ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[RobE]

Let's try an analogy.

You own a 22' sailboat, and go sailing in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Oregon. You get caught in a wind, and wind up 20 miles out to sea, when you boat capsizes and sinks. Within 4 hours, you will be dead from hypothermia.

However, the coast guard has been monitoring you, and a helicopter is dispatched, and soon arrives at your location. A diver jumps into the water, and throws you a rope.

You grab the rope.

The diver pulls you into a basket, and you are taken up into the helicopter, and flown to safety.

Now, did you "save your self with help" by grabbing the rope? Or did you respond to the offer to be saved by grabbing the rope, so the Coast Guard could save you?

Michael

Let me adjust the scenario:

God creates the ocean, the ability to grab the rope, the rope, the helicopter, everything associated with the coast guard, and you. The coast guard flies out to you and lowers the rope and you tell them you don't need their help, and to go away.

Now, do you have the ability to save yourself or not? If so, where did you get that ability? If not, then why don't you have that ability?

Drowning in sin,
Rob

 

[RobE]

Yes to both.

So, when are you guys going to start arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? :chuckle:

Would that be a Bic pen or a Cross pen?

Rob :cheers:

 

[Sozo]

Does anyone have an opinion about Romans 7:17 that doesn't involve an obfuscating quagmire of philosophical arm-waving?

Well Jim, since you have such an exhaustive knowledge of terms, I think a Greek rendering of the word "now" would be an excellent place to start.

"So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which indwells me."

 

[RobE]

I would say that, ontologically, we are no different than Adam as he was created.

Michael

How about after we are saved? Flesh begets flesh, Spirit begets spirit. Don't we become a new creature in Christ? This is ontologically different, isn't it?

Rob

 

[themuzicman]

Let me adjust the scenario:

God creates the ocean, the ability to grab the rope, the rope, the helicopter, everything associated with the coast guard, and you. The coast guard flies out to you and lowers the rope and you tell them you don't need their help, and to go away.

Now, do you have the ability to save yourself or not? If so, where did you get that ability? If not, then why don't you have that ability?

Drowning in sin,
Rob

I don't disagree that God gave us the ability to choose. The key is that choice to believe doesn't save us. It's simply the condition God placed upon the offer of salvation.

Michael

 

[koban]

I don't disagree that God gave us the ability to choose. The key is that choice to believe doesn't save us.

You don't see choice as an inseperable aspect of the salvation process?

It's simply the condition God placed upon the offer of salvation.

Is that offer given to all or not?

 

[themuzicman]

How about after we are saved? Flesh begets flesh, Spirit begets spirit. Don't we become a new creature in Christ? This is ontologically different, isn't it?

Rob

I still think that Paul is referring to epsitimology and ethics, here. Natural birth results in the adoption of the worldy worldview. Spiritual birth results in the adoption of a spiritual worldview.

The problem with saying that our final condition is ontologically different than Adam's original nature is that Christ's work in restoring creation would be a failure. God's intent is to redeem and restore ALL of creation to His design, and if we're different in the end, God's purpose fails.

Michael

 

[themuzicman]

You don't see choice as an inseperable aspect of the salvation process?

Process:

Christ's propitiating act -> God draws (by teaching Jn 6:44-45) -> We hear and learn (Jn 6:45) and choose to believe (Jn 6:47) -> Process of sanctification (working out our salvation) -> physical death -> final resurretion and salvation.

Is that offer given to all or not?

Romans 5:18 says that Christ's act brought justification TO all men. Now, that doesn't mean that all are drawn, as per John 6:44.

Michael

 

[Sozo]

God's intent is to redeem and restore ALL of creation to His design, and if we're different in the end, God's purpose fails.

Michael

Where do you get this idea? God's intent is to give us His Life, to become partakers of His divine nature. To have unhindered, and unconditional fellowship with us, that cannot be broken.

 

[RobE]

Serious Question

Serious Question

I don't disagree that God gave us the ability to choose. The key is that choice to believe doesn't save us. It's simply the condition God placed upon the offer of salvation.

Michael

How do we reach a point where we can excercise that choice? Are we able to do it by ourselves?

Rob

 

[RobE]

I still think that Paul is referring to epsitimology and ethics, here. Natural birth results in the adoption of the worldy worldview. Spiritual birth results in the adoption of a spiritual worldview.

Process of man's completed ontology:

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

Gen 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.​

The problem with saying that our final condition is ontologically different than Adam's original nature is that Christ's work in restoring creation would be a failure. God's intent is to redeem and restore ALL of creation to His design, and if we're different in the end, God's purpose fails.

