Thanks but I don't believe Open Theism has the correct answer.

__________________
"Sin fascinates you, then it assassinates you."

Rom 8:12-13 So then, brethren, if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Preach the Gospel at all times ... if necessary, use words. (St. Francis of Assisi)

I take it you've explored that avenue already? If so, what in particular led you to believe it was incorrect? (Just curious, not trying to start an argument.)

Studying God's omniscience from Scripture.

__________________
"Sin fascinates you, then it assassinates you."

Rom 8:12-13 So then, brethren, if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Preach the Gospel at all times ... if necessary, use words. (St. Francis of Assisi)

Ok, no offense, but I kind of figured that. What in particular about God's omniscience do you find from studying the Scripture that leads you to believe that Open Theism (or at least Mr. Boyd's version) is incorrect?

(Hint: I'm looking for specifics.) (I'll say again, so you don't think I'm trying to bait you or something: I am not looking for an argument. What I am looking for is your perspective on Open Theism; I don't know everything, and could possibly have missed something when I was studying this. I will not reply with "but what about..." or any such thing.)

I believe Scripture presents a senario where God's Divine omniscience spans and encompasses foreknowledge of all past, present, and future events.

__________________
"Sin fascinates you, then it assassinates you."

Rom 8:12-13 So then, brethren, if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Preach the Gospel at all times ... if necessary, use words. (St. Francis of Assisi)

Ok, you're getting there. That's a little more specific. But it's only a statement of the opposing viewpoint, and a declaration of belief that the Scripture supports this opposing viewpoint. This doesn't help me see why Open Theism is incorrect. I will not continue this further here; because, as I said, I am not looking for an argument, only instruction.

In closing, I think you find that if you examine the statement you have made and carry it out to it's full implications (Scriptural, philosophical, logical, and metaphysical), you will find that you have automatically answered the question with which you started this thread.

I have a answer for my question. I only submitted it to see how others would handle it, if at all. So far no one has actually attempted to deal with it.

__________________
"Sin fascinates you, then it assassinates you."

Rom 8:12-13 So then, brethren, if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Preach the Gospel at all times ... if necessary, use words. (St. Francis of Assisi)

Oh....duh!

(I can be particularly dense sometimes.)

Saints beware! - This guy or girl is offering you 'Open theology', a direct attempt to introduce a false God. A much more understandable God, who (despite the scriptures!) does NOT know the future, and Who just does the BEST He can, with what (unfortunately!) eventuates.

One such false shepherd, having assured one of his young female flock that 'A' was God's choice for her husband, THEN turned round and told her, upon the husband totally departing from her and Christian moral behaviour, that GOD was JUST as shocked & horrified as SHE was, and so UNDERSTOOD how she felt!!! - Any saint who falls for this abomination isn't simply reading the ample Scriptures enough, but is merely into proud philosophies and spurious theodices.

The "I AM" knows the 'end from the beginning'. As the good old creeds say;

I. God the good creator of all things, in His infinite power and wisdom, doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all His creatures and things,[1] from the greatest even to the least,[2] by His most wise and holy providence, to the end for which they were created, according unto His infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of His own will; to the praise of the glory of His wisdom, power, justice, infinite goodness, and mercy.[3]

II. Although in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first cause, all things come to pass immutably and infallibly;[4] so that there is not anything befalls any by chance, or without His providence;[5] yet by the same providence He ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.[6]

III. God, in His ordinary providence maketh use of means,[7] yet is free to work without,[8] above,[9] and against them[10] at His pleasure.

IV. The Almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in His providence, that His determinate counsel extendeth itself even to the first fall, and all other sinful actions both of angels and men;[11] and that not by a bare permission, which also He most wisely and powerfully boundeth, and otherwise ordereth and governeth,[12] in a manifold dispensation to His most holy ends;[13] yet so, as the sinfulness of their acts proceedeth only from the creatures, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.[14]


A

"This guy...is offering..."

Correction: "...was offering..."

In the two years since I recommended those books, I have, by the grace of God, been brought to a Reformed understanding of this topic, and totally agree with your warning, and thank you for it.