Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views

by Tiffany Clarke Harrison

Book Overview

Join Paul Helm, David Hunt, William Lane Craig and Gregory A. Boyd as they share four distinct views on the openness of God. Edited by James K. Beilby Paul R. Eddy.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0830826521
• ISBN13: 9780830826520
• Release Date: October 2001
• Publisher: IVP Academic
• Length: 221 Pages
• Weight: 0.80 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 6.0" x 9.0"

Customer Reviews

High quality arguments and interaction

This is not a book for the faint in heart (or should I say mind?) in that it took me a good three years just to get familiar with all the terms and issues that each of the authors understand and try (valiantly) to communicate. If you are looking for an introductory book to the various views of foreknowledge in Christian thought, this is probably the best option available, but newcomers to the debate will struggle. Seminary students or general students of the foreknowledge debate will enjoy it, though it is light on biblical exegesis (minus Boyd's chapter). Like it or not, philosophical theology weighs heavily in the foreknowledge debate, and it cannot be ignored. Yet there is nothing wrong with editing a book that explores those philosophical presuppositions which involve some very interesting and profound questions such as: 1) Is everything in the future knowable? 2) How are human beings free if God knows what they will do? 3) Does God's omniscience include knowledge of what we would or would not do in certain circumstances? 4) If God controls everything how could we be free agents? 5) Is world history fated to happen a certain way? Each author brings their own strengths to the debate. Paul Helm ably defends the Augustinian view from a Calvinist perspective. Craig carries the day with perhaps the best written and best argued essay on middle-knowledge. Hunt offers some helpful critiques of Augustinianism and Open theology that should not go unnoticed. And Boyd offers a biblically rooted case for Open Theism that must be dealt with seriously if it is to be rejected. If you are a looking for a fantastic educational experience on an important attribute of the divine character, this volume should be on your shelf.

Fantastic

I keep coming back to this book, re-reading the various arguments, especially Craig's and Boyd's summaries of their positions. A very useful Four Views book.

Excellent Introduction to the Foreknowledge debate

Most of the reviews on this page miss the boat entirely. Rather than actually reviewing or recommending DF the reviewers are merely venting their anger because their particular view is challenged. Pay them no mind. DF is an excellent book. Buy it and read all the views with as much of an open humble mind as you can. It's better than the alternative spoon feeding that is rampant in many circles of Evangelicalism today. The glossary is a great idea more publishers should follow.Keep em coming Eddy, Beilby, Gannsle ....etc.

Helpful Intro to Current Thinking on a Throny Problem

First off, I think we owe a good deal of gratitude to Inter Varsity for their "Four Views" series of books. (Or maybe we owe it to Zondervan. I'm not sure whose came first.) The format of reasoned debate in print between representatives of current major views on a controversial topic is the best way I can think of for the interested layman to begin constructing his own views.As for the book at hand, it presents a wide-ranging, though not exhaustive, spectrum of thought on how divine foreknowledge can be reconciled with human freedom. Gregory Boyd -- you've got to love him or hate him, it seems -- presents an "Open Theology" view, while Paul Helm takes the other extreme of pretty much traditional Calvinism. In the middle, David Hunt presents a simple foreknowledge view and William Lane Craig gives us the Molinist or "middle knowledge" perspective.Boyd's explication of Open Theology is a clear and well-reasoned argument, starting from scripture. He answers most objections quite well, though I think he is on some shaky ground when he talks about specific prophecies such a how Jesus knew that Peter would deny him exactly three times. In any event, after reading his essay, I would think that most readers could conclude that Open Theology, thought perhaps incorrect, is not the evil heresy that it is often said to be. But, if you read many of the reviews on this page, you will see that quite a few people disagree with me here.David Hunt gives a well-reasoned justification of the simple foreknowledge view that God simply knows what the future is going to be: He simply knows what it is that we will freely choose. After reading Hunt's essay, it seems to me that this view is the only real challenger to Boyd's open theism (or maybe vice versa).William Lane Craig is due a great deal of credit for making Molinism accessible to the lay reader. Though I had to read his essay twice to understand it, it is the first essay I have ever read that made sense of Molinism for me at all. One weakness of Craig's argument is that he simply assumes the possibility of truth in what are known as "counterfactuals of freedom". A counterfactual of freedom would be something like "If it is Sunday, Sam will freely go to church." But he never answers the question of how Sam can go to church *freely* if his going to church is *determined* by the fact that it is Sunday. (Was that confusing? Take heart. If you understood anything I just typed, you are in a better position to understand Craig's essay than I was.) Craig's essay was also disappointing in its tone. He is by far the most belligerent of the four writers. He is informative, but he is not pleasant to read.Paul Helm's essay from a Calvinist perspective was a bit of a disappointment. He spends alot of time arguing for why we need a compatiblist view of freedom, that is, a view in which God's foreordination and determination of our actions is completely consistent with our having the freedom to choose. But

Fine Introduction Into A Much Heated Controversy

Heresy-squelching, at least the way Calvin encouraged it (by burning people at the stake), is no longer a viable, legal way of handling people with "unorthodox" views. So, the only alternative left to classical Calvinists, and the one that is frequently and effectively resorted to the most, is the tactic of defaming and attacking (ala Luther style) the character and published works of those who veer too far away from the "proper" way of viewing things. The purpose of a book of this genre is primarily and essentially to invite dialogue and discussion. It is not necessarily the enforcement and establishment of a particular religion, thought, or ideal. Books like these are hallmarks of Americanism, beautifully eschewing the fact that the given predominance of a particular idea, however foreign, is a clarion call to their worth and value. The four views concerning divine foreknowledge represent and illustrate the current status of a sector of biblical scholarship where controversy is forthcoming and expected. Certain people will have you believe that their way is the ONLY way and arduously try to dissuade others from pursuing alternate lines of thinking while vehemently calling it heresy. Such monopoly of thought engenders the kind of stagnation and dimness of vision as displayed by the Pharisees of Jesus' day. Nonetheless, call it heresy or novelty, debates of this sort should and must be encouraged. The reader is "free" to align him or herself with whatever idea suits his or her conscience, while permitting others the same allowance - consequences and all. Much fruit and progress will result after careful assessment of all points of views. I hope the reader would let fair judgment to preside, giving no heed to closed-mindedness and prejudice.Read and let read.