ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[patman]

Hilston, what is even more confusing is you say God authored sin for person A and B and guy C 1,2,3,4 and Q and he himself is still good for doing it.

Which is more likely, that he planned all the different mode swings of man or he gave us freewill and is able to treat each of as we deserve?

 

[Hilston]

Open View Theology, Open Theism, or whatever it may be called, is the view about God that I strongly believe.

This view is about our God of the Bible, and His ability to have feelings, passion, remorse, anger, expectations, sorrow, as well as the ability to do anything He wants to do ...

Notice the heavy existentialism, humanism and irrational emotionalism in these words. It's all about what God is "able to do," what God is "able to feel," with no regard for who God is in His essence. It's as liberal as an Al Franken bumper sticker and as gay as pink shirt. It's no wonder that Open Deists are clueless when it comes to God's impassibility and immutability. While Bob Hill's view may very well be about a conception of a God who has the "ability to have feelings, etc.," this does not describe the God of the Bible. Sure, the Bible describes God in emotional terms, very often figurative, but the Open Deist makes it all about encumbering God with the emotional vicissitudes of humanism, turning God into a psychological packmule who must simultaneously hold tens of thousands if not millions of emotions, all at once, as He personally, relationally, lovingly reacts to each and every person who happens to come into His range of experience.

... This theology is based strictly on the Bible’s statements about our glorious God.

That's very close to what Lucifer said in the Garden.

It is the biblical theology that shows that God gave man enough freedom to believe God when God said he may be saved by believing in Jesus Christ as his Savior because He died for him.

And so Bob Hill thus promotes a humanistic man-must-save-himself soteriology. And despite God supposedly giving man "enough freedom to believe God," God's design of mankind was so poor and flawed that, despite this so-called freedom, the vast majority of His pinnacle creation flip God the bird and choose hell instead. God couldn't even design free beings of which most would choose to love Him. Instead, He did the best He could and created free beings of which the vast majority defy Him and reject Him. And you trust this God of yours? Why? On what grounds?

Open Theism also believes God has the ability to change His mind or repent about something He said He would do. He usually does this when man has done something to cause God to either repent from harm that He said He would do, or repent from something good that He said He would do for man, but because man sinned, He now says He will not do it.

Such is the emotional whirlwind that is the Opposable Thumb God. God is so distracted by feeling joy, sorrow, grief, delight, anger, regret, love, frustration, surprise and hatred simultaneously that He needs finite errant men to pray and remind Him of what needs to be done in the world.

It is also the answer to the Calvinistic view that God predetermines everything that has happened and will happen. We have much material on this subject on our site, biblicalanswers.com.

At that website, you'll find material that cites Calvinism, distorting and disregarding the context of the excerpts, quoted by all the inbred Open Deists on TOL, thus perpetuating the distortions found on that site. It has the added benefit of showing the world that Open Deists care very little for academic integrity and careful scholarship and frankly are not to be trusted to accurately represent their opponents' viewpoint (all according to God's decree, of course).

I learned about this position a little over 45 years ago. At that time, I knew of no one who believed it. That has dramatically changed in the last 25 years.

False theology is funny that way. It's starts small, appeals to the lowest common denominator, then explodes into a disgusting theological mess, blowing debris all over the place, most of it landing in hell (all according to God's decrees, of course).

This view of God shows how wonderful He is in all of His glory.

On the contrary, the Open View shows, according to the logical conclusions of their assumptions, what a massive Loser, a psychotic emotional hurricane, and a blithering Schlub He is.

 

[Hilston]

Hilston, It is not hard to have different feelings towards different people and still be the same person.

Is that how Open Theism defines being relational, personal and loving? "Having feelings toward" someone? Open Theists talk about having a personal, loving relationship with God. Is that all it is? God having "feelings" toward you?

Is he eternally mad at Israel because of his extreme impassability?

It's clear that you don't understand the doctrine of impassibility.

God is a rock in someways. he is father too. This isn't a concept that I make up, the Bible is full of examples.

But you did make up the idea that God is NOT a rock, didn't you? The Bible was full of those examples as well.

... He even tells Israel he will not be angry with them forever, how can you not take that as change?

I do take that as a change. Who are you talking to, patman?

I would like to go into a little more detail with you, but I feel it would be a waste of time because you do not address any of my questions from the Bible.

Which one's have I missed? Or have you forgotten who you're talking to?

... If I were to quote you scripture you'd just call me "stupid" and not tell me why you disagreed.

You must have me confused with someone else, patman. I dont' think I've ever used the term "stupid" in this forum. And I don't think I've ever failed to tell someone why I disagreed with their interpretation of scripture. So either this is just libel on your part, or you have a bad memory.

It seems all I can give to you is milk,, when you should be ready for the meat.

