Open Theism

[John the Baptist]

God says that He does not change, but you say that He does? Perhaps it is as I posted? That His Promises are [ALL] Conditional, huh? :fadein:

---John

 

[John the Baptist]

God says that He does not change, but you say that He does? Perhaps it is as I posted? That His Promises are 'almost' [ALL] Conditional, huh? :fadein:

---John

 

[TanNinety]

God says that He does not change, but you say that He does?

That is at best burning a good strawman instead of looking at Drew’s post in its entirety. Drew never (If I have taken his post correctly) said God changes. God revises His plans was what was said and a fine example was also given.

Perhaps it is as I posted? That His Promises are 'almost' [ALL] Conditional, huh? :fadein:

---John

I fail to see how your statement supports only the closed theism and not open theism!
Please explain how "conditional promises" EXCLUSIVELY support “God knows all†closed theism.
Can God’s promises not be “conditional†according to Drew’s post or the open theistic views? If not, why?

 

[John the Baptist]

Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:13 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I voted "True" for the second vote. Call me a heretic if you will. I would rather be a heretic than be a pharisee.


John here:
You said it :o not me! Not yet anyway.

 

[John the Baptist]

"The writers in favor of free-will theism differentiate their views from those of Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism, Arminianism, Eastern Orthodoxy, neo-orthodoxy, and Islam, all of whichâ€â€differently from one another, but similarly over against open theismâ€â€assert that God has a certain knowledge of all aspects of the future."
_____
John here: My view?

Upfront, I do not hold the views of the Revelation 17:5 Babbling ones to the best of my knowledge? Yet, some of them might hold to my 'wisdom', huh? :wink:

But: It was the change of plans of God that I was defending, that are found throughout His Word! He knew both ends of them all even before man was created, even from eternity! Some claim that God changed His mind with Nineveh. Yet, the prophecy was conditional, and God knew what would come about, if Jonah was faithful, huh? :wink: And if he was not? We would have seen a differant ending being documented!

And in Romans 4:17 we see God calling things as a done deal even before they are! Such as the Eternal Gospel of Christ! Eternal seems to go a while back, huh? :fadein: Like the Immortal Godhead & the VERY LETTER of their Eternal Covenant.
EPISTLE OF CHRIST! 2 Corinthians 3:3.

And the conditional 'promises'? Just a few that are non-conditional, such as the rain, sunshine, Etc.

So one see's that I believe in a God who is Immortal in Eternity, whose 'knowledge' is unlimited in all and every direction! :wink:

I find it absurb that any could think that when the Godhead created Lucifer, that they did not know that he would in time, fall from free-will Grace! Remember that it was he, that was a covering Cherub over that 'in time' Bloodied Eternal Mercy Seat!

--John

 

[Solo]

But are you saying that a minority viewpoint is what determines a theological heresy?

No.

Then why did you say this...

So far it is 7 to 1 against Open Theism. It doesn't surprise me that one heretic exists on this forum

:roll:

At the time it looked like there was only one heretic to seven, but now I see that there are two.

 

[Guest]

At the time it looked like there was only one heretic to seven, but now I see that there are two.

Golly gee, Mr. Solo! Can we find them, beat them, and then burn them at the stake?

After all, that's how we treat heretics! Right?

 

[Soma-Sight]

I think God CAN know the future and can CHOOSE NOT to know the future as well.... (He can always look away from His crystal ball if He chooses)

If you already know everything that is going to happen.... there is no suspense or point to it on a personal level.

I bet God purposely "forgets" or "sleeps" so He can have adventures Himself.

Just look at Jesus! If He already knew He would do everything perfectly there would be no suspense, drama, or reason to feel human emotions like in Gethsemene.

 

[Solo]

At the time it looked like there was only one heretic to seven, but now I see that there are two.

Golly gee, Mr. Solo! Can we find them, beat them, and then burn them at the stake?

After all, that's how we treat heretics! Right?

No, we don't want to harm them, we want to alert them to their deception so that they can repent and not suffer any consequences from God almighty when they are judged. I hope that you will assist in praying for all to be on the path of truth, saved from the snare of the devil.

 

[Solo]

I think God CAN know the future and can CHOOSE NOT to know the future as well.... (He can always look away from His crystal ball if He chooses)

If you already know everything that is going to happen.... there is no suspense or point to it on a personal level.

I bet God purposely "forgets" or "sleeps" so He can have adventures Himself.

Just look at Jesus! If He already knew He would do everything perfectly there would be no suspense, drama, or reason to feel human emotions like in Gethsemene.

You continue to show me that you do not know God almighty. You really ought to repent from your rebelliousness towards him, and get out of the new age trap that you live in before it is too late.

 

[DivineNames]

Open Theism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This view of God, based on a libertarian view of free will, allows its advocates to 1) Attribute both power and wisdom to Him without suggesting that He ordains everything to His own glory, including evil (Calvinism) 2) Avoid the logical inconsistency of suggesting that libertarian human freedom can coexist with foreknowledge and Divine Sovereignty (Arminianism).

Arminianism would presumably define God's sovereignty in such a way that it isn't inconsistent with human freedom. Problem solved.

There is an alleged inconsistency between divine foreknowledge and free will. That claim is controversial. The problem is actually also relevant to Calvinism.

 

[John the Baptist]

Open Theism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This view of God, based on a libertarian view of free will, allows its advocates to 1) Attribute both power and wisdom to Him without suggesting that He ordains everything to His own glory, including evil (Calvinism) 2) Avoid the logical inconsistency of suggesting that libertarian human freedom can coexist with foreknowledge and Divine Sovereignty (Arminianism).

Arminianism would presumably define God's sovereignty in such a way that it isn't inconsistent with human freedom. Problem solved.

There is an alleged inconsistency between divine foreknowledge and free will. That claim is controversial. The problem is actually also relevant to Calvinism.

*********
Well, for me I do not care a lick what these dead guys thought, think or whatever? Most of their stuff is still alive & well! Revelation 17:1-5! It ain't changed a hoot! :
So & so believed that, and so & so believed this! They all are a bunch of Babylonian jabberer's :roll:

I have an idea (even if it is very narrow in the way) that God would have us use the hermeneutics He provided. His Word! Matthew 4:4 & 2 Timothy 3:16 for doctrinal study!

---John

 

[Soma-Sight]

You continue to show me that you do not know God almighty. You really ought to repent from your rebelliousness towards him, and get out of the new age trap that you live in before it is too late.

Fear is the Mind-killer

I respect your opinion Solo and you have a good point.

However to even think for a second that you know the True nature of God and what He can/cannot do is very prideful.

I doubt a false opinion on this matter warrants a loss of Salvation anyways.

I merely am suggesting that God can do whatever He chooses.

If He HAS to know the future than He HAS NO FREE WILL.[/b]

 

[Drew]

If the future is not fully settled in advance, then it makes God all the more wise in his ability to orchestrate a universe (not totally under his control in respect to every single minute event and not totally known in advance to Him) to accomplish his purposes. I think that it is entirely plausible to assert that God is sovereign in the sense that his will always is achieved and yet not require that he be in control of every single event (with the attendant necessity of perfect and complete foreknowledge.

 

[John the Baptist]

Some of you guys need to realize that some of us who post are set in the spiritual concrete of the Word of God. (Colossians 1:23) If you have anything to offer that is such, please post it rather than just your 'nothing' talk stuff. See Matthew 4:4 for what I am talking about.

---John

 

[TanNinety]

So scripture is all that we have to know God? ..so "inviting Jesus into your heart" ..building a "relationship" with God and being taught of God is nothing? ..none of you could disprove the open theistic position.

1 Corinthians 14:26 Well, my brothers and sisters, let's summarize what I am saying. When you meet, one will sing, another will teach, another will tell some special revelation God has given, one will speak in an unknown language, while another will interpret what is said. But everything that is done must be useful to all and build them up in the Lord.

Now thats what gathering of the Church is ..when someone brings something that has been revealed to them it becomes "nothing" talk. If the disciples thought as you guys do now then we wouldnt even have scripture after the old testament.

Here is a thinker but it wont work if you think that God gave you a brain to not use because if you think it becomes "nothing" talk.

If the angels knew like you guys are saying that God was ALL knowing omniscient then how was satan even able to persuade 1/3rd of the angels to rebel against God?
Were they on a suicide mission knowing that God knows everything and that they dont stand a chance?
How can such knowledge of "our GOD knows everything that there is to know" inspire any angel to rebel against Him unless they have a legitimate reason to believe that they actually stood a chance in suceeding?

Go ahead side step the above questions, pull your stunts of how I need to repent than to actually address what I posted.

 

[Drew]

An extract from something written by John Sanders in Christianity Today:

God does grieve over our sinful rebellion (Gen. 6:6; Eph. 4:30). Though God originally planned to have Saul and his lineage be kings over Israel, because of Saul's sin, God changed his mind and selected David instead (1 Sam. 13:13, 15:11).

The prophet Isaiah says to King Hezekiah, "Thus says the Lord," you will die and not recover from this illness. Hezekiah prays to God, asking him to change his mind. God does and sends Isaiah back to announce, "Thus says the Lord," you will recover from this illness (2 Kings 20:1-6).

Our prayers can have an effect on God's plans. It makes no sense to say God grieves, changes his mind, and is influenced by our prayers, and also claim that God tightly controls everything so that everything that occurs is what God desired to happen! Furthermore, on several occasions God expected Israel to repent but they did not do what God expected (Isa. 5:2; Jer. 3:6-7, 19-20). Also, God uses words such as might, if, and perhaps (Exod. 4:8-9; Jer. 26:3; Ezek. 12:3), indicating that some of the future is open, but such words make no sense in your viewâ€â€in fact, God seems less than genuine to offer forgiveness when he already knows they will not repent.

 

[TanNinety]

Do I know what 1287x 565419 = is? No, but does that make me ignorant of the result of 1287 x 565419? No, I can well use my math ability to calculate exactly the result of it. But until I precisely calculate it, the result is just an open number.

God does not pull each and every event out of His “infinite data bank†where ALL information is already populated and static and there is no room for change. I do not doubt that God, given any present state is able to precisely calculate any of the future events as farther into the future as He wishes to. But He allows an open future. This allows God to revise and adapt His game plans and make Him a greater loving God in any circumstance than “God already set everything like it should be, but somehow we have freewill†scenario. Moses being able to persuade God not to smite Israel or Abraham trying to talk God into not blowing up Sodom if he can find at least 10 righteous men is possible when God leaves this open future into the hands of His creation.

How can you pray anything in sincerity when you think God has already made up His mind? Why should we pray “thy will be done†if there is not a possibility of “thy will not being done�

Just like 1287x 565419 is an open number until I calculate it so does God leave open future so we can be workable clay in His hands. But just like 1287x 565419 can be precisely calculated to 727694253, God is able to calculate the future events of an unconditional prophecy dead on. God is not a pre-recorded broken gramophone record who is going round and round playing what was already recorded. He is much more magnificent than that. I am still waiting on an explanation for the “angelic rebellion†if angels understood Gods omniscience according to closed theism?

 

[Drew]

It may surprise some readers to read the following belief that I hold:

"God could have perfect foreknowledge of everything that will come to pass without taking away man's free will".

Now, I am inclined to think that God actually does not have perfect foreknowledge of all that will come to pass. But He could (subtle, but important distinction).

So my reason for being sympathetic to open theism has nothing to do with a belief that foreknowledge takes away free will - I do not beleive that it does.

Instead, I believe that there are a lot of Scriptures that represent God as regreting, changing his mind, etc. So, it is for Scriptural reasons that I am "open" to open theism, not because my firm belief in the reality of free will requires that open theism be correct.

For those who are interested in an argument as to why free will is not incompatible with foreknowledge:

The premiss "If God knows that I will do X, then I must do X" is essentially flawed. When properly restated as "It must be that (if God knows that I am going to do X, then I will do X), the problem seems to disappear (you may have to think on this a while - I know that I did)

The full argument by Swartz can be found at http://www.sfu.ca/philosophy/freewill2.htm (look for the topic Epistemic Determinism)

 

[Guest]

The premiss "If God knows that I will do X, then I must do X" is essentially flawed. When properly restated as "It must be that (if God knows that I am going to do X, then I will do X), the problem seems to disappear (you may have to think on this a while - I know that I did)

You seem to be stating that the following is true in some cases:

If God knows that I will do X, then I can choose to not do X.

If this were the case, then God's knowledge was incorrect, and therefore God was wrong - otherwise he would have known you would not have done X in the first place.