ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I can feel confident in this because of the numerous examples in God's word.

He could indeed, but that doesn't change that the fact that things didn't turn out as expected so I am not sure I get the question.

God isn't worried that we will think less of Him if He anticipates something that does not comes to pass. After all... it's us that are the ones dropping the ball and failing His expectation (oh, and just an FYI: there are also examples of man not failing when God expected that he would fail).

Apparently God would rather that we have genuine freedom than be right about every prediction He made about us. God values us more than His own accuracy regarding us - Praise the Lord for that!

If God can sometimes unilaterally intervene, to set things back on track, and use His power to exercise control over His creatures, then I assume you agree that His intervention eliminates the freedom of those directly impacted by God's intervention. Do you agree? If you do not, how do you see the nature of God's direct intervention?

Why does God tell us that He gives us prophecy?

Asked another way....

What is the purpose of prophecy according to God?

I would like to ask a favor that we hold off on questions that are tangential for just a bit longer. I have only a few more related to the current topic (confidence in the eschaton) then I am more than willing to answer other questions.

 

[Delmar]

I suggest we do not.

(Not as children of Almighty God!)

For that would be tacky. . . .

. . .let alone improper, and humanistic, and unScriptural . . .besides, disrespectul of His Holiness.

Nang

It is tacky, improper, and humanistic, unScriptural, and disrespectful of His Holiness to believe that God considers sports? How so?

 

[themuzicman]

God's creation was not "perfect." It was very good, but not perfect; therefore I believe the future holds a glory and perfection worked only in Christ Jesus, that has not yet been experienced by mankind.

Well, that's what Calvinism requires, since it has no other way to explain sin, but that means that God's actions were imperfect.

The same as the garden of Eden? Is that how the "New Jerusalem" is described?

I'm referring to a world without sin, without evil.

Do you not think a spiritual, glorified body will be superior to the body of dust inhabited by Adam?

If there is no physical resurrection, then there is no point to salvation. There is no other physical body that a human could be resurrected into than the one like we already have, albeit without the illness.

Muz

 

[elected4ever]

11 But the Angel of the LORD called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!”
So he said, “Here I am.”
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.”it says nothing about God finding out that Abraham loved Him but that the ANGEL had the learning experience. God already knew! Pay attention to who said what and when it was said!:bang:

 

[elected4ever]

OK, Muz, just show me were it says that creation is perfect or complete. You assume that creation was perfect and complete because God ended this phase of His work. God just said that what He had done was very good. If man was the image of God then why did God say that the tree of life had to be protected from man in order that man should not be as one of them? The answer is, Man was not yet the completed or perfect image of God. Man is an unfinished work.

 

[elected4ever]

It is tacky, improper and disrespectful of His Holiness to believe that God considers sports? How so?

Who cares what it make the Pope feel like if he thinks he is not properly respected.

 

[Philetus]

It is tacky, improper, and humanistic, unScriptural, and disrespectful of His Holiness to believe that God considers sports? How so?

Everybody knows God loves the NFL because He preordained it ... at least the really big games ... to be played on Sundays, the Lord's day. I don't know about baseball ... that seems to be more 'open'. Hockey, on the other hand, must be of the devil ... don't they have a team called 'The Mighty DUCKS" and fight all the time?

 

[elected4ever]

Everybody knows God loves the NFL because He preordained it ... at least the really big games ... to be played on Sundays, the Lord's day. I don't know about baseball ... that seems to be more 'open'. Hockey, on the other hand, must be of the devil ... don't they have a team called 'The Mighty DUCKS" and fight all the time?

That is true because man is Not For Long.:chuckle:

 

[Delmar]

The settled view would assert that God knows today who will win the game tomorrow (in fact He knew from eternity past) The Open view would assert that God knows exactly how likely it is that the Yankees will defeat the White Soxs. If,for example, God knows that there is a 93% chance that the Yankees will win would that mean He was wrong if the White Sox won? Not at all, because God knew there was a 7% chance that the White Sox would win!

No takers? (I left out the first sentence since it offended Nang)

 

[elected4ever]

Originally Posted by Delmar View Post
The settled view would assert that God knows today who will win the game tomorrow (in fact He knew from eternity past) The Open view would assert that God knows exactly how likely it is that the Yankees will defeat the White Soxs. If,for example, God knows that there is a 93% chance that the Yankees will win would that mean He was wrong if the White Sox won? Not at all, because God knew there was a 7% chance that the White Sox would win!No takers? (I left out the first sentence since it offended Nang)

So now god is a gambler. maybe you woud approve if God joined the World Poker Tour?:dunce:

 

[Philetus]

Do any Open Theists still find it surprising that Calvinists can find any number of extensive published word studies, commentaries and versions (mostly from their own long tradition) to support their interpretations of any and all verses that need to be retranslated because God can’t seem to speak clearly so that the average Joe can understand the bible? Is that really surprising?

