This book covers some of the hot topics that arise from thinking about God s foreknowledge For instance, does God know the future free actions of human agents If he does not, does that mean he is not omniscient But what if it was logically inconsistent to claim that an indeterminate event could be known in advance, for there is nothing that grounds the truth of said event over, infallible foreknowledge or belief, which is entailed by knowing some proposition, p would seem to settle the matter, thus removing any alternative possibilities to do otherwise and therefore falsify the knowledge, which is impossible roughly if some proposition, p, is known, then p is true, thus if it is true that a subject S knows that p, then p cannot be false, S cannot be mistaken A good summary of several views on foreknowledge, but a bit too technically philosophical for my tastes I recommend Predestination and Free Will Four Views on my book list instead. Quite easily the most widely accessible, philosophically competent book on divine foreknowledge, it is difficult to find aengaging dialogical work on this topic. Four authors defend their own perspectives Paul Helm, the Augustinian Calvinist view David Hunt, the Simple Foreknowledge view William Lane Craig, the Middle Knowledge view and Gregory Boyd, the Open Theist view Each other defends his view with significant rigor and sophistication. Despite being of a Molinist persuasion, I found Hunt s defense of simple foreknowledge theoretically rich His discussion of Ockhamism in particular was quite easily the clearest I ve yet seen, and his utilization of Frankfurt style counterexamples, though perhapsat home in an Augustinian tradition, is worth considering without fully This book does a good job of laying out the differences between prominent views on divine foreknowledge I found some of the explanations to bephilosophical and complicated than I would like, but it is a difficult concept I would have liked to seebiblical exposition rather than if then type arguments Nice format though with four authors and rebuttal from each I d recommend it. Question Of The Nature Of God S Foreknowledge And How That Relates To Human Freedom Has Been Pondered And Debated By Christian Theologians At Least Since The Time Of Augustine And The Issue Will Not Go Away More Recently, The Terms Of The Debate Have Shifted, And The Issue Has Taken On New Urgency With The Theological Proposal Known As The Openness Of God This View Maintains That God S Knowledge, While Perfect, Is Limited Regarding The Future Inasmuch As The Future Is Open And Not SettledDivine Foreknowledge ã Divine Foreknowledge: 4 Views µ Download by Ò James K. Beilby Four Views Provides A Venue For Well Known Proponents Of Four Distinct Views Of Divine Foreknowledge To Present Their Cases Gregory A Boyd Of Bethel College Presents The Open Theism View, David Hunt Of Whittier College Weighs In On The Simple Foreknowledge View, William Lane Craig Of Talbot School Of Theology Takes The Middle Knowledge View, And Paul Helm Of Regent College, Vancouver, Presents The Augustinian Calvinist View All Four Respond To Each Of The Other Essayists, Noting Points Of Agreement And Disagreement Editors James K Beilby And Paul R Eddy Introduce The Contemporary Debate And Also Offer A Conclusion That Helps You Evaluate The Relative Strengths And Weaknesses Of Each View The Result Is A Unique Opportunity To Grapple With The Issues And Arguments And Frame Your Own Understanding Of This Important Debate
I love this series This volume from 2001 partially revisits the 1986 volume on predestination and free will and, in my view, is not quite as good The four views presented here are these Gregory A Boyd Senior Pastor of Woodland Hills Church in St Paul, Minnesota presents a Neo Arminian Open Theist view in which God has only limited foreknowledge Boyd takes literally passages in Scripture that suggest that God makes decisions which He later regrets This is logically consistent, but paints a rather strange picture of a God who is mostly just stumbling around in the dark It is also interesting that Boyd makes reference to modern physics, apparently without realising that special relativity implies a deterministic block universe view of time the late David Hunt of The Berean Call presents a non Calvinist view that accepts foreknowledge but not predestination I found this chapter a little con This book is heavily philosophical, and for that reason I think it is not as good as it could have been I prefer an exegetical account of dealing with divine foreknowledge, free well, sovereignty etchowever, I do realize that philosophy enters the tangles of theology because it helps untangle tensions in the Bible Philosophy is important, and all of us are philosophers even one s who supposedly hate it , but it must remain in service to biblical authority rather then having biblical authority serve our own philosophy It is at that point when we speak from our own authority and not God s Mainly this book is philosophy, so eat your heart our philosophers. The book takes four views of divine foreknowledge by four different authors and let s each author present their case and then reply to each case presented by the other auth ë Divine Foreknowledge: 4 Views ë Solid effort looking at God s knowledge of the future Found myself wishing it wastheological and biblical, less philosophical and theoretical Greg Boyd represents the open theism view Thankfully, I think this view has already peaked and is receding in prominence It takes the God changes his mind regrets texts in Scripture literalistically instead of anthropomorphically David Hunt keeps his cards close to his chest in the simple foreknowledge view chapter He believes that God knows the future, but declines to address how or why William L Craig is the best known modern defender of Molinism or middle knowledge This holds, in short, that God considered all possible worlds, and the decisions that humans would have made in each of those worlds of which there are obviously trillions and trillions , and choose the world that turned out II m hovering between giving this book 3 and 4 stars, but I went with 3 There were things I liked and things I didn t liike I loved how the book was structured each section was written by a theologian who held a different viewpoint regarding Divine Foreknowledge Then, the other three theologians would write a response to the other s essay So since there were four different writing styles, I liked some better than others The Open Theism chapter was by far my favorite He based his viewpoint upon scripture which I m familiar with whereas the other theologians based their essays on complex logic formulas which were muchdifficult for me to understand The Augustanian Calvanism chapter was alao written inbiblically based s While this was an interesting read, and sheds some light on the theology of the denominational world, I was quite disappointed in the lack of a scriptural approach by most of the authors obviously the reason for the theological weakness in the denominational world For most of the book, the authors simply ignored any scripture that disproved their theory, treating it as if it didn t exist Often, those who addressed troublesome passages did so in an effort to discredit them, rather than adjusting their theory to rightly apply what the scriptures stated In the end, none of the 4 theories presented harmonize completely with what the scriptures actually say There are, however, some interesting observations that can be gleaned from the topic, and the presentation of 4 different views of God s foreknowledge One worth citing is the difficulty of understanding something that has
About The Author
James K. Beilby
James K Beilby PhD, Marquette University is professor of systematic and philosophical theology at Bethel University in St Paul, Minnesota.