ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 3

[godrulz]

The insistence that God cannot be God if He can choose to not know something that someone else knows is what's sad.

You are compromising an essential issue. God cannot be the devil. He cannot choose to not be eternal, omnipotent, etc. Some character attributes are volitional, but other attributes of God are inherently unchangeable due to who He is and His nature as God.

 

[nicholsmom]

What do you understand about this passage?

Eze 1:1 And it happened in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth of the month, as I was among the captives by the river Chebar, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God.
Eze 1:2 On the fifth of the month, the fifth year of King Jehoiachin's captivity,
Eze 1:3 Coming the Word of Jehovah became known to Ezekiel, the son of Buzi, the priest in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar. And the hand of Jehovah was on him there.
Eze 1:4 And I looked, and behold, a windstorm came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire flashing itself, and a brightness to it all around, and out of its midst, like the color of polished bronze out of the middle of the fire.
Eze 1:5 Also out of its midst came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was how they looked; they had the likeness of a man.
Eze 1:6 And four faces were to each, and four wings to each.
Eze 1:7 And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot. And they sparkled like the color of burnished copper.
Eze 1:8 And the hands of a man extended from under their wings on their four sides; and the four of them had their faces and their wings,
Eze 1:9 joining each one to the other by their wings. They did not turn in their going; each one went toward the front of their face.
Eze 1:10 And the likeness of their faces: the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side to the four of them; and the face of an ox on the left side to the four of them; and the face of an eagle to the four of them.
Eze 1:11 So their faces were. And their wings were stretched upward; to each, the two wings of each one were joined; and two wings covered their bodies.
Eze 1:12 And each went toward the front of their faces. To where the spirit was to go, there they went; they did not turn in their going.
Eze 1:13 And the likeness of the living creatures: they looked like burning coals of fire; like the appearance of torches. It was continually circling among the living creatures. And the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning.
Eze 1:14 And the living creatures kept running and returning, like the appearance of a flash of lightning.
Eze 1:15 And as I looked at the living creatures, behold, one wheel was on the earth by the living creatures, with its four faces.
Eze 1:16 The appearance of the wheels and their workmanship was the color of beryl, and the four of them had one likeness. And their appearance and their workmanship was like a wheel in the middle of a wheel.
Eze 1:17 When they went, they went on their four sides; and they did not turn when they went.
Eze 1:18 And their rims: they were even high; they were even awesome. And their rims were full of eyes all around the four of them.
Eze 1:19 And in the going of the living creatures, the wheels went beside them; and in the lifting up of the living creatures from the earth, the wheels were lifted up.
Eze 1:20 Wherever the spirit was to go, there they went; there the spirit was to go, and the wheels were lifted up along with them. For the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.
Eze 1:21 In their going, these went; and in their standing still, these stood still. And in their lifting up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up along with them. For the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.
Eze 1:22 And there was a likeness over the heads of the living creature; an expanse, like the color of awesome crystal stretched out over their heads from above.
Eze 1:23 And under the expanse their wings were straight, the one toward the other. Each one had two wings covering on this side, and to each two covering on that side of their bodies.
Eze 1:24 And I heard the sound of their wings, like the sound of great waters, like the voice of the Almighty, in their going was the sound of tumult, like the sound of an army. In their standing still, they let down their wings.
Eze 1:25 And there was a voice from the expanse which was over their heads, in their standing still, and they let down their wings.
Eze 1:26 And from above the expanse that was over their heads was a likeness like a sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne. And on the likeness of the throne was a likeness looking like a man on it from above.
Eze 1:27 And I saw Him looking like the color of polished bronze, looking like fire all around within it. From the likeness of His loins even upward, and from the likeness of His loins even downward, I saw Him, looking like fire, and it had brightness all around.
Eze 1:28 As the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain looks, so the brightness all around looked. This was how the likeness of the glory of Jehovah looked. And I saw. And I fell on my face, and I heard a voice of One speaking.

V28 and chapter 2 portray this vision as God, yet is a strange vision like one we have not seen before. What is it telling us about God?

Reread it with this question in mind. Scripture is the seat of our understanding. It is scripture, not Greeks, nor Americans, nor philosophers that theology should come.

Are there no OVers who will answer this excellent question? The symbolism of the imagery in Ezekiel is unmistakable.

 

[godrulz]

Are there no OVers who will answer this excellent question? The symbolism of the imagery in Ezekiel is unmistakable.

