We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
How do you respond to Genesis 15:13–15?
The Lord tells Abraham that his offspring “shall be aliens in a land that is not theirs, and shall be slaves here, and they shall be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions.”
This passage may constitute a conditional prophecy which could have been modified had circumstances called for it. Many if not most prophecies in the Bible are conditional (cf. Jer. 18:7–10). They are not mere previews of an unalterable future. They rather reveal God’s present intentions, assuming things don’t change.
On the other hand, the passage may indeed constitute an unconditional prophecy. In this case the passage reveals a now-unalterable feature of God’s providential plan. The sovereign Lord of history who is ultimately in control of the movement of the nations (Acts 17:24–28) deemed it wise to ensure that his future people would be in captivity for four centuries. It is important to note, however, that the Lord would not need to control and/or foreknow every other detail about human history to accomplish this. The Lord of history who grants whatever degree of freedom he wishes to grant to his human subjects can control and foreknow aspects of the future and guide history toward his desired goal without micro-controlling and foreknowing every detail along the way.
Some have trouble conceiving of how God could settle some things about the future without settling all things about the future. But if we reflect on the matter a bit we will see that we ourselves live with the assumption that some things about the future are settled and some things not. We assume control over certain aspects of our future without feeling the need or desire to control all aspects of our future.
For example, a person may resolve that she is going to be a teacher. This much has become certain to her, but surrounding this now-unalterable destiny there is a myriad of contingencies that remain uncertain. Exactly what kind of teacher will she become? Exactly how long will it take to complete the training? Exactly where will she eventually work? These and a million other questions about her future may be left open without calling into question the certainty that she will be a teacher.
The fact of the matter is that every particular thing we determine about the distant or immediate future is a determination made within the context of many indeterminate variables. Why is it, then, that many feel the need to assume that if God predetermines and/or foreknows some things about the future he must predetermine and/or foreknow all things about the future? This all-or-nothing conclusion is not consistent with the biblical account or our experiences.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism, Responding to Objections
Verse: Genesis 15
Related Reading
How Calvinism Misses the Point About Salvation
Calvinists sometimes argue that various passages in John teach that the Father chooses and then “draws” certain people to Christ. Those who are “drawn” certainly come to Christ (John 6:37) while all who are not drawn remain in their sin. For example, John portrays Jesus as repeatedly teaching that “no one can come to me…
Does the Open View Undermine God’s Sovereignty?
A common objection to the concept of a risk-taking God is that it seems to undermine God’s sovereignty. If any particular individual can opt out of God’s plan, then every individual could conceivably opt out of God’s plan, and it seems that God’s entire plan for world history could ultimately fail. Some have argued that…
Why Can’t God? Reflections on the Oord Interview (podcast)
Greg reflects on his interview with Thomas Jay Oord. Episode 503 http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0503.mp3
What did Jesus mean when he said he came not to bring peace, but a sword (Mt 10:34)?
Given Jesus’ uniform teaching about loving enemies and abstaining from violence, and given that his followers were known for their refusal to engage in violence for the first three hundred years of church history, it’s obvious that Jesus wasn’t saying he came so that his disciples would use swords. The context of Jesus’ comment makes…
Why have you consistently stressed the need for the Western Church to learn from the African Church?
Question: I’ve heard you argue that the white Western church has a lot to learn theologically from African cultures. What is it specifically that you’re referring to? Response: I do strongly believe that the western church needs to humbly sit at the feet of our fellow Christians in Africa. My conviction is based on four…
Boyd’s Bad Ass Tattoo
by: Greg Boyd In the process of working through a philosophical issue surrounding the openness of the future around twenty years ago, I and two friends (Alan Rhoda and Tom Belt) ended up creating the “Hexagon of Opposition”, or “Hexagonic Logic of Futurity,” as I’ve sometimes called it. I’ll explain what it all means in…