ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[Philetus]

This is not true ... blah, blah, blah ....

Then why did you write it?

Your comments are so far off base. This is in response to Nang and you just confuse the issue, so butt out.

 

[elected4ever]

Then why did you write it?

Your comments are so far off base. This is in response to Nang and you just confuse the issue, so butt out.

You are a lier and a pervert. the same as godrules. You can't even quote me in context. You have to pervert what I said. So go away little man, you have nothing in me.:loser: :loser:

 

[godrulz]

You are a lier and a pervert. the same as godrules. You can't even quote me in context. You have to pervert what I said. So go away little man, you have nothing in me.:loser: :loser:

LiAr? Pervert? I may be ignorant or wrong in thinking in your eyes, but that does not make me a liar. You denied the Deity of Christ in writing. Pointing this out makes me a truth-bearer, not a liar. Pervert is usually associated with sexual immorality. On what basis do you make this accusation?

If I have lied, corner me (misunderstandings are not malicious lies) and I will apologize publicly and make it right. In whatever sense I am a pervert, allow me to defend myself, instead of just throwing out slander/libel.

 

[elected4ever]

LiAr? Pervert? I may be ignorant or wrong in thinking in your eyes, but that does not make me a liar. You denied the Deity of Christ in writing. Pointing this out makes me a truth-bearer, not a liar. Pervert is usually associated with sexual immorality. On what basis do you make this accusation?

If I have lied, corner me (misunderstandings are not malicious lies) and I will apologize publicly and make it right. In whatever sense I am a pervert, allow me to defend myself, instead of just throwing out slander/libel.

You are a lier and a pervert. , get away from me you son of the devil.

 

[Nang]

according to your view individuals are elected not loved; God loves nobody in particular.

Where do you get this?

"We love God because He first loved us." I John 4:19

All I am saying is that there was nothing worthy in us for God to love. God loves us only because we "are accepted in the Beloved." (Eph. 1:6)

The only worthiness sinners possess, is the imputed righteousness and faith of Jesus Christ. God can only look upon us, and hear our prayers and petitions because of Christ's mediatorship at the throne of grace, on our behalf. His High Priesthood is our only access to the Father.

In corporate election God loves everybody in particular (each and every one regardless of their state) and adds those who respond in faith to his gift of life to the corporate elect.

There is no such thing as "corporate" election. Election is particular. God does not position entire peoples in Christ, and have Christ die for all peoples, and then make salvation conditional upon their responses. God elected a particular people (by name), Christ died for those particular people (by name), and the Holy Spirit calls and regenerates those same particular people to new life; gifting them with the faith of Jesus Christ to believe and repent of sins. This is Godly performance of the unilateral Covenant made amongst the Godhead before the foundation of the world. These particular people were named as heirs under the will and testament of Almighty God, and Jesus Christ suffered the death required that the heirs might receive the inheritance. Only sons are heirs . . .not the world at large.

What you have said above is that God really doesn't love anybody but Himself (the Son). In fact you have said that God loves the world (created things) but not people.

God loves His entire creation; excepting wickedness and evil. God is eliminating all wickedness and evil from His creation. God loves His elect people, who have been forgiven their wickedness and evil, and the entire universe will be delivered when these sons of God are revealed in glory with the Lord:

"The creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." Romans 8:21

Is that the same God who commands us to love one another, not the things of the world?

Yep.

Being totally unworthy is not the same as being totally worthless.

What worth do you bring to God? What virtue or righteousness can you offer Him?

No wonder the world (and the people in it) aren't buying your version of 'truth'. The same people who are on the one hand saying that human beings are worthless to God are on the other hand building a case against abortion based on the sanctity of life so they can execute abortionists.

Don't you dare attempt to put that one on me. "Thou shalt not murder" has nothing to do with admitting we are worthless sinners.

Go figure. While fundamental Calvinists scratch their heads and wonder how fundamental extremist Muslim suicide-bombers can blow people up physically they continue to blow them off spiritually. I’m not sure which is more destructive.

Now you went and got real ugly . . .I will not respond to your posts any longer, if you are going to ignorantly make such nasty comparisons. I do not deserve to receive such from you or anyone else.

Nang

 

[Clete]

I can see how it would be difficult to say that God is love unless at some point He has loved. And the debate is centered around whether or not that action stems from a choice, an act of His will, or if His will and His choices are the result of His nature. I think I have said this before, but those actions that come from God, such as Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, and self-control, are the fruit of the Spirit. They result from the nature of God, who is Spirit. You and I do not simply choose to love because God chose to perform an action of love towards us, and now we imitate it, but rather because He has given us His Spirit, without which, love is impossible. The only possibility that we have of loving others as an act of the will stems from our new nature. This tells me that it is the nature which preceeds the action, and therefore God loves because He is love. The one who does righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. You must first be righteous for the righteousness to come.

Mystery,

I think I have to ask you to define love. It seems to me that love and righteousness are basically synonymous. Love is acting in another's best interest, is it not? Is it your belief that unsaved mothers do not love their children? If so, you definitely need to give me your definition of 'love' because I just don't see it.

Matthew 7:9 Or what man is there among you who, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will he give him a serpent? 11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!

1 Kings 3:16 Now two women who were harlots came to the king, and stood before him. 17 And one woman said, “O my lord, this woman and I dwell in the same house; and I gave birth while she was in the house. 18 Then it happened, the third day after I had given birth, that this woman also gave birth. And we were together; no one was with us in the house, except the two of us in the house. 19 And this woman’s son died in the night, because she lay on him. 20 So she arose in the middle of the night and took my son from my side, while your maidservant slept, and laid him in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom. 21 And when I rose in the morning to nurse my son, there he was, dead. But when I had examined him in the morning, indeed, he was not my son whom I had borne.”
22 Then the other woman said, “No! But the living one is my son, and the dead one is your son.”
And the first woman said, “No! But the dead one is your son, and the living one is my son.”
Thus they spoke before the king.
23 And the king said, “The one says, ‘This is my son, who lives, and your son is the dead one’; and the other says, ‘No! But your son is the dead one, and my son is the living one.’|” 24 Then the king said, “Bring me a sword.” So they brought a sword before the king. 25 And the king said, “Divide the living child in two, and give half to one, and half to the other.”
26 Then the woman whose son was living spoke to the king, for she yearned with compassion for her son; and she said, “O my lord, give her the living child, and by no means kill him!”
But the other said, “Let him be neither mine nor yours, but divide him.”
27 So the king answered and said, “Give the first woman the living child, and by no means kill him; she is his mother.”
28 And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had rendered; and they feared the king, for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him to administer justice.​

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

You are a lier and a pervert. , get away from me you son of the devil.

Soooo, sons of the Devil are perverts who lay around a lot? Is that what you're trying to say?



Somebody please ban this dork before I kill myself! I mean come on already! If you cannot spell the word 'liar' (even after having been corrected no less) do you really have anything meaningful to contribute to a theology debate forum? :bang:

 

[themuzicman]

I doubt being a dork is against forum policy.

Muz

 

[Mystery]

I doubt being a dork is against forum policy.

Muz

Good thing for you!

Oh wait, you said "dork" not pork :doh:

 

[themuzicman]

Good thing for you!

Why does has debate become personal to you? You look for every opportunity to insult people who engage you, and you seem fixated on me, lately.

Muz

 

[Clete]

I doubt being a dork is against forum policy.

Muz

Dang it!

 

[Mystery]

Why does has debate become personal to you? You look for every opportunity to insult people who engage you, and you seem fixated on me, lately.

The squeaky pig always gets the grease.

:chuckle:

 

[Philetus]

Dang it!

:second:
Nang it!
atrol:

I'm at least one up on you ... AMR, E4E, and Nang ... closer to the GR's stats.

Nang wrote:

God does love the whole world, which is His creation. That does not mean God loves all the wicked creatures in the world, who hate and rebel against their Maker. God is not obligated in the least to loving those who hate Him.

If God (supposedly) loves each and every individual in the world, who would be left to suffer the emotions such as "jealous, indifferent, or callous?"

God's love is bestowed upon Jesus Christ, and only those found positioned in Him, by the gift of grace from God, are saved by this love.

I love being written off by the likes of these. I find myself in good company.

 

[elected4ever]

Oh please, don't let little old me stand in your way. Have at it :dunce: :loser:

 

[Nang]

:second:
Nang it!
atrol:

I'm at least one up on you ... AMR, E4E, and Nang ... closer to the GR's stats.



I love being written off by the likes of these. I find myself in good company.

You have not been written off . . .you have been told off.

I have not put you on my Ignore List. I just don't like being compared to murderers and religious fanatics, because I am a Calvinist.

However, if you persist in showing me disrespect and insult, like Mystery did, I will write you off.

Have a nice day . . .

Nang

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

AMR,

Do you see any differences in categories of attributes and character relating to God? His being and character are related, but not identical.

I disagree. Character is nothing more than one of the attributes or features that make up and distinguish a being. As I stated previously (in my own words, but thanks for the compliment) God’s attributes are identical with His essence. You cannot separate God’s essence from His attributes. What we can do is attempt to classify God’s attributes in order to learn more about the nature of God. Barth’s (Christian Dogmatics II, part I) outline of how the attributes may be classified is often used. According to Barth, the attributes of God may be classified using one of the following six different classification methods:

(1) positive and negative
(2) communicable and incommunicable (what God is and of Himself)
(3) quiescent and active
(4) relative (to creation) and absolute
(5) transitive and intransitive
(6) metaphysical and moral

Readers of theology will note that many theologians use method (2). No matter what methods are used, all of God’s attributes fall into the classes of great and good. When one examines any of the orthodox writings, we see this method at work, a sort of ecumenical consensus based upon 1,500 years of thinking by Christian scholars. What comes from this is a gathering of the attributes according to five biblical affirmations:

(1) ‘God is spirit’ (John 4:24)
- personality
- self-consciousness
- self-determination
- life
- activity
- intelligence

(2) ‘the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath, there is no other’ (Deuteronomy 4:39)
- Biblical doctrines of monotheism

(3) ‘our God is greater than all gods’ (2 Chronicles 2:5)
- self-existence
- eternity
- immensity
- omnipresence
- omniscience
- omnipotence
- incomprehensibility
- absoluteness
- inifinty
- transcendence and immanence
- time and space, time-space

(4) ‘Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good’ (Psalms 107:1)
- holiness
- righteousness
- truth
- faithfulness
- love
- mercy

(5) ‘the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19)
- one simple essence/substance, three modes of subsistence (not modes as in the sense used by Unitarianism), which are often called “persons”, which do not divide the essence of God. Instead God’s essence is common to the three Persons in God, not communicated from one to another; they each of them partake of the essence, and possess it as one undivided nature—‘as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ’, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father.

… metaphysics includes omnipresent, omnipotent, eternal, omniscient, form.

Metaphysics is such a loaded term I don’t know why anyone would use it in discussions without first spending lots of time motivating its use. I think this hinders your own communication, for it is laden with meta-level content (e.g., see Freelight) that many cannot pierce without lots of back and forth. You should carefully examine how you say things and strive for greater clarity, especially for the sake of the less informed. I think you have things worth saying and you will glorify God by seeking greater clarity of expression. Many of my initial posts (like this one) take literally hours to craft as I struggle and pray over my words, for I know others may be led astray by my words. May it please, I am not holding myself out as the model of clarity, but only suggesting that I see less effort in the thousands of your almost rote-level postings.

It is impossible for man to be like God in these areas.

Error! It is impossible to be like God in any area of His being. God has not exhaustively revealed Himself to His creatures, nor will we ever fully comprehend God. God’s revelation is analogical not univocal. (For more discussion, see here.)

God is triune: He is spirit, not matter. He has unity and diversity. He is not solitary. This is also unique about God, though we also have spirit and are tripartite, but not triune in God's sense.

Again, your words are loaded with pitfalls for the uninformed. If you agree to (5) above, we are basically in agreement. If not, much more clarity and discussion is warranted.

God is Creator: He is personal, has character, morals, experiential ability, intellectual ability, sovereign free will, sequence/duration, freedom. These are attributes of personality, not being. These qualities are automatic in man, in some sense, as we are in His personal image (we have will, intellect, emotions). We are not sovereign, but we can chose. These things make relationship possible.

I do not dispute that we can think of God as having a personality, but only in the sense as I have described here. God’s attributes are qualities that inhere in the being of God.

From these attributes of being and personality flow His moral attributes: love, holiness, righteousness, lovingkindness, wisdom, truthfulness, faithfulness, etc. These attributes are possible for man, not automatic (men have wills, but not all men love, are faithful or truthful, etc. in every choice...we can be selfish liars, by choice). They are contingent as we respond to God and others or fail to live up to His absolutes and laws of love. This is another aspect of the Imago Dei.

Error! Every positive attribute of God inheres in all positive attributes of God. When discussing how God can be righteous, loving, omnipotent, etc., we must be careful to avoid separating the divine essence and the divine attributes/perfections. We must also guard against false conceptions of the relation in which these attributes / perfections stand with each other.

Confusing being and personality may be your root error, suited to Anselm, Aquinas, Plato, or whoever, but not the best biblical understanding.

No, you have confused the two, seeing them as something separate and distinct from God’s very being. The loaded language (e.g., Greeks!) you are using has nothing to do with what I have stated here. You are using knee-jerk responses to make a point that is unsupportable.

Verses can be given for each of these attributes (I will give your going rate of $5 for Bible answers).

Well, you already owe me $25 for the five already cited. I could easily have posted verses for all of the items under the classes (1) – (5) above, but then you would be a very poor man afterwards. If you really want them, I can do so, but I will expect full payment.

In summary:
Uncreated= attributes of being
Creator= attributes of personality
Triune (relational)
Moral attributes/character (not just being, but volitional; love is a choice, not a state).

This is what I mean by your meta-speak. Who can decipher these words without a godrulz Rosetta stone?

 

[Spitfire]

Remind me of what Catholics think this was. I think Mormons see it as part of the atonement by sweating blood. This is not valid. The garden was part of the experience leading up to the cross, but it is only at the cross that sacrifice and redemption takes place.

Catholics believe (or should believe) that there was great significance to everything that Jesus said or did. His agony in the garden was not atonement, but a necessary part of his willingly taking up his cross on our behalf, resisting temptation and succeeding where Adam had failed. Or was it merely accidentally that this occurred in a garden?

 

[Mystery]

Mystery,

I think I have to ask you to define love. It seems to me that love and righteousness are basically synonymous. Love is acting in another's best interest, is it not? Is it your belief that unsaved mothers do not love their children? If so, you definitely need to give me your definition of 'love' because I just don't see it.

Matthew 7:9 Or what man is there among you who, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will he give him a serpent? 11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!

1 Kings 3:16 Now two women who were harlots came to the king, and stood before him. 17 And one woman said, “O my lord, this woman and I dwell in the same house; and I gave birth while she was in the house. 18 Then it happened, the third day after I had given birth, that this woman also gave birth. And we were together; no one was with us in the house, except the two of us in the house. 19 And this woman’s son died in the night, because she lay on him. 20 So she arose in the middle of the night and took my son from my side, while your maidservant slept, and laid him in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom. 21 And when I rose in the morning to nurse my son, there he was, dead. But when I had examined him in the morning, indeed, he was not my son whom I had borne.”
22 Then the other woman said, “No! But the living one is my son, and the dead one is your son.”
And the first woman said, “No! But the dead one is your son, and the living one is my son.”
Thus they spoke before the king.
23 And the king said, “The one says, ‘This is my son, who lives, and your son is the dead one’; and the other says, ‘No! But your son is the dead one, and my son is the living one.’|” 24 Then the king said, “Bring me a sword.” So they brought a sword before the king. 25 And the king said, “Divide the living child in two, and give half to one, and half to the other.”
26 Then the woman whose son was living spoke to the king, for she yearned with compassion for her son; and she said, “O my lord, give her the living child, and by no means kill him!”
But the other said, “Let him be neither mine nor yours, but divide him.”
27 So the king answered and said, “Give the first woman the living child, and by no means kill him; she is his mother.”
28 And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had rendered; and they feared the king, for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him to administer justice.​

Resting in Him,
Clete

Many people performed acts of love and righteousness, but they still fell short of the glory of God. They are still as filthy rags. Unless it is His Spirit working in you, it is still an operation of the flesh. God is the source of life, and it is His life alone that qualifies as righteous and as genuine love.

 

[godrulz]

You are a lier and a pervert. , get away from me you son of the devil.

Try the ignore button (though I never use it because I think the mature thing is to work through things, not pout and avoid).

If you are going to accuse me of things, grow a spine and be specific so I can apologize or clarify my points.

 

[godrulz]

Soooo, sons of the Devil are perverts who lay around a lot? Is that what you're trying to say?



Somebody please ban this dork before I kill myself! I mean come on already! If you cannot spell the word 'liar' (even after having been corrected no less) do you really have anything meaningful to contribute to a theology debate forum? :bang:

I think it would be better if you consider homicide, not suicide. Perhaps we can arrange a tar and feathering?