What is the issue for Open Theism? God has perfect past and present knowledge. He can also determine and know things about the future. Ezekiel 1 is a non-issue in relation to OT vs closed theism.

 

[nicholsmom]

What is the issue for Open Theism? God has perfect past and present knowledge. He can also determine and know things about the future. Ezekiel 1 is a non-issue in relation to OT vs closed theism.

The symbolism in Ezekiel clearly points to God's omnipotence (in this case to judge - storm wind, clouds, flashing lightening, fire, glowing coals, the rims of the wheels were lofty and awesome, the expanse, the throne, the glory - all speak of the mighty magnificence of the One who sits on the royal throne), His omnipresence (four creatures, four faces, four hands, four wings, four wheels with intersecting wheels - all compass directions indicating the omnipresence of God), His unchanging nature (neither creatures nor wheels turned), His omniscience (eyes all over the rims of the wheels.

I know that you have no trouble with the majesty of God. What I want for you to realize is that it is very easy to see that passages like these (the final chapters of Job come to mind, too) lead us (traditionalists) naturally to a vision of God that shows Him to be without limit in time or space or power to do exactly as He pleases. This is a vision of supreme majesty beyond our imagining.

We don't need Greek ideas to teach us of the limitless nature of God - it can be seen right in a plain reading of the Bible.

 

[godrulz]

The symbolism in Ezekiel clearly points to God's omnipotence (in this case to judge - storm wind, clouds, flashing lightening, fire, glowing coals, the rims of the wheels were lofty and awesome, the expanse, the throne, the glory - all speak of the mighty magnificence of the One who sits on the royal throne), His omnipresence (four creatures, four faces, four hands, four wings, four wheels with intersecting wheels - all compass directions indicating the omnipresence of God), His unchanging nature (neither creatures nor wheels turned), His omniscience (eyes all over the rims of the wheels.

I know that you have no trouble with the majesty of God. What I want for you to realize is that it is very easy to see that passages like these (the final chapters of Job come to mind, too) lead us (traditionalists) naturally to a vision of God that shows Him to be without limit in time or space or power to do exactly as He pleases. This is a vision of supreme majesty beyond our imagining.

We don't need Greek ideas to teach us of the limitless nature of God - it can be seen right in a plain reading of the Bible.

Properly understood, Calvinism, Arminianism, and Open Theism equally share a majestic, glorious view of God.

My interest is to define God's revealed attributes in a biblical way untainted by tradition that is philosophically influenced (ironically, this is the problem with Origen, Augustine, and others).

I have a problem with those who think that God must be able to make square circles (logical absurdity) in order to have a majestic, true view of omnipotence. Sorry, does not compute.

Likewise, the issue with omniscience relates to creation, not His attributes (did God sovereignly choose a deterministic, settled, micromanaged creation or did He choose to create significant others, contingencies, aspects of unsettledness, providential control/macromanaging, etc.).

As well, issues like the nature of time and eternity are not fully resolved in Scripture, so godly philosophy and logic can be helpful in addition to the biblical evidence.

 

[nicholsmom]

Properly understood, Calvinism, Arminianism, and Open Theism equally share a majestic, glorious view of God.

I did concede this point.

My interest is to define God's revealed attributes in a biblical way untainted by tradition that is philosophically influenced (ironically, this is the problem with Origen, Augustine, and others).

Agreement with ancient pagan philosophers on a single point concerning the nature of the universe can come in complete ignorance of the philosophies and even of the philosophers themselves. Which is to say that we can both come to the same conclusions from different directions and for different reasons.

Also everyone is right some of the time - even Origen and Augustine.

I have a problem with those who think that God must be able to make square circles (logical absurdity) in order to have a majestic, true view of omnipotence. Sorry, does not compute.

Ah well, one man's logical absurdity is another man's likelihood. It's all a matter of perspective.

Likewise, the issue with omniscience relates to creation, not His attributes (did God sovereignly choose a deterministic, settled, micromanaged creation or did He choose to create significant others, contingencies, aspects of unsettledness, providential control/macromanaging, etc.).

As well, issues like the nature of time and eternity are not fully resolved in Scripture, so godly philosophy and logic can be helpful in addition to the biblical evidence.

I only wanted you to recognize the rationality of arriving at the traditional view by way of awe as described in Ez. I wasn't going for a full-blown discussion, just an "I can see how you could have arrived at your particular point of view without needing help from Aristotle or Augustine." But if you are unwilling to even try, then nevermind.

