The false doctrine of Open Theism

[DivineNames]

Ahhh, no.

Aren't you the one who uses circular reasoning and secular philosophy to form your arguements? Or is that Drew, you both seems to run on the same false teaching, the same arguements and false logic over

To form my arguments, I aim at true premises and valid logic.

To accuse me of running on "false teaching" is rather silly, because I am not a Christian. And as for accusing me of "false logic", didn't I show in a different thread that you don't have a clue when it comes to "logic" ??

 

[Drew]

In the spirit of open-mindedness, I will now imagine that it is my job to make a case that the 2 Kings 20 text can be reconciled with the "traditional" (non-open-theism) position. I do this for the sake of stimulating further substantial debate - I do not agree with the conclusion of the following argument , but I hope it can serve as a catalyst for you opponents of open theism to build a stronger case.

Here goes:

It cannot be denied that God tells Hezekiah (through Isaiah) that he will not recover. It cannot be denied that Hez indeed does recover. If God knows the future, this makes him seem to tell Isaiah a falsehood about Hez's future - something we really don't want to attribute to God.

Perhaps a solution lies in the limitations of the audience for whom this account is intended - you and me. Perhaps God has to portray himself as a human with limited knowledge of the future in order to deliver his main theme. So the important point here is that God portrays himself as having the limitation of not knowing the future in order to help us understand his message, even though he does indeed know the future as fully settled. Being humans, we need to have the story told to us in a way we make sense of, and perhaps God needs to present himself to us as a limited human in order for us to understand the main point (whatever that happens to be).

It may not be fair for people like Drew to suggest that this text forces us "traditionalists" to have to choose between a God who knows the future fully and one who misrepresents the truth when he says "you will not recover". Perhaps God really does know the future as fully settled and his "you will not recover" statement is not a falsehood because it was a necessary literary device used in service of transmitting the main theme to the reader, a reader who cannot easily comprehend an omniscient God but can perhaps understand things better if God represents himself as limited.

 

[DivineNames]

You and Drew keep on dodging those scripture (You know, the scripture that rather suggests that Jesus died for many and that sinners are dead and hate God...)

Which scripture would clearly imply limited atonement? Perhaps there is some, but I haven't seen it.

And as far as debate goes, you have been proved in this forum to be unbelieving and ignorant. You resort to sleazy attacks in frustration as an unbeliever does.

No, I don't resort to sleazy attacks "in frustration", although I certainly will attack people like yourself who wish to be aggressive.

If you look at the way Drew has behaved, he has calmly and politely discussed the issues with you. Anyone can see it.

How do YOU behave JM?

You are proved ignorant in debate. You can't follow simple argument. You get frustrated. You start getting nasty, and making sleazy attacks. Anyone can see it.

 

[Solo]

In the spirit of open-mindedness, I will now imagine that it is my job to make a case that the 2 Kings 20 text can be reconciled with the "traditional" (non-open-theism) position. I do this for the sake of stimulating further substantial debate - I do not agree with the conclusion of the following argument , but I hope it can serve as a catalyst for you opponents of open theism to build a stronger case.

Here goes:

It cannot be denied that God tells Hezekiah (through Isaiah) that he will not recover. It cannot be denied that Hez indeed does recover. If God knows the future, this makes him seem to tell Isaiah a falsehood about Hez's future - something we really don't want to attribute to God.

Perhaps a solution lies in the limitations of the audience for whom this account is intended - you and me. Perhaps God has to portray himself as a human with limited knowledge of the future in order to deliver his main theme. So the important point here is that God portrays himself as having the limitation of not knowing the future in order to help us understand his message, even though he does indeed know the future as fully settled. Being humans, we need to have the story told to us in a way we make sense of, and perhaps God needs to present himself to us as a limited human in order for us to understand the main point (whatever that happens to be).

It may not be fair for people like Drew to suggest that this text forces us "traditionalists" to have to choose between a God who knows the future fully and one who misrepresents the truth when he says "you will not recover". Perhaps God really does know the future as fully settled and his "you will not recover" statement is not a falsehood because it was a necessary literary device used in service of transmitting the main theme to the reader, a reader who cannot easily comprehend an omniscient God but can perhaps understand things better if God represents himself as limited.

Hezekiah was dying from an illness and was not going to recover from it.
Hezekiah prayed for a healing and God removed the illness.
Hezekiah did not recover from the illness because the illness was removed.
Until Hezekiah prayed for God's healing, he was dying from an unrecoverable illness.
Simple, but against those who are following the heresy of Open Theism, and this is the one verse of scripture that they lay their entire set of beliefs upon.
You open theists can continue to walk with your eyes closed to the truth. Good bye.

 

[Drew]

Hezekiah was dying from an illness and was not going to recover from it.
Hezekiah prayed for a healing and God removed the illness.
Hezekiah did not recover from the illness because the illness was removed.
Until Hezekiah prayed for God's healing, he was dying from an unrecoverable illness.
Simple, but against those who are following the heresy of Open Theism, and this is the one verse of scripture that they lay their entire set of beliefs upon.
You open theists can continue to walk with your eyes closed to the truth. Good bye.

1 In those days Hezekiah became ill and was at the point of death. The prophet Isaiah son of Amoz went to him and said, "This is what the LORD says: Put your house in order, because you are going to die; you will not recover."

2 Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the LORD, 3 "Remember, O LORD, how I have walked before you faithfully and with wholehearted devotion and have done what is good in your eyes." And Hezekiah wept bitterly.

4 Before Isaiah had left the middle court, the word of the LORD came to him: 5 "Go back and tell Hezekiah, the leader of my people, 'This is what the LORD, the God of your father David, says: I have heard your prayer and seen your tears; I will heal you. On the third day from now you will go up to the temple of the LORD. 6 I will add fifteen years to your life. And I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria. I will defend this city for my sake and for the sake of my servant David.' "

7 Then Isaiah said, "Prepare a poultice of figs." They did so and applied it to the boil, and he recovered.

Please compare the material in bold from Solo's post to the material in bold from the text of 2 Kings 20.

'nuff said........