Open Theism Stirs Controversy on College Campuses

[Clete]

Originally posted by Hilston
There is finite reality, and then there is God, who is the ultimate and infinite Reality.

Reality is reality Jim, if there are two or more parts of it great, but there is still only one reality.

God (infinite and uncreated Reality) can and does transcend finite reality (creation).

I never denied that God transcends creation, of course He does; He created it. But again, there is only one reality; everything that is real defines it.

First, this is equivocation. "Really", as you've used it, is equivalent to "actually" or "truly" as opposed to "not really" or "falsely." Second, there is no logical necessity that says the infinite and transcendent God cannot do things within finite reality.

You totally missed the point! I used the word "really" because it is from the root word "real" the same root word from which we get "reality". I assumed the connection was obvious. What is real is really part of reality. That which is not part of reality is not really real. Get it?

I'm surprised that you're making this argument, Clete.

It feels like you aren't understanding it.

So you're arguing for something being infinite besides God?

Reality is not a thing, its a concept, an idea. It has to do with that which is real. See above.

You have it backward. The Lake of Fire is within God. There is nowhere in creation that is outside of God. If God is infinite, then the passages in scripture that describe God as looking away or not being present cannot be taken literally. If you wish to assert that God is not infinite, then you can have the literal interpretation. If you agree that God is infinite, then you cannot have the literal interpretation and be logically consistent.

Not so. I think this statement comes from a misunderstanding of what it means to be infinite. It is not necessary for God to be everywhere for Him to be infinite in size, for example, because infinity minus any quantity less than infinity leave you with infinity.
Take time, for example. Remember the last verse of the hymn "Amazing Grace"?

• "When we've been there a thousand years, bright shining as the Son,
  we've no less days to sing God's praise then when we first begun."

This is a very true statement! A billion years from now there will be no less time left than there was a billion years ago. Such is the nature of infinity.
So the belief that God is not present in Hell does nothing to His infinity at all unless you believe that Hell itself is infinitely large, which I don't.

The Godhead, the Logos included, has never been less than infinite.

I never said otherwise.

The second Person, in His humanity, willingly submitted Himself to the finite parameters of creation.

He limited Himself in some way then, right? That's all I'm saying.

But He did not, in His Deity, ever let go of the atoms that He has held together since the creation.

I never said anything about that.

If the future does not exist, it must be created.

No it doesn't. The future does not exist now nor has it ever existed nor will it ever exist. What exists, exists now, period.

Then nothing exists, Clete. There is no "now." Before you say the word "now," the word to be uttered is future and doesn't exist. As soon as you say "now", the uttered word is past, and doesn't exist. Memories have existence, so does true and accurate history, which often belies memories.

Okay, we need to hang out on this for a bit. Slow down for a second and think this through with me.
First of all I didn't say that memories don't exist. They do exist in your head or in whatever state that memories take, the point is that they exist now, it is the past and the future that don't exist. History exists, books exist, computers exist, you and I exist, etc, etc. But all these things exist in the present, not the past or the future. They used to exist in what we now call the past and they might exist in what we now call the future but they only actually exist now.
Secondly, the word now is indeed a very short word that only takes a small fraction of a second to say but within that small amount of time is a mind bending number of individual "nows". First, there is present the first hint of the sound that the letter 'n' makes, then a very little while later an 'ow' sound is present at which point the 'n' sound is now past and is no longer heard, it's existence has past and now only exists in the mind of those present to know it has been uttered.
Existence flows seamlessly from one moment to the next and everything that exists is present in that tiny moment of time which we refer to as the "present" or "now". The fact that either of those two words take a lot of "nows" to use is irrelevant to the point.

So if God created a world of evil humans in which all their actions were locked in place and the future was "closed", God would still be righteous as long as He didn't punish any of them for doing evil? Is that your view?

