[@tbuitendyk]

At around 13:00 you are essentially saying that the Molinist perspective is irrational. It seems to me that to make such a claim you would first have to establish that causality can only flow forward in time. Quantum mechanics suggests otherwise, and so if along with QM we grant that free will agent choice can be logically prior to God's knowledge of said choices, then the illogic that you claim about the Molinist position disappears.

[@RichardFriend48]

Is it true God did not predetermine that man would sin, and I agree that He did not want them to sin, but to say that God did not know they would is again saying that God is not omniscient. There is no problem with God knowing something will happen and the free choice of man. That is perfectly consistent, with God, and does not force man to do anything. God just happens to know what man will do.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

RichardFriend48 The reason Christians believe that Omniscience must include knowledge of the future has much to do with the Greek philosophy of Plato. The church has largely adopted the idea that God is outside of "time" and that He created "time" along with the creation itself. This lines up with the philosophers' false Greek gods who were far removed from mankind. Our God is not like this at all. He is shown to be "patient" at times in the Word. If we escape the false teachings of the Greek philosophers regarding time, we will stop allowing it to taint our understanding of the nature of God. Time is not a "thing" to be created. Einstein treated time as a physical object that can "warp", "dilate", and be traveled through both forward and backward. Time is not a "thing" nor is it a "creation". It is linear only and is merely the observance of the series of events within a living soul's perception. Time is a pre-requisite for it's own creation. In other words......time would have to exist in order for there to be a "point in time" for it to come into existence. This is impossible. Therefore, God is omniscient but has in His omnipotence, desired to create free- will beings. The future actions of free will beings is not part of a creation that can be known because the actions are moment by moment....created by the free will being. God knows the things that He plans to literally make happen and that's what prophecy is.

[@RichardFriend48]

contemplate It is not from Greek Philosophers, but from God's Word that we get the concept of God knowing all things, having foreknowledge of all things. Acts 2:23 "this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men." Romans 8:29 "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters." I Peter 1:2 "who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood"

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

RichardFriend48 I don't believe that the word shows God to determine everything. What I find to be most fascinating though, is that Calvinists are usually completely un-moved though they believe that God predestines the bulk of human kind to an everlasting torment. I happen to reject the doctrine of eternal conscious torment and I still think that if God predestined most to a sorry state of an inability to seek God or believe the gospel that it would be cruel and totally unjust. No decent human being would treat their own children like that. So if I hold to the opinion that God doesn't know the future by His own choice, of free will creatures made in His image and likeness, I don't think it diminishes the character of God an iota. Predestination in my opinion greatly scars the character of God to the degree that would make us sick to our stomachs if we found out a mad scientists clowned human beings to torture them. What's worse is that Calvinists think that that brings glory to God. I vehemently disagree.

[@RichardFriend48]

contemplate You are confusing foreknowledge with foreordination, and so does Jesse Morrell. I am not a Calvinist, but I fully understand what they believe, and reject it. I do not believe that God predestines men to hell. God knows who will receive Christ and who won't, but that does nothing to cause it to happen. God draws and the Spirit convicts, but it is up to man to make that choice to respond to God's calling. Man can accept or reject. Man has Free will. It is the perfect balance between Calvinism and Open Theism and it is Biblical. So there is your answer. God knows what our choices will be (foreknowledge), but man has free will to respond or not to God's work in his life. What is wrong with that? Nothing, again, it is Biblical and does not diminish God's character, like Calvinism does.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

RichardFriend48​​​​​​​ What's wrong with that is that it is illogical. Actions of free will creatures are created at the time we create them. We are mini "creators" in the image of God in that in a limited way, we create our future and make decisions that effect ourselves and others with almost infinite and exponential consequence. Since God has chosen to give us this future creating ability, He has also chosen to not know what those decisions will be. If it were possible for Him to know, than those decisions would have to exist in a kind of cosmic data base somewhere and we would then be locked into doing what is recorded in that data base rendering us "not free" and also rendering God Himself not free to change that data base. But if God did change the actions in the data base, now we're back to being again.... not free. There's no logical choice....if we are free to make decisions, than God doesn't know them ahead of time.  I'm sorry but you just can't have it both ways and I reject the "it's just a mystery" argument. 

[@francesvincent7373]

God can know the beginning from the end

[@paulwiley777]

Will God's middle knowledge, for example, saved David from king Saul killing him when David asked God if he stayed where he was at will he die by Saul?, and God said yes if he stayed. So David left the area. If God has middle knowledge about this situation about David, why not everything else in the future? I think the middle knowledge of God goes against open theism.

[@RichardFriend48]

In Gen 6, just because God stated that He regreted that He made man, does not mean that God didn't know they would come to that point. That is a huge assumption, and I believe a wrong one. To think that God did not know that is certainly saying that God is not omniscient

[@bibletheology]

RichardFriend48 Omniscience is knowing all that can be known and knowing reality as it is, not as it isn't. God knew that they might sin because their future had that possibility. If God knew that mankind would sin but created them anyways, how could He then repent of creating them when He sees them sinning? That makes no sense. He sent the flood because sin is not what He created them for.

[@MattieMay]

God created all of time at ONCE. The beginning and the end. We are looking at it from a temporal perspective, but God's love rains down on all of time simultaneously. So God' perspective isn't based in time. It's non-temporal - it's *eternal*. Meaning *timeless*.

[@Brian_L_A]

God and time. To understand this, you need to consider the question, "Can God make a bolder so big that He could not lift it?" There really is no answer to this for it would depend on if His creative ability was greater than His strength or vice versa. I would hazard to say that it depends on the characteristics of the universe that bolder is in. Now, let's extend this idea of the bolder to time. Is it possible for God to create a universe with time as such an integral part of it that even God would have to be in this time He created. Again, what is God's greater power, to create a time encased universe? Or a universe where time is but a river that he could easily pull in and out of and transverse? Now, looking at the Bible, always our first source for theology, we see it explicitly stating over and over that God is in time. And, even prayer makes no sense if God can see the future, for then the future would be fixed and what is the use of praying? There are a few verses that may imply God exists in all time or even out of time, but they only perhaps imply it, such as Isaiah 57:15 where God is said to inhabit eternity. This does not demand that God exist in all times as once. And is easily fulfilled with a God that existed for all time in the past and will continue to exist for all time into the future. Either satisfy this verse. So we can see that theology certainly allows God to be in time. In fact, this is the majority and clear teaching of the Bible. Furthermore, simple logic demands that God be in time.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

Brian A Agreed. The reason Christians believe that Omniscience must include knowledge of the future has much to do with the Greek philosophy of Plato. The church has largely adopted the idea that God is outside of "time" and that He created "time" along with the creation itself. This lines up with the philosophers' false Greek gods who were far removed from mankind. Our God is not like this at all. He is shown to be "patient" at times in the Word. If we escape the false teachings of the Greek philosophers regarding time, we will stop allowing it to taint our understanding of the nature of God. Time is not a "thing" to be created. Einstein treated time as a physical object that can "warp", "dilate", and be traveled through both forward and backward. Time is not a "thing" nor is it a "creation". It is linear only and is merely the observance of the series of events within a living soul's perception. Time is a pre-requisite for it's own creation. In other words......time would have to exist in order for there to be a "point in time" for it to come into existence. This is impossible. Therefore, God is omniscient but has in His omnipotence, desired to create free- will beings. The future actions of free will beings is not part of a creation that can be known because the actions are moment by moment....created by the free will being. God knows the things that He plans to literally make happen and that's what prophecy is. The crucifixion proves this undoubtedly. It is a point in history where the Son took on a human nature. Did the Son of God always have a human nature? No. will He continue to have both the nature of God and man for all eternity? Yes. This shows that God operates "in time" just as we do.