Oh please. So now you're the apostle Paul?

Hilston, what is even more confusing is you say God authored sin for person A and B and guy C 1,2,3,4 and Q and he himself is still good for doing it.

And you chide me for not being ready for meat? You're clueless, patman. Try to get this: Since when does being the author of sin make the author sinful? Is my daughter sinful for imagining a story in which one of the characters tells a lie to another character? Should she be reprimanded for authoring evil?

Which is more likely, that he planned all the different mode swings of man or he gave us freewill and is able to treat each of as we deserve?

False dichotomy, patman. It is of absolute necessity that God planned the capriciousness of human beings AND that He gave man freewill AND that He is able to treat each man as he deserves. But I fully expect this to confuse you.

 

[RobE]

Hilston: God planned but is not the immediate cause of evil.

Where does it say or show in the Bible that.



Bob Hill

Matt. 12:40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Matt: 26:

1When Jesus had finished saying all these things, he said to his disciples, 2"As you know, the Passover is two days away—and the Son of Man will be handed over to be crucified."

3Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, 4and they plotted to arrest Jesus in some sly way and kill him. 5"But not during the Feast," they said, "or there may be a riot among the people."

18He replied, "Go into the city to a certain man and tell him, 'The Teacher says: My appointed time is near.

31Then Jesus told them, "This very night you will all fall away on account of me, for it is written:
" 'I will strike the shepherd,
and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.'[c] 32But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee."

53Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?"

55At that time Jesus said to the crowd, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. 56But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled." Then all the disciples deserted him and fled.

Mark 8:31He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
33But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."

Mark 9:31because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise."

Mark 10:32They were on their way up to Jerusalem, with Jesus leading the way, and the disciples were astonished, while those who followed were afraid. Again he took the Twelve aside and told them what was going to happen to him. 33"We are going up to Jerusalem," he said, "and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, 34who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise.

John 19:11Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin."

Hebrews 5:8Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him 10and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.

Rob

 

[Hilston]

Where does it say or show in the Bible that

"God planned but is not the immediate cause of evil."

Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. (Isa 53:1-10)

The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: ... for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad. (Mt 26:24,31)

t is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought ... and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him. Mr 9:12,13

Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. (Luke 18:31)

For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. (Lu 22:37)

And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. ... And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: (Lu 24:44,46)

And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre. (Ac 13:29)

Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: (Ac 2:23)

For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. (Ac 4:27,28)

Only in the mind of the Open Theist was the execution of Christ NOT authored by God. Only in the mind of the Open Theist was the execution of Christ optional. Only in the mind of the Open Theist does "as it is written" actually mean "as it just so happened by chance." This is the irrationality and mental Chinese acrobatics that is Open Theism.

 

[Hilston]

This is getting ridiculous. Someone ~ anyone, it doesn't matter who ~ please help your friend Clete, because I think he has lost his mind. Open Theism has finally done him in. If you've already told him, please tell him again, for his own good, to put me on his ignore list.

Perhaps you're incredulous. Perhaps you don't think it's as bad as I'm describing it. But check this out. I found yet another Clete bomb in my negative rep rubbish bin this morning:

I don't read your post Jim, I simply scan them for references to me or my posts. All I want is for you to begin to act as though I do not exist.

Notice that he claims not to read my posts. Yet, he had to read my post in order to know that I was urging his friends to tell him not to read my posts.

Then he says he wants me to "begin to act as though" he does not exist. Note the Hollywood-liberal-victim mentality going on in Clete's mind: Clete is the one with the problem, but he expects other people to take responsibility for it. Why should I be the one to have to pretend he doesn't exist, especially when there's a fully functional "ignore list" option that he could easily use so he never has to read any of my posts?

Moreover, how can I begin to pretend that Clete is dead or doesn't exist when, everytime he posts comments to me in my rubbish bin, he resurrects himself and reminds me that he is alive and well?

Since March, when Clete originally asked me to pretend he's dead, Clete has continued to talk about me, has insulted me and has misrepresented me in dozens of his posts. Is this the behavior of a dead man? Are these the actions of someone who really wants me to pretend he doesn't exist? There's a variation of passive-aggressive pathology going on here, and it can't be healthy.

Pay close attention, all you Open Theists, because you are seeing your future. Whatever damage Open Theism has done to your mind thus far pales compared to what awaits you. Clete is your future. You have been forewarned.

All according to God decrees, of course.
Jim

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Hilston,

Any comments on my last post? (#3597)

 

[godrulz]

Drugs can affect your brain, but I do not think Open Theism can mess it up :doh:


Is still did not catch your answer why or how it is all according to God's decrees for us to believe the 'error' of Open Theism when it is the Holy Spirit's job to lead us into all truth? This seems like a contradiction (decretal systems are flawed).

