What is the Biblical basis / defense for how Boethius used his concept of divine eternity to solve the foreknowledge problem for human free will?

### Background of the question **Bible and Philosophy together** The Bible is not a strictly philosophical text (although the Wisdom books in the Bible can arguably be called ancient Hebrew philosophy), yet there are many assertions about the nature of God that *invite* humankind to reflect *further* on humanity's (or a single human being's) **relationship with God**, that makes Christian philosophy a legitimate enterprise while remaining **truthfully** grounded in Biblical ***narrative* and *concrete*** revelation, since the philosophical mode is necessarily ***atemporal* and *abstract***. In this view, 1. proper Biblical exegesis (as [*salvation history*](https://www.crosswalk.com/faith/bible-study/what-is-salvation-history.html)) focusing on our *relationship with God* and on *redemption + sanctification + glorification* of humanity as **God relates with humankind *in time* and *in the flesh*** can work hand in hand with 2. *atemporal* reflections by our **God-given Intellect** to probe the depth of our existence & psychology, using all the faculties of our human psyche (which is ***our saved flesh***): passion, reason, will, happiness, purpose, emotions, memory, etc. One such Biblical assertion about the nature of God is the famous passage Isa 55:8-11 that has been used and abused in the service of *both* orthodoxy *and* heresies (such as Word of Faith), so it's not surprising that the *Catholic Culture* article cited below also cites that passage plus how Boethius works out Isa 40:22 philosophically. **Boethius and his definition of divine eternity** Humankind is created "tuned" for *both* narrative *and* atemporal reflection of God and Nature, which explains why Boethius's [*On the Consolation of Philosophy*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Consolation_of_Philosophy) remains popular maybe because Boethius was one of the most successful Christian thinkers who applied *both* Biblical truths and Philosophy to the human psyche. One sign of his continued relevance: in Nov 2024 Baptist historical theologian Gavin Ortlund reminded the faithful how Boethius is [The Most Neglected Theologian in All Church History](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYcIfZeXbe0) For those new to Boethian divine eternity concept, it's important get his definition right (from [Book V prose 6](https://www.exclassics.com/consol/consol.pdf)) . One translation: > “Eternity is the complete, simultaneously-whole, and perfect possession of interminable life.” (*aeternitas est interminabilis vitae tota simul et perfecta possessio*) Modern proponents use the Flatland analogy to help explain the relationship between the two horizons (eternal and temporal), before using it for many applications. For example, a major 21st century proponent of the Boethian solution, Eleonore Stump, also uses the analogy to explain Boethian relation of the 2 horizons before applying it of to flesh out *in psychological terms* how God is present to us and how God loves us **from His eternity to our time** (see her 2013 paper [*Omnipresence, Indwelling, and the Second-Personal*](https://philarchive.org/archive/STUOIA)) . Notice how the topic is *also* the #1 *narrative* theme in the Bible (namely, our personal relationship with God) and the paper illustrates how we can do proper **INTEGRATION** between what the Bible says (in its own mode of discourse) and the *atemporal* philosophical and psychological reflections **within our psyche** during our earthly life-span of about "70 years" (Ps 90:10), taking cues from how the Biblical Wisdom books *themselves* (Job, Psalms, Ecclesiastes, etc.) did these reflection in the ancient (Near Eastern) philosophical mode. **Boethian solution for "foreknowledge" and free will** Boethian concept of eternity is also often used to solve the problem of divine foreknowledge and free will, an enduring solution popularly called the "Boethian solution" outlined in [Book V prose 3-5](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Consolation_of_Philosophy) (see https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/111145/what-is-boethiuss-solution) that spells out *precisely* how God "might" from his *Eternal Horizon* interacts with us in the *Historical Horizon* in a way that preserves *both* Providence *and* free will. (I said "might" to acknowledge that philosophical thinking is *necessarily* speculative, although *grounded in the reality God created*, but also *necessary* to provide ourselves a good rational defense of the faith.) I still need to find a good, more rigorous paper on this, preferably one that compares this solution with a more common solution in terms of [compatibilism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism) , but a brief description can be found in [this *Catholic Culture* article](https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/never-failing-present-boethius-on-gods-eternity/) and [Gavin Ortlund's *Truth Unites* video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYcIfZeXbe0&t=467s) starting at minute 7:47. --------------- ### The question Sorry for the long (but necessary introduction) but my question is this: **how would proponents of the ["Boethian Solution"](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/111145/what-is-boethiuss-solution) (to solve the foreknowledge problem for human free will) give a *better* Biblical exegesis** than those who use the Bible to object, such as in [this answer](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/111146/10672) : > This theory contradicts the scriptural concepts which Paul expresses, namely foreknowledge, predestination and election. Of course **the answer needs to compare 2 Biblical exegeses** of the verses used to show how the one for the proponents is *the better and more responsible* exegesis. Example: the answer should avoid relying on the ambiguity of meaning by *mere citing* of open-ended phrasing of verses such as Isa 55:8-11, either by the **pro camp** (such as the *Catholic Culture* article above) or (on the other extreme) by the **opposing camp** (such as many Christians who use the same verses for *dismissing* the possibility of philosophical thinking on Biblical themes).