3 of 3

Unlike human nature, God's knowledge is not partial or fragmentary, most importantly because God's knowledge does not occur "from a particular nexus of time." Rather, God "knows exhaustively, in eternal simultaneity." In short, God's knowledge is "incomparable." Surely this is what we should expect if we're dealing with God.

A word or two further regarding God's relationship to time might be appropriate, particularly in light of the openness model's contention that there are aspects of the future God does not know. I contend that this is incorrect, largely because God's relationship to time forecloses the possibility that God does not know all aspects of the future. Here Oden is again helpful. The argument runs along the following lines:

God's knowledge of the world is infinite. Hence, God in relationship to time "must be aware of duration and succession, even though not bound by them. If God did not understand duration and succession, God would understand even less about time than we do."

Even though God understands time, God is not trapped within it. God remains eternal. Thus, God "views all times as eternal now," while simultaneously understanding "the process of temporal succession." Here is a key distinction between divine and human knowledge. "We do not know next year until next year, but God knows next year already. We learn only successively through experiencing, but God does not have to learn something God already knows. We know things in part and by pieces, but God knows things fully, all at once," while still understanding duration and succession.

Thus, future events are not future for God, "but simply present." This seems to me to be a critical distinction that clearly sets off the classical model from that held by openness theologians.

Let me know what you think.

Chris

John Sanders replies, next page.

Copyright © 2001 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

first page |  3 of 3

share this page

May 21 2001, Vol. 45, No. 7