Morality implies a volitional choice; therefore, "evil humans in which all their actions were locked in place and the future was "closed"" is a self-contradictory idea.
If you take out the word 'evil', I think you'd be getting somewhere. God could have made people whose action where locked in place, yes. But had He done so, morality, good, evil, love, hate, etc would all be meaningless to those people. They would be utterly incapable of loving God or each other. This would not impact the righteousness of God as long as He didn't decide to punish or reward these robotic people according to their actions.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[SOTK]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

SOTK,
I've already responded to much of this in my previous post to you but I just saw this so I'll add a bit to what I said...


Well it's more than a guess because God isn't just sitting idly by watching things happen. He is intimately involved and is able to influence and even manipulate individuals in order to bring about that which He desires to have happen. It's not like the weather man making educated guesses about something over which he has no control whatsoever.

If God, in your words, is manipulating individuals in order to bring about that which He desires to have happen, how is the concept of free will figured into this? The future may be open but if God "manipulates" individuals along the way, how open is the future?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
There is no such thing as "human logic"! This is a very important point. Logic is logic, something is either logical or it is not. Something is either contradictory or it is not, something is either knowable or it is not. It makes no difference whether a person is human, Martian, Vulcan, or divine, if something cannot be know then it cannot be known. If God knows it, then it is knowable. If humans cannot know it but God can, then it is still knowable. Logic is as logic is; the person using it is irrelevant.
Besides that, the fact that the future doesn't exist is not really the best reason to give as to why God cannot know it exhaustively. The reason why He cannot know it is because of free will. If we cannot choose to do or to do otherwise then we are not free. If the future is known by God (or by anyone else for that matter) then our ability to do otherwise is an illusion at best and so, therefore, is our freedom. If we are not free, and God punishes or rewards us for actions we did not choose to do, God is unjust. God is not unjust! Therefore, we must be free and our future actions must be unknown and unknowable, even to God.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Okay, I'm with you on your logic argument to a point. What I was trying to get at with my point is that I believe we are finite and God is infinite. We are created and God is The Creator. What may be illogical to me may be logical to God. The concept of Time, specifically the concept of past and future, is beyond my ability to comprehend it. I can't comprehend it because it does not exist for me. It very likely exists for God and He understands it perfectly. I can not even begin to understand the creation of life. God says that He created life. With science, I can see how intricate and delicate the creation of life is and even watch life happen, however, in terms of understanding how God did it, I'm baffled. It's beyond me. Take the concept of living forever. Christ promises eternal life. What the heck is that?? How can I or you begin to even understand what eternity means? That's what I meant by human logic. I worded my point poorly. There is a limit to our understanding of God's character and power and all that that entails. Just because the idea that God's exhaustive knowledge of past, present, and future seems utterly ridiculous or illogical to me and you, does not necessarily make it so.

I admit freely that I have a hard time understanding how free will factors into a Closed View. So far, the only thing that I can come up with that kind of makes sense to me is the following: I still have free will in the Closed View, however, when I exert my will it will never go against that which God has already pre-determined to have happen. In God's exhaustive knowledge, He already knew/knows what choices I will make. My choices/actions will never go against that which He has pre-determined. My free will choice in whatever I do will always make sense to me, and I will always lean to that choice. It would be impossible for me to make a free will choice which would go against that which God has already pre-determined.

In Christ,

SOTK

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by SOTK

If God, in your words, is manipulating individuals in order to bring about that which He desires to have happen, how is the concept of free will figured into this? The future may be open but if God "manipulates" individuals along the way, how open is the future?

You caught that, did you. I'm not so sure how that works either. I guess we don't have "exhaustive" free will? If God can force us to do things, overriding our will, then the question is how much can/does he do this?

This really comes into play with prayer. If everything is predestined, my prayers aren't going to change anything, because what's gonna happen has already happened. But if we have total free will that God cannot manipulate us in anyway, my prayers aren't going to do anything that way either. So if my prayer will do anything, for sure the future needs to be open, but by the same token God has to be able to influence our actions to some degree, meaning our free will isn't 100% free.

:think:

 

[novice]

Originally posted by SOTK

If God, in your words, is manipulating individuals in order to bring about that which He desires to have happen, how is the concept of free will figured into this? The future may be open but if God "manipulates" individuals along the way, how open is the future?

Two points...

1. God doesn't manipulate every molecule for all of time. Yet there are times God manipulates in certain circumstances to accomplish specific tasks.

2. This manipulation does not remove freewill in the same sense that my manipulating my children (in certain circumstances) does not remove their freewill. In other words.... the people whom God manipulates still have the ability to reject Gods manipulation, and when and if this happens God finds another path to meet His objectives.

For instance...
God wanted to use the nation of Israel as a conduit to bring salvation to the world and set up God's kingdom here on earth. God manipulated Israel in a variety of ways to accomplish this goal. (Isaiah 5:2) But Israel continually rejected God (Isaiah 5:4) (Acts 7:51). Eventually God quite attempting to manipulate Israel and turned to the gentiles ushering in grace (via Paul) through faith in the risen Christ.

So there we have clear example of God manipulating a people yet not removing their freewill, Israel used this freewill to eventually move God to set-aside His people and turn to another.

It isn't that God does not have the power to create a race of robots obeying his every command.... yet it is that God did not want a race of robots obeying His command.

 

[SOTK]

Originally posted by novice

Two points...

1. God doesn't manipulate every molecule for all of time. Yet there are times God manipulates in certain circumstances to accomplish specific tasks.

2. This manipulation does not remove freewill in the same sense that my manipulating my children (in certain circumstances) does not remove their freewill. In other words.... the people whom God manipulates still have the ability to reject Gods manipulation, and when and if this happens God finds another path to meet His objectives.

For instance...
God wanted to use the nation of Israel as a conduit to bring salvation to the world and set up God's kingdom here on earth. God manipulated Israel in a variety of ways to accomplish this goal. (Isaiah 5:2) But Israel continually rejected God (Isaiah 5:4) (Acts 7:51). Eventually God quite attempting to manipulate Israel and turned to the gentiles ushering in grace (via Paul) through faith in the risen Christ.

So there we have clear example of God manipulating a people yet not removing their freewill, Israel used this freewill to eventually move God to set-aside His people and turn to another.

It isn't that God does not have the power to create a race of robots obeying his every command.... yet it is that God did not want a race of robots obeying His command.

God, manipulating a person or persons in any way shape or form, is going to remove their free will. You can explain it any way you would like, but it's gonna happen. You can't use the parental analogy because parents don't have the authority and power of God. When I attempt to manipulate one of my kids, all I'm using is my voice, experience, and intelligence. Those can be great tools yet my child can still easily back out of that attempt at manipulation and exert his free will. Somehow I think God has a lot more tricks up his sleeve than a mere parent not too mention those tricks are omnipotent in nature.

I don't think God used Israel for salvation at all. You are right about the gentiles and Paul, but I don't feel God ever intended for Israel to be used for salvation. By the way, I don't think God has ever "set a side" Israel. They are still His people.

The whole "Robot" argument doesn't scare me away when it's thrown up to discourage the Calvinistic view. I could use a Robot analogy with Open View as well. Given what I've heard about manipulation, humans in this OV are kind of like Robots themselves. The difference is that with the Open View Robot analogy, human robots have the ability to think and make choices not unlike the concept of AI. However, robots, even with AI, can be reprogrammed. Kind of like being "manipulated", no?

Listen, I am not entirely convinced that the future being closed prevents the lack of choice or free will. (See my last reply to Clete) I think it's more a matter of just not being able to completely understand how it works at first glance.

In Christ,

SOTK

 

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
Reality is reality Jim, if there are two or more parts of it great, but there is still only one reality.

Do you believe reality is infinite?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
I never denied that God transcends creation, of course He does; He created it.

How does God transcend creation?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
You totally missed the point! I used the word "really" because it is from the root word "real" the same root word from which we get "reality". I assumed the connection was obvious. What is real is really part of reality. That which is not part of reality is not really real. Get it?

Yes, I got that, the connection was obvious, and I saw it coming like a circus elephant down the sidewalk. You missed my point. Real is really part of reality, just as truth is truly part of what is true. This is equivocation. It doesn't say anything. Get it?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
Reality is not a thing, its a concept, an idea. It has to do with that which is real. See above.

OK, fine. Are you making an argument for infinitude that transcends God?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
Not so. I think this statement comes from a misunderstanding of what it means to be infinite. It is not necessary for God to be everywhere for Him to be infinite in size, for example, because infinity minus any quantity less than infinity leave you with infinity.

Who said anything about size? Nothing exists apart from God, independent of God, at any distance from God. He is separate from His creation (i.e., holy), but creation cannot exist separated from Him. All, even hell and the Lake of Fire, are contained within Him.

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
So the belief that God is not present in Hell does nothing to His infinity at all unless you believe that Hell itself is infinitely large, which I don't.

It's not a matter of size. It's a matter of existence. Anything that exists is contained within God. There is nothing that transcends Him or that is outside of Him.

Hilston wrote: The Godhead, the Logos included, has never been less than infinite.

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
I never said otherwise.

But you still think God can choose to not be somewhere?

Hilston wrote: But He did not, in His Deity, ever let go of the atoms that He has held together since the creation.

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
I never said anything about that.

But you still think God can choose to not be somewhere?

Hilston wrote: If the future does not exist, it must be created.

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
No it doesn't. The future does not exist now nor has it ever existed nor will it ever exist. What exists, exists now, period.

Prove the past and future do not exist.

Hilston wrote: Then nothing exists, Clete. There is no "now." Before you say the word "now," the word to be uttered is future and doesn't exist. As soon as you say "now", the uttered word is past, and doesn't exist. Memories have existence, so does true and accurate history, which often belies memories.

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
Okay, we need to hang out on this for a bit. Slow down for a second and think this through with me. First of all I didn't say that memories don't exist. They do exist in your head or in whatever state that memories take, the point is that they exist now, it is the past and the future that don't exist.

Are there true and false memories? How do we ascertain which are which?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
History exists ...

Please define "history."

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
... books exist, computers exist, you and I exist, etc, etc. But all these things exist in the present, not the past or the future.

The events that define history exist in the past, Clete.

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
They used to exist in what we now call the past and they might exist in what we now call the future but they only actually exist now. ... Existence flows seamlessly from one moment to the next and everything that exists is present in that tiny moment of time which we refer to as the "present" or "now". The fact that either of those two words take a lot of "nows" to use is irrelevant to the point.

Your view is utterly unbiblical, Clete. Scriptures instruct us to count on the future, with full assurance of faith, firm and unwavering certitude regarding a future which you say does not exist. The Word of God gives us explicit prescriptions to long for a future we do not see, but nonetheless exists.

Ro 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. 24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? 25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.
Eph 1:18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, ...
Col 1:5 For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;
Tit 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

Hilston wrote:
So if God created a world of evil humans in which all their actions were locked in place and the future was "closed", God would still be righteous as long as He didn't punish any of them for doing evil? Is that your view?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
Morality implies a volitional choice; therefore, "evil humans in which all their actions were locked in place and the future was "closed"" is a self-contradictory idea.

Then let's modify the statement.

So if God created a world of humans whose only emotion was jealousy, in which all their actions were locked in place and the future was "closed", God would still be righteous as long as He didn't punish any of them for any of their actions? Is that your view?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
If you take out the word 'evil', I think you'd be getting somewhere. God could have made people whose action where locked in place, yes. But had He done so, morality, good, evil, love, hate, etc would all be meaningless to those people.

So what. Could God do that?

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
They would be utterly incapable of loving God or each other. This would not impact the righteousness of God as long as He didn't decide to punish or reward these robotic people according to their actions.

So you're basically saying that there is only one kind of world God could have created and still be righteous and loving, right?

So what part of the syllogism do you disagree with?
God is infinite, completely free of limits and finite boundaries.
All of creation, without exception, is finite.
Therefore, God's knowledge of His finite creation is exhaustive.

 

[logos_x]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

:thumb:


Univeralism is a topic for another thread I think.

It isn't my intention to hijack this thread..only raise another option that calvinistic or open theistic believers might want to consider.
Frankly..the old argument between open theism and calvinism takes up a lot threads on TOL...and they all sound the same.
Forgive me for giving a different perspective to the debate.

No not quite. God could not make, not would not make, big difference.

Ok.
doesn't change the point I was making though.

Okay, it seems you are trying to use this as some sort of argument for universalism which if so, it's a pretty bad one. Nothing you said even comes close to logically requiring such a belief.

My argument is just as valid and compelling as anyone elses on this thread.
What makes your view more logical...so much more logical that it requires such a belief as yours?
Maybe it was a bad argument...seems to be catching.

Further, in regards to the word impossible being quite meaingless to God, I have one question for you. Is it possible for God to hook up with Satan and be his best friend and buddy in crime?

Resting in Him,
Clete

What about the opposite?
Can God bring everyone back to himself?
Is it possible for Satan to be redeemed...
My argument is that everything, universally, is IN GOD in the end...Not that evil is allowed to continue and remain outside of God.
That you would even consider asking that kind of question as though it somehow invalidates universal reconciliation shows that you have no idea what it means.


But...since this isn't the place to discuss it...have fun.

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by SOTK

It doesn't exist for me and for you, but I think it definitely does for God. Why is it such a stretch to believe God is powerful enough to be able to know the future? If He can make the universe and everything in it, why would you think knowing the future would be impossible for Him or that it wouldn't exist for Him? This is what I have meant by logic.

How would it exist for God? And what is logic, anyway?

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Christine

He's God, Lighthouse. He healed the blind and lame, made the dead alive, and performed other miracles incomprehensible to the mind of man. If God can do all that, a mere act like knowing the future should be no problem. The future doesn't exist to us mortal men, but it does exist to God.

If it exists to God, then it exists to us. So, either it exists, or it does not.

If God's going to do something, is that not the same as making something happen? Also, are you saying that God's prophesies don't have to come true?

His prophesy against Nineveh didn't. He changed His mind. And David certainly thought God would change His mind about the death of the son he was to have with Bathsheba.

Are you saying God's prophicies don't carry much weight?

I never said that. But God does change His mind.

Lighthouse, God knows all that can be known including future events. You are limiting him to being like man, and having no clue what will happen next. You are left to ignore and/or explain away passages like

I am arguing that that which does not exist can not be known.

Numbers 23:19: " God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

I never said God lies. But He did repent that He made man, and He repented of the evil that He said He would do against Nineveh.

You say God doesn't know the future? What about this passage?

Isaiah 46:10: "Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure"

He declared the end. He declared what He would do in the end. Nothing more. This does not give any reason to believe that He knows the details, or that he can even see the future. Only that He knows what He will do.

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by SOTK

No, God does not lie and I fail to see anywhere in the Bible where God lied about being able to have knowledge of future events. For example, every prophecy about the Messiah in the OT came true in Jesus Christ. Did they not?

Because God brought them to pass. And He knew He was going to, so He gave prophesies to His people about Messiah. God knew what He was going to do, and what He was going to bring about.

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by SOTK

God, manipulating a person or persons in any way shape or form, is going to remove their free will. You can explain it any way you would like, but it's gonna happen. You can't use the parental analogy because parents don't have the authority and power of God. When I attempt to manipulate one of my kids, all I'm using is my voice, experience, and intelligence. Those can be great tools yet my child can still easily back out of that attempt at manipulation and exert his free will. Somehow I think God has a lot more tricks up his sleeve than a mere parent not too mention those tricks are omnipotent in nature.

I don't think God used Israel for salvation at all. You are right about the gentiles and Paul, but I don't feel God ever intended for Israel to be used for salvation. By the way, I don't think God has ever "set a side" Israel. They are still His people.

The whole "Robot" argument doesn't scare me away when it's thrown up to discourage the Calvinistic view. I could use a Robot analogy with Open View as well. Given what I've heard about manipulation, humans in this OV are kind of like Robots themselves. The difference is that with the Open View Robot analogy, human robots have the ability to think and make choices not unlike the concept of AI. However, robots, even with AI, can be reprogrammed. Kind of like being "manipulated", no?

Listen, I am not entirely convinced that the future being closed prevents the lack of choice or free will. (See my last reply to Clete) I think it's more a matter of just not being able to completely understand how it works at first glance.

In Christ,

SOTK

God manipulating events, has no bearing on free will. He can manipulate us, into doing something, without forcing us to do it. And just because He manipulates us at one time, does not mean that He is constantly manipulating us. The same goes for events. He manipulates some, but not all.

 

[Chileice]

Originally posted by Hilston

Here's a better question, Sozo. Is there a future tense parsing of verbs in the Hebrew language?

:freak:

Actually, there is no future tense in Hebrew. You must "intuit" it from context. The reason why saying "I AM" was more powerful in Hebrew than in any other language. It implies existence past present (if that exists) and future.

 

[Chileice]

quote:
Originally posted by novice

Two points...

1. God doesn't manipulate every molecule for all of time. Yet there are times God manipulates in certain circumstances to accomplish specific tasks.

2. This manipulation does not remove freewill in the same sense that my manipulating my children (in certain circumstances) does not remove their freewill. In other words.... the people whom God manipulates still have the ability to reject Gods manipulation, and when and if this happens God finds another path to meet His objectives.

For instance...
God wanted to use the nation of Israel as a conduit to bring salvation to the world and set up God's kingdom here on earth. God manipulated Israel in a variety of ways to accomplish this goal. (Isaiah 5:2) But Israel continually rejected God (Isaiah 5:4) (Acts 7:51). Eventually God quite attempting to manipulate Israel and turned to the gentiles ushering in grace (via Paul) through faith in the risen Christ.

So there we have clear example of God manipulating a people yet not removing their freewill, Israel used this freewill to eventually move God to set-aside His people and turn to another.

It isn't that God does not have the power to create a race of robots obeying his every command.... yet it is that God did not want a race of robots obeying His command.

Originally posted by SOTK

God, manipulating a person or persons in any way shape or form, is going to remove their free will. You can explain it any way you would like, but it's gonna happen. You can't use the parental analogy because parents don't have the authority and power of God. When I attempt to manipulate one of my kids, all I'm using is my voice, experience, and intelligence. Those can be great tools yet my child can still easily back out of that attempt at manipulation and exert his free will. Somehow I think God has a lot more tricks up his sleeve than a mere parent not too mention those tricks are omnipotent in nature.

I don't think God used Israel for salvation at all. You are right about the gentiles and Paul, but I don't feel God ever intended for Israel to be used for salvation. By the way, I don't think God has ever "set a side" Israel. They are still His people.

The whole "Robot" argument doesn't scare me away when it's thrown up to discourage the Calvinistic view. I could use a Robot analogy with Open View as well. Given what I've heard about manipulation, humans in this OV are kind of like Robots themselves. The difference is that with the Open View Robot analogy, human robots have the ability to think and make choices not unlike the concept of AI. However, robots, even with AI, can be reprogrammed. Kind of like being "manipulated", no?

Listen, I am not entirely convinced that the future being closed prevents the lack of choice or free will. (See my last reply to Clete) I think it's more a matter of just not being able to completely understand how it works at first glance.

In Christ,

SOTK

I have read this whole thread with a great deal of interest. Two things strike me:
1. the general lack of scriptural backing for the ideas presented.
2. the general uselessness of the argument in spite of its interest.

SOTK had us pray for his wife a while back. Philosophizer did just a couple of days ago. WHY? Because they thought that God would do something. SOTK's wife now has a job, thanks to his church connections. Would we say thanks to God? Did God "manipulate" someone to get her the job? Or did SOTK manipulate someone? Did the person feel pressure because she was in the church or was she just the best person for the job?

The point is that we EXPECT God to manipulate people and events or we would never pray. Prayer itself presupposes a certain disposition toward open theism. If all is pre-determined, what on earth does it matter if we pray or not?!

Yet, on the other hand we expect that same God to have the power to do what we need... even to change the future. In a sense, we all expect that God DOES live in the future as well as the present. Again, why would we pray to someone who MIGHT be able to figure out the future?

I think Novice is on the right track. God operates in a way that seems ambiguous to us. Is it illogical? Who can really say? Do we really know all the logic of the universe? Does God transcend His creation? Is he bound by his own creation? Is he rational, suprarational, irrational, in need of rations? What does it really matter? We know we are dealing with a being beyond our total comprehension. If not, we limit him as much as the mormons with their doctrine of eternal progression. Yet if He is all in all how do we explain evil? These are the great questions humans have struggled with since time began. To assume we here on TOL, even with our amazing intelligence and collective wisdom, are going to come up with the definitive answers to free-will vs. sovereignty; transcendence vs. imminence, etc., I think we have a grossly inflated sense of our own capabilities and importance.

These are the points, though very interesting as intellectual gymnastics, that can divide churches, mar the witness of Christianity in the world and generally take us out of any truly important spiritual battles. We spend our life on the sidelines fighting over non-provable minutia while the world goes to hell in a hand basket. I think in PRACTICAL terms, every Christian wotrth his salt is somewhere in between, whether that is logical or not. We pray because we were told to. We trust because we believe God is good. We think we have free-will but we trust he is sovereign enough to make things work out in spite of man's gross errors on this planet. We believe He is almighty, but somehow merciful and relenting of evil. If not, our lives are a moral and physical absurdity.

Maybe I could call myself a closed theist with an open mind. Or an open theist in a closed universe. Why do we always think the answer is either/or? Could it not be both/and?

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by Chileice
Why do we always think the answer is either/or? Could it not be both/and?

Are you suggesting that it could be either "both/and" or "either/or"?

Do you see it? Either/or always emerges. This is the backbone of the law of non-contradiction. To break it is to be utterly illogical.

Good post otherwise!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[logos_x]

Chileice,

:cheers:
Well said...
And I second that!

 

[Nineveh]

Great post novice

SOTK,
Don't take the manipulation to an extreme. It's not manipulation of all things for all times, but rather those things which God has said would come about.

Take Jesus' birth place for example.

The promise:
Micah 5:2
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

How the promise was fulfilled:
Luke 2:1
In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.

To what extent would God have to manipulate Caesar Augustus into taking a census at that time? Perhaps nothing more than an appeal to his ego. Could caesar have ignored the manipulation? Sure. But as Clete has pointed out, God knows His creation and the human heart.

This doesn't mean God manipulated all of rome before and after He had accomplished what He wanted done, just caesar in this instance to bring about His purpose. He manipulated the Red Sea to make a way for His people, He manipulated caesar to make way for Jesus' birth.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Nineveh

Don't take the manipulation to an extreme. It's not manipulation of all things for all times, but rather those things which God has said would come about.

Take Jesus' birth place for example.

The promise:
Micah 5:2
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

How the promise was fulfilled:
Luke 2:1
In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.

Ok, but how did God know in advance that there would be a virgin available?

 

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Sozo

Ok, but how did God know in advance that there would be a virgin available?

You mean when He gave the prophecy of a virgin birth? Luckily we are all born that way and not all of us become disdainful of being chaste

 

[Lucky]

The point is that we EXPECT God to manipulate people and events or we would never pray. Prayer itself presupposes a certain disposition toward open theism. If all is pre-determined, what on earth does it matter if we pray or not?!

Exactly.

Yet, on the other hand we expect that same God to have the power to do what we need... even to change the future. In a sense, we all expect that God DOES live in the future as well as the present. Again, why would we pray to someone who MIGHT be able to figure out the future?

Here I disagree. I don't think God has to be in the future to influence it. The present is simply what was the future just a second ago. If God needs to change things, he can do it actively, as it's happening in the present.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Sozo

Ok, but how did God know in advance that there would be a virgin available?

There were no public schools back then so it was much easier for God to make this prediction.