In 2 Nephi 3, Lehi shares with his son Joseph a fascinating revelation that Joseph of Egypt¹ saw the Nephite day over a thousand years in the future as well as Joseph Smith’s day over 2000 years farther into the future. This example is often shared with me from my friends when we get farther along with the conversation about the openness of God. It is an excellent example to push us to think about God’s knowledge of the future and how He could know Joseph Smith’s name if His children made free choices from Joseph of Egypt’s day (1700 BC) to 1830 New England times.

Joseph of Lehi and Joseph Smith were not the only people named many years before their birth. Moses and Aaron (JST Genesis 50:34-35); Cyrus (Isaiah 44:28); Mary, the mother of Christ (Alma 7:10); John the Revelator (1 Nephi 14:27), and of course, Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 1:21)² were all names decades if not centuries before their birth. So we see that God knows facts or truths that are far into the future. From the very beginning, God uses the names of His children as prophecies, as teaching devices, and as constant reminders of our covenant responsibilities.² Joseph Fielding McConkie explains the importance of Joseph’s name.

Traditionally, the etymology of the name Joseph is given as “the Lord addeth” or “increaser.” Though appropriate, such renderings have veiled a richer meaning in the name as it is associated with the biblical story. The Hebrew text reads, “Asaph” which means “he who gathers,” or “he who causes to return,” or perhaps most appropriately “God gathereth.”

Timeless omniscience or omnipotence in time

Believing that God has an open future in a relationship with His children does not preclude that he can promise future events and bring them to pass. Open theism is not process theism. Process theism states that God started the world but then has little to no control of the process after His instigation. He can’t affect us in time at all. Open theism sees God as a relational being that provides an open future for His children to love Him. However, He still has power and agency to affect the present and the future at any moment. As we can see in scripture, He can speak a future disciple’s name, and that disciple comes in the future with the name.

One fascinating example of God’s intervention in the choice of a child’s name is in Luke 1:5-25 with the naming of John the Baptist. God intervened to inspire Zacharias to name him John. This story is dramatic in its intervention, but I am sure that there are many other stories with a ‘still small voice’ that moves a couple to name their son. Maybe Joseph Smith Jr’s naming was such an inspiration in that he was not the first or even second-born son.³ Yes, God can speak in history and use His power to bring that future to pass.

In discussing Isaiah’s naming of Cyrus over 100 years before his birth, we have a Biblical example of a similar phenomenon. Greg Boyd provides a keen insight that can apply to Joseph of Egypt’s vision of Joseph Smith as well.

This passage is not a “crystal ball” sort of prediction. It is rather a declaration of what the Lord himself is going to accomplish. He is going to “grasp the hand” of Cyrus and direct him. This doesn’t imply that everything about Cyrus was directed by God or that Cyrus was not a free moral agent outside of God’s declared intentions. And it certainly doesn’t imply that everything about the future is foreknown by God. It only implies that whatever God has already decided he’s going to do in the future is known by him before he does it. He foreknows it by knowing his own intentions in the present.

Yes, God did know and does know many of our earthly names well before our parents speak them. Some of those names are known by simple inference from what He has observed. Others are known because He has declared them. The example of Joseph Smith’s prophesied name does provide strong evidence that God knows facts about the future. However, the knowledge of Joseph’s name is not a ‘slam dunk’ witness for ‘fixed future omniscience’ or ’exhaustive specific foreknowledge’ as Pinnock describes. It is also a great example of how God can control the future by knowing his own intentions in the present. I think that this ability to plan and work with His children for the future is what President Eyring was implying in his last conference address.

The Lord saw it all coming. He planned for it, step by step, as He has done with other changes in His Church. He has raised up and prepared faithful people who choose to do hard things well. He has always been lovingly patient in helping us learn “line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.” He is firm in the timing and the sequence of His intentions.

I hope this post provided some context about what it means for God to have an open future. In having a free future, He has not left us or relinquished His agency, omnipotence, wisdom, or plan for the future. God is living with us in time and working with us to build Zion. While He lives with us in time, He invites us to live time differently. Adam Miller shared,

Time is at the heart of [God’s] vulnerability. Time and suffering appear inseparable. Without time, nothing can change. Without change, nothing can be lost. And without loss, there would be nothing to suffer. If Christ can weep [(Moses 7:28,33)], then time must matter to him. … Rather than being untouched by time, it seems to me that Christ is divine because he has a particular way of handling time. He handles time with care.

• commentary
• time
• openness
• omniscience