open theist don't believe God has foreknowledge
Strictly speaking, Open Theists are the ones who actually believe God can foreknow, because “fore” is a temporal word.
Your view is not really foreknowledge from God’s perspective. It is timeless knowledge.
Open Theism says God can know future events when those future events are knowable.
but if God did then it would be a force
No.
No one said foreknowledge is a force.
the only necessity is God believing it
That's not how this works.
“Necessity” means something cannot be otherwise.
If it is necessary that God infallibly believes they will not repent, and God’s infallible belief cannot be false, then they cannot repent without making God’s belief false.
So you cannot isolate the necessity in God’s belief and pretend it has no bearing on the event entailed by that belief.
If the belief is infallible, the contrary event is impossible.
modal fallacy , "will happen" and open theist switch it to "must happen"
No.
The argument is not, “It will happen, therefore it must happen.”
The argument is, “If God infallibly foreknows it, then it cannot fail to happen without making God’s foreknowledge false.”
You keep leaving out the word “infallibly.”
the necessity is in the truth of what God said will happen
God said Nineveh will be overthrown in forty days.
It never happened.
God said "that He will without fail drive out from before you the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Hivites and the Perizzites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Jebusites" - Joshua 3:10
It did not happen. (Judges 3:5)
God said He will make of Moses a great nation. - Exodus 32:10
It never happened, because Moses changed God's mind.
God said He would bring calamity upon Ahab.
It did not happen as originally announced.
MANY TIMES in the Bible God says He will do something that He never does.
opentheism.org
That is why Jeremiah 18 matters.
God Himself says that if He speaks concerning a nation to pluck up, pull down, and destroy it, and that nation turns from evil, then He will relent of the disaster He thought to bring upon it.
So you cannot simply point to prophetic language, even strong prophetic language like “without fail,” and say, “See? Exhaustive infallible foreknowledge.”
God said many things will happen. Not all of them did.
The entire Bible is full of examples of God not getting what He wanted to happen, what He said would happen, and what He willed to happen.
That shows irrefutably that the "future" contained within prophecy is not automatically necessity.
the necessity does not transfer to the people themselves , God knows they did not repent
Then answer the question directly.
If God infallibly foreknew before they existed that they would not repent, could they repent?
If yes, then God’s foreknowledge could be false.
If no, then they could not do otherwise.
That is not a modal fallacy. That is the consequence of infallibility.
(Revelation of John 9:20-21) [20] And the rest of the men who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and golden, and silver, and bronze, and stone, and wooden idols (which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk). [21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
Repeating the verses doesn't change anything, W2G.
I've already answered this prooftext.
That you keep reposting it instead of advancing the argument is your own error.
open theism modal fallacy, who is making the choice of did not repent
They are.
But if their non-repentance was infallibly foreknown before they existed, then they could not repent without making God’s foreknowledge false.
So again, the issue is not force.
The issue is whether the alternative was genuinely possible.
you do believe God has infallible foreknowledge of this?
No, not in the classical sense you are arguing for.
I believe Revelation is prophecy. I believe God can reveal future events. I believe Revelation 9 says they did not repent.
I do not believe that proves exhaustive infallible foreknowledge of every future free choice before those people existed.
(Revelation of John 9:20-21) [20] And the rest of the men who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and golden, and silver, and bronze, and stone, and wooden idols (which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk). [21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
Repeating the verses doesn't change anything, W2G.
I've already answered this prooftext.
That you keep reposting it instead of advancing the argument is your own error.