 

[godrulz]

Most of us claim to have biblical views apart from outside speculations.

 

[Lighthouse]

You are compromising an essential issue. God cannot be the devil. He cannot choose to not be eternal, omnipotent, etc. Some character attributes are volitional, but other attributes of God are inherently unchangeable due to who He is and His nature as God.

And? Your point?

I never said God could choose to be other than what He is. I'm saying He is not what you think He is.

Are there no OVers who will answer this excellent question? The symbolism of the imagery in Ezekiel is unmistakable.

Lon is not very good at communicating, or making concise points. So he is largely ignored.

 

[Lon]

Lon is not very good at communicating, or making concise points. So he is largely ignored.

Brass tacks:

What is Ezekiel saying about God's nature?


How much more concise can that have been?


You are not being honest, you'd better have said: "I can't be bothered to read lengthy scripture." The above is not true.

As to the other contingents, I also cannot see your point. I simply asked:

Are you walking the talk?

-reading scripture
-praying/in daily communion
-loving your enemies as well as those easy to love
-applying several goals in your life from scripture: Like loving all, being gentle, conveying Him in gentleness, love and respect?

Okay, it is a bit longer, but what did you miss? What was "not very good at communicating?" Again, you are not being honest or true or are operating on a very basal intellectual threshold.

 

[godrulz]

I think that was a cheap shot at Lon. We all have problems being understood at times.

 

[Lon]

Well, he is correct about my verbosity. I have to agree with that one.

 

[Nick M]

The symbolism in Ezekiel clearly points to God's omnipotence (in this case to judge - storm wind, clouds, flashing lightening, fire, glowing coals, the rims of the wheels were lofty and awesome, the expanse, the throne, the glory - all speak of the mighty magnificence of the One who sits on the royal throne), His omnipresence (four creatures, four faces, four hands, four wings, four wheels with intersecting wheels - all compass directions indicating the omnipresence of God), His unchanging nature (neither creatures nor wheels turned), His omniscience (eyes all over the rims of the wheels.

God said "now I know", and "to see if the outcries against Sodom and Gomorrah are true". That couldn't be more plain. Did you know that God knows you better than you know yourself? It isn't that he has a crystal ball. Nor can you appear to comprehend that he can bring things to pass. If it was settled, he couldnt' bring things to pass.

Now, you say why God said he would see if the Sodom and Gomorrah were as evil as he heard. The fact that this topic is on its second thread and has as many posts as it does just shows some of you don't want to know.

 

[Lighthouse]

Brass tacks:

What is Ezekiel saying about God's nature?


How much more concise can that have been?


You are not being honest, you'd better have said: "I can't be bothered to read lengthy scripture." The above is not true.

As to the other contingents, I also cannot see your point. I simply asked:

Are you walking the talk?

-reading scripture
-praying/in daily communion
-loving your enemies as well as those easy to love
-applying several goals in your life from scripture: Like loving all, being gentle, conveying Him in gentleness, love and respect?

Okay, it is a bit longer, but what did you miss? What was "not very good at communicating?" Again, you are not being honest or true or are operating on a very basal intellectual threshold.

I can read the Scripture. That's not the problem. I just don't like reading your posts, because they're mostly just ramblings of ignorance. And posting the entire chapter was pointless. You only needed a few verses relevant to the topic to make your point.

Also, you posted the Scripture without giving your view on how it related to the subject, or how it "enforced" your view.

Care to try again?

The fact that this topic is on its second thread and has as many posts as it does just shows some of you don't want to know.

Actually, this is the third thread in the series. But it has been the topic of many more threads than that.

 

[Lon]

I can read the Scripture. That's not the problem. I just don't like reading your posts, because they're mostly just ramblings of ignorance. And posting the entire chapter was pointless. You only needed a few verses relevant to the topic to make your point.

Also, you posted the Scripture without giving your view on how it related to the subject, or how it "enforced" your view.

Care to try again?


Actually, this is the third thread in the series. But it has been the topic of many more threads than that.

Good, I believe Ezekiel specifically expressing God's omniscience v18, omnipresencev6,14,16, omnipotence v24, holiness v28, judgement v4, immutable v9,12, righteousness v7,14, and transcendence v22,26,28. Furthermore, that these come directly from scripture, not Greeks, or philosophers, or Americans or other theologians.

 

[Lon]

I can read the Scripture. That's not the problem. I just don't like reading your posts, because they're mostly just ramblings of ignorance. And posting the entire chapter was pointless. You only needed a few verses relevant to the topic to make your point.

