How do you respond to Matthew 16:21?
“From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.”
The ministry and death of Jesus are the centerpieces of God’s plan in world history. Therefore, very little surrounding Jesus’ life and death was left to chance. It had been determined from ages past that the Lord himself would have to become a man and die. This is something God was going to do, and thus it was foreknown from whatever time he decided it. In this verse Jesus reveals the divine plan to his disciples. But we have no reason to conclude from this that the whole of the future was settled in Jesus’ mind (see Mark 13:32). Indeed, Jesus’ prayer in the Garden suggests that he held an outside hope that even his death could be averted at the last minute (Matt. 26:39). Nor should we conclude that the specific elders, chief priests and scribes who were going to be instrumental in putting Jesus to death were predestined or foreknown from ages past to do so. The verse simply indicates that by the time Jesus was teaching his disciples about his future it was certain that some of these people would act in this fashion.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism, Responding to Objections
Verse: Matthew 16
Related Reading
What is the warfare worldview?
The warfare worldview is based on the conviction that our world is engaged in a cosmic war between a myriad of agents, both human and angelic, that have aligned themselves with either God or Satan. This is the view that is presupposed throughout the entire Bible, and it’s especially evident in the New Testament. For…
The Hexagon of Opposition
Throughout the western philosophical and theological tradition, scholars have assumed that the future can be adequately described in terms of what will and will not happen. In this essay I, Alan Rhoda and Tom Belt argue that this assumption is mistaken, for the logical contradictory of will is not will not but might not. Conversely,…
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…
Prayer and the Open Future
Kurt Willems posted a blog today written by Derek Ouellette regarding why understanding that the future is partially open is the only thing that really makes sense of prayer. Derek addresses his thoughts to your younger self, the self that was more “Open. Teachable. Curious. Adventurous.” Let’s all be willing to respect and freely interact…
Lighten Up: Oh my… I am so very very scared…
Well, my dear friend Frankie V. once again has a bad case of verbal diarrhea (explains his breath lately), running off about how he’s going to smack me down in our “all-out, no holds barred, ring-side seat, verbal wrestling match” on the open view of the future. I’m supposed to shutter in my boots at…
How do you respond to Psalm 139:16?
“In your book were written all the days that were formed for me, when none of them as yet existed.” Psalm 139 is a beautiful poetic expression of God’s personal moment-by-moment involvement in our lives. So intimate is his involvement that he knows our thoughts before we utter them (vs. 2–4). His loving presence surrounds…