[@ravissary79]

contemplate really this is something that quantum mechanics has shed a lot of light on. Reality is at its basement, fuzzy. It totally rends the Newtonian Calvinist and modernist mechanical view of reality, that all actions have pristinely perfect and absolute reactions. They seem to in the net result (most of the time), but at the basement of matter, that isn't true at all. The actual matter and energy that acts and reacts is far more unpredictable and... squishy. It's a little chaos machine wrapped in a package of order. It's as if the universe itself was wired in a such a way to allow for potentiality to break out. Every action and reaction have that tiny chance of a wildcard getting in there and doing something crazy. This is what Process Theology got right. What they got wrong is everything else (as they pretty much ignored the bible all together). Yeah, Platos good contribution was in talking about how all pure good ideas come from an ultimate mind that thinks them, and that these ideas are, in essence, eternal and perfect... it's a wonderful description, not of the spiritual realm (timeless and unchanging) but of God's mind: pristine, infinite and vastly and meticulously diversified. I happen to actually believe that it IS a condescension of language that God said that someone's actions never entered into his mind. That, I believe is a figure of speech. It's describing emotional shock hinging upon an unsettled event of moral choice that took an unlikely and grave turn, it isn't that God never knew what the possible answer might be and didn't already have a contingency crafted with detailed beauty. SO the "condescension" is like one proposed by Calvin: he seemed to think half of what YHWH said in the OT was pure anthropomorphism without emotional weight), but nowhere near as severe (merely an idiom but with full temporal and emotional impact retained). Like the idea that God "repented" that he did something. It means he changed his mind that something that was a good idea turned out to be as good as he'd hoped in light of what others did with it (it doesn't mean he had real regrets, since all his actions are perfect, but something emotionally like them and it comes from disappointment concerning something of great emotional and value based importance)... so he didn't "repent" of it like you or I would, but it's the best words to describe his feelings of disappointment in trying to describe the loss of what he'd have LIKED to accomplish with his people, but now can't in the same way. He is now thwarted, but he is grieved.

[@rogersacco4624]

See Closer to Truth John Polkinghorne Does God Know the Future ?

[@nicajacob]

predestination and absolute foreknowledge is silly after reading the chronological order of Genesis and arriving to Genesis 6:6 and so on

[@gunngrease9810]

Mind blowing! I love it!

[@thebritbrobain4998]

Open Theism is not the best argument against Calvinism. I do agree that Calvinism is not true in that God does not cause evil, and determinism isn’t true. However it makes total sense to say that God has created humans with free will however He also knows the truth value of every future event. He does not cause the choice, but definitely knows the outcome. Also, you can’t say that every future event is not certain, because any event that does not occur is a non event. And God does not know non events because God does not know absurdities. However God does have knowledge of every future event but God is not the cause of every future event because some events are evil and God does not cause evil.

[@josephgoudreau7425]

How can God know the future if it's not predetermined? He would be guessing predicting, God knows everything he never guesses

[@paulwright7551]

Where did you get the idea that God knows the future? Cause you and Bubba heard someone say that in church one day?

[@granthollandvideos]

