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 Isaiah 44:28–45:1?
This passage is one of the most persuasive evidences of divine foreknowledge in the Bible. The verse proclaims the Lord as the one “who says to Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd, and he shall carry out all my purpose’; and who says of Jerusalem, ‘It shall be rebuilt,’ and of the temple, ‘Your foundation shall be laid.’ Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped to subdue the nations before him…”
According to the traditional view of the book of Isaiah, Isaiah recorded this prophecy about Cyrus over a hundred years before Cyrus was born. The passage is clear evidence that the Lord foreknew that a king named Cyrus would arise and would be instrumental in rebuilding Jerusalem.
At this time in world history, it fits the Lord’s overall providential plan to return the Israelites to their land. He thus takes unilateral control over a small portion of the immediate future and determines that it shall come about in a certain way. He even predetermines what the name of the king who shall release them shall be, undoubtedly as a sign to the Israelites that he—not the idols they were inclined to chase after—was responsible for setting them free (see 46:9–11; 48:3–5).
This passage is not a “crystal ball” sort of prediction. It is rather a declaration of what the Lord himself is going to accomplish. He is going to “grasp the hand” of Cyrus and direct him. This doesn’t imply that everything about Cyrus was directed by God or that Cyrus was not a free moral agent outside of God’s declared intentions. And it certainly doesn’t imply that everything about the future is foreknown by God. It only implies that whatever God has already decided he’s going to do in the future is known by him before he does it. He foreknows it by knowing his own intentions in the present.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism, Responding to Objections
Verse: Isaiah 44
Related Reading
Roger Olson’s Review of The Cosmic Dance
Today we wanted to share a review of The Cosmic Dance by esteemed theologian Roger Olson. You can check out an excerpt below or you can read the whole review here. You can place an order for The Cosmic Dance here. The Cosmic Dance is Greg’s (and friends’) attempt to present the case that the best contemporary science supports viewing…
Shouldn’t preachers rally Christians to fight political injustice?
Question: My pastor has publicly supported your book The Myth of a Christian Nation. But he’s recently called on the church to take a stand against the injustice of our local government cutting funding for inner city recreational facilities. This seems right to me, since we’re suppose to defend the cause of the poor and…
Did God Predestine Judas to Betray Jesus? (podcast)
Greg talks about the role Judas played in the crucifixion of Jesus and speculates about his potential for good. Episode 516 http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0516.mp3
Open Theism: A Basic Introduction
On Monday and Tuesday, Greg explained Molinism and contrasted it against the open view of the future. (Click here for part 1). Because many see the open view as a limited view of God, it’s helpful to be clear that this has less to do with the nature of God and is about the nature…
The Case for Including Open Theism Within Arminianism
Here is an excellent post by my good friend Roger Olson in which he makes the case that Open Theism should be embraced by Arminians as an orthodox, if somewhat non-traditional, form of their faith. In fact, Roger argues (rightly in my opinion) that Open Theism is much closer to the “heart” of Arminianism than…