sentientsynth
New member
TOL's James Hilston Agrees: Yes, God Can Change [In Certain Ways; See Show for Details]!!
Disclaimer ~
Although it may appear as if sentientsynth, that is, yours truly, worded the title of this thread, may it be forthrightly disclaimed that this thread's title was reformulated by Jefferson, the moderator of this forum, so as to match the title of the BEL show. (The above title reflects the BEL show's title only in part.) Thank you for your co-operation.
________
Monday May 1st, 2006. This is show # 86.
So, what do you guys think of the conversation?
I thought that the point of the qualified nature of Calvinistic/Augustinian doctrine of immutability was established.
Summary:
* During TheologyOnline's Battle Royale X, Bob Enyart pointed out that the pagan Greek doctrine of utter immutability is the origin of the Christian view that the future is not open, but utterly settled. On this show, TOL member James Hilston basically admits what millions get stuck believing, that even God Himself is NOT free or able to change anything in the eternally pre-scripted future! (Startling!) Martin Luther argues in his Bondage of the Will that "resistless logic" demands an utterly settled future (exhaustive foreknowledge) if you accept the teaching of immutability. (That is, Luther sadly argues that foreknowledge also must be exhaustive because God is [utterly] immutable. And it is by this pagan influence that millions of Christians have tragically come to believe that the sodomite rapes a child because God decrees that he must, for God's own glory, which teaching is a grotesque perversion of God's love, and sacrifices God's goodness on the altar of immutability.) Hilston attempts to show that Bob exaggerates the common Christian belief in "utter immutability" held by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, etc. and Bob defends his proposition. Finally, Hilston quoted from Lamerson in our own BR X as an example that Calvinists really do believe that God changes, leading me to summarize how severely Lamerson stonewalled on my question of whether or not God changes, and Hilston admitted that yes, Lamerson did dodge that question!
Today's Resource: Read Bob's debate about Open Theism against D. James Kennedy's professor Samuel Lamerson! You will absolutely love Battle Royale X, Is the Future Settled, or Open?, or your money back! Read it for free, online at TOL, or purchase the debate in its more comfortable and helpful 240-page manuscript form! You'll learn that God's qualitative attributes (of being Living, Personal, Relational, Good and Loving) take precedence over His quantitative attributes (of how much power, presence, knowledge, emotion and change God can exercise), and that in the Incarnation, God the Son emptied Himself (Phil. 2:5-11) of his quantitative but NOT his qualitative attributes and that the four Gospels fully reveal, not Christ's quantitative, but His qualitative attributes!
Disclaimer ~
Although it may appear as if sentientsynth, that is, yours truly, worded the title of this thread, may it be forthrightly disclaimed that this thread's title was reformulated by Jefferson, the moderator of this forum, so as to match the title of the BEL show. (The above title reflects the BEL show's title only in part.) Thank you for your co-operation.
________
Monday May 1st, 2006. This is show # 86.
So, what do you guys think of the conversation?
I thought that the point of the qualified nature of Calvinistic/Augustinian doctrine of immutability was established.
Summary:
* During TheologyOnline's Battle Royale X, Bob Enyart pointed out that the pagan Greek doctrine of utter immutability is the origin of the Christian view that the future is not open, but utterly settled. On this show, TOL member James Hilston basically admits what millions get stuck believing, that even God Himself is NOT free or able to change anything in the eternally pre-scripted future! (Startling!) Martin Luther argues in his Bondage of the Will that "resistless logic" demands an utterly settled future (exhaustive foreknowledge) if you accept the teaching of immutability. (That is, Luther sadly argues that foreknowledge also must be exhaustive because God is [utterly] immutable. And it is by this pagan influence that millions of Christians have tragically come to believe that the sodomite rapes a child because God decrees that he must, for God's own glory, which teaching is a grotesque perversion of God's love, and sacrifices God's goodness on the altar of immutability.) Hilston attempts to show that Bob exaggerates the common Christian belief in "utter immutability" held by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, etc. and Bob defends his proposition. Finally, Hilston quoted from Lamerson in our own BR X as an example that Calvinists really do believe that God changes, leading me to summarize how severely Lamerson stonewalled on my question of whether or not God changes, and Hilston admitted that yes, Lamerson did dodge that question!
Today's Resource: Read Bob's debate about Open Theism against D. James Kennedy's professor Samuel Lamerson! You will absolutely love Battle Royale X, Is the Future Settled, or Open?, or your money back! Read it for free, online at TOL, or purchase the debate in its more comfortable and helpful 240-page manuscript form! You'll learn that God's qualitative attributes (of being Living, Personal, Relational, Good and Loving) take precedence over His quantitative attributes (of how much power, presence, knowledge, emotion and change God can exercise), and that in the Incarnation, God the Son emptied Himself (Phil. 2:5-11) of his quantitative but NOT his qualitative attributes and that the four Gospels fully reveal, not Christ's quantitative, but His qualitative attributes!
Last edited by a moderator:
