ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1
- Thread starter ChristisKing
- Start date
- Status
themuzicman
Well-known member
RobE said:
IMHO, "learning" is the wrong term, because that implies that someone knows something that God doesn't know. God knows all knowable things, but because LFW decisions aren't knowable, He only gains knowledge of them as the occur.
Growing? No.
Evolving? No.
Michael
themuzicman
Well-known member
hermes said:
A cite would be useful so we can see the context.
Michael
The reforemed doctrine of predestination does not portray man as a sock puppet. You don't understand the difference between predestination and fatalism. tha is why you make charges similar ot the sock puppet comment. Godrulz, you'll will not be able to grasp the reformed doctrine of predestination until you closely study the many instances in the Bible where man's free will and God's sovereignty are seen working hand in hand. Godrulz--please have a good Lord's day tomorrow. May your gathering begodrulz said:
blessed by the presence of the Holy Spirit.
hermes said:
The key to resolving the biblical tension between God's sovereignty and man's freewill is not to negate genuine (vs illusory), self-evident freedom. It is to recognize that God predestines and brings some vs all things to pass and to recognize that sovereignty is providential vs meticulous control.
I have to work tomorrow, but His presence will be with me as I serve others in the prehospital care setting.
Rest assured that a theocentric, God-glorifying, sovereignty upholding (God Rules!) view is my desire. He alone is worthy because of His worth. He is the most awesome, valuable being in the universe. We are His creatures. Let us magnify Him in spirit and in truth!
I understand the Bible to be prophetic...all things will be as shown in the Bible.Everytime anyone questions the events in the Bible, they find they were wrong and the Bible was correct...ask any Historian and they will tell you the Bible is the most accurate base of chronological history.It is easy to understand the phrase "Signs of the times".
patman
Active member
God's Knowledge vs. Mans and Open Theism
God's Knowledge vs. Mans and Open Theism
One of the biggest problems critics of Open Theism have against it is that it makes God appear to "learn," grow or evolve. That leads to the thought that a man may know something God doesn't know.
How can man know something God doesn't?
That one question effectively closes the ear of someone who might otherwise listen to the views of the Open Theist.
I must admit that I do believe God CAN learn. But let me define learn as "discovering knowledge about something previously unknown." Here are examples of God learning something previously unknown:
Genesis 22:12
And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”
Deuteronomy 8:2
And you shall remember that the LORD your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to humble you and test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not.
Deuteronomy 13:3
you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your God is testing you to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
2 Chronicles 32:31
However, regarding the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, whom they sent to him to inquire about the wonder that was done in the land, God withdrew from him, in order to test him, that He might know all that was in his heart.
From the verses above, we see God testing people's heart in order to gain previously unknown things about the hearts of his people. The verses are clear that this was the purpose of the testing, to gain understanding.
BUT the thing we must keep in mind is that even those were being test do not know if they will pass the test until the test is complete. So it is not as though we know something God doesn't. We find out at the same time.
God does know us better than anyone. And God does know everything knowable and worth knowing. Unlike any of us. But when something that was previously unknown makes itself known, God gains that knowledge and reacts to that new knowledge according to his character.
Our God is wise enough to handle anything that will happen even though the future doesn't exist yet. God doesn't need 100% future knowledge in order to be powerful, wise and loving. Instead he knows how to find the knowledge he needs in order to be just, right and relational in such a way no man could compare.
So Open Theist critics shouldn't over annalize "God's learning." Open Theism does not take the belief of an open future to discredit God. Instead we agree with what the Bible teaches about God's method's of gaining knowledge and have faith and joy in knowing he is able to do what is right and good every time.
God's Knowledge vs. Mans and Open Theism
One of the biggest problems critics of Open Theism have against it is that it makes God appear to "learn," grow or evolve. That leads to the thought that a man may know something God doesn't know.
How can man know something God doesn't?
That one question effectively closes the ear of someone who might otherwise listen to the views of the Open Theist.
I must admit that I do believe God CAN learn. But let me define learn as "discovering knowledge about something previously unknown." Here are examples of God learning something previously unknown:
Genesis 22:12
And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”
Deuteronomy 8:2
And you shall remember that the LORD your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to humble you and test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not.
Deuteronomy 13:3
you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your God is testing you to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
2 Chronicles 32:31
However, regarding the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, whom they sent to him to inquire about the wonder that was done in the land, God withdrew from him, in order to test him, that He might know all that was in his heart.
From the verses above, we see God testing people's heart in order to gain previously unknown things about the hearts of his people. The verses are clear that this was the purpose of the testing, to gain understanding.
BUT the thing we must keep in mind is that even those were being test do not know if they will pass the test until the test is complete. So it is not as though we know something God doesn't. We find out at the same time.
God does know us better than anyone. And God does know everything knowable and worth knowing. Unlike any of us. But when something that was previously unknown makes itself known, God gains that knowledge and reacts to that new knowledge according to his character.
Our God is wise enough to handle anything that will happen even though the future doesn't exist yet. God doesn't need 100% future knowledge in order to be powerful, wise and loving. Instead he knows how to find the knowledge he needs in order to be just, right and relational in such a way no man could compare.
So Open Theist critics shouldn't over annalize "God's learning." Open Theism does not take the belief of an open future to discredit God. Instead we agree with what the Bible teaches about God's method's of gaining knowledge and have faith and joy in knowing he is able to do what is right and good every time.
God is personal. The Bible portrays Him as having a history and a future, not experiencing all reality in one eternal now simultaneity (philosophical vs biblical concept). God knows all that is knowable. By sovereignly creating significant others and a partially open/unsettled future, some things are known as possible vs actual. It is not a deficiency in omniscience to not know a nothing or something that is not a possible object yet because it has not come into existence (like who will win the 2010 Superbowl).
Agape4Robin
Member
:think:RobE said:
Good question
RobE
New member
patman said:
Patrick that was honestly answered. This one fact of a learning God is the cetral pillar to process philosophy/theology. This is why I keep asking Godrulz(who objects vehemently to the association with process) to recognize and admit the similarity. Also, as it happens, the originators of Open Theism have verifiable ties with process.
Is this bad?
Rob
Process theologians also believe that Jesus rose from the dead. Does that make you a process theologian as well?RobE said:
Your argument is flawed in about every way imaginable. The Bible specifically says that Jesus learned while He was here on Earth so what's the bid deal anyway?
In order for you argument to be at all valid, you would have to demonstrate that the idea of a God that learns is an a sufficient condition of process theology. That is to say that you would have to demonstrate that process theology is inescapable once one accepts the idea of a learning God. Simply pointing out a single common point of theology does nothing to equate the two doctines.
No, it doesn't. What would negate it as an object of knowledge would be if it were both in the future and a product of one or more free will agents.
Resting in Him,
Clete
RobE said:
Omniscience. He knows all that is knowable. He knows reality as it is (correctly distinguishes possible, actual/certain, probable, necessary and distinguishes the reality of the past, present, future). God knows all truth exhaustively. This does not mean He knows that which is possible as actual before it becomes certain (contingencies).
RobE said:
If the Second Coming of Christ happens today, there will be no Superbowl. If there is a terrorist attack in Detroit, there may not be a game. The game is still potential as to its details and outcome. It is virtually certain that it will be played. It is certain now (vs 5 months ago) who will be in the game. It is not certain who will get injured, score, pick their nose, drop the ball, etc. Do not confuse the fixed playoff result with the yet future Superbowl. We can know somethings about the future, but not all things (assume no other variable is introduced to change the future).
RobE said:
Similar does not mean identical. Just because there are counterfeit spiritual gifts or pagan trinities does not disprove the true Trinity or spiritual gifts. Likewise, just because Augustinian views have Platonic influences does not mean all of his ideas were invalid. Clark Pinnock, Open Theist, contrasts Open Theism and Process Thought showing similarities and differences. Most Open Theists consider Process a form of finite godism and heretical.
Of course I believe it's possible for God to know that. In fact, I believe He does know that.RobE said:
patman
Active member
RobE
RobE
Rob, I am not familiar with "process". I will have to look that up. From Clete's, a respected OT and a person of like mind, I will allow him to answer that. In light of his answer I feel compelled to point out something from our past conversations. Godrulz will answer for himself as well.
I am concerned with the way you compare views you don't hold to others you think are wrong....
Remember when you referred to yourself, Bob Enyart, Me, and other Open Theist of being Armineans?
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=913029&postcount=439
You said, "p.s. You used my Bob Enyart quote before I got to use it myself. I want you to understand that Bob is an Arminian as well. But please don't tell him. I want it to be a surprise later."
Then I sent you a link about Armenians to show you that despite one or two similarities,here, and you expressed that you were wrong for doing this and denied being one yourself.
I hope this reminds you that you shouldn't make the same mistake again. Just because we are simular in some aspects to an "unliked" view, does not mean we are the same, and furthermore it doesn't mean we are wrong. And that is the point I hope to make.
You try to understand Open Theism by comparing us to other views you both agree and disagree with, and thus you really don't understand us. Remember when I tried to show you how you misunderstand more than you understand?
The biggest problem we face in preaching our message are the many ways it can be misunderstood. Many of us were once on the other side of the theological fence and then changed after considering the Word.
So that is what I ask you to do. It shouldn't matter what we "sound like" or "remind you of." All that should matter is "are we preaching the word?" Is it based on scripture? Is the message sound?
I know we have to think and describe the verses we present, but it is important to realize that Open Theism lets the bible speak as a whole, not just in parts here and there.
The biggest point against the calvinist, Armenian, or other settled theist is that there is no verse that says "God knows all of the future." It is simply assumed to be so because God did predict the future from time to time, and he did it often. AND he is powerful. Those do imply some future knowledge, but not ALL future knowledge.
It is simply wrong to exaggerate the word. Let it read as it is.
God Bless RobE,
Pat
RobE
Rob, let me start by saying I truly appreciate you. I will pray for you and your family in regards to your request. This is a hard time. I wish you all the best...RobE said:
Rob, I am not familiar with "process". I will have to look that up. From Clete's, a respected OT and a person of like mind, I will allow him to answer that. In light of his answer I feel compelled to point out something from our past conversations. Godrulz will answer for himself as well.
I am concerned with the way you compare views you don't hold to others you think are wrong....
Remember when you referred to yourself, Bob Enyart, Me, and other Open Theist of being Armineans?
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=913029&postcount=439
You said, "p.s. You used my Bob Enyart quote before I got to use it myself. I want you to understand that Bob is an Arminian as well. But please don't tell him. I want it to be a surprise later."
Then I sent you a link about Armenians to show you that despite one or two similarities,here, and you expressed that you were wrong for doing this and denied being one yourself.
I hope this reminds you that you shouldn't make the same mistake again. Just because we are simular in some aspects to an "unliked" view, does not mean we are the same, and furthermore it doesn't mean we are wrong. And that is the point I hope to make.
You try to understand Open Theism by comparing us to other views you both agree and disagree with, and thus you really don't understand us. Remember when I tried to show you how you misunderstand more than you understand?
The biggest problem we face in preaching our message are the many ways it can be misunderstood. Many of us were once on the other side of the theological fence and then changed after considering the Word.
So that is what I ask you to do. It shouldn't matter what we "sound like" or "remind you of." All that should matter is "are we preaching the word?" Is it based on scripture? Is the message sound?
I know we have to think and describe the verses we present, but it is important to realize that Open Theism lets the bible speak as a whole, not just in parts here and there.
The biggest point against the calvinist, Armenian, or other settled theist is that there is no verse that says "God knows all of the future." It is simply assumed to be so because God did predict the future from time to time, and he did it often. AND he is powerful. Those do imply some future knowledge, but not ALL future knowledge.
It is simply wrong to exaggerate the word. Let it read as it is.
God Bless RobE,
Pat
Philetus
New member
RobE said:
OOPS! Sorry about that. I used Bogey when I first came to TOL and switched as soon as I could. I owe you one. You'll have a unique avatar soon enough.
No question now. Just read Patman's last post with an open mind and heart. My lord, it did me good. There is a lot of wisdom in it. Even OTs can learn about how we address other from it. You don't have to accept OT to understand it, but you won't be able to refute it until you do.
Also, I picked up from P's post that you and your family need prayer ... I don't know any details ... don't need to .... but God knows every detail of what is going on and He listens to his children, all of them and responds to all of them who call on him. I'll gladly add my prayers to the others.
Friends!
Philetus
- Status