We are wasting our time talking to hard core Calvinists. The world isn’t listening to them any longer why are we? Calvinists certainly are not listening to us. Why do they see us as a threat? What difference does it make anymore what their theology says about God being in meticulous control and knowing what the poor are NOT going to eat tomorrow? They have to live and act AS IF their theology doesn’t make a hoot of difference. I think that is the posture I will take toward their theology as well. It just doesn't matter.

It just doesn't matter to the lost what God knows or when He knows it. Why should it matter to us? We still have to witness and they still have to respond. Even the Calvinist admits this. Why should Nang care if Delmar thinks God likes sports. Why does anyone care what E4E thinks? Who is Philetus?


Who is my neighbor? Now maybe there is a question we need to concern ourselves with. Many who don’t have enough to eat won’t have enough to eat not because God is in meticulous control but because we are wasting our time and resources trying to convince the wrong people (ourselves/each other) that we/they have/don't have the freedom to give of themselves or let their neighbor go hungry. People aren’t hungry because God is/isn't in control. People are hungry because we don’t have any SELF-CONTROL.

As an Open Theist, I do believe in exact exhaustive foreknowledge! Ours! When we stand before the King and ask, “Lord, when did we see YOU hungry?” we experts of the Word (on both sides) already know in exhaustive meticulous detail exactly what He will say.

Philetus

 

[Philetus]

That is true because man is Not For Long.:chuckle:

I thought you were Elected 4 EVER?????
Hey, Go long, E. Go long. On 4.

 

[Philetus]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delmar View Post
The settled view would assert that God knows today who will win the game tomorrow (in fact He knew from eternity past) The Open view would assert that God knows exactly how likely it is that the Yankees will defeat the White Soxs. If,for example, God knows that there is a 93% chance that the Yankees will win would that mean He was wrong if the White Sox won? Not at all, because God knew there was a 7% chance that the White Sox would win!

:cheers:
I think God is a risk taker.
But the odds are stacked in His favor. It's HIS house.

No takers? (I left out the first sentence since it offended Nang)

Nang who?
Wasn't he the big hitter on steroids that plays for the Cardinalists?
:chuckle:

 

[Delmar]

Do any Open Theists still find it surprising that Calvinists can find any number of extensive published word studies, commentaries and versions (mostly from their own long tradition) to support their interpretations of any and all verses that need to be retranslated because God can’t seem to speak clearly so that the average Joe can understand the bible? Is that really surprising?

We are wasting our time talking to hard core Calvinists. The world isn’t listening to them any longer why are we?

Last year, I watched a young lady's world come apart as she came face to face with the idea the the pain in her life happened because "God had some reason for it" The only answer I had for her was "God didn't want your daddy to hurt you". She couldn't buy it. She was too entrenched in the teaching that every evil that ever happens, happens because it brings glory to God! I will stand against that garbage with my dieing breath!

Calvinists certainly are not listening to us. Why do they see us as a threat? What difference does it make anymore what their theology says about God being in meticulous control and knowing what the poor are NOT going to eat tomorrow? They have to live and act AS IF their theology doesn’t make a hoot of difference. I think that is the posture I will take toward their theology as well. It just doesn't matter.

It just doesn't matter to the lost what God knows or when He knows it. Why should it matter to us? We still have to witness and they still have to respond. Even the Calvinist admits this. Why should Nang care if Delmar thinks God likes sports. Why does anyone care what E4E thinks? Who is Philetus?


Who is my neighbor? Now maybe there is a question we need to concern ourselves with. Many who don’t have enough to eat won’t have enough to eat not because God is in meticulous control but because we are wasting our time and resources trying to convince the wrong people (ourselves/each other) that we/they have/don't have the freedom to give of themselves or let their neighbor go hungry. People aren’t hungry because God is/isn't in control. People are hungry because we don’t have any SELF-CONTROL.

As an Open Theist, I do believe in exact exhaustive foreknowledge! Ours! When we stand before the King and ask, “Lord, when did we see YOU hungry?” we experts of the Word (on both sides) already know in exhaustive meticulous detail exactly what He will say.

Philetus

 

[Delmar]

So now god is a gambler. maybe you woud approve if God joined the World Poker Tour?:dunce:

It is not God, who's world view hinges on Him knowing the winner ahead of time! Seems to me that, if God is a sports fan, He would rather just enjoy the game.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

If God can sometimes unilaterally intervene, to set things back on track, and use His power to exercise control over His creatures, then I assume you agree that His intervention eliminates the freedom of those directly impacted by God's intervention. Do you agree? If you do not, how do you see the nature of God's direct intervention?

I do not believe that God ever "flips a switch" and takes over a man's will. God may limit a man's choices and thereby effect the man's ability to choose.... or God may persuade, or pressure, a man to choose in a certain way (i.e., Jonah) but the man still has his own will.

An example... some people wrongly think that a prisoner in jail has lost his freewill. Of course that isn't the cause. The prisoner has lost his free-DOM, not his freewill. The prisoners choices and abilities are now limited in jail, but his will is just as free as ever.

God can effect our will in a variety of ways through external pressures, circumstances, or obstacles, but I do not believe that He ever removes our will from us.

I would like to ask a favor that we hold off on questions that are tangential for just a bit longer. I have only a few more related to the current topic (confidence in the eschaton) then I am more than willing to answer other questions.

:up:

 

[Lon]

No takers? (I left out the first sentence since it offended Nang)

Originally Posted by Delmar
The settled view would assert that God knows today who will win the game tomorrow (in fact He knew from eternity past) The Open view would assert that God knows exactly how likely it is that the Yankees will defeat the White Soxs. If,for example, God knows that there is a 93% chance that the Yankees will win would that mean He was wrong if the White Sox won? Not at all, because God knew there was a 7% chance that the White Sox would win!

She's a girl, of course she would think that about games.
I totally forgive her for that view and understand it.
"Hun? Grabbed those pretzels off the counter." (ducks, cowers)

The difference here of course is our take on what God knows. Because OV has Him in prediction rather than foreknowledge (Biblically given btw). Your percentage theory supports your view and makes it plausible, however one has to buy the intial premise to appreciate it "God knows what is knowable and the future doesn't exist."

My nonOV perspective says: "God knows all. Foreknowledge is a scripturally given."

 

[Nathon Detroit]

She's a girl, of course she would think that about games.
I totally forgive her for that view and understand it.
"Hun? Grabbed those pretzels off the counter." (ducks, cowers)

The difference here of course is our take on what God knows. Because OV has Him in prediction rather than foreknowledge (Biblically given btw). Your percentage theory supports your view and makes it plausible, however one has to buy the intial premise to appreciate it "God knows what is knowable and the future doesn't exist."

My nonOV perspective says: "God knows all. Foreknowledge is a scripturally given."

:sigh:

Lon.... you don't need to buy into any premise.

Delmar is making a point about a wrong prediction NOT constituting a mistake. That's it! It's just a side-point of contention that is being addressed.

It gets so frustrating debating settled viewers because you guys are so afraid to answer simple questions or explore hypotheticals and analogies. It almost seems as if your theology is so weak that any little exploration will break it.

Sorry to be harsh but it is just so incredible frustrating sometimes.

 

[Lon]

Do any Open Theists still find it surprising that Calvinists can find any number of extensive published word studies, commentaries and versions (mostly from their own long tradition) to support their interpretations of any and all verses that need to be retranslated because God can’t seem to speak clearly so that the average Joe can understand the bible? Is that really surprising?

We are wasting our time talking to hard core Calvinists. The world isn’t listening to them any longer why are we? Calvinists certainly are not listening to us. Why do they see us as a threat? What difference does it make anymore what their theology says about God being in meticulous control and knowing what the poor are NOT going to eat tomorrow? They have to live and act AS IF their theology doesn’t make a hoot of difference. I think that is the posture I will take toward their theology as well. It just doesn't matter.

It just doesn't matter to the lost what God knows or when He knows it. Why should it matter to us? We still have to witness and they still have to respond. Even the Calvinist admits this. Why should Nang care if Delmar thinks God likes sports. Why does anyone care what E4E thinks? Who is Philetus?


Who is my neighbor? Now maybe there is a question we need to concern ourselves with. Many who don’t have enough to eat won’t have enough to eat not because God is in meticulous control but because we are wasting our time and resources trying to convince the wrong people (ourselves/each other) that we/they have/don't have the freedom to give of themselves or let their neighbor go hungry. People aren’t hungry because God is/isn't in control. People are hungry because we don’t have any SELF-CONTROL.

As an Open Theist, I do believe in exact exhaustive foreknowledge! Ours! When we stand before the King and ask, “Lord, when did we see YOU hungry?” we experts of the Word (on both sides) already know in exhaustive meticulous detail exactly what He will say.

Philetus

Exact perhaps (doubtful - "When Lord? When did we see you...")
Exhaustive? hmmm
Foreknowledge, yes, I agree. It isn't from our own knowledge base, but His.
We do know this day is coming with no doubts.

I think what you are trying to say is good: We should both be looking toward doing His business.
But first, I think discussions here are His business, and second, I think your call is somewhat diminished by drawing the lines at the offset.

Finally, I think the sports comment has more to do with gender than doctrinal position. Certainly 'how' God enjoys a game is doctrinal.

 

[Lon]

:sigh:

Lon.... you don't need to buy into any premise.

Delmar is making a point about a wrong prediction NOT constituting a mistake. That's it! It's just a side-point of contention that is being addressed.

It gets so frustrating debating settled viewers because you guys are so afraid to answer simple questions or explore hypotheticals and analogies. It almost seems as if your theology is so weak that any little exploration will break it.

Sorry to be harsh but it is just so incredible frustrating sometimes.

Naw, I love ya, it's all good.

That was also my point (but apparently not made well).

I was just putting the well-made point into the larger picture of our respective considerations.
(I can still appreciate a nice hit from the opposite team)