 

[Delmar]

Notice the heavy existentialism, humanism and irrational emotionalism in these words. It's all about what God is "able to do," what God is "able to feel," with no regard for who God is in His essence. It's as liberal as an Al Franken bumper sticker and as gay as pink shirt. It's no wonder that Open Deists are clueless when it comes to God's impassibility and immutability. While Bob Hill's view may very well be about a conception of a God who has the "ability to have feelings, etc.," this does not describe the God of the Bible. Sure, the Bible describes God in emotional terms, very often figurative, but the Open Deist makes it all about encumbering God with the emotional vicissitudes of humanism, turning God into a psychological packmule who must simultaneously hold tens of thousands if not millions of emotions, all at once, as He personally, relationally, lovingly reacts to each and every person who happens to come into His range of experience.

That's very close to what Lucifer said in the Garden.

And so Bob Hill thus promotes a humanistic man-must-save-himself soteriology. And despite God supposedly giving man "enough freedom to believe God," God's design of mankind was so poor and flawed that, despite this so-called freedom, the vast majority of His pinnacle creation flip God the bird and choose hell instead. God couldn't even design free beings of which most would choose to love Him. Instead, He did the best He could and created free beings of which the vast majority defy Him and reject Him. And you trust this God of yours? Why? On what grounds?

Such is the emotional whirlwind that is the Opposable Thumb God. God is so distracted by feeling joy, sorrow, grief, delight, anger, regret, love, frustration, surprise and hatred simultaneously that He needs finite errant men to pray and remind Him of what needs to be done in the world.

At that website, you'll find material that cites Calvinism, distorting and disregarding the context of the excerpts, quoted by all the inbred Open Deists on TOL, thus perpetuating the distortions found on that site. It has the added benefit of showing the world that Open Deists care very little for academic integrity and careful scholarship and frankly are not to be trusted to accurately represent their opponents' viewpoint (all according to God's decree, of course).

False theology is funny that way. It's starts small, appeals to the lowest common denominator, then explodes into a disgusting theological mess, blowing debris all over the place, most of it landing in hell (all according to God's decrees, of course).

On the contrary, the Open View shows, according to the logical conclusions of their assumptions, what a massive Loser, a psychotic emotional hurricane, and a blithering Schlub He is.

The Bible describes God as emotional Jim, deal with it. If you are going to call the Biblical discriptions of God "figures of speech", make an attempt to explain what those "figures of speech" mean.

 

[Delmar]

This is getting ridiculous. Someone ~ anyone, it doesn't matter who ~ please help your friend Clete, because I think he has lost his mind. Open Theism has finally done him in. If you've already told him, please tell him again, for his own good, to put me on his ignore list.

Perhaps you're incredulous. Perhaps you don't think it's as bad as I'm describing it. But check this out. I found yet another Clete bomb in my negative rep rubbish bin this morning:

Notice that he claims not to read my posts. Yet, he had to read my post in order to know that I was urging his friends to tell him not to read my posts.

Then he says he wants me to "begin to act as though" he does not exist. Note the Hollywood-liberal-victim mentality going on in Clete's mind: Clete is the one with the problem, but he expects other people to take responsibility for it. Why should I be the one to have to pretend he doesn't exist, especially when there's a fully functional "ignore list" option that he could easily use so he never has to read any of my posts?

Moreover, how can I begin to pretend that Clete is dead or doesn't exist when, everytime he posts comments to me in my rubbish bin, he resurrects himself and reminds me that he is alive and well?

Since March, when Clete originally asked me to pretend he's dead, Clete has continued to talk about me, has insulted me and has misrepresented me in dozens of his posts. Is this the behavior of a dead man? Are these the actions of someone who really wants me to pretend he doesn't exist? There's a variation of passive-aggressive pathology going on here, and it can't be healthy.

Pay close attention, all you Open Theists, because you are seeing your future. Whatever damage Open Theism has done to your mind thus far pales compared to what awaits you. Clete is your future. You have been forewarned.

All according to God decrees, of course.
Jim

Clete is GREAT!

 

[nowheredude]

Clete is GREAT!

:up:

 

[Bob Hill]

Open Theism

What does it mean to be free? It at least means that one is able to make significant decisions. What if you discovered that all the choices you thought you made freely were mapped out in advance?

Here’s another question. Does God know everything that is going to happen in the future? This has been the teaching of orthodox Christianity from early on.

But let’s put these two together. If God knows everything that is going to happen, is there real freedom? Or, if we are truly free, can God really know the future entirely?

In recent years some evangelical scholars have rejected the view laid on us because of the influence of Greek philosophy, that God knows everything about the future. Interpretation of the Bible was based more on Greek philosophy than Scripture. What the Open View theologians see in Scripture, especially in the Old Testament, is a God who “flexes” with the actions and decisions of people, and even expresses surprise at what people do.

