ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[Hilston]

One must resort to an unwarranted figurative approach to dismiss many passages to come up with a deterministic philosophy that misrepresents God and His ways.

• Time does not exist.
• Love is not a place or a thing
• [Love is] a figure of speech.

:noway:

To those whose souls have not yet succumbed to the Luciferian poison of Unsettled Theism, please note: This is what happens to the mind of the Open Theist if one allows the humanism and existentialist ideologies get inside and start cooking one's innards. Rationality becomes elusive, one's reasoning faculties begin shutting down, the ability to make sound judgments falls off competely, and one starts making insane and idiotic claims like Clete does above. The worst part ~ the absolute worst part ~ is that when the mind is so far given over to such a Satanic assault on God's very nature and character, it reaches a point where the truth is so deeply suppressed that statements such as Clete's are uttered without acknowledging the severity and irrationality of them. It is a disconnect from reality. It is a dysfunction of the mind. It is a disease of the soul. It is truly as tragic as it is insidious.

And it cracks me up. What else can one do but laugh in derision at the pseudo-intellectual pedantic pomposity of Clete and his co-sycophants.

Hypocrite, moron, jackass, liar, and tool,
Jim

 

[Lighthouse]

No, Hilston, I said you were the entire toolshed, not just a tool. Remember?

Anyway, for those of you who have not yet figured it out, it is pointless to engage Hilston in any type of discussion. He will always deny anything he disagrees with, and will change the subject in an effort to avoid refuting anything. And no matter what one may believe, if he knows you believe the future to be open/unsettled, he will demand that it is this view that has led you to any belief he deems false.

 

[Catatumba]

Open Theism is just plain Theism. Theism is the aknowledgement by man that there is a creator force greater than himself,ie., a god; but this force remains inpersonal and aloof to any of man's activities. Therefore man is open to be active in doing anything.

 

[Delmar]

Clete
I really liked this point!

It wouldn't be any more meaningful to say that God was bound by time than it would be to say that God was bound by existence

 

[Hilston]

Dear deardelmar,

In your view, is God bound by love?

Hypocrite, moron, jackass, liar and tool,
Jim

 

[Philetus]

Hypocrite, moron, jackass, liar and tool,
Jim

Your father must be proud.​

 

[Delmar]

Dear deardelmar,

In your view, is God bound by love?

Hypocrite, moron, jackass, liar and tool,
Jim

The only time I have ever used the term "bound by" in reference to God is when responding to the inane arguments of those who say God is not bound by...

A clever word smith can talk about square circles and "prove" that God is bound by reality, but it is only a play on words! The fact that God is real and does not commit absurdities is not a prison for him.

 

[Delmar]

* Time does not exist.
* Love is not a place or a thing
* [Love is] a figure of speech.

:noway:

To those whose souls have not yet succumbed to the Luciferian poison of Unsettled Theism, please note: