Time is how we perceive things, and is known to be a part of the fabric of the universe, e.g. gravitational time dialation.
Possibly, though you may be surprised that there are some creation scientists who do not buy into EinsteinÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s special theory of relativity. Why do I personally have a hard time with it? For a completely unscientific reason: Ã¢â‚¬Å“Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?Ã¢â‚¬Â (1 Cor 1:20). How many things can you think of that unbelievers discovered about fundamental science that is true?
that's what it means to be eternal. I'm not saying that he created the future, only that when he created the universe, he knew everything that would take place. I admit, that this is what I've been taught, and I'm not prepared to defend it with scripture.
That is also what I was taught, and believed until the last few years. Three years ago if I were to have died, and God asked me if He can Ã¢â‚¬Å“seeÃ¢â‚¬Â into the future, I would have said unequivocally Ã¢â‚¬Å“yesÃ¢â‚¬Â! If I were to die today, I would have to honestly answer Ã¢â‚¬Å“I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t knowÃ¢â‚¬Â! That is where I am at with this issue. Why? There are no verses that falsify the Open View (OV) position that the future does not yet exist (if you find one IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d be very interested to see it, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve been searching for two years for one ). OV postulates that God cannot know something that doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t exist. He knows what the future holds because he will Ã¢â‚¬Å“bring it to passÃ¢â‚¬Â. There are so many verses that seem to better fit with this idea than the idea that God peers into the future, then tells us what will happen.
One way to falsify the OV is to find a verse that God knew us before we were conceived. Psalms 139 doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t do that (see below).
I don't much about Calvanism, other than it denies free will and, IMO, distorts the doctrines of election and pre-destination.
I agree, and why I will boldly predict you will change your view of Psalms 139, as I did just recently. Otherwise, it will force you into a strict Calvinist position. Let's take a look -->
PSA 139:16 Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Thy book they were all written, The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them.
What is the context of this passage? David is praising the awesome design of our God while we are in the womb!
Ps 139:13-16: For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.
This clearly must be referring to our time in the womb! The days fashioned for me Ã¢â‚¬â€œ in the womb! If not, then you have to become a strict Calvinist - I canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t see any other logical way out of this dilemma. Why? Then you have to admit that God ordained (NAS; NKJV above that uses Ã¢â‚¬Å“fashionedÃ¢â‚¬Â) the death of Susan SmithÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s kids, the kids at Columbine, all the murders throughout history! This is one of the bizarre positions that Calvinists are forced to hold, but it is completely unjustified by scripture, being contrary to GodÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s attributes. We know this cannot be true and must be rejected because of scores of other scripture (i.e. God is not the author of evil, i.e. Deut 32:4, God is longsuffering that *all* be saved, etc). I believe such an idea that our days are all ordained is unsupportable in scripture short of wrenching Psalm 139 out of its context. What is interesting is most Christians will on one hand say that God did not pre-ordain all the murders, and on the other hand unwittingly support Psalms 139. But once the context is understood, the problem goes away. If the word ordained was not used here, it would be a little bit harder sell to claim the passage referred to the womb, we would essentially be left guessing. But ordained was used, so we don't have to guess - -it clearly must mean the womb, or else lots of other scripture have to be compromised.
BTW, Ã¢â‚¬Å“the lowest parts of the earthÃ¢â‚¬Â is an idiom for the womb (i.e. see Job 1:21).
Another thing to note Ã¢â‚¬â€œ this passage when taken to mean God ordained all our days, has been used to justify apathy toward abortion by Christians. I think we have to seriously reconsider our long taught, Christianity 101 view of this scripture. I can see why OV proponents so often point to the heavy Greek pagan influence on Augustine (and subsequently Calvin) that permeates most of Christianity, and why we need to reject it. It just doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t fit.