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 Exodus 32:14?
The Lord states his intention to destroy Israelites because of their wickedness: “Now let me alone,” he says to Moses, “so that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them” (vs. 10). Moses “implored the Lord” (vs. 11) and, as a result, “the Lord changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people” (vs. 14).
If the classical view of divine foreknowledge is correct, God would already have been certain that he wasn’t going to “consume” the Israelites and his statement to Moses regarding his plan to do just this would be disingenuous. Scripture’s teaching that God “changed his mind” about the matter would be inaccurate as well. If God’s declared intention and Scripture’s teaching are true, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that God’s mind was not eternally settled regarding the fate of Israel at this time.
Some theologians have tried to avoid this conclusion by suggesting that God can make plans in time which go directly against what he eternally foreknows and can even eternally foreknow that he will change his mind. But it is difficult, to say the least, to get a coherent conception of God genuinely planning something he is certain will not be, or genuinely changing his mind to arrive at a conclusion he eternally foreknew.
As far as I can discern, the concept of God foreknowing he will change his mind is self-contradictory. It is like saying, “God has an eternally unchanging mind which knows that he will someday change his mind.” If God’s mind really changes, it can’t really be eternally unchanging. If it’s really eternally unchanging, he can’t really change it. Think about it.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism
Verse: Exodus 32
Related Reading
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…
What is the significance of Judges 2:20–3:5?
The Lord did not provide any assistance in Israel’s battles, “In order to test Israel, whether or not they would take care to walk in the way of the Lord as their ancestors did” (vs. 22). The pagan opponents of Israel “were for the testing of Israel, to know whether Israel would obey the commandments…
How do you respond to 1 Peter 1:20?
“[Christ] was destined before the foundation of the world, but was revealed at the end of the ages for our sake. Through him you have come to trust in God…” This passage reveals that God created the world with Jesus Christ in mind (cf. Col. 1:15–17). The divine goal was (and is) to acquire a…
Doesn’t the open view demean God’s sovereignty?
The Open view demeans God’s sovereignty only if one assumes that “sovereignty” means “meticulous control.” By why think this is the way God wants to rule the world? The biblical narrative presents a God who gives humans (and apparently angels) free will, who is flexible and creative in running the world, and who relies at…
What do you think of the classical view that God is impassible?
The classical view has historically 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…