ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[patman]

I don't hate you. I don't understand you.

If the future does not exist, but our children do, and God created our children . . .you are saying there is no future in the mind of God for them. You are saying that my two granddaughters have nothing on which to trust in life.

Both of them have committed themselves to remaining chaste, trusting in God to provide them Christian and faithful husbands. If the future does not exist, what purpose for such decision, hope, and trust?

Get my gist ? . . .

Nang

When I speak of future, I speak of time in general. The 4th dimension. I can understand the confusion.

There are three camps about the future. You can think of the first as though time were a VCR tape. As it plays, the playhead can be considered the present. As the tape unrolls and goes past the playhead, the events recorded become the past and the up and coming events are the future.

If time is like this VCR tape, the future "exists."

Another idea is that the time is like a play, this play is based on a script. As the actors are acting out the play, all their past, present, and future actions come from the script. And even though they have yet to act out the ending, the ending exists if only on paper.

However, I think of time as a giant building. The building isn't complete, because we are constantly building it. Buildings have blue prints, but as any architect will tell you, blue prints change.

Blueprints aren't like a script, because as the play is preformed on the script is finished.

Does that make more since?

 

[Nang]

When I speak of future, I speak of time in general. The 4th dimension. I can understand the confusion.

There are three camps about the future. You can think of the first as though time were a VCR tape. As it plays, the playhead can be considered the present. As the tape unrolls and goes past the playhead, the events recorded become the past and the up and coming events are the future.

If time is like this VCR tape, the future "exists."

Another idea is that the time is like a play, this play is based on a script. As the actors are acting out the play, all their past, present, and future actions come from the script. And even though they have yet to act out the ending, the ending exists if only on paper.

However, I think of time as a giant building. The building isn't complete, because we are constantly building it. Buildings have blue prints, but as any architect will tell you, blue prints change.

Blueprints aren't like a script, because as the play is preformed on the script is finished.

Does that make more since?

I choose the VCR analogy.

Nang

 

[patman]

I choose the VCR analogy.

Nang

Yeah, with that one, the viewer is outside of the Tape... or he is outside of time. He can fast forward at will, or rewind, knowing perfectly what is going to happen next, having full view of what is happening on the tape.

One reason I reject that idea is because not only is the viewer watching the tape, he also made the tape and everything that happens on it. That by itself isn't so bad, but when the tape is pornographic, for example, it doesn't reflect good upon the maker of the tape.

 

[Nang]

Yeah, with that one, the viewer is outside of the Tape... or he is outside of time. He can fast forward at will, or rewind, knowing perfectly what is going to happen next, having full view of what is happening on the tape.

One reason I reject that idea is because not only is the viewer watching the tape, he also made the tape and everything that happens on it. That by itself isn't so bad, but when the tape is pornographic, for example, it doesn't reflect good upon the maker of the tape.

Nah, pre-programmed VCR tapes, made according to the producer, are free from outside corruptions, until and unless the persons given responsibility for playing the tape, spit tobacco or other vile substances (or attempt to insert illegal editing); thereby, subject the original and pristine reels, to invasive alterations.

Kinda screws things up when that happens . . .things don't play so smoothly or clearly, and often extreme restoration measures are required to get the tape to play to the predestined, preprogrammed, preproduced . . . end.

Nang

 

[patman]

Nah, pre-programmed VCR tapes, made according to the producer, are free from outside corruptions, until and unless the persons given responsibility for playing the tape, spit tobacco or other vile substances (or attempt to insert illegal editing); thereby, subject the original and pristine reels, to invasive alterations.

Kinda screws things up when that happens . . .things don't play so smoothly or clearly, and often extreme restoration measures are required to get the tape to play to the predestined, preprogrammed, preproduced . . . end.

Nang

Hehe, we are going to have to stop talking in analogies now

So are you saying that you think the devil (or evil men) screwed up creation (AKA the tape)?

