ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[Yorzhik]

You're right! He is very smart. However; 'How' exactly did God set up Judas for destruction? Especially when it's God's stated desire that ALL would be saved.

Judas presented himself, by his own will, as a vessel for wrath. And God obliged. Further, God could have influenced the priests and even Judas himself to consider options that God preferred when creating the Passion of Christ.

 

[themuzicman]

Ever heard of group dynamics? Even people can predict with some certainty that a certain percentage of people will choose a particular choice, without knowing exactly which individuals in that group will actually do it.

Muz

 

[Yorzhik]

But if God says "This will certainly happen," and it doesn't, then that's false prophecy, so his prophecies saying "this is sure," must be sure indeed.

Like if God says "surely I will drive them out". Like that kind of certainty?

Also, if God says "I tell you the truth" to Peter when he knows it might not be true, that is telling a lie.

Tell me right now, am I telling the truth?: "I tell you the truth, the New England Patriots will go undefeated this season."

So prophecy when it's unconditional, cannot be an estimate.

Unless the condition is implied, right?

Deuteronomy 18:21-22 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?" If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken.

Sadly enough, the Open View directly contradicts this Scripture.

Ah, no. The people of the time were open view, and viewed that passage in an open view context. So they were OK with a prophet saying "you're going to die in 15 days" and then before the 15 days passed, the prophet could reverse himself and "God changed His mind, you're not going to die in 15 days."

 

[RobE]

Judas presented himself, by his own will, as a vessel for wrath. And God obliged.

John 17:12 'While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.​

You're saying that God foreknew what Judas would do; or,

Further, God could have influenced the priests and even Judas himself to consider options that God preferred when creating the Passion of Christ.

You're saying that God coerced Judas actions. Maybe both?

 

[RobE]

He does desire all to be saved, but salvation cannot be caused or coerced if it is based on love and holiness. There are issues relating to His moral government of the universe..

Where would this leave Clete, Muz, and Yoriz's arguments about the outcome of Judas?

John 17:12 'While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.​

These things exist as a consequence of issues relating to freedom, not because they are desired or intended. IF they were for a higher good or God's will, they would not be harshly condemned and judged (which they are).

But God does permit them according to His will for the higher good. Remember, we both agree He is able to stop them.

 

[godrulz]

Please don't strand me on a desert island with Lon or RobE?!

 

[Philetus]

Please don't strand me on a desert island with Lon or RobE?!

:chuckle:

I'll gladly take Lon, you can have Lee. Weeeelllllllllll........... looks like its RobE, Clete and Judas on the final episode of Survivor. (I'll bet Clete votes himself off the island first.)

 

[RobE]

Please don't strand me on a desert island with Lon or RobE?!

Really? I know how to light a fire without matches, gig, and build boats.

 

[RobE]

:chuckle:

I'll gladly take Lon, you can have Lee. Weeeelllllllllll........... looks like its RobE, Clete and Judas on the final episode of Survivor. (I'll bet Clete votes himself off the island first.)

Just like an open theist, thinking his own vote is the most important.:freak:

What happens if Judas and I vote each other off? It's more likely Clete would make an alliance with Judas to vote me off; and, then, on the night of the vote Judas would betray Clete by voting Clete off, resulting in a three way tie again.

The only way is if Clete and I vote Judas off and then wait and see which one us goes insane first from listening intently to each other:jawdrop: (now there's a real survivor challenge!).

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Please don't strand me on a desert island with Lon or RobE?!

Rob's posts are making a lot of sense to me. What's your beef with him?

 

[themuzicman]

Rob tries to take the inane and make it sound sensible.

But anyone with even a little critical thinking sees right through it all.

Muz

 

[Philetus]

Just like an open theist, thinking his own vote is the most important.:freak:

What happens if Judas and I vote each other off? It's more likely Clete would make an alliance with Judas to vote me off; and, then, on the night of the vote Judas would betray Clete by voting Clete off, resulting in a three way tie again.

The only way is if Clete and I vote Judas off and then wait and see which one us goes insane first from listening intently to each other:jawdrop: (now there's a real survivor challenge!).

Typical.
Clete would walk on water to get off that island. :surf:

 

[Philetus]

Rob's posts are making a lot of sense to me. What's your beef with him?

Then please, explain his position to the rest of us.
:idea: On second thought just explain it to him.

 

[RobE]

Rob tries to take the inane and make it sound sensible.

But anyone with even a little critical thinking sees right through it all.

Muz

I have never defended open theism! And, if this were true I could probably get rich by writing a theological book on divine fallibility.

 

[themuzicman]

I have never defended open theism!

And thank God you don't. We don't need a loss of credibility like that.

Muz

 

[Philetus]

I have never defended open theism! And, if this were true I could probably get rich by writing a theological book on divine fallibility.

What? :shocked: Your last one didn't sell all that well? :greedy:

 

[lee_merrill]

We don't need a loss of credibility like that.

I think the lack of credibility comes when OVT people avoid difficult questions, with such jibes substituting for replies...

 

[Philetus]

How you comin with the pink elephants, Lee?

 

[lee_merrill]

Like if God says "surely I will drive them out". Like that kind of certainty?

So then God does speak and then not act, he does promise and not fulfill?

Tell me right now, am I telling the truth?: "I tell you the truth, the New England Patriots will go undefeated this season."

No, you are not telling the truth in the sense of a certain statement, but "truly, truly" means the statement is sure.

Unless the condition is implied, right?

But I meant when God says "this will surely happen," then if it doesn't happen, that is a word the Lord did not speak. Contra Open Theism--see "I will surely drive them out" above.

The people of the time were open view, and viewed that passage in an open view context. So they were OK with a prophet saying "you're going to die in 15 days" and then before the 15 days passed, the prophet could reverse himself and "God changed His mind, you're not going to die in 15 days."

But I meant when God says "this will surely happen," then if it doesn't happen, that is a word the Lord did not speak. Contra Open Theism.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Lon]

Please don't strand me on a desert island with Lon or RobE?!

You feel trapped because of this???

It wasn't a trap, but for one not 'game' for 'winning' and 'losing' analogy, you sure play with the idea. This was the point of my win scenario.
God wins, and my point is that He is more than just capable, He must win. There is no room for error with God.

In your chess game, God always wins. His Son will return. All wrongs will be made right. The only reason God could lose is if He chooses to, otherwise we have a Christian message closer to Yin/Yang.

Because God's knowledge could not have Him losing, you must concede He never makes mistakes (and Sanders was absolutely wrong).

Again, this means God is much closer to a virtual EDF than OV would admit. There is nothing that would be a 'new' move if God knows all there is to know past and present. I'm arguing for a better OV position here.

Leaving the game analogies behind, 'Very smart' isn't good enough. He has to be able to bring about His intention (win). God cannot fail, both because of who He is and what He has determined. There is no greater strength that can defeat God. There is no smarter being that can outsmart Him at His own creation.

"Very Smart." How smart? If God never loses, He knows future intentions and actions of men as old hat. There is no move man can make that He isn't prepared for. There is nothing man can do to thwart His intentions. If you begin to follow this line of logic to its conclusion, you'll be very close to EDF logically.

I believe this is the argument Rob was trying to make for several days now.

That was my last statement to you.