Care to try again?

Second point: Who am I debating with? What kind of man are you?
From what center do you say such things as this? That these are "ramblings?" That I'm a "moron," "stupid," "ignorant?"

Col 3:8 But now, put off all these things: anger, rage, malice, slander, abusive language from your mouth.

Psa 15:3 He does not slander,
or do harm to others,
or insult his neighbor.

1Ti 3:2 Then it behooves the overseer to be without reproach, husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, well-ordered, hospitable, apt at teaching,
1Ti 3:3 not a drunkard, not contentious, not greedy of ill gain, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous,

2Ti 2:24 But the servant of the Lord must not strive, but to be gentle to all, apt to teach, patient,
2Ti 2:25 in meekness instructing those who oppose, if perhaps God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth,
2Ti 2:26 and that they awake out of the snare of the Devil, having been taken captive by him, so as to do the will of that one.

Jam 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first truly pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy.

Tit 3:2 They must not slander anyone, but be peaceable, gentle, showing complete courtesy to all people.
Tit 3:3 For we too were once foolish, disobedient, misled, enslaved to various passions and desires, spending our lives in evil and envy, hateful and hating one another.

Eph 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Eph 4:31 You must put away every kind of bitterness, anger, wrath, quarreling, and evil, slanderous talk.
Eph 4:32 Instead, be kind to one another, compassionate, forgiving one another, just as God in Christ also forgave you.

Col 3:12 Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with a heart of mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience,
Col 3:13 bear with one another and forgiving one another, if someone happens to have a complaint against anyone else. Just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also forgive others.
Col 3:14 And to all these virtues add love, which is the perfect bond.
Col 3:15 Let the peace of Christ be in control in your heart (for you were in fact called as one body to this peace), and be thankful.

1Pe 2:1 So get rid of all evil and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.
1Pe 2:2 And yearn like newborn infants for pure, spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up to salvation,
1Pe 2:3 if you have experienced the Lord's kindness.

*Not just you. I even have seen the leadership here encourage another after posting slanderous vitriol. A student is not above his teacher. What kind of person is TOL producing? This is a call to own your own walk with Christ and follow His leading appropriately in sincerity, even against the teacher/pastor.

 

[godrulz]

Good, I believe Ezekiel specifically expressing God's omniscience v18, omnipresencev6,14,16, omnipotence v24, holiness v28, judgement v4, immutable v9,12, righteousness v7,14, and transcendence v22,26,28. Furthermore, that these come directly from scripture, not Greeks, or philosophers, or Americans or other theologians.

We all affirm these truths, but differ as to our biblical understanding of them.

Strong immutability fits atemporality, but at the expense of prayer, relationship, a sound theodicy, etc. I believe Scripture supports divine temporality, weak immutability, a non-deterministic M.O., genuine vs compatibilistic freedom, etc. I do not believe middle knowledge gets around the issues, etc.

The exact nature of omnipresence, etc. is not revealed, so there is room for godly philosophy, logic, etc.

We all claim to use Scripture, not other sources, yet we come to different conclusions. Throwing verses around with a cultist does not always work either, because they have their prooftexts, eisegesis, etc.

If things were clear all of the time, we would not have centuries of debate by 'equally capable, godly believers' (TM).

 

[Clete]

The symbolism in Ezekiel clearly points to God's omnipotence (in this case to judge - storm wind, clouds, flashing lightening, fire, glowing coals, the rims of the wheels were lofty and awesome, the expanse, the throne, the glory - all speak of the mighty magnificence of the One who sits on the royal throne), His omnipresence (four creatures, four faces, four hands, four wings, four wheels with intersecting wheels - all compass directions indicating the omnipresence of God), His unchanging nature (neither creatures nor wheels turned), His omniscience (eyes all over the rims of the wheels.

I know that you have no trouble with the majesty of God. What I want for you to realize is that it is very easy to see that passages like these (the final chapters of Job come to mind, too) lead us (traditionalists) naturally to a vision of God that shows Him to be without limit in time or space or power to do exactly as He pleases. This is a vision of supreme majesty beyond our imagining.

We don't need Greek ideas to teach us of the limitless nature of God - it can be seen right in a plain reading of the Bible.

Ridiculous!

You are reading your theology into the text. The Greek Omni's are not present in this passage - period. The power and the glory of God are obvious but your Calvinist colored glasses are causing you to see things that are not there.