 

[Nang]

Hehe, we are going to have to stop talking in analogies now

So are you saying that you think the devil (or evil men) screwed up creation (AKA the tape)?

Neither.

Neither succeeded in fatally screwing up God's plan.

God's creation tape will play to its glorified end . . . to accomplish its purpose for whom it was produced . . .despite the sticky, dirty, clumsy fingers and ineptness of the creatures to whom responsibility was given to push the "start" button.

Nang

 

[Nang]

Hehe, we are going to have to stop talking in analogies now

Agreed.

Now, will you answer this?

Please?

I would really like to get a response as to how the Open Theists would respond to this kind of committment by virgin Christian young ladies in our midst.

Nang

 

[patman]

Nang,

To your other post, we should look at how things are in both OV and SV. Let's do this by looking at the life of different people in the world and the trials they face.

People face all kinds of trials. Some overcome, and some are over come. I do not really want to make this personal, no one likes the thought of their loved ones being hurt, but your grandchildren face these possibilities too.

Under settled theology, these trials are all predestined, and utterly unchangeable.

If someone were to face a life or death trial, and that person wasn't saved, the consequences for that person are devastating. What is worst is there is nothing at all the person can do. He cannot pray for salvation, because he wasn't predestined to. He has no hope. God, from before time, according to ST, foresaw the future of this person burning in hell, and foreordained it to happen, only saving a select people.

Now under Open Theology, that same person is left to his own will. God did not see his future from the beginning of the world. God didn't choose for him whether or not he would choose God back when he made the world. That person has hope. Because God chooses everyone, all he needs to do is chose back!

There is more hope under Open Theism than Settled Theology. Under Settled Theology, whether it be our eternal resting place, or be it our day to day lives, nothing is truly left to our will.

You may find comfort in God's control that Settled Theology applies to us, but what about those who are victims of that control, who end up with broken lives, and end up with devastated eternities? If God would so willingly predestine a terrible eternal life for thousands of people, why would he be so gracious to you and your granddaughters to the extent that you have hope?

According to Settled Theology, God has either predestined them to heaven or hell, and no amount of prayer, no amount of plea, no matter how many people may be doing it, can change God's mind on whether or not to save them.

But with Open Theism, God has already decided he wants them. All that needs to happen is they choose him back, and God will be faithful to take them. More over, God has settled a big part of the future! He has already determined that he will give us all a blessed home in heaven who are in Christ. He will add our names to his book, and we will all be there, because our hope will be made a reality.

 

[Nang]

Nang,

To your other post, we should look at how things are in both OV and SV. Let's do this by looking at the life of different people in the world and the trials they face.

People face all kinds of trials. Some overcome, and some are over come. I do not really want to make this personal, no one likes the thought of their loved ones being hurt, but your grandchildren face these possibilities too.

So, you are saying my granddaughters' choice to remain virgins, is a gamble?

Under settled theology, these trials are all predestined, and utterly unchangeable.

Is chastisy a "trial?" Or is remaining a virgin, faithful obedience performed out of faith and love of God?

How can something performed in faith and love of God be a gamble or trial that might fail?

If someone were to face a life or death trial, and that person wasn't saved, the consequences for that person are devastating. What is worst is there is nothing at all the person can do. He cannot pray for salvation, because he wasn't predestined to. He has no hope. God, from before time, according to ST, foresaw the future of this person burning in hell, and foreordained it to happen, only saving a select people.

But my question has to do with my granddaughters who are saved. Can they be assured that their faith and hope in the moral teachings and promises of God, will be blessed in the future?

Now under Open Theology, that same person is left to his own will. God did not see his future from the beginning of the world.

How do I tell this to my granddaughters, who are hoping to please God through holiness, unto earthly blessings as well as receiving eternal life?

Is there no spiritual blessing for those who love God, love His commands, and live according to His Holy Spirit, will, and word?