He did such a great job with Matt Slick,, well done, and the going out to preach is just so wonderful. Go very very slowly over the premise for yourself, his view of God knowing all,, yet giving free will is only inconsistent if we remove a God who deals with us only through Jesus who comes into flesh, his own creation of space time. Once we see that God deals with us through this God Man,, Jesus, who came in flesh, the problem disappears, and goes from confusion to rest. It was through Jesus,, who is God that space time, nature or flesh was created, he is the key to this puzzle. In this respect of God piecing his creation, is the fault of most of these science fiction theories, but if we look at Jesus, even a child would understand this, because he stays in space time, for now, because faith is now. Confusion here is a fruit, the root is the refusal to deal with Jesus who came in flesh in your own natural here and now, perhaps only in a certain area. It is best to think childlike and simply here, not as time travelling writers. .Him and Calvin make the same mistake, yet his view could still be inside Christianity, whereas Calvin's not. This is because both press ( as time space natural creations, who are in the now of nature) onto Gods foreknowledge, a type of pressure for God to act on it, but this is inconstant with an all powerful God who acts when he wants to, but has chosen to act with us through Jesus who came in the flesh,,. In fact God will not act with man outside of Christ Jesus in the flesh, ie a Jesus who was to come in flesh , Jesus who came in flesh, ie space time and nature, all else is illegal for man to go to God but through Jesus who came in flesh..That old cross is truly the center of the universe... Both are trying to act with God outside of a Jesus who came in Flesh, and so confuse the situation like a science fiction back to the future thing.. He deals with us in time and nature as a man, even though now he is in Glory, yet we act with him as men, and he deals with us as such, He sees and knows all yet has chosen to allow man free will to live his life and make moral choices for life and for the gospel, without placing a power to act on his own certain foreknowledge, either God knows or he doesn't. Yes some things are chosen to be hidden from Jesus's man side and he chooses for us to stay obedient, like the exact time of his return,,, but that does not affect this subject,, because he sent the Chosen one Jesus who is God into time and space and his creation. . Calvin professes himself chosen before Jesus comes in the flesh,, this is outside of Christianity as he has no regard for the cross, it is a cult teaching that goes outside of Jesus in flesh, and so goes onto countless heresies,, and onto twist the character of God, but this is because Calvin refuses to deal with Jesus in space time as God who came in flesh,.Maybe like one of the original science fiction writers, but far from Christain. But Jesse here allows for true free will, and the dealing with Jesus correctly, so no qualms in the gospel

[@florinbirsan2223]

Why do you think @jesse Morrell that foreknowledge of the free choices made by people is a contradiction? Foreknowledge doesn’t have to be Deterministic! I don’t see any contradictions here but perhaps a forced limitation attributed to God⁉️

[@chriswest8389]

Interesting. Your chart for determinism is a line. For every oposite reaction etc.( the angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence.) Line two, is a fractal or a branching tree.each fractal must be in turn different as each of our means and motivation R , by nessesity, diferent. We R all unique.By the way, in contrast, each fractal output must always exceed any input especially when fractal meets fractal ( compound complication) This appears to make CCFs unintelligible. Plus, does this not render molinisms " given what you DID do, you WILL do- again impossible?WE create the situation a new each time. We R proactive here. The situation bends to us. Or, who was that greek cat that said: you cant step into the same river twice".

[@SlavikChiley]

How do you reconcile Psalms 139:16 with the open theism position? "Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them." NASB

[@dustinleitch2587]

+Slavik Chiley He's talking about the days you are in the womb. The entire chapter is a fetology.

[@SlavikChiley]

Dustin Leitch Even if it is only speaking of the days in the womb it is still hard on Open Theism position.

[@SlavikChiley]

Dustin Leitch OpenAirOutreach​ A friend asked me, "If God did not know that man will sin, why scripture saith 'before the foundation of the world was the lamb slain'"?

[@Zacharyimpellicceiri]

+Slavik Chiley it Says slain from the foundation of the world. In another words the animal skins the Lord used to cover Adam and eve and animal sacrifices pointed to the Lord Jesus the And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

[@SlavikChiley]

Zachary Impellicceiri Dustin Leitch​ OpenAirOutreach​ This is the scripture that my friend was referring to. Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was FOREORDAINED BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, but was manifest in these last times for you, 1 Peter 1:18-20 KJV What was Christ foreordained to do? Was it to redeem us? Why would God foreordaine him to do so if the knowledge of man's fall would not be yet existent or yet determined by free will before the foundation of the world according to the Open Theism position?

[@CalamityStriker]

Honestly I think the problem of Open Theism and Calvinism is that they are both working with the same faulty premise: That God's foreknowledge is directly correlated to man's free choices. However, neither the Calvinist nor the Open Theist has ever proven that God's foreknowledge of our choices makes our choices less genuine and less our own or all by God's direct decree. Could it not be that God, who is not bound by time could know with absolute certainty all of our choices and they still be genuinely our own choices? Why limit God with an unnecessary assumption? Many who leave or are hurt by Calvinism slingshot themselves to the other extreme of Open Theism. I think this is faulty and unnecessary. Just because Calvinism misinterpreted Romans 8 and 9 doesn't mean you have to throw out the entire two books as if there is no alternative interpretation of those passages.

