All Posts

Calvinists often cite Isaiah 10 as evidence that God deterministically caused the Assyrian invasion of Israel. They claim that because God sent Assyria as a tool of judgment, and later punished them, this supports the idea that God ordains all events—including human sin—while remaining just in holding people accountable for actions they could not have avoided. Isaiah 10:5-6 Woe to the Assyrian, the rod of my anger, in whose hand is the club of my wrath! I send him against a g

I recently posted this tweet (X) for my Calvinist friends to consider: Here’s the argument I want my Calvinist friends to consider: If God determines all things, then He determines every thought, belief, and action. All people—including Christians—hold false theological beliefs. Therefore, God determines all people to affirm false theological beliefs. A being who intentionally determines people to believe falsehoods about ultimate reality is—by definition—functioning as a dec

In the previous article, we looked in depth at the actual structure of Colossians 1:15-20. But what is the passage actually about? What is Paul writing to the Colossian believers? At its core, we find the message of vv. 15-20 is about Christ and his relationship to creation. As previously mentioned, each stanza—though in relation to one another—has a different theme. The first stanza is about Christ and his relationship with the original creation. The second stanza focuses on

The Apostle Paul is known for the power and elegance of his writing. Of the authors in the New Testament, none compare to his rhetoric. Though his writings take the form of letters, he manages to fill them with instruction, warnings, loving encouragement, and in some instances passages that are almost poetry. The two greatest examples of possible poetry are Philippians 2:6-11 and Colossians 1:15-20. The latter, Colossians 1:15-20 is the focus of our study. Like Philippians 2:

It amazes me how often—even in Christian circles—I hear people downplay, or even deny, that God must be worthy of worship. Some seem so committed to defending their particular view of Calvinism, Open Theism, or some other “ism” that they end up granting the claims of certain atheists: “Sure, maybe there’s a creator of the universe, but that doesn’t mean He’s a maximally great being or worthy of worship.” That’s a huge mistake—and completely unnecessary, especially when Molini

Over the past several weeks I’ve written a number of articles explaining why I believe Open Theism struggles to make sense of the biblical data. That was one of the main reasons I ultimately rejected Open Theism after leaving Calvinism back in 2010. At the time, I gave Open Theism a serious look. I studied Greg Boyd’s work and appreciated many of his insights. I liked his pastoral tone and his passion to defend God’s goodness. In fact, for quite a while I kept Open Theism “o

One of the clearest tests of divine authority in scripture is God’s ability to declare the future with precision and certainty. Isaiah 41:21–23 is not vague: “Declare to us the things to come. Tell us what the future holds, so we may know you are gods.” This is not a demand for moral wisdom or historical insight. It is a demand for foreknowledge. And not just general foreknowledge—it is a test of predictive specificity: “Tell us what is going to happen so that we may know you

As fireworks light up the sky and star spangled banners wave across the nation, many Americans pause on July 4th to celebrate the topic which was the focus of my doctoral dissertation—freedom. But why exactly do we celebrate freedom? Is it just tradition? Fireworks and grilled burgers or hot dogs? Or is there something deeper—something that reaches beyond politics and touches metaphysical reality? I believe there is. In fact, I’d argue that the 4th of July is one of the most

Every now and then, a golden nugget glints from an unexpected corner of Scripture—one that speaks directly to today’s theological debates. I was recently informed of one such gem that is buried in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) version of Psalm 139:16 (numbered as Psalm 138:16 in the LXX): “Thine eyes saw my unwrought substance, and all men shall be written in thy book; they shall be formed by day, though there should for a time be no one among them. ” —Psalm 138:16, LXX (Bren

Why Knowing Isn’t Necessitating, and Freedom Still Stands It seems obvious to me that if God creates a world in which nothing—neither the laws of nature nor any supernatural force— causally determines my mental or physical actions, then I possess genuine, libertarian freedom. Not only am I the source of my actions, but I can truly do otherwise—even if (in fact) I won’t. Let’s make it concrete. Imagine I choose to wear a red shirt today. Suppose it’s a fact that I won’t wear

