ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[Nang]

Nang...
Is Jesus sitting at the right hand of God with two natures? If not, why not?

I would be willing to tackle this question, if you want to start a new thread in order to advocate the errors of Arianism.

For I believe this particular heresy to be off topic in a thread re: Open Theism.

Nang

 

[elected4ever]

I would be willing to tackle this question, if you want to start a new thread in order to advocate the errors of Arianism.

For I believe this particular heresy to be off topic in a thread re: Open Theism.

Nang

It is of topic and I do not believe you can defend your position as Jesus having a sin nature as you suggest.

 

[Nang]

It is of topic and I do not believe you can defend your position as Jesus having a sin nature as you suggest.

I have not suggested Christ had a sin nature. Jesus Christ was sinless; while also being fully Man.

 

[Mystery]

I would be willing to tackle this question, if you want to start a new thread in order to advocate the errors of Arianism.

For I believe this particular heresy to be off topic in a thread re: Open Theism.

Nang

If you want to start a new thread, go ahead, but I am not teaching "Arianism", so don't be a jerk.

You can start it by proving the hypostatic union.

 

[dale]

And does God make us willing via our nature, or directly determining our will?

Muz

Both. If we're not already willing, He can certainly make us willing.

It seems the evil we do would be through influencing our falleness. I see the good we may be doing as the result of either being rational creatures that are capable of doing the right thing at times or the result of Godly influence convincing us to willingly do the right thing.

Him influencing our fallen natures, or being created by God as rational beings capable of right decisions, or by being directly influenced by Him to do right, doesn’t really seem to be of any difference to me. At the end of the day He is still in control, not man.

 

[dale]

SO, He directly makes us choose badly?

Muz

Asked and answered Here

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Is that your [Mystery's] picture in avatar or a movie star or something?

Responding with my tongue firmly in my cheek:

"Incredibly good looking, but not very smart. A pedantic prick and ignominious know-it-all."

But I will never tell anyone, Mystery. :chuckle:

 

[godrulz]

Romans 5

Does God?

Rom. 5 is about physical depravity and death (your proof text, at least).

God is personal, so He has a will. He choses to be holy. His moral and personal attributes are not like His uncreated attributes (eternal, omnis).

 

[godrulz]

Jesus did not have two natures.

Jesus is one person with two natures: Deity and humanity. Your statement denies foundational truths forged by the early Church in the face of heresy.

 

[godrulz]

Responding with my tongue firmly in my cheek:

"Incredibly good looking, but not very smart. A pedantic prick and ignominious know-it-all."

But I will never tell anyone, Mystery. :chuckle:

Do you take bribes to reveal the identity of the masked man?

So far, Tico and sozo are suspects. Myst seems too mean to be Tico and too smart to be sozo (or at least sozo was not so dispensational, if I recall).

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Do you take bribes to reveal the identity of the masked man?

So far, Tico and sozo are suspects. Myst seems too mean to be Tico and too smart to be sozo (or at least sozo was not so dispensational, if I recall).

My lips are sealed. Sorry. It took me some time to get to the bottom of this and I was not unpleasantly surprised.

Yes, the dispensationalism threw me for a time. It was quite uncharacteristic. Of course I assume everyone should be covenantal.

I am having way too much fun watching Mystery hold your feet to the flames and am hoping the heat will cause your usual boilerplate posts will morph into something more substantial. :chuckle:


EDIT: On second thought, one of those nearly unbannable lifetime memberships in TOL might loosen me up.

 

[Mystery]

Rom. 5 is about physical depravity and death (your proof text, at least).

Depravity and death, resulting from.... the disobedience of ONE man.

God is personal, so He has a will. He choses to be holy.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! You need to prove this man/god theory of yours.

His moral and personal attributes are not like His uncreated attributes

God is not moral, God is righteous and Holy. God is not in subjection to law/laws. Are you a Mormon?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Rom. 5 is about physical depravity and death (your proof text, at least).

God is personal, so He has a will. He choses to be holy. His moral and personal attributes are not like His uncreated attributes (eternal, omnis).

One needs to be careful how far to push the analogy between man and God (a common error by open theists), for the analogy originates with God. See here.

 

[Clete]

Garden Myst...er..ee

Is that your picture in avatar or a movie star or something?

He looks like Jim Hilston and AMR seems to think that's who it is as well...

Compare AMR's post #2547 and the "About Me" quote HERE and notice also that the "My Website" link takes you to Jim Hilston's web page and I know for certain that roundslanteye is Jim AOL instant messenger screen name (He's half Asian (Thai, I think) and half Caucasian).

He's Dispensational, which Jim is as well and so things are beginning to add up here. I've suspected for a while that it was Jim but AMR's post confirms it, or at least it would if I had some reliable information about why AMR believes it to be him. For final confirmation we could have Knight or Turbo check his IP address, although I really don't think that's necessary.

By the way, what it took AMR "some time to get to the bottom of" I figured out in about 30 seconds. It's not hard to figure such things out, nor is it a state secret.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

"Mystery" is the key here. From one of his posts in the BR forums:

"the revelation of the Mystery supplanted the nation of Israel (their tree was pulled out of the root) so that the Body of Christ (the subject of the Mystery) could be grafted in. That is why Paul is quoting the promises of Israel. They do not apply to the Body. Israel needed to know that their distinctive Hope was not lost, but only put on hold."

Another can of whup butt laid upon godrulz by someone who is almost a Calvinist...or at least was once almost one a few years ago. Does life get any better than this? :chuckle:

 

[godrulz]

Depravity and death, resulting from.... the disobedience of ONE man.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! You need to prove this man/god theory of yours.


God is not moral, God is righteous and Holy. God is not in subjection to law/laws. Are you a Mormon?

Physical and moral depravity are related, not identical.

God has a will, intellect, emotions (personal vs impersonal). We are in His personal image and have the same attributes. This does not make God a man, nor does it make man a god!

God is righteous. Morals contrasts with metaphysics in academic discussions (not to be confused with mere morality).

Lex Rex, not Rex Lex.

Was embracing Mid-Acts in the desert a condition of getting unbanned, my friend and foe?

 

[Mystery]

Knight, are you catching all of this?

:rotfl:

 

[Mystery]

Physical and moral depravity are related, not identical.

That's right. In order to be morally depraved, one must be physically depraved first. That was the result of ONE man's sin.

God has a will, intellect, emotions (personal vs impersonal).

I wasn't correcting you about God having a will, but that His will is not what makes Him Holy and Righteous. His will is in subjection to His Holiness.

Lex Rex, not Rex Lex.

It's neither.

 

[Clete]

Jim,

What makes God righteous?

 

[Mystery]

Jim,

I'm flattered, and humbled. I'm sure Jim will be insulted.

What makes God righteous?

The same thing that makes Him holy, love, just.