[@lordgrindleford]

Terence Jones That's right. I'd put it this way: we do have free will, but it is limited to our preference for good or evil, which God foreknew, but did not fore-ordain, in each of us from the beginning. But we are not free to act out our preferences without God's consent: our actions are entirely pre-ordained by God, from start to finish, with his foreknowledge of us in consideration. Thus our motivations (fore-known but not pre-ordained) are exposed by our actions (pre-ordained). So pre-ordination by God relates to events and times, but not to the leanings of the heart, where God has, in love, given us freedom. This is what I believe the scriptures say. The idea (of open-theism) that God's repentance in Gen6 is to be interpreted as proof of an event in history that took God by surprise goes against reason and scripture. But surely Calvinism is worse, whose god condemns some and rewards others according to his own irresistible power and regardless of anything inherent in man. The Open-Theist's God lacks sovereignty, but the Calvinist's is a monster.

[@jakec1004]

lordgrindleford Ph'nglui mglw'nafh cthulu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtag

[@ricardobach2184]

+Terence Jones In fact, this "GOd outside the time" doesnt solve the problem, just google it

[@dand4485]

Doesn't Open Theism deny the basic non compromising attributes of God? Most every definition i see for it clearly says... "He has made His knowledge of, and plans for, the future conditional upon our actions. Though omniscient, God does not know what we will freely do in the future." Hmm, isn't this complete nonsense? How can God be omniscient but then doesn't know who will be saved. And for that problem Eph 1:3-7 would also be problematic? For the Eph passage "WHO" predestined "who" and "When" was the choice made.

[@swimant0]

I think if you have to vindicate God then you are answering a question that is a wrong question. Therefore you get a wrong answer. Because you answer a question that is based in a fallacy. Wrong question = wrong answer. Also it seems your argument equates foreknowledge with predestination.

[@preachingyeshua]

I just felt like adding that in the book of Jonah, Jesse is presupposing that God said He would destroy Nineveh in 40 days. But the Bible never says that. Please read Jonah and see for yourself. It does not say exactly what God actually told Jonah to preach. So I believe when it comes to the story of Jonah, we don't have all the information. So to answer the question, did God lie. No, because it never says what God actually told Jonah to preach, like I said We don't have the whole story. A couple things to think about. Jesse said God does predetermine some things. Did God predetermine Peter denying Him in Mark 14:27? Because How could the God of open theism possible know that Peter would deny Him not only once, but three times? Peter might never have denied Jesus. Then Jesus would have made a false prophecy. Also in Rev. 6:9-10 How could God possible know that more saints were going to be martyrs. (Because killing someone is a free will choice of a human.) How could God know their would be more martyrs let alone a set number. "And it was said to them that they should rest a little while longer until both the number of their fellow servants, who would be killed as they were, was completed." The last thing I will say is that. The fact that God has emotions and was sad that He made mankind. And all of the other place God gets sad or disappointed in scripture. Is because God is emotional Just like you and me. Take for example the fact that all of us know one of our family members or more than one might die while we are alive. Does that stop us from grieving when they die??? No of course not because we are emotional beings. Look at John 11:1-15 and 33-37. Jesus knew Lazarus was going to die. But what did He do when he died, He WEPT. In John 13:18-21 we see Jesus being troubled in His spirit even though He knew Judas was Going to betray Him "most assuredly I say to you, one of you will betray me." (Side note, How could God know for certain some one will betray him if betrayal is a free will choice of man?) So we see Even though God knows Mans free will choices, He is can still be sad, troubled, etc. When we make those choices. Just some things to think about.