Open Theists often argue that the future is not fully knowable because it consists of undetermined possibilities. They say God is omniscient—but only of what can be known. Since free choices haven’t happened yet, and aren’t “fixed,” they claim those choices have no truth-values until they occur. But this view runs headfirst into the very opening of Jeremiah. “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to

In my last post, I argued that future-tensed propositions involving libertarian agents can have truth-values. That knocked over the first domino in a logical sequence refuting the assertions of many in the Dynamic Omniscience and Open Theism (DO/OT) camp. Now it’s time for domino number two: the claim that counterfactuals of creaturely freedom (CCFs) also have truth-values . This is where things heat up. Dr. Alan Rhoda, a leading Open Theist philosopher, claims that “there i

The core claim of compatibilism—that moral responsibility is compatible with determinism—is crushed under the pressure of a simple but inescapable argument. If a person is morally responsible, then it must be the case that the person could have  chosen  otherwise. This is the essence of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP). But if exhaustive divine determinism is true, no one ever could have chosen otherwise, for every choice would be the inevitable result of divi

As a Mere Molinist, I've always considered Open Theists to be my theological allies in the battle against exhaustive divine determinism (EDD). Of course, I knew why I wasn't an Open Theist and knew the problems with the view, but I had no desire to fight my friends in public. This is the case because I sincerely believe that EDD is far more dangerous than Open Theism. But then my Open Theist friends, such as Warren McGrew and Pat Patel, started coming after Molinism in genera

A friend of mine recently challenged the idea that God has exhaustive foreknowledge, arguing that the plain reading of Scripture favors Open Theism—that is, the view that God doesn’t (and can’t) know what libertarianly free creatures will do in the future. He suggested that when Isaiah says God declares the end from the beginning, it doesn’t really mean what it sounds like. Instead, God is just predicting outcomes on a short enough timeline that observers can see He’s behind

Recently, a Calvinist philosopher attempted something rather surprising: he came to the defense of Open Theism after I published several articles critiquing the view . This was unexpected, given his usual opposition to any view that affirms libertarian freedom. But in this case, it seems his disdain for Molinism made Open Theism look like the lesser evil. The context was a discussion of Jesus’ famous prophecy about Peter : “Truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “this very night

One of the most compelling episodes in the Gospels is Jesus’ famous prediction of Peter’s denial: “I tell you, Peter, the rooster will not crow today until you have denied three times that you know me.” (Luke 22:34) It’s the kind of moment that punches you in the gut—Jesus, calmly foretelling the failure of His closest friend. The scene is striking—not only because of the personal betrayal, but because of the startling precision and quiet confidence with which Jesus delivers

Open Theists often argue that God does not know future free decisions—not due to any lack of power or intelligence, but because, on their view, there is simply nothing there to be known. On this model (especially in its “Dynamic Omniscience” form), God knows all truths—but future-tensed propositions about libertarianly free choices are simply not true yet. They don't exist. As a result, God doesn’t have beliefs about them and can’t be wrong. But here’s the dilemma: Scripture

I first became aware of Brandan Robertson through TikTok. Brandan has over 250,000 followers on the platform and often goes viral for his takes on progressive theology. His following on Instagram (17+ thousand) and X (22+ thousand) is modest in comparison, but his influence on progressive theology is only increasing. Queer and Christian: Reclaiming the Bible, Our Faith, and Our Place at the Table is currently the #1 new release on Amazon in the category of “Gender and Sexua

Can God really know the future, or does He just make really good predictions? Some Open Theists claim God “knows” the future—not because He sees it as it truly is, but because He exhaustively understands all possibilities, necessities, and creaturely tendencies. That might sound impressive, but is it really knowledge—or is it just a glorified divine guess? That question was insightfully raised by Taylor, a commenter on my recent blog. He wrote: "When I think of God ‘knowing’