Christ's work was sufficient and the whole purpose of creation itself. For man to be "made" in His image would include man having the knowledge of good and evil. We in fact must die to the flesh and be 'born again' to the spirit. Flesh from flesh, Spirit from spirit. In spirit we have eternal life; whereas, in flesh we will be destroyed(eternally tormented) with the rest of creation at judgement.

Adam had no way of overcoming his own 'nature' without Jesus Christ because He is the ONLY way to the Father. Open Theism's assertion that Adam could have 'saved' himself is the problem with LFW, Pelagianism, and other assorted delusional states.

Our very essence must change or be condemned according to His word.

Grateful to Him,
Rob

 

[Hilston]

However, the coast guard has been monitoring you, and a helicopter is dispatched, and soon arrives at your location. A diver jumps into the water, and throws you a rope.

You grab the rope.

The diver pulls you into a basket, and you are taken up into the helicopter, and flown to safety.

Now, did you "save your self with help" by grabbing the rope? Or did you respond to the offer to be saved by grabbing the rope, so the Coast Guard could save you?

The analogy is flawed on many levels. A more biblical analogy would acknowledge that you're already dead when the Coast Guard gets there. Lu 9:60 Ro 6:13; 2Co 5:14,15 Eph 2:1,5,6; 5:14; Col 2:13. You couldn't grab the rope, because you're dead. In fact, you've been dead for days, and you stink. That's the analogy the Bible gives us in the story of Lazarus.

The biblical view is that Christ truly saves you from out of death. He regenerates you to life. The biblical teaching is that we were dead; completely unable to respond to God (Ro 8:7). Unable to see with dead eyes. Unable to hear with dead ears. Dead ears cannot hear. Lazarus could not have heard Jesus' voice when he was called out of the tomb unless God made Lazarus' ears work. Lazarus did not "grab a rope." God revived a dead man and restored all his faculties for him to respond and to come out of that tomb. The Biblical view is that we can truly thank God for saving us. He really did it. He didn't just provide a potential salvation for those smart enough to "grab the rope." He really saved us out of death, made us alive. He didn't just save us from dying. We died. He revived us. I can truly say "Jesus saved me." The Open Theist can only say, at best, "Thanks for the assistance."

The Open View teaches that men are their own Saviors. It is a works salvation. It is a self-absorbed, self-gloryifying, self-aggrandizing theology that exalts man and denigrates God (Job 40:8). The Open Theist worships the creature instead of the Creator (Ro 1:25), deifying Man to be His Own Savior, and humanizing god to be only a little higher than the angels (if that). The Open Theist wants the final word. And that's the bottom line: What good is Jesus' sacrifice? If it depends on you, then it's not sufficient. Jesus doesn't save. You do. It takes determination, tenacity, a strong-will to grab and hang on to that rope. Jesus' sacrifice doesn't save anyone. It's just a rope. A rope doesn't save.

What's the difference between the guy who doesn't take the rope and the one who does? The one who does is smarter, better, more reasonable, more thoughtful, more glorified. He has something to be proud of, a badge to wear on his chest, flowing robes, and trumpet to blast. "Great job, Open Theist! Way to go, man! You did it! You grabbed the rope! It's all you, baby! Sure, the rope was there, but what good is the rope if you don't grab it, right? You da man. You. Da. Man!!!" What about Jesus? Oh, Him? He's just a Rope.

 

[themuzicman]

Where do you get this idea? God's intent is to give us His Life, to become partakers of His divine nature. To have unhindered, and unconditional fellowship with us, that cannot be broken.

19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.

Notice that creation is a part of Christ's work, as we see also here:

15 And He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

Thus, Christ's work was to do more than just bring us eternal life. His work included redeeming all of creation, of which bringing us life is a key component.

If we are not restored as the rest of creation is restored, then Christ's work is incomplete.

Michael

 

[themuzicman]

How do we reach a point where we can excercise that choice? Are we able to do it by ourselves?

Rob

I point you to John 6:44-45.

44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. 45 "It is written in the prophets, `And they shall all be taught of God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

We are unable to come, until God draws us. What is God's drawing? It is being taught of God. Thus, we must hear and learn from the Father in order to come to Christ.

Michael

 

[Sozo]

Notice that creation is a part of Christ's work, as we see also here:



Thus, Christ's work was to do more than just bring us eternal life. His work included redeeming all of creation, of which bringing us life is a key component.