A number of articles and a few books have been written on the subject of open theism by Dr. Greg Boyd. I’ve read them all. Boyd asks many questions, but for me, the best one is: “Does God ever change His mind?” Boyd believes God does, because God knows little of what man is going to do in the future. Therefore, God has responded to man’s ridiculous behavior as we see in His Word.

We open theists believe that God knows the things that He is going to do and responds to human behavior in different ways. We see this in a number of places in the Bible. The Flood was God’s response to mankind’s most horrible desire for filth and degradation.
Gen 6:5-7 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”

Later, God had the same feelings about the people He was going to make His own.
Ex 32:9-14 And the LORD said to Moses, “I have seen this people, and indeed it is a stiff-necked people! 10 “Now therefore, let Me alone, that My wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them. And I will make of you a great nation.” 11 Then Moses pleaded with the LORD his God, and said: “LORD, why does Your wrath burn hot against Your people whom You have brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 “Why should the Egyptians speak, and say, ‘He brought them out to harm them, to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth’? Turn from Your fierce wrath, and repent from this harm to Your people. 13 “Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants, to whom You swore by Your own self, and said to them, ‘I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven; and all this land that I have spoken of I give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.’” 14 So the LORD repented from the harm which He said He would do to His people.

I’m thankful for our wonderful God.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Clete]

This is getting ridiculous. Someone ~ anyone, it doesn't matter who ~ please help your friend Clete, because I think he has lost his mind. Open Theism has finally done him in. If you've already told him, please tell him again, for his own good, to put me on his ignore list.

Perhaps you're incredulous. Perhaps you don't think it's as bad as I'm describing it. But check this out. I found yet another Clete bomb in my negative rep rubbish bin this morning:

Notice that he claims not to read my posts. Yet, he had to read my post in order to know that I was urging his friends to tell him not to read my posts.

Then he says he wants me to "begin to act as though" he does not exist. Note the Hollywood-liberal-victim mentality going on in Clete's mind: Clete is the one with the problem, but he expects other people to take responsibility for it. Why should I be the one to have to pretend he doesn't exist, especially when there's a fully functional "ignore list" option that he could easily use so he never has to read any of my posts?

Moreover, how can I begin to pretend that Clete is dead or doesn't exist when, everytime he posts comments to me in my rubbish bin, he resurrects himself and reminds me that he is alive and well?

Since March, when Clete originally asked me to pretend he's dead, Clete has continued to talk about me, has insulted me and has misrepresented me in dozens of his posts. Is this the behavior of a dead man? Are these the actions of someone who really wants me to pretend he doesn't exist? There's a variation of passive-aggressive pathology going on here, and it can't be healthy.

Pay close attention, all you Open Theists, because you are seeing your future. Whatever damage Open Theism has done to your mind thus far pales compared to what awaits you. Clete is your future. You have been forewarned.

All according to God decrees, of course.
Jim

:chuckle:

 

[Poly]

:chuckle:

You're going to end up making him crazier than he already is.

 

[Bob Hill]

Poly,

That's impossible.

Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

Clete,

Thanks for your posts.

In Christ,
Bob

 

[Outlaw]

Clete is GREAT!

According to God's decree, of course.

 

[patman]

:chuckle:

Clete, Hilston told someone, to tell someone I know, to tell me, to tell you we are all crazy and we should just do ourselves a favor end it all.

So he gave us this:

:readthis: <--click

It is instructions on how to take a paperclip, some rubber band and moist wads of paper to create a projectile weapon. We are to use this weapon on ourselves to end it all. He said it would be fast and painless, but it is for our own good. We should listen.

I took his advise very seriously(as I always do) and constructed one for myself, but still seem to be living... and Open Theist. I can't get it to work. What is wrong with me? (Dang O.T. infected brain :doh: )

So, I guess his advise isn't very good, but maybe you should give it a try. If it doesn't work for you either, you could try this:

I managed to print off a picture of Hilston's avatar to use for target practice. So this thing does works for that. Kinda helps take the edge off his rants even!

But anyway, Thanks Clete! We need more like you.

 

[patman]

Hilston, you asked, "Which one's have I missed? Or have you forgotten who you're talking to?"

It's clear that you don't understand the doctrine of impassibility....I do take that as a change. Who are you talking to, patman?

Seee? You got me again. I have no idea what you are talking about because you don't use complete answers.

It's just a "Your wrong," and "Please hate me..please," and then a "Your brain is melting from the O.V."

Well that leaves me with a lot to respond to,

 

[Bob Hill]

patman,

I too, see that it is no use to waste time with those who just like to call names or be extremely sarcastic. I want to enjoy the give and take on the Word of God. I have a better chance of learning more about our wonderful God.

Bob Hill