1 post tagged “foreknowledge”

Just over a year ago, I took a class in Game Theory (for those who don’t know what that is, the guy who developed most of it is John Nash, the subject of A Beautiful Mind).

In the class, one of the “games” we looked at was the interaction of a human and some higher being (usually referred to in the problem as God).  The game was set up like this:

·         There are two suitcases, one with one million dollars and one with one thousand dollars

·         You, as the human, take either one or two suitcases.

·         If God knew you would take one, you take the one with one million dollars.

·         If God knew you would take both suitcases, he puts one thousand dollars in one of them and takes the one million dollars from the other suitcase.

·         If you then take one suitcase and he predicted you take one suitcase, you would get one million dollars.

·         If you take two suitcases and he predicted you take one suitcase, you get 1,001,000 dollars.

So that makes the following payoff table, with God being the column player, and you being the row player:

Here is why this is a big game theory problem:

The dominant strategy for you, the row player, is to take both, because the payoffs are better for each prediction.  $1000 is better than $0 and $1,001,000 is better than $1,000,000.

However, consider if God is wrong 10% of the time:

EV(take both) = (.9*1000)+(.1*1,001,000) = 101,000

EV(take one) = (.9*1,000,000)+(.1*0) = 900,000

The expected values tell you that you should always take one.  In game theory, the dominant strategy and expected values are always supposed to support one another.

Some economic philosophers has speculated that this kind of a deep paradox proves that there is no God.

If you have read this blog before, you should know that I do not agree with the above position; in fact I readily maintain that there is a God who is active and present, especially shown to mankind through the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

The problem with the above “game” is that it assumes that God does not have definite foreknowledge (that he does not know the end from the beginning) and from there concludes that there is no God.  If we are considering a God like that, it is simple to disprove his existence.  This is exactly why I will maintain until the day I die that the God of the Bible has an exhaustive foreknowledge.  If we bend that doctrine at all, we end up not with a weaker God, but with no God.

It has become hip as of late, at least in philosophical circles, to question whether God knows the future.  While the Bible teaches clearly that God knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10), this should also compel us to hold onto the doctrine of God’s foreknowledge.  Believe me, I was one of those people, who tried to talk around this doctrine, to soften it; I have since been convicted of my error.  If we weaken this doctrine, all of a sudden we lose the ability to pray with confidence; we lose the comfort of the sovereignty of God.  And not only that: we lose God.  Might I submit that while the doctrine of God’s exhaustive foreknowledge is offensive to some, discarding it is offensive to God.  Who would you rather offend?

Now to him who can do more than we can ask, think, or even imagine.  To Jesus be all the glory forever and ever.  Amen.