Re:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?118651-Open-Theism&p=4756807&viewfull=1#post4756807
The argument presented in logical syllogism, e.g., "Yesterday God infallibly believed T" therein is from a book by Zagzebski. This has been discussed at length with Clete in the past in that she assumes God exists in time and not outside of time. See also:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?38999-ARCHIVE-Open-Theism-part-2&p=1733139&viewfull=1#post1733139
She (Zagzebski) readily concedes the logical syllogism fails for any view of God that assumes He exists in eternity. The link above is to one of three archived TOL discussions of open theism that you would profit from reviewing. The three open theism archive threads contain numerous rebuttals to open theism by some of the best members holding to the traditional Protestant views of the nature of God.
See also: http://goo.gl/LcxqHl
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?118651-Open-Theism&p=4756807&viewfull=1#post4756807
The argument presented in logical syllogism, e.g., "Yesterday God infallibly believed T" therein is from a book by Zagzebski. This has been discussed at length with Clete in the past in that she assumes God exists in time and not outside of time. See also:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?38999-ARCHIVE-Open-Theism-part-2&p=1733139&viewfull=1#post1733139
She (Zagzebski) readily concedes the logical syllogism fails for any view of God that assumes He exists in eternity. The link above is to one of three archived TOL discussions of open theism that you would profit from reviewing. The three open theism archive threads contain numerous rebuttals to open theism by some of the best members holding to the traditional Protestant views of the nature of God.
See also: http://goo.gl/LcxqHl
