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.
If God anticipates each possibility perfectly, how does he differ from the “frozen God” of classical theism?
Question: If God anticipates each and every possibility as if each were only possibility, how does God ever experience novelty and adventure? It seems that a God who perfectly anticipated (from all eternity) every single possibility as if it were the only possibility would not differ from the timeless “frozen God” of classical theism
Answer: My claim is not that God experiences every possibility as if it was the only possibility; its rather that God anticipates every possibility as if it were the only possibility. In my view, God’s actual experience of a possibility once it becomes actual always involves an element of newness and additional definiteness — which, I believe, is the main definitional difference between possibility and actuality (I defend this in my book Trinity and Process). This is also how I would account for God’s experience of novelty and adventure. Because an ontological (viz. not merely epistemological) possibility is always one among many, there is always something new in God’s experience when one possibility is actualized (viz. when it transitions from a possibility to an actuality). When an improbable possibility is actualized, God naturally experience something like “surprise” (without, however, any loss of preparedness). When things are at risk, there is an appropriate sense of adventure.
By the way, one problem for classical theists who argue (against open theists!) that God’s knowledge cannot be improved upon by the unfolding of time is that they have difficulty articulating how God’s experience of the actual now differs from God’s foreknowledge of now. Unless something is added by the actual experience, how does God that the “now” is happening? In other words, how does God know what time it is?
Category: Q&A
Tags: Foreknowledge, God, Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Attributes and Character, Defending the Open View
Related Reading
Thankful for the Passion of God
The classical view of God has held that God is impassible, meaning he is above pathos (passion or emotions). The main reason the church came to this view was that, following the Hellenistic philosophical tradition, they associated emotions with change while believing God was above all change (immutable). Moreover, experiencing emotions implies that one is affected by…
How can you put your trust in a God who’s not in control of everything?
Question: I read your book Is God to Blame? and found it to be very compelling. It’s rocking my world. But I’m also finding I’m now having trouble trusting God like I used to. I used to believe that God ordained or at least foreknew all that was going to happen. Now I’m questioning this, and I’m wondering…
What is the significance of Exodus 4:10–16?
Immediately after convincing Moses of his ability to [somehow!] convince the elders of Israel to listen to him, Moses says, “O my Lord, I have never been eloquent…I am slow of speech and slow of tongue” (vs. 10). The Lord reminds him that he is the Creator and is therefore bigger than any speech impediment.…
“Whatever it means, it cannot mean that.”
pure9 via Compfight Roger Olson wrote a great article a couple of days ago entitled Why (High) Calvinism Is Impossible. He points out that there is no way to understand God as “good” while also believing in double predestination. The idea that God predestines some to heaven and a vast majority to hell for his “glory”…
What is the significance of Jeremiah 3:19–20?
“I thought how I would set you among my children…And I thought you would call me, My Father, and would not turn from following me. Instead, as a faithless wife…you have been faithless to me…” If the future is eternally and exhaustively settled, and if God therefore knows it as such, he could not have…
An Open Orthodoxy
Sharon Mollerus via Compfight Our friends Tom Belt and Dwayne Polk recently started a blog called An Open Orthodoxy. This is going to be something you’ll want to follow. Really smart guys with something to say. They posted this clarification on the defining claim and core convictions of open theism that hits the nail on…