Theology Club: What is Open Theism?

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
This is just more of the same sanctimony already pointed out to you. Filling a post with Scripture just because you think it makes a worthy discussion is pretentiousness.

Rather than focus on the specific Scripture I have asked you related to your "God does not know" stance, you post abstract polls...with no Scripture by the way. Just sayin'. ;)

AMR


Cults are infamous for stringing proof texts together, but a failure at exegeting in context. Quoting a verse is not interpreting a verse.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
The greatest witness against OT is the hatefulnes and scorn expressed by its proponents.

Nang
You say the same thing about MAD, which paints your comment here as disingenuous, because all the people you say these things about in an attempt to discredit their beliefs are both OV and MAD. Which leaves you without knowing which particular belief would be to blame if the blame actually lay with a particular belief, which it doesn't.

Then there's the fact that the OV on TOL who are not MAD, such as godrulz and themuzicman aren't the kind who call people idiots when they're being idiots. And those who are MAD but not OV are much the same way, such as Hilston [when he's here].

So it's clearly neither OV or MAD that are the issue in the "hatefulness" with which you have a problem.

Also, I'm willing to bet you can't provide any elaboration on your accusations of hatefulness and scorn. You might be able to provide what you think are examples, but will be unable to show them to be based in either.

I was directed to TOL because of the vitriolic hatred expressed by Clete against my husband on another site. And the first person I put on my Ignore List was
Lighthouse . . . for his terrible expressions of hatred and lack of respect for others.

Neither Clete or Lighthouse and very few other OTers show genuine love, concern or respect for those who profess a more established or historical belief.

OTers have not proven to have been given ears
to hear.

Nang
And the irony is that I wasn't OT when I joined TOL and was probably put on ignore while I was still Arminian.

This is just more of the same sanctimony already pointed out to you. Filling a post with Scripture just because you think it makes a worthy discussion is pretentiousness.
Who said anything about filling a post with Scripture? I don't even do that very often, unless I'm just really trying to prove a point to someone who's being a complete idiot.

All I asked is that you provide the support from the word of God to back up Calvin's writings that you seem to think are theologically spot on. If you can't do that then I have no reason to trust them.

And it wouldn't even require much, just a passage or two.

Or maybe I should follow God's example and ask for two or three witnesses.

Rather than focus on the specific Scripture I have asked you related to your "God does not know" stance, you post abstract polls...with no Scripture by the way. Just sayin'. ;)
Because the question at hand isn't about any particular Scripture. You claimed that the majority of OV proponents on TOL disagreed with my stance on the idea that God is in control over what He knows of even the present, by choice.

There isn't a single OV on TOL who doesn't know which verses are in question here. And even if one did not it's irrelevant because the choices are clear enough for the purposes of polling.

But, hey, if you're not satisfied then maybe you should man up and you could post the verses you think are relevant and need to be considered.
 

Dialogos

Well-known member
You're an idiot.
I've read your posts, and I've read AMR's posts and it is quite clear that AMR actually thinks before posting, so whose the idiot?


Lighthouse said:
This is why I call you stupid, because you couldn't even recognize the context.
AMR doesn't post mind numbingly stupid assertions that he has to back peddle from.

You do.

Remember the whole foolishness about God becoming omniscient "after the cross" which you apparently thought happened after acts 2. Now you tell me, compared to that which of AMR's posts sound stupid?
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I've read your posts, and I've read AMR's posts and it is quite clear that AMR actually thinks before posting, so whose the idiot?
He is, because he has to think about it.

AMR doesn't post mind numbingly stupid assertions that he has to back peddle from.

You do.
Would you care to show me where I've back pedaled?

Oh, look, I know when to use "pedal" versus "peddle." So now we've established I'm smarter than you.

Remember the whole foolishness about God becoming omniscient "after the cross" which you apparently thought happened after acts 2. Now you tell me, compared to that which of AMR's posts sound stupid?
That isn't what I said.:nono:

You have a reading comprehension problem.

I feel sorry for you, because you're a failure.
 

Dialogos

Well-known member
He is, because he has to think about it.


Would you care to show me where I've back pedaled?

Oh, look, I know when to use "pedal" versus "peddle." So now we've established I'm smarter than you.
LOL.

Congratulations, you are "smarter" than I am.

There are a lot of people on the planet who are smarter than I am. Many of them are still wrong when it comes to the way they interpret the scriptures.

So if it makes you feel better about yourself to be "smarter" than I am then go ahead and make such boasts. It will prove that there is more hope for a fool than there is for you (Prov 26:12).
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
LOL.

Congratulations, you are "smarter" than I am.

There are a lot of people on the planet who are smarter than I am. Many of them are still wrong when it comes to the way they interpret the scriptures.

So if it makes you feel better about yourself to be "smarter" than I am then go ahead and make such boasts. It will prove that there is more hope for a fool than there is for you (Prov 26:12).
Do it then...
 
Top