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.
What is the significance of Genesis 22:12 ?
Abraham passed God’s “test” (vs. 1) by being willing to sacrifice his son. The Lord says “…now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son…”
If the classical understanding of foreknowledge is true, God’s statement “now I know” seems disingenuous. The meaning of God’s explanation for this knowledge — “since you have…” — is also obscured. Indeed, if the future is exhaustively settled there would be no point in his test of Abraham, because God would never have to find out anything.
Defenders of the classical view of foreknowledge usually argue that God’s testings were not for his sake, but for the sake of the person being tested. God eternally foreknew whether or not the person(s) would pass the test, but he wanted the person’s character to be manifested to them. This explanation sounds plausible except this verse explicitly records God proclaiming “now I know…” Other verses contain similar statements (e.g. Deut. 8:2, 13:1–3). The only reason I can see as to why someone would insist that the testings were for the people, not God, is because they bring to the text a theology which will not allow them to accept the straightforward meaning of the text: God tests people to find out how they shall resolve their character.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism
Verse: Genesis 22
Related Reading
Podcast: Is Open Theism Growing in the World?
Greg discusses the place of Open Theism in contemporary Christianity. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0149.mp3
How do you respond to Genesis 45:5; 50:20?
Joseph said to his brothers, “…now do not be distressed, or angry with yourselves, because you sold me here; for God sent me before you to preserve life,” (cf. v. 7). Joseph later says, “Even though you intended to do harm to me, God intended it for good, in order to preserve a numerous people…”…
How do you respond to Isaiah 46:9–11?
The Lord says, “I am God, and there is none other; I am God, and there is no one like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying ‘My purpose shall stand, and I will fulfill my intention.’” To distinguish himself from the dead idols Israel was…
A Calvinist and an Arminian walk into a bar…
Toby Bradbury via Compfight Roger Olson posted A Conversation between a Calvinist and an Arminian about God’s Sovereignty that we thought was dead on. In fact, we kind of wonder if Roger is bugging some of the conversations we’ve had. Déjà vu much? And since Roger has argued that Open Theism should be included under the broader umbrella of…
Response to Bruce Ware’s “Defining Evangelicalism’s Boundaries: Is Open Theism Evangelical?”
The following essay was written in response to Bruce Ware’s article, “Defining Evangelicalism’s Boundaries: Is Open Theism Evangelical?” Published in The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, June 2002. Introduction I want to begin by expressing my utmost respect for the high value placed on academic fairness and integrity by the editorial board of JETS.…
How do you respond to John 13:18–19; 17:12?
“I am not speaking of you all; I know whom I have chosen. But it is to fulfill the scripture, ‘The one who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.’ I tell you this now, before it occurs, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I am he.’” Jesus prays…