God didn't choose for him whether or not he would choose God back when he made the world. That person has hope. Because God chooses everyone, all he needs to do is chose back!

They would both tell you that is "totally weird." Both realize that they are chosen by God, and not vice versa. Most of their friends have no concept of the hope God has given them through His Holy Spirit and teaching of the Scriptures. It is only the grace of God, that causes them to have a different attitude and mindset than their peers . . . and they know it and acknowledge it.

There is more hope under Open Theism than Settled Theology. Under Settled Theology, whether it be our eternal resting place, or be it our day to day lives, nothing is truly left to our will.

Well, my dear girls have enough savvy to know, that regardless of their fleshly urges and peer pressure, the protection of holy chastisy is realized by the sanctifying presence of God's Holy Spirit who works God's will in their lives. Morality is guaranteed by the indwelling of God . . .not by human will or resolve.

You may find comfort in God's control that Settled Theology applies to us, but what about those who are victims of that control, who end up with broken lives, and end up with devastated eternities?

I truly do not know of what you speak. Honestly, I have never known a person who believed in God and trusted in God and submitted their lives and will to God, who has ever suffered "broken lives" or "devastation."

If God would so willingly predestine a terrible eternal life for thousands of people, why would he be so gracious to you and your granddaughters to the extent that you have hope?

Would you deny me God's grace, even though I cannot provide personal merit for having received it?

According to Settled Theology, God has either predestined them to heaven or hell, and no amount of prayer, no amount of plea, no matter how many people may be doing it, can change God's mind on whether or not to save them.

But with Open Theism, God has already decided he wants them.

If God has "already decided He wants them," . . .how is this different than the doctrine of Unconditional Election?

All that needs to happen is they choose him back, and God will be faithful to take them.

Oh, I see. God elects a people He wants, but their salvation is conditional upon their choice.

More over, God has settled a big part of the future! He has already determined that he will give us all a blessed home in heaven who are in Christ. He will add our names to his book, and we will all be there, because our hope will be made a reality.

I suspect you would really and secretly like to be a Calvinist.

For indeed, God has all the future settled. My granddaughters are saved and safe in Christ, and they are promised blessings for their obedience of chastisy in one way or another; their names are indeed written in the Lamb's Book of Life; and they have hope to live according to Godly holiness . . .not according their own wills (which are constantly tempted to run with the drinking and promiscuous crowds they know). . .but because they have been led to live according to the will of God.

I fail to see how they could have this strength of hope and resolve, if they were not taught that God has their future planned for His glory and for their good.

Nang

 

[patman]

So, you are saying my granddaughters' choice to remain virgins, is a gamble?
.......

I fail to see how they could have this strength of hope and resolve, if they were not taught that God has their future planned for His glory and for their good.

Nang

Nang, I am sorry, for some reason I thought you were just using that as an example.

I hate to say it, but there are thousands of Christians, just as willing as your granddaughters to remain pure, but it doesn't happen. Why should your granddaughters be any different, even under Calvinism?

Whether Calvinism or Open Theism is true, the reality is that people sin. Some have premarital sex, some murder, some steal pencils. If God predestines it so your granddaughters are strong, he is also making the men who would tempt them weak.

If God really predestined everything, one would think everyone would be pure, if that is what God really wants.... but as it were, whatever is predestined is what God wanted. If your granddaughters fall, it was their destiny under your theology. God appointed it to happen, and there is nothing you can do about it. Even if they are saved, they too are only a puppet to God's will, a puppet to God's predestination for their lives.

In the Open View, God still gives them strength, but it is up to them to sin or not. If they resist, that is great! But they still need God's grace for those other sins, those impure thoughts, etc. That grace comes from God as a gift, of nothing we have done. They could fall, but still God would save.

So their hope is in God, but their sins are their own. God will cover them in the blood of Christ, and make them white as snow, but it is what it is. Christian's sin. No sound theology, not even Calvinism, can assure them that they will not. Of the two, Calvinism takes the control out of their hands and puts it in God's, who may or may not have predestined them to sin.