It is amazing to me the embarrassing gibberish that people actually take to be solid Biblical arguments! :bang:

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

God is Love because its his Nature, His very Being (God does not choose to BE what He already IS).

This is a lie from Satan!

I don't usually evoke Satanisms like that but that's exactly what this is.

If God does not choose to be what He is then He is NOT love - by definition.

Free will, choosing, desires, directives... flow from God's BEING as expressions of his creative desire to express, inter-relate, expand, evolve, grow, experience, experiment, etc.

Stolen concept fallacy.

Try really hard and you might detect why.

See above. I do not see the logic of God choosing to Be what God already IS, for God is not 'choosing' to be Love, but naturally is expressing what He is BEING in 'relationship'.

Contradictory nonsense.

The nature of relationships must also be chosen by at least one of the parties in the relationship. The Father loves the Son because He chooses to do so, not because He simply does so as though He were some sort of machine that did not choose the nature of its own character.

True, Infinite Love is ever opening, expanding and evolving along with the free will choices of souls in an open-ended universe of unlimited potentials... towards a universal end, of greater perfection, experience, innovation and novelty.
GIbberish

However, as noted earlier,...I hold that the Ontology of Deity is ever what Deity IS. Love simply IS. Of course, Love is demonstrating itself thru 'freedom of choice' and co-operative relationships - unfoldings that are ever dynamic.

You're stupid. I'm sorry I wasted my time typing this post.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Lon]

Mr. Boyd, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Pinnock, Mr. Enyart, Mr. Hill,

Are you watching? Are you aware?

What kind of disciple are you producing? Is it the kind you always imagined?

How is it that in salvaging a relational God you've spawned such un-relational, vitriolic, mean-spirited, and antithetic Christian disciples?

It is an indictment and atrocity. Sadly, it is nothing like I'd imagine from "an attempt at a more biblical theology."

I should have known when there was no prayer forum. I should have known when there was no graciousness. I should have known when the tag-lines have always been 'smack of truth' or 'open rebuke.'

"Open rebuke is better than love concealed" comes in couplet:

Pro 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend,
but the kisses of an enemy are excessive

Pro 27:9 Ointment and incense make the heart rejoice,
likewise the sweetness of one's friend from sincere counsel.

Open rebuke in context is from a friend!

Pro 18:23 A poor person makes supplications,
but a rich man answers harshly.
Pro 18:24 A person who has friends may be harmed by them,
but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother.

1Pe 3:8 And finally, all be of one mind, having compassion on one another, loving the brothers, tenderhearted, friendly.
1Pe 4:8 Above all keep your love for one another fervent, because love covers a multitude of sins.
1Pe 4:9 Show hospitality to one another without complaining.


The traditional view preserves godly character, at the least. Even if we of traditional persuasion were possibly wrong on some point or another, how could one reject that and be affiliated with a theology that refuses to address godliness? Refuses to correct their own? Refuses to set a high-bar for godly behavior? How can one applaud a doctrinal point and neglect the spirit and harsh worldliness of the poster?

Dear sirs, if your theology produces such as these, repent! Test the fruit. Re-examine. Re-align. Better to lose face than to be guilty of milestones.

 

[godrulz]

Yikes. The TOL brats are culpable for their own behavior. Calvinists can also be big jerks. The issue is immaturity, character, etc. There is nothing in major belief systems that would account for bad attitudes, behavior, etc. This is a fleshly issue, not a doctrinal issue. I would say OT and Calvinists can be equally arrogant convinced they are right and others are wrong. There is nothing inherent in the traditional view that makes character more likely.

John Sanders and others have endured ridicule, censure, misrepresentation, etc. and remain gracious and much more conciliatory than many of the misguided Calvinistic attacks/attackers.

It is a non sequitur to think Open Theism explains some extremes found here. It is also not the responsibility of prominent OT's to visit and police here (many probably are not aware, could care less, would not condone beliefs and behavior, etc.). The local church and its leadership is a discipline setting, not the wild west of internet forums that lack face-to-face accountability.

We are disciples of Jesus, not Calvin, Sanders, Pinnock, Enyart, etc. (oh, that is DOCTOR, not Mr. in many cases).

I hope I can at least model civil dialogue since we are in the same family, unlike Mormons, JWs, atheists, etc. I do admit that I have more in common with free will theisms (Arminianism, etc.) than deterministic views that impugn the character and ways of God (something that does evoke emotional responses from us).