Nov

What Does God Know?

Posted by: Sonny in Belief, Sovereignty, Spiritual Warfare

The modern Christian conception of God does not actually come from the Bible. Instead, its roots can be found in the writings of Plato and Aristotle. And the God of Greek philosophy is far more remote and inhuman than the one portrayed in both the Old and New Testaments. This has created a tension in the field of theology that does not really answer any of the questions that the atheist or the hurting lost souls of this world so desperately need.

I have been in a few discussions on this site and in my class on Wednesdays about these concepts. Some might even call them arguments. There are a couple of us that get a little passionate about our beliefs.

There are different aspects to classical theism that I do not subscribe to and I have attempted to create a dialogue about such things as Gods omnipotence, His omniscience, and other attributes and how they relate to a proper understanding of the reality of spiritual warfare.

In my group of brothers and sisters in Christ I have not found much resistance with the idea that we have free will or that God does not definitively control all things. The area of most resistance, surprisingly, has to do with God’s foreknowledge of events and free will choices.

I do not believe we can actually have free will or make true choices if God already knows the choice. How can I not make the choice He has already seen? But some seem to think my question should instead be, how can God’s or anyone’s prior knowledge interfere with (cause to happen or prevent from happening) my present choice or future decision to act?

A friend made this statement, “I know that I will not rob a bank today. That does not mean I don’t have a choice. I know what my choice will be, yet I can freely choose.”

My answer is that if God knows the future like you or me, then there is no free-will problem. In fact, this comparison of divine omniscience to human inferred knowledge is essentially what I hold to be true, instead of the sovereign view which would say that God knows, unlike you, that you would most definitely not rob that bank. You know you would not, based on your knowledge of who you are, and God knows you would not, based on the same thing. Not on the basis that He has already seen your day come to its conclusion.

I’d like to raise God to be higher than this view. I believe God knows more than us, namely every possible choice we can make. I believe God just doesn’t know in the absolute sense, which choices we will make until we actually make them.

The fact is that we all “know” things that don’t actually happen the way we expected. What if someone, at gunpoint, forced you to rob a bank? That would force you to do something that you knew at the beginning of your day you would not do.

To really understand the classical view I am talking about, this concept of infinite divine foreknowledge as put out by classical theism, we must see it as having zero contingency. If God absolutely knows what will happen before it happens, then there is neither meaning nor responsibility for human choice. This determinism is the foundation of most of the moral complacency of Greek fatalism. The common view of the sovereignty of God is really due to the scholastic merging of Aristotle’s thoughts, not from study of the very dynamic God of the Bible.

Let’s take a look at a logic problem.

1. God’s having absolute foreknowledge implies that if I mow my lawn on Saturday afternoon, then God saw at an earlier time that I would mow my lawn on Saturday afternoon.

2. Necessarily, all that God has seen is true and absolute.

3. No one has the power to make a contradiction true.

4. No one has the power to erase someone’s past knowledge, that is, to bring it about that something known in the past by someone was not known in the past by that person.

5. No one has the power to erase someone’s existence in the past, that is, to bring it about that someone who did exist in the past did not exist in the past.

6. So if God foreknew that I will mow my lawn on Saturday afternoon, I can refrain from mowing only if one of these conditions is true:
(i) I have the power to make what God has seen false.
(ii) I have the power to erase God’s past foreknowledge.
(iii) I have the power to erase God’s past existence.

7. Alternative (i) is impossible. (This follows from steps 2 and 3).

8. Alternative (ii) is impossible. (This follows from step 4).

9. Alternative (iii) is impossible. (This follows from step 5).

10. Therefore, if God foreknows that I will mow my lawn on Saturday afternoon, I do not have the power to refrain from mowing my lawn on Saturday afternoon.

Work on that one and I leave you with this thought based on years of actually believing it and still not seeing an answer in the classical view of absolute exhaustive foreknowledge.

One of atheism’s strongest condemnations of Christianity is, if God (if there is one!) absolutely knows what will happen, why does he allow the world to go on with all of its atrocities and horror? Why doesn’t He change things? Why did He even bother?

I know from experience that none of your answers will satisfy.

Love you all

Tags: Atheism, Belief, Bible, Christianity, classical theism, Discussion, divine omniscience, foreknowledge, Free will, greek philosophy, Knowledge, Lie, Love, Sin, Spiritual Warfare, Theology

This entry was posted on Thursday, November 13th, 2008 at 1:04 am and is filed under Belief, Sovereignty, Spiritual Warfare. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

15 comments so far

Connie Davis

Got it! It has finally sunk in my pea brain through this thick skull. These discussions over the past three weeks have made me have to think, which I haven’t had to do in a while. As you mentioned, I felt sorta guilty accepting this because I thought it was belittling God to a point. But now I see that it really doesn’t. After I could accept that fact, everything else just seemed to fall in place.

I enjoyed this “mini series” and am looking forward to the next.

Love and Peace,
Connie

November 13th, 2008 at 8:00 am

Justin A

That last sentence sounds a little fatalistic. Besides, if God doesn’t know, I don’t see how you could know.
The following is not intended to prove God knows or doesn’t know. My point here is to take a small step to make it easy to grasp the concept that God’s foreknowledge does not preclude our free will.
The Bible makes it very plain that God knows our thoughts. I think it is easy to see that God can know that if someone approached me 5 minutes from now and offered me $100.00 to jump off a cliff to certain death that I wouldn’t do it. I am assuming for the purposes of this exercise that all present circumstances stay the same. This is not trying to show that God has all foreknowledge. This is just to show that there are at least some circumstances where God could know what we will do and yet we would still have free will. If God really knows my thoughts (the Bible says He does) surely he knows enough about my nature that he knows I wouldn’t do that. Yet I have perfect free will to choose that option. Put another way, if God knows anything, surely he knows that there is at least one thing I would not do in at least one circumstance. Yet I have free will to make that choice.
I am not trying to prove foreknowledge or free will with the preceding exercise. The purpose of this exercise was to make it easier to understand it if it is in fact true.
Concerning your logic statement:
A minor thing to point out is that God does not need “absolute” foreknowledge to know what you will do this Saturday. If he knows just a week ahead of time he would know that. That doesn’t negate your argument in any way. I just wanted to point it out.

On point 6, I think you meant to say, “If God ‘foreknows’ that I ‘will’ mow my lawn on Saturday afternoon, I can refrain from mowing only if one of these conditions is true:” I think this helps your argument to state it this way. The way you stated it implies that it is possible to refrain from doing something you have already done which is clearly impossible. I will assume you meant to say it the way I corrected it.
I don’t see anything in your logic that would prevent the following change to your final conclusion in point 10:
Therefore, if God foreknows that I will mow my lawn on Saturday afternoon, either I do not have the power to refrain from mowing my lawn on Saturday afternoon or God actually does know what choice I will make of my own free will.
I think the main problem with your idea is your statement 6(i) “I have the power to make what God has seen false.” This is a statement that does not prove anything and you have to assume you are correct for the statement to make sense. If God has actually seen it then it cannot be false. And it leaves us with the same question we started with “Can God see it?”
Here is my attempt to answer your point about atheism’s condemnation of Christianity because of the atrocities and horror.
The point the atheists are making is an example of an argument proving too much. If there is no God and everything is a result of random chance, just a random association of molecules over eons of time that finally arranged their self into what we see today, then atrocity and horror have no meaning. If a rock randomly falls off a cliff and kills someone it is not a horror or atrocity or evil. It just happened. If some of the random molecules got together and became a mass murderer you cannot call him or his actions evil. It is not morally different than a rock falling off a cliff. But I think that we, and atheists, recognize that there is such a thing as evil. From an atheistic perspective, the condemnation of Christianity for God being evil makes no sense. If there is no God there is no evil.
So, why doesn’t God change things? Probably the most correct answer is that he is doing things the best way they can be done. That is admittedly not a very satisfying answer. But, do you know of things that have happened in your life that were extremely difficult at the time they were happening but later (maybe years later) you realized that those things actually built your character and you were a better person today for it? I do. You can come up with alternative ways that God could have done things but everything I have seen someone try to come up with was full of problems. God could have made us all love him and everybody. But would that really be love? People wonder why a loved one dies. Everyone dies. Do you really want them to live forever in this sin cursed world? In Christianity we have the only real comfort and that is that we will see them again and can live for an eternity in a beautiful place without all the sin we see here. For a summary (without a book’s worth of typing) I think God chose the best possible way for the best possible result. And I think the “best possible result” is good beyond our imagination. 1 Corinthians 2:9, But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. By the way, Ravi Zecharias is very eloquent in addressing this issue.
Why did God even bother? God is love.

November 13th, 2008 at 8:18 am

Sonny

God does know our thoughts. He just doesn’t know what I haven’t thought yet. But He also knows “how” I think, which makes His ability to predict my thoughts much more than even I myself can.

Your statements on the logic problem are correct, I think, and seem to me to help me back up my thoughts. Thanks.

As far as atheism goes, your statement sums up the main reasons most atheists do not believe in God. The classical views of God do not address the issue of evil as coming from anywhere other than God, but yet we say God is all love, so they do not believe us. And I don’t blame them. If there is no God, evil is just the negative side of chance. But if evil is real, and God is real, and He has all that the classical theist claims, such as absolute exhaustive foreknowledge, absolute definitive control, a will that nothing can deny, then He is not all loving based on what we see all around us.

I know you don’t believe all of this. I don’t either. But so many do. And it does not help the cause of Christ.

Thanks for the point about “would” and “will”. I “will” change it and yes God anticipated that because He knows me well enough to know that I hate saying things wrong. But if He foresaw me changing it before He even created the world, then I “have” to, so let me get to it.

Love you

November 13th, 2008 at 12:56 pm

Sonny

Thanks Connie and please know that I did not get it until dwelling on it for quite a while. And everything is not totally fleshed out yet but I do think I am getting closer to an understanding of God that satisfies my previous objections to Him.

Some may think that to be a waste of time, but I don’t because there are many unbelievers out there. And we need answers that will draw them not turn them away.

But they have to be based on the truth. This is what, to me, is so time consuming.

Love you

November 13th, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Justin A

“absolute exhaustive foreknowledge, absolute definitive control, a will that nothing can deny.” I don’t remember reading about these words before. You must be reading some books I haven’t read. I have a comment about the last phrase. I suppose you are saying that someone defines classic theism as including “a will that nothing can deny”. I think the Bible very plainly teaches that God’s will can be denied. The Bible said God is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” The Bible also says that many people will perish and will not come to repentance. That seems obvious to me that God’s will can be denied. What am I missing?

November 13th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Sonny

You are missing the fact that these are the things I have been argueing against and you seem to be defending them. The most widely held views of Gods soverignty, omnipotence, and omniscience are exactly as I describe. It is called reformed theology, more commonly known as calvinism. Armenians hold a little less harsh view but even though we do not hold the absolute beliefs as I have been portraying, the way we talk about it implies that this is our beliefs.

I have suspected a little bit of misunderstanding between us because you want to hold on to some idea of God’s foreknowledge while I want to define the word for what it implies and abandon it because it does not look like what Jesus portrayed.

These may be new terms to you but they are what you have been defending. Even though not intentionally.

Love you

November 13th, 2008 at 8:36 pm

Sonny

If the previous comment reads a little “short” or “snippy”, it was not meant that way.

Love you

November 13th, 2008 at 8:56 pm

Heath

Hi Sonny,

You already know my position on this but figured I might offer up a few thoughts about what you wrote…

1) It is not God’s foreknowledge that plays into the existence of libertarian free will, because his knowledge of the choice does not directly affect the choice. (knowledge has no causal relationship to free moral agents exercising choice) Instead, it is the existence of a settled future which impacts both free will and God’s foreknowledge. (if the future exists, the a-God knows it and b-you can’t change it.) It is much easier to approach a classical theist on this ground (asking the question of whether or not the future is able to be changed) and then explore the nature of knowledge (can something be known that doesn’t exist) then it is to directly confront their incorrect view of God. It takes a whole lot longer to tear down their walls (and often causes much offense) then it does to simply let them jump over them on their own…

2) Side note: Your first sentence seems to me to be lacking a historical perspective. Church fathers all the way back to Paul (and including Paul, in my opinion) have held to an Aristitilian and Platonic view of God. It is certainly not a modern phenomenon in the church. In fact, I do believe that there are elements of the Bible, especially the writings of Paul, that suggest a view of a God who has exhaustive forknowledge. But there is also plenty of ammunition in scripture that suggest that there is an unsettled future. So Scripture can often be used by both sides to batter one another with the result being that each side feels justified in their belief. And classical theists will point to these passages to say you are wrong in asserting they are Platonic in their beliefs.

Enjoyed the post… Keep the discussion going!

November 13th, 2008 at 10:58 pm

Leigh

I don’t know if I have the energy to respond to this post (work was hard today), but I will try.

God put his only Son here on Earth to die for our sins. Have you ever wondered what would have happened if Jesus said “No?” Well, things worked out where the prophecy was fulfilled but I would look at Calvinism this way: Did God absolutely know that Jesus would die for us? I don’t think so. Most people would say yes but I don’t know. If you believe that God knew exactly how it would turn out then in a sense people who subscribe to Calvinism would be right because God has everything planned and mapped out before we are born and die. Our actions wouldn’t matter because everything would be as it should be – The way God wanted it to be for us. But I think that is why Jesus was born to Mary and lived his life. from birth. He was allowed to engage in earthly activities and I think that God not only wanted him to know the joys and sorrows of Man but that he wanted Jesus to engage in free will, ultimately making His choice to die on the cross that much more important.

Now, having said that, I honestly believe that we live the life we live. There may be choices we make that will tie us into the events of the future (if you subscribe to the visions of the Saints, appearances of Mary, the Rapture, etc) but if we all ready have our life planned and God knows what your choices and life will be like in the future, then what’s the point of God giving us free will?

There are lots of things that I have seen in my life that lead me to believe that God can’t know everything and have it all mapped out for us.

Sonny, your own life experiences are a great point to highlight: Either God knew you would live more than half of your adult life as an atheist and then, when it was time, knew you would find God and live the rest of your life to serve Him OR he gave you the free will to make that choice and all the “tools” you would need to get to the point you are at today. If our lives were determined before we were born, then, since God wants us to live in his image and do his works, we all would have been born doing this from the jump. But we can’t – the only one who can or has been given that chance is Jesus. And we can only live our lives like he lived his, we can’t be him.

Atheists, to me, should love free will. They have the opportunity to chose to not believe in God and at that point can point the blame on all of the troubles of the world on a God they don’t even believe exists. Why doesn’t God step in and fix it? If he did, there would be nothing to work for: there would be no one to help the sick, give to the poor, preach His name. Jesus’s death would have been for nothing. All His work, all his efforts, all his love would just simply be no big deal instead of something special.

Anyway, love and peace to all. It’s now time for my mind to rest. And no more logic problems, please. :slain:

November 13th, 2008 at 11:02 pm

Sonny

Heath,

Thanks for the input. I have read most of your archives. When I got saved, I just had to find answers for a lot of the prior problems that I have had with religion and especially christianity. If God was the way most of the major christian writers describe, then He wasn’t what the Bible seemed to describe to me.

I found out about your view of all of these things recently and found the writers on this subject to put order to what I already thought I saw in the Bible. I am being careful about the label because I have seen many dismiss it out of hand when mentioned. Not hiding it, just trying to coax some into looking into the ideas before the label.

This post has been actually brought out of me before I was fully ready because of some conversations I have been drawn into. I believe you would agree that some do speak in terms that are more reformed than they realize. That is what I am attempting to address mostly.

Thanks for the input about the Hellenic aspects of the Bible. I know Paul was probably well versed in it also and I have problems overcoming some of his writing. Romans is tough.

Leigh,

Thanks for the input. I really didn’t know where Catholics stood on these issues. Or is this just your personal opinion?

Love you all

November 13th, 2008 at 11:45 pm

Shannon Mimbs

First of all, I do have to say that the picture for this post is tremendous. It reminds me of Lord of the Rings (however, the eye represents something completely opposite there, and looks much better here).

Secondly, I am mourning the loss of my posts and comments on our site. I’ve been working with it quite a bit today, to no avail. If you have updated your site to 2.6.3 successfully, then I definitely need some wordpress tutelage. If not, be careful about the update. :blogs:

Given the nature of this initial discussion, and considering my time constraint today, I decided to copy a comment that I previously made in another blog, as an initial response to this topic. I agree with Heath that the nature of the future is a helpful entryway into the topic (at least for me)…

I do agree that God knows “some things about the future.” Yet the nature of the future (in which he surely knows some things) appears laced with possibilities that could go either way (contingent upon our choices) – meaning that the future is not
fixed (with no chance of alteration) to one script. Some things in the future are fixed and thus “knowable.” While other things are open and “not knowable,” because they do not yet exist.

The issue does not seem to be whether God perfectly knows the future; for that which exists, God absolutely knows. What seems to be at issue is whether an unmade choice is “knowable.” In this regard, I agree with Sonny that the results of such decisions are not 100% knowable to God or anyone else, because until the decision is made, it does not exist.

Does this mean that creation is in grips of chaos or that God is somewhat detached from working within creation (as a deist may attest)? Not at all. God, who knows every possible decision that we could make, sovereignly works within such decisions to bring about his purpose(s) of redemption (and ultimate restoration of all things). Kind of like a tree branch diagram (as opposed to a line) of the future (with each decision offering numerous possibilities contingent upon choice); upon the making of the decision, other numerous possibilities arise. Now, God knows the infinite possibilities; yet, given humanity’s God-bestowed (limited) free-will, part of the future is open (and not able to be known 100%) to the impact of our decisions.

Some contend that God meticulously controls all things (both good and bad) in order to fulfill a “perfect plan.” For such folks, the issue is a given – God knows everything that will happen, because he will in fact meticulously bring it to pass. Yet, for those of us on the more “Arminian” side of things, we bear responsibility for the choices that we make. They are our choices which have great consequences to us and others.

Take prayer for instance. If the future is fixed/settled, then everything that will happen is already determined. How are we to understand the many “if…then” (conditional) statements in the Scriptures? For there are many examples in the Bible where God refused to bring things to pass without the participation or reciprocity of his people. I think most of us would agree that some things (many in fact) are contingent upon our praying? And some people do not experience God’s desired best for their lives, because they choose not to obey, pray, petition, fast, be silent, speak, etc.? If this is true, then is our not experiencing God’s desired best for our lives part of God’s “perfect plan,” or because sometimes our decisions go against God’s will and have grave consequences?

So, I would contend that our (relational) freedom and the nature of the (partly open) future are intertwined by God’s design in order that there exist the true potential for a loving relationship between persons and God. God works within such a creation (by his Spirit) in order to bring about redemption (and ultimate restoration of all things). Some (especially in the Reformed camp to whom Sonny made reference) have said that this is a front to God’s sovereignty; however, I am in agreement with others who maintain that God’s “sovereignty” is much more dynamic (great, glorious) in seeing him work within a partly open future in a manner which allows for persons’ free decisions. By his infinite wisdom, God bears creation along unto the restoration of all things. Not as a puppet master, of sorts, but in a relational, creative, intimate manner.

Peace

November 14th, 2008 at 12:23 am

Heath

Sonny,

In case you haven’t already picked it up, read “The God Who Risks” by John Sanders. It has helped me on this discussion more than any other work.

Romans is indeed difficult, however remember that each writer brings his own perspectives to his writings. Understand Romans for what it is: the writings of a Jewish Roman Pharissee turned Christ Follower. Certainly his background affected how he described God’s interactions with humanity, as did his dramatic calling. Yet still there are elements of an understanding of free will even in Paul’s works. So I think Paul is a bigger challenge because of the dichotomy of thought… It is hard to process in a logical format. I wonder sometimes if may of Paul’s writings were much like our blog posts… an attempt to sort it all out.

November 14th, 2008 at 12:47 am

Sabrina Walker

Sonny your statement “I’d like to raise God to be higher than this view. I believe God knows more than us, namely every possible choice we can make. I believe God just doesn’t know in the absolute sense, which choices we will make until we actually make them.” is the one I agree with. I put something similar on totus totus but you wrote it in better terms then I did. Thank you for that. I tried to get my view across but could not figure out how to write it as well as you did.

November 14th, 2008 at 1:45 am

Sonny

Heath,

Yeah, thats an interesting thought. Since many blog posts actually get unpacked in the comments, I wonder what we might find if we could get hold of some comments from people reading Paul in Pauls day instead of reading Paul so many years after the culture is totally gone.

Sabrina,

You are doing fine. keep your comments coming.

Love you all

November 14th, 2008 at 2:26 am

Sonny

Shannon,

Somehow I overlooked your comment. Thanks for the input. Even while you must be devastated. As I said on your site, I haven’t upgraded and don’t want to.

I liked that picture too. It seems that sometimes I find just the right one for my thoughts at the moment.

I am digesting your comments and don’t yet know if it will warrant more response. As always, I learn from you when you write.

Hope your blog contents can be retrieved when you have more time.

Love you

November 14th, 2008 at 4:04 am