[@donaldcoleman7569]

preachingyeshua your imposing upon the text friend.. we only have the bible as truth.. to go outside of its words and assuming what we think to align with our own ideas is imposing

[@ReapingTheHarvest]

Jonah 3:4 says 40 days. It was prophecy.

[@billjohnson3702]

One might describe time as a necessary by-product of thought and action. Therefore a necessary measuring by-product of God's existence.

[@MattieMay]

+Bill Johnson Time was created at the moment the universe was created. Time flows from the beginning of creation, and does not exist prior to it.

[@bonniejohnson1518]

+tweck99999 nowhere in the bible does it say before time...yes it sys before the world was but not before time...time is not a thing which is the major flaw in Einstein's silly theories...Bill

[@RichardFriend48]

I am not a Calvinist. I believe in Foreknowledge of God, He knows all the choices we will make, not the Foreordination of all things by God. You say it is inconsistent for someone to believe that God knows all the choices I will make. I see it as perfectly consistent. You did not explain why it is not consistent.

[@bibletheology]

RichardFriend48 If God foreknows all of the future, not because He has predetermined all of the future, then what kind of control could God possibly have over the future? If God foreknew from eternity that you would be in car accident tomorrow and die, can God intervene? No, because His foreknowledge cannot be wrong. Eternal foreknowledge of all future events that is not based upon predetermination would render God powerless to intervene or change anything in human history. He becomes a helpless observer.

[@preachingyeshua]

bibletheology Your statement; "If God foreknows all of the future, not because He has predetermined all of the future, then what kind of control could God possibly have over the future?" is failing to mention that if God knew I would be in a car accident and die, wouldn't He also know whether or not He will choose to intervene.. God would be able to know what would happen, and determine if He would intervene, then when the event takes place, God would then be able to intervene or not. Therefore God can know I will be in a car accident and choose whether or not to intervene.

[@RichardFriend48]

bibletheology PreachingYeshua makes sense. God would know that he would intervene or not and that future would be known by Him, because He knows whether he would intervene or not. If God foreknows I would die in that accident, then it means that He has chosen not to intervene. Simple as that. There is no way that God becomes a helpless observer. He can do what he wants, and not do what He doesn't want. He is not a helpless observer. He knows what he will do or not do in the future and is absolutely never helpless. He foreknows all things, praise His Name!

[@dustinleitch2587]

+RichardFriend48 God cannot count to infinity. The future includes an infinite amount of possibilities. Therefore God cannot know all of the choices of free agents.

[@RichardFriend48]

+Dustin Leitch The future of human beings before the new heavens and the new earth does not have an infinite amount of choices. Therefore God DOES know the all the choices of free agents.

[@bibletheology]

Someone said, "I have to correct you on one part thus far (10mins) in to your video Jesse Morrell. You claim that God has more knowledge within the OTV "tree of events" than in comparison to the straight line of certainty because He can see all the possibilities rather than just a straight line of events. The fact is, God in predestination of all things within a straight line of certainty can still calculate all the possibilities that could have been otherwise exactly the way you try an make your "tree of event" superior to the straight line." I said: Actually if God has ETERNAL foreknowledge then there were not alternative possibilities for God to choose from in predestination. Could He choose or decree contrary to His foreknowledge? So with eternal foreknowledge, based upon eternal predestination, there is ONLY a straight line of certainty. The idea that God had possibilities to choose between before predestining would be Open Theism. But since in Calvinism God's foreknowledge and predestination are "eternal," then there was no "before" He predestined in which there were open possibilities.

[@Andy-tf2il]

Excellent presentation, Jesse!

[@chriswest8389]

Im looking into open theism and how it relates to neo molinism. Even if god Cannot know what moral free beings will do in principle, is there still a grounding problem? In addition to randomness as an objection to freewill, the problem is compounded as it pertains theism. It, freewil,must come from the void then? Outside the domain of god which is impossible. God has to be pro active every step of the way. Gods moral nessesitys have to be 100 percent. meaning determinism meets predestination. 5 point 0 calvinism.Very nasty.

[@jordandthornburg]

"When a calvinist uses the word sovereignty you can know what he means is puppetry" LOL

[@athaskins]

Yes, according to Calvin, that statement is true. Know your Calvin. "“First, the eternal predestination of God, by which before the fall of Adam He decreed what should take place concerning the whole human race and every individual, was fixed and determined.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.121),"

[@athaskins]

Yes according to Calvin that statement is true. Know your Calvin. "Calvin writes: “What we must prove is that single events are ordered by God and that every event comes from his intended will. Nothing happens by chance.” (The Institutes of Christian Religion, Book I, Ch. 16, Sect. 4)"

[@athaskins]

Yes according to Calvin that statement is true. Know your Calvin. "Calvin writes: “When he uses the term permission, he means that the will of God is the supreme and primary cause of everything, because nothing happens without his order of permission.” (The Institutes of Christian Religion, Book I, Ch. 16, Sect. 8,)" That' means babies that are raped by pedophiles are done so by God's decree and will. .... dude... you follow a sicko psychopath that also had 35 women's hands chopped off, and called it Gods decree and will, then had them tortured for 30 days, the the ones who did not die under torture or disease in a dungeon, were burned slowly with wet wood, to make them scream longer. GET IT?

[@fiveSolas879]

@@athaskins chance is not biblical. if something is random, then God isnt incontrol. thats a false god

[@Jamie-Russell-CME]

It seems to me for God to know anything, than open theism would fall apart. Because if God knows all the possibilities, and related influences, and the minds of those in a given situation better than the minds themselves, than what would keep Him from knowing that which will be chosen in those situations? If the event can not be predicted than they become free by nothing but arbitrary manifestations of particularity. And they, or any free choice, could not be predicted. Rendering prophecy, the incarnation, and any hope in the certainty of salvation, or anything else, impossible. The only just, and loving answer would be freedom with an omniscience of absolute, perfect foreknowledge. The mystery lies in either, the nature of freedom and its possibility outside of absolute arbitrary cause otherwise known as the mystery of freewill, or the mystery is a matter of God creating freedom while being able to have perfect foreknowledge. I prefer the first. God has foreknowledge while bestowing freedom. And the mystery is in how we can be sufficient sources of our free decision.

[@bonniejohnson1518]

simply because he knows them as reality, and possibilities are not necessarily certainties, and that nature o reality.....God didn't know of all that he heard about Sodom was true, so He went down their to learn if it was so,,,,

[@lauromartinez8948]

Why do you say the Arminian perspective makes no sense? You can decide to do X with your free will, and the fact God knew you were gonna choose that doesn’t make you less free. You perfectly could have chosen Y, B or C If you had chosen Y God foreknowledge would have been different.

[@LoftOfTheUniverse]

Isn't it possible to believe that God knows what will happen, and what could have happened as well? I'd imagine, that half of being omniscient is the obvious; knowing what will be. The other half, oddly, is knowing that it didn't HAVE to be that way... Does that make sense? Thanks

[@josephmoore6765]

This is heresy!

[@rayjacobs1146]

Amen Joseph.

[@SHEvans]

The prayers of men have changed the plans of God: Ex. 32:10-14; Num. 11:1-2, 14:12-20, 16:16:20-35; Deut. 9:13-14, 9:18-20, 9:25; 2 Sam. 24:17-25; 1 Kin. 21:27-29; 2 Chron. 12:5-8; Jer. 26:19 God speaks of the future in terms of what may or may not be: Ex. 3:18, 4:9, 13:17; Eze. 12:3 God changes His plans in response to changing circumstances: Ex. 32:10-14, Jer. 18:1-10 Charles Finney || Self Deceivers kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5K5pWeJZ6isn6s

[@staza1]

Thanks for the truly helpful and enlightening comment. I hope you feel better after sharing this incredible wisdom.

[@scotthix2926]

Isaiah 5 is saying that Israel did not obey God. Aka wild grapes. He is not shocked by this he is telling Israel has disobeyed.