ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[elected4ever]

Do you believe that faith alone will save you and that there is nothing that we can do as humans to merit salvation?

Yes

Do you believe we are of a fallen nature and essentially evil?

I believe we are a fallen nature but not necessarily evil. We are dead to god by nature and we do our own thing regardless of the will of God. Whether the things we do are good or evil (morality) is in the eye of the beholder. God is not moral but righteous and we must be as god is or we are we will remain dead Salvation is giving life from the dead. If we receive life then we are not dead (in sin) and are not sinners. Only the dead (sinners) sin.(Commit dead works)

 

[Clete]

You did not answer the question nicely or otherwise. God can not commit an unrighteous act any more than a chicken can bark. It is not the nature of God to do unrighteously. It matters not one wit what our judgments of God's acts are. God cannot do unrighteously. Righteousness is not an act or a choice but a state of existence. God cannot act opposed to who He is.

You asked me a question and I answered it. Just because you disagree with the answer doesn't mean I didn't answer the question. I did answer the question and I supported my answer with a rational line of reasoning. You, on the other hand, seem to think that things are so just by virtue of the fact that you say them.

The term righteousness has a range of meaning which includes the concept of being in a state of right standing before God. This state of being could not apply meaningfully to God. It's sort of silly to say that God is in right standing with Himself. Thus I assumed (and rightly so) that you were using the term righteous in the sense of being morally good. This use of the term righteous presupposes choice. There is no moral implication when there has not been a willful choice made. A chicken is not credited morally for having clucked instead of having barked because the chicken does not make that choice. Likewise, if it is meaningful in any respect for us to call God a good God, then we imply when we say such things that God has chosen to be so.

This is also why faith means something to God. Gravity is a natural property of mass. It isn't a decision that mass makes; mass doesn't choose to generate a gravity field, it just does so by nature; it cannot do otherwise. Thus we do not trust the the Earth will hold us to its surface because it is not a matter of trust, it is a matter of fact. Likewise if God's goodness was not a choice, it would not be a matter of faith to trust in His goodness but merely a matter of fact. There would be no faith involved whatsoever. I trust God because I really do believe that He is good; that He chooses to act in my best interests and can be trusted to do so because of His character, not because He is incapable of doing otherwise. I trust in a living God, not a stone idol that can neither turn its head to the left nor the right.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Let's get to the real failure of the argument that Christian theologians like Augustine forged Greek philosophy with "original Christian way of thinking."

Paul of Tarsus was a Hellenized Jew from a city in Asia Minor. How was he able to convert the gentiles? By speaking on their terms and philosophy. Look at Corinthians or any other of the epistles addressed to the church of the Gentiles. They teem with Greek philosophy.

How about Luke a gentile convert. Are you saying he wasn't influenced by Greek philosophy.

Why were the Gospels written in the Greek?

Just when do you believe this influence of Greek philosophy started? At the very beginning of Christianity? The facts are overwhelming that it did.

I think you might be arguing from a false premise, which if so would explain the whole line of reasoning you've been putting forward.

We, as open theist, do not object to Greek philosophy per se. It is pagan, irrational and unbiblical Greek philosophy that we object too.

It is not that we say that a doctrine is false based solely on the fact that the Greeks believed it but rather, we use the fact that particular doctrines come directly from Greek philosophy to say that a second and thorough look at such doctrines is warranted on the basis that it may or may not be Biblical.

The Calvinistic understanding of Immutability (the cornerstone doctrine of Calvinism) is not Biblical but is indeed Aristotelian/Neo-Platonist. And those are two separate points. The assertion that the doctrine comes from Aristotle and Plato can be easily proven; the history is really clear and basically accepted universally to the point that the Westminster Confession openly uses Aristotle's own words to support their belief in the absolute immutability of God. The point about the doctrine being unbiblical is almost as easily proven. All one would need to do is read the book of Genesis, in which we find passages that kept Luther from accepting Christianity until his bishop interpreted them in light of the Classics. But the point here is that they are two separate points and that no one is saying that everything the Greeks ever did was evil and wrong.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[BillH]

Catholics have a tougher-minded criterion for "accepting Jesus", one that is lifelong

Catholics have a tougher-minded criterion for "accepting Jesus", one that is lifelong

Don't give me that crap. I married a Catholic. I know you teach works for salvation. I know you perform idle worship. I know that the RCC has no concept of what a saint is. I know that you practice ancestor worship. I know that you count beads like some buddhist monk. I know you pray to the dead, those who have pasted on before, when Jesus said whatever you ask in my name the Father in heaven will give it to you. The RCC is pure pagan. Your priest remind me of the witch of Endor.

Elected....Easy..patience..and kindness. Others will know us by our love and by our fruits.