 

[Nang]

Of the two, Calvinism takes the control out of their hands and puts it in God's, who may or may not have predestined them to sin.

I guess that is what I am trying to convey to you.

My girls know the grace of God and His salvation, and have put their future in His sovereign and controlling hands, according to the faith gifted to them by His grace, and the instilled hope that assures them He will bless their chaste lifestyle.

Frankly, I am thrilled that they are letting God decide their future, rather than running with the crowd.

It is "totally weird" you do not see this as HOPEFUL, good, and righteous, and glorifying to God, but as something to doubt, criticize, and even charge against them simply because Grandma is a Calvinist . . . especially so, considering you OVT'ers all claim to be so ethically pure and Americas' foremost advocates of sexual morality, anti-abortion, who believe in rights to life, etc., etc.

Oh well . . .just thought I would share some real-life Christianity-in-practice with you . . .it is my first-hand witness to the goodness of the Lord Jesus Christ evident in a couple of lovely young women who have been sanctified by the grace and holy power of God, amidst this ugly, sinful, dark world of sin.



Nang

 

[patman]

I guess that is what I am trying to convey to you.

My girls know the grace of God and His salvation, and have put their future in His sovereign and controlling hands, according to the faith gifted to them by His grace, and the instilled hope that assures them He will bless their chaste lifestyle.

Frankly, I am thrilled that they are letting God decide their future, rather than running with the crowd.

It is "totally weird" you do not see this as HOPEFUL, good, and righteous, and glorifying to God, but as something to doubt, criticize, and even charge against them simply because Grandma is a Calvinist . . . especially so, considering you OVT'ers all claim to be so ethically pure and Americas' foremost advocates of sexual morality, anti-abortion, who believe in rights to life, etc., etc.

Oh well . . .just thought I would share some real-life Christianity-in-practice with you . . .it is my first-hand witness to the goodness of the Lord Jesus Christ evident in a couple of lovely young women who have been sanctified by the grace and holy power of God, amidst this ugly, sinful, dark world of sin.



Nang

Nang, what gives? Why do you try disgrace everyone who doesn't agree with you?

It IS good they are putting themselves in Gods hands, but THEY put themselves there through God's help (that is, through Christ). God didn't make them do it, they did it! Jesus was knocking, they answered.

But according to Calvinism, WE ALL are in God's control whether we like it or not, and WE ALL sin or repent according to his plan. There is no hope in that because whether we sin, or we overcome is not up to us. Under Calvinism, those who sin do so because they were made that way and can do no different. Under Open Theism, they sin because they wanted to, and could stop with God's help.

I thought you would be happy to hear this.

 

[Philetus]

=Pariah;1600794]Hi Philetus,

Hey, Pariah

I believe I was referring to the topic of Open Theism, not Open Theists. I didn't say that those engage in it do not believe in God. I was referring to the topic.

If you would rather be identified by that, that is your call, but I would rather be identified by faith in Jesus Christ. Paul addressed that about whom believers are to be identifying themselves with.

How do you separate the two? When you say that Open Theism doesn't let God be God or that in the OT system God isn't God, you are in fact saying that Open Theists don't believe God is God. You can't back peddle out of that one.

1 Corinthians 3: 5Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. 7So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

And yet believers are identifying themselves with Calvin and other such men.

And now, you as an Open Theist. You said it. I didn't it.

I'm not 'identifying' my self with any man. I've been an Open Theists since way before I heard the term or read the words of Sanders, Boyd or Pinnock. I'm an Open Theist because I believe the future is open and subject in part to the contingencies based on God given freedom to make decisions independent of God's will. (some simply call that sin) My faith is in Jesus; not the future.

Guess you didn't have a thing to say about the link logically refuting open theism.