If we are not restored as the rest of creation is restored, then Christ's work is incomplete.

Michael

Nothing in any of those verses implies restoring things to their original state. Man is not going to become as he once was in the garden. That is a very hopeless view of the redemption.

 

[RobE]

Romans 8:19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.​

Do you deny the underlined scripture, Michael?

Rob Mauldin

 

[themuzicman]

Process of man's completed ontology:

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

Gen 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.​

The refernce to "knowing" in that last verse sounds very epistimological, to me.

Christ's work was sufficient and the whole purpose of creation itself. For man to be "made" in His image would include man having the knowledge of good and evil.

Why? Do you claim that Adam was omniscient?

We in fact must die to the flesh and be 'born again' to the spirit. Flesh from flesh, Spirit from spirit. In spirit we have eternal life; whereas, in flesh we will be destroyed(eternally tormented) with the rest of creation at judgement.

If you assume ontological change, then I suppose that would be the natural conclusion. I'm just not sure it's scriptural.

Adam had no way of overcoming his own 'nature' without Jesus Christ because He is the ONLY way to the Father.

So, Adam was created with a sinful nature?

Open Theism's assertion that Adam could have 'saved' himself is the problem with LFW, Pelagianism, and other assorted delusional states.

I believe Pelagianism said that post-fall man could save himself. I know I certainly don't embrace that.

Our very essence must change or be condemned according to His word.

Cite?

Muz

 

[themuzicman]

Romans 8:19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.​

Do you deny the underlined scripture, Michael?

Rob Mauldin

Not at all. Creation will be redeemed even as the judgment of mankind comes, and those who have receive salvation are revealed. Notice that creation is set free from its slavery to corruption. Who sets creation free?

Muz

 

[themuzicman]

The analogy is flawed on many levels. A more biblical analogy would acknowledge that you're already dead when the Coast Guard gets there. Lu 9:60 Ro 6:13; 2Co 5:14,15 Eph 2:1,5,6; 5:14; Col 2:13. You couldn't grab the rope, because you're dead. In fact, you've been dead for days, and you stink. That's the analogy the Bible gives us in the story of Lazarus.

The biblical view is that Christ truly saves you from out of death. He regenerates you to life. The biblical teaching is that we were dead; completely unable to respond to God (Ro 8:7). Unable to see with dead eyes. Unable to hear with dead ears. Dead ears cannot hear. Lazarus could not have heard Jesus' voice when he was called out of the tomb unless God made Lazarus' ears work. Lazarus did not "grab a rope." God revived a dead man and restored all his faculties for him to respond and to come out of that tomb. The Biblical view is that we can truly thank God for saving us. He really did it. He didn't just provide a potential salvation for those smart enough to "grab the rope." He really saved us out of death, made us alive. He didn't just save us from dying. We died. He revived us. I can truly say "Jesus saved me." The Open Theist can only say, at best, "Thanks for the assistance."

The Open View teaches that men are their own Saviors. It is a works salvation. It is a self-absorbed, self-gloryifying, self-aggrandizing theology that exalts man and denigrates God (Job 40:8). The Open Theist worships the creature instead of the Creator (Ro 1:25), deifying Man to be His Own Savior, and humanizing god to be only a little higher than the angels (if that). The Open Theist wants the final word. And that's the bottom line: What good is Jesus' sacrifice? If it depends on you, then it's not sufficient. Jesus doesn't save. You do. It takes determination, tenacity, a strong-will to grab and hang on to that rope. Jesus' sacrifice doesn't save anyone. It's just a rope. A rope doesn't save.

What's the difference between the guy who doesn't take the rope and the one who does? The one who does is smarter, better, more reasonable, more thoughtful, more glorified. He has something to be proud of, a badge to wear on his chest, flowing robes, and trumpet to blast. "Great job, Open Theist! Way to go, man! You did it! You grabbed the rope! It's all you, baby! Sure, the rope was there, but what good is the rope if you don't grab it, right? You da man. You. Da. Man!!!" What about Jesus? Oh, Him? He's just a Rope.

I believe your local strawman 503 will be by this afternoon to have a chat with you about your abuse and burning of their fellow members.

Muz

 

[RobE]

We are unable to come, until God draws us. What is God's drawing? It is being taught of God. Thus, we must hear and learn from the Father in order to come to Christ.

John 6:37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.​

Draws or gives?

John 6:64Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.​

Known before?

John 6:70Then Jesus replied, "Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!" 71(He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.)​

I wonder how Jesus foreknew this?

God's smarter than you think,
Rob