First, marrying a Catholic doesn't by itself mean anything. There are many people holding a faith who don't understand it. This is a bad "appeal to authority".

We don't teach works for salvation. Absolutely false. Find in the Catholic Catechism any such notion. We hold that we "believe" with our life, we love with our whole life, we "accept Jesus" with our whole life. Only that kind of "tough-minded" response to God's love is complete and sincere...vs...what someone says on an altar call, one emotionally moving night.

The acid test of real belief, the proof of really saying Yes, "Lord I believe"..is to believe with your whole life. Love is action. Belief is action. Acceptance is action.

In both Protestant and Catholic cases...each believes that the receiver in some manner cooperates, ascedes, yields, "accepts" God's call. In both cases there is an "action". Accepting is still an action. Catholics just happen to believe that the act of "accepting" continues and is life long.

In the same way that Jesus's love for us wasn't done until he died....our love to Jesus, our response to Jesus isn't over until we die. Our "acceptance" of the Lord as "our personal Lord and Savior" is a life-long response.

A saint is nothing more than a soul in heaven. We are all called to be saints.

Protestants also ask others to pray for them. Catholics do as well...those living on earth..and those who are now living with Christ....we just realize that death doesn't separate Christians...we are still connected through the Body of Christ. That's what "communion of saints" means.

Why do Protestants ask others to pray for them..why are there community prayer lists.

 

[baloney]

So if I use Greek philosophy and prove that its rationally sound, then there shouldn't be a problem right?

Before we get into actual debates about open theism, couldn't it be easily argued that Since Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk, followed the rule of St. Augustine and his whole way of thinking about justification etc. came out of that school of thought of the Augustinians,

then couldn't one easily argue that the whole Protestant reform has been heavily influenced by Augustine and according to you statement about Calvin, Aristotle as well?

 

[elected4ever]

Elected....Easy..patience..and kindness. Others will know us by our love and by our fruits.

First, marrying a Catholic doesn't by itself mean anything. There are many people holding a faith who don't understand it. This is a bad "appeal to authority".

We don't teach works for salvation. Absolutely false. Find in the Catholic Catechism any such notion. We hold that we "believe" with our life, we love with our whole life, we "accept Jesus" with our whole life. Only that kind of "tough-minded" response to God's love is complete and sincere...vs...what someone says on an altar call, one emotionally moving night.

The acid test of real belief, the proof of really saying Yes, "Lord I believe"..is to believe with your whole life. Love is action. Belief is action. Acceptance is action.

In both Protestant and Catholic cases...each believes that the receiver in some manner cooperates, ascedes, yields, "accepts" God's call. In both cases there is an "action". Accepting is still an action. Catholics just happen to believe that the act of "accepting" continues and is life long.

In the same way that Jesus's love for us wasn't done until he died....our love to Jesus, our response to Jesus isn't over until we die. Our "acceptance" of the Lord as "our personal Lord and Savior" is a life-long response.

A saint is nothing more than a soul in heaven. We are all called to be saints.

Protestants also ask others to pray for them. Catholics do as well...those living on earth..and those who are now living with Christ....we just realize that death doesn't separate Christians...we are still connected through the Body of Christ. That's what "communion of saints" means.

Why do Protestants ask others to pray for them..why are there community prayer lists.

Your hulusinating.. You cannot accept Christ and remain dead. Your life is really death just like all of us once were. You are a saint only after you have received God's life. It does not matter what you do if you have not accepted Christ. No one on earth has the power to forgive sins. No priest can give absolution to anyone. No power on earth can impart life.

 

[BillH]

Remain in me, and I will remain in you.

Remain in me, and I will remain in you.

Your hulusinating.. You cannot accept Christ and remain dead. Your life is really death just like all of us once were. You are a saint only after you have received God's life. It does not matter what you do if you have not accepted Christ. No one on earth has the power to forgive sins. No priest can give absolution to anyone. No power on earth can impart life.

Elected: You missed the point and are forgetting the Bible.

Jesus said: "Remain in me" not you're "electedforever".

"accept" can as easily be considered a lifelong process. "Receiving" can also be considered a continuous process...a life line to Jesus.

Here are some passages from the Gospel of John to reflect on.

John 15:4 Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.

John 15:6 If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

John 15:7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you.

John didn't write anything about an "altar call"...or about any discrete, single point in time, a single moment.

 

[baloney]

http://heritage.villanova.edu/vu/heritage/allthings/1999Wa.htm

This short writeup gives a clear understanding how Luther's zeal for Augustine lead to the idea of faith alone.

 

[Lon]

Except that the historical linkage between Reformed theology is not disputed even by Calvinists. The Westminster confession uses Aristotle's own arguments, for crying out loud. It's very clearly documented for anyone to look up and discover for themselves. You, on the other hand are relying on second hand source of information which you are either unable or unwilling to cite.

So I still don't get your point. Are you arguing that these ideas are correct because the Jew supposedly believed them? If so, then I have to tell you that what the Jews believed is not the standard for faith and practice in the Christian faith. I don't care who believed what, if a doctrine is either unbiblical or irrational then it is false - period.

Resting in Him,
Clete

That is your perogative, but with traditional commentaries pointing to the fact that they did believe such, then it would support that the Greeks sometimes got it right, not that Hebrews have it wrong. It would in fact, be very dire evidence against OV. It'll open up a can of worms OV simply will not be able to put a lid on.

 

[elected4ever]

Elected: You missed the point and are forgetting the Bible.

Jesus said: "Remain in me" not you're "electedforever".

"accept" can as easily be considered a lifelong process. "Receiving" can also be considered a continuous process...a life line to Jesus.

Here are some passages from the Gospel of John to reflect on.

John 15:4 Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.



John 15:6 If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

John 15:7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you.

John didn't write anything about an "altar call"...or about any discrete, single point in time, a single moment.

lets contenue on, shall we

John 15:11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.
12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.
15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.
16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
17 These things I command you, that ye love one another.

There is no commandment that the Lord gave other than to love one another. The purpose of loving one another is that the joy of Christ will remain in you. The Apostle John repeated this desire in 1 John 1:4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.. he also said, 1 John 3:1 ¶Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.
4 ¶Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
11 ¶For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.
13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.
14 ¶We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
20 ¶For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.
22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
23 ¶And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

As far as a child of God sinning the apostle said it was impossible. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Jesus said that being born again was a necessity. "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

The Apostle John also said, 1 John 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14 ¶And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
17 ¶Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.

How did we receive this new birth and love with a Godly love?

First, we must realize that we need Christ, 1 John 1:5 ¶This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8 ¶If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

When we accept this truth and we come to Christ the following is true, 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
has Jesus been faithful and just to you? Has Jesus forgiven you sin? Has Jesus cleansed you from all unrighteousness? If he has the Father has birthed witin you a new Spirit born of his seed and you are no longer a sinner but a new, righteous creation. Old things have passed away and all has become new regardless of what those who lord it over you have to say about it.

The apostle Paul has this to say, Romans 8:1 ¶There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 ¶And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

 

[BillH]

"Remain in me".

"Remain in his kindness or you will be cut off"

"keep the commandments"

"he who keeps my commandments loves me"

nothing counts but faith working through love

Those who persevere to the end will be saved

He who endures to the end will be saved.

Drive body for fear of being disqualified

Those thinking they are secure may fall

Must hold out to end to reign with Christ

If sin after receiving truth judgment remains

 

[baloney]

Bill and elected can you take your spat someplace else?

 

[BillH]

Baloney, sure....I thought it had relevance because of the pivotal difference and focus of "being saved" as a discrete, completed past act...vs. "being saved" as an ongoing/ever present response to God.

Here's why : I believe our view of time and where God is in time, has consequences for our understanding of what Love really is. In other words, if God is only in the present....we can only love in the present. This immediacy and "presence" of God's available love helps us wash away fuzzy ideas about what Love really is. It's not a future intention, it's not an emotion...it's present, self-sacrificing action in the model of Jesus on the cross.

we can only love "in the present"...because that's only where God is.

I think I'll stay but discipline myself to focusing on the title of this thread...not necessarily where's it's devolved to, part of which is clearly my fault.

Thank you for the reminder.

 

[elected4ever]

"Remain in me".

You cannot remain in Christ unless you are a new creation

"Remain in his kindness or you will be cut off"

You must be born of the seed of God if you are to remain in his kindness.

"keep the commandments"

You can't keep the commandments if you remain in the flesh. You must be born again.

"he who keeps my commandments loves me"

Only those who are as Jesus is can keep His commandments.

nothing counts but faith working through love

Nothing counts but the righteousness of God which the flesh does not have. We must be born of the Spirit to receive God's righteous character

Those who persevere to the end will be saved

Only those who God has made righteous will persevere

He who endures to the end will be saved.

The flesh will not endure

Drive body for fear of being disqualified

Clarify

Those thinking they are secure may fall

clarify

Must hold out to end to reign with Christ

We reign with Him now. Why wait?

If sin after receiving truth judgment remains

You can receive the truth and not believe it and yes judgment remains. You have read it so you have received it and you have not believed it so you remain in judgment.

Your Eternal Future:execute:

 

[BillH]

As a courtesy to baloney, we can take this elsewhere....fwiw..those are quick paraphrases of Bible verses...using biblegateway.com you can find the source..or if you want I can email them to you or post elsewhere.

 

[baloney]

The argument is really nothing to do with God in time, but how grace works in our lives.

If open theists believe that faith alone justifies us then why put up such a fuss about free will since free will acts would be meaningless.

 

[BillH]

Very well.

Then back to my very recent reference to the verses in John: "Remain in me"...presumably then it's possible to not remain in Him. Presumably there's some ability to "opt out" and choose not to remain in Him. So free will is still consequential...and our whole life response to God is how we "accept Jesus". And our actions following our turn to Christ are very important.

This is what i mean by "being saved" (Catholic view) vs. "Been saved" (most Protesants). The "being saved" notion handles quite well...faith, and how grace works in our lives.

Free will "remains" vitally important and it used continually over the course of one's life to 'accept', to "believe", to "love" Jesus...and our neighbors.

 

[DFT_Dave]

What is the open view about?

There are two opposing camps with competing models within Evangelical Christianity; 1) the open view, 2) the closed view.

Both groups share the belief that God created the world according to Genesis and has a beginning and that God has always existed and has no beginning.

Both believe that God is infinite/eternal and that man is finite/temporal.

Both believe that Christ is the incarnate Word of God and is the eternal Son of God.

Both believe that the atonement alone is the bases for the salvation of mankind, all of whom are under the penalty of death because of sin.

Both believe there will be a future day of judgement and the return of Christ to rule this world for the rest of eternity.

Then what is the difference and why is there a difference between the two if there is this much agreement?

I would start with the nature of God's will and power and then to his knowledge. In that God has created man and is the cause of his existence, does it follow that God creates and is the cause (directly or indirectly) of all that man does--closed view--or has God given man the ability to be the cause of his own activity--open view?

In that God is the cause of mans activity in the closed view, it follows that God being infinite, foreknows all that man will do.

In that God gives man the ability to be the cause of his own action in the open view, it follows that God does not foreknow all that man being finite, will do.

In the open view the activity of man has options and alternatives, free will exists and the future is open but free will does not control the consequences of our choices. If we believe in the atonement of Christ we will have eternal life, if we do not we will perish.

In the closed view the activity of man has no options nor alternatives, free will does not exist and the future is closed because God controls the choices the consequences are assured and we are already in heaven or hell.

We will go back an forth accusing each other of taking verses out of context, being guilty of committing logical fallacies, and of reading Greek philosophy into our view, but the differences and their conclusions will remain as I have stated them.

If my analysis of this debate holds up after others have commented on it, I will render my reason for believing in the open view.

 

[Clete]

So if I use Greek philosophy and prove that its rationally sound, then there shouldn't be a problem right?

Logic was a subject of Greek Philosophy not a product of it. Without logic Aristotle could not have figured anything out about sound reason.

But merely proving that something is rationally sound isn't enough; it must also be Biblical.

Before we get into actual debates about open theism, couldn't it be easily argued that Since Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk, followed the rule of St. Augustine and his whole way of thinking about justification etc. came out of that school of thought of the Augustinians,

then couldn't one easily argue that the whole Protestant reform has been heavily influenced by Augustine and according to you statement about Calvin, Aristotle as well?

YEAH! That's the whole point! The reformers broke from Rome (i.e. the Catholic church) not Greece (i.e. Aristotle). Open Theism seeks to finish the job and get back to a truly Biblical perspective about who God is and how He relates to His creation.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[elected4ever]

What is the open view about?

There are two opposing camps with competing models within Evangelical Christianity; 1) the open view, 2) the closed view.

Both groups share the belief that God created the world according to Genesis and has a beginning and that God has always existed and has no beginning.

Both believe that God is infinite/eternal and that man is finite/temporal.

Both believe that Christ is the incarnate Word of God and is the eternal Son of God.

Both believe that the atonement alone is the bases for the salvation of mankind, all of whom are under the penalty of death because of sin.

Both believe there will be a future day of judgement and the return of Christ to rule this world for the rest of eternity.

Then what is the difference and why is there a difference between the two if there is this much agreement?

I would start with the nature of God's will and power and then to his knowledge. In that God has created man and is the cause of his existence, does it follow that God creates and is the cause (directly or indirectly) of all that man does--closed view--or has God given man the ability to be the cause of his own activity--open view?


In that God gives man the ability to be the cause of his own action in the open view, it follows that God does not foreknow all that man being finite, will do.

Not so fast, God does give man the ability to cause his own action but it does not follow that God does not know the action. God's foreknowledge is not the cause of the action. Man's ability to choose causes the action.God's response to the choice made is known to God and to man. God' reaction to the action is a predetermined response.