Your link stinks. We have been debating those issues for more than two years on this thread (and part 1). If you have anything new to bring to the table ... bring it. But starting by simply linking to the same ol and writing off Open Theism isn't helpful or edifying.

I think this thread is more man than God since it edifies not, and I should not waste any more time in it as it is an obvious vanity and vainglorying of exalting one's intellect over another and in referencing another intellect's over another. I can see already by your behaviour that I should not have come in at all.

Galatians 5: 14For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 15But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

Look at the top of your screen, Doofus.
THEOLOGYONLINE: The web community that rebukes one another ... loves one another.
Of course it is more man than God. Its a theological debate ... not a prayer meeting. God hasn't posted here in a long time.

(Now that would be some screen name and avatar. )

I would advise that for all those that value their relationship with the Lord that if you cannot discuss this thread in Christ's love, then you are not serving Him at all in this topic, and follow suit. There are plenty of threads to edify one another in the faith which we are called to do, so that we may be found ready when He appears.

This discussion and debate doesn't challenge my relationship with the Lord or with my fellow Christians in the least. And I agree with you that any one who is not mature enough to be here to butt heads without loosing heart should hightail it out of here as fast as they can and go grow up before coming back.

Thanks for the rebuke ... got love?

:wave2:
Philetus

 

[Philetus]

How does one use the word HOPEFUL in the context of a settled future?

 

[RobE]

I do not agree that change is impossible without 100% foreknowledge.

If I say, 'I am going to Wendys' and I end up going to Arbys what changed?

Did my action change? No. I went to Arbys.
Did the future change? No. I went to Arbys.
Am I able to say that my knowledge changed unless I exhaustively foreknew what I was going to do?

Did I lie?

Some we have some foreknowledge ourselves that we use to try to prevent or bring about certain events.

We have tons of foreknowledge. We operate based upon foreknown outcomes. Cause and effect. We do A, B occurs. Without cause and effect, nothing happens. I type 'C' and see 'C' produced on the computer screen. I press 'submit' and the post appears on TOL. Sure things might interfere with it, but with exhaustive intelligence(i.e. total knowledge of all present events) I am able to say with certainty(definitiveness) that the future will unfold according to my perfect knowledge.

And I agree, God has some foreknowledge... a lot more than any of us. I simply cannot agree that he has total foreknowledge.

You agree that God has the same amount of knowledge that you have. If God exhaustively knows all present conditions, then His knowledge becomes definite. Outcomes become sure. Your statement, "a lot more than any of us" admits the natural truth of the situation. I would say infinitely more than us, including knowing us better than we know ourselves. This being true then where does that leave us. If God is able to tell where every atom in the universe will be in 1 second, then what precludes Him from knowing where they will be in 2 seconds?

We may regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes. -- Pierre-Laplace's Demon.​

Here are some assumptions you must have for this to be true.

1. It is possible to know all the information about the past and present states of the universe.

Is it possible God knows the past and present exhaustively?

2. It is possible to know all the natural laws governing the universe.

Is it possible God knows all natural laws?

3. These natural laws are fully computable and do not underdetermine the physical outcomes.

Does God understand all created behaviors?

4. That an "intellect" could be capable of computing the future states of the universe faster than they actually occur.

Is God intelligent enough to know all present things at once?

5. That such an intellect could exist without being inside the universe (contra proponents of Materialism).

Does God exist outside of creation?

6. That such knowledge would not change or alter the universe in such a way that the state of the universe would change.

Does God's knowledge of creation change creation in any way?

 

[RobE]

How does one use the word HOPEFUL in the context of a settled future?

What does it mean in open theism. Hope for the unknown? Doesn't there need to be something to hope for? Without results from action there is no hope, only delusion.

 

[patman]

If I say, 'I am going to Wendys' and I end up going to Arbys what changed?

Did my action change? No. I went to Arbys.
Did the future change? No. I went to Arbys.
Am I able to say that my knowledge changed unless I exhaustively foreknew what I was going to do?

Did I lie?



We have tons of foreknowledge. We operate based upon foreknown outcomes. Cause and effect. We do A, B occurs. Without cause and effect, nothing happens. I type 'C' and see 'C' produced on the computer screen. I press 'submit' and the post appears on TOL. Sure things might interfere with it, but with exhaustive intelligence(i.e. total knowledge of all present events) I am able to say with certainty(definitiveness) that the future will unfold according to my perfect knowledge.



You agree that God has the same amount of knowledge that you have. If God exhaustively knows all present conditions, then His knowledge becomes definite. Outcomes become sure. Your statement, "a lot more than any of us" admits the natural truth of the situation. I would say infinitely more than us, including knowing us better than we know ourselves. This being true then where does that leave us. If God is able to tell where every atom in the universe will be in 1 second, then what precludes Him from knowing where they will be in 2 seconds?

We may regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes. -- Pierre-Laplace's Demon.​

Here are some assumptions you must have for this to be true.



Is it possible God knows the past and present exhaustively?



Is it possible God knows all natural laws?



Does God understand all created behaviors?



Is God intelligent enough to know all present things at once?



Does God exist outside of creation?



Does God's knowledge of creation change creation in any way?

Whoa, God has WAY more future knowledge than I have. God's definitive future knowledge is limited by the choices we have not made.

Example, "Will Abraham give everything he has to me if I ask it of him?"

It was a choice Abraham didn't make yet, so that is why God tested him, to see the answer. It is these freewill choices that we are still in the grey area that God doesn't know the outcome because the answers to the choices do not exist in the present.

 

[Philetus]

What does it mean in open theism. Hope for the unknown? Doesn't there need to be something to hope for? Without results from action there is no hope, only delusion.

Only thing bad about the ignore button is that you have to be signed in for it to work. And even though I asked first, let’s have another go at it, RobE, and see what happens. I hope we can do this without loosing it in fewer than 10 posts.

The farmer hopes it will rain next Friday. I hope it won't. Will it?

Unless you have exhaustive foreknowledge, you don't know. But you can hope. If you know for absolute certain ... then it ain't hope. If you can make it rain and do so ... it ain't hope ... its intention and control. Will you? When did you decide?

Hope isn't a delusion either way; unless you think just hoping guarantees results and then you are really setting yourself up for disappointment. But, the word of God says that Hope does not disappoint us. We can distinguish from contingencies (at least Open Theists can) and what God has said God will do and have complete confidence in that future because (to use a recent phrase thrown at OT) God is God and can do anything. It may or may not rain. That’s a contingency built into the very fabric of the environment. It isn’t going to affect God’s ultimate intentions for the future either way, but it may wreck my planned picnic. My hope may have been misdirected, and I may be disappointed that it rained, but my HOPE in the future God has planned (not seen) isn’t shaken in the least bit because I know God is able to do what God has said God will do. And as far as I can tell, God hasn't said a thing about next Friday's weather. We will all have to wait and see.

By faith, I hope in the future God in Christ is now preparing. My neighbor doesn't. That shapes the future to some degree. It's called Open Theism, Open View, Free Will Theism and probably is held by many who simply don't call it anything. They just accept it as reality.

Your turn ... answer the question.

Philetus

 

[Philetus]

Neither.

Neither succeeded in fatally screwing up God's plan.

Nang

Key word: FATALLY.

We screw up by missing out on God's plan. God's BIG plan remains in tact whether we decide to participate or not.

Philetus

 

[Philetus]

Whoa, God has WAY more future knowledge than I have. God's definitive future knowledge is limited by the choices we have not made.

Example, "Will Abraham give everything he has to me if I ask it of him?"

It was a choice Abraham didn't make yet, so that is why God tested him, to see the answer. It is these freewill choices that we are still in the grey area that God doesn't know the outcome because the answers to the choices do not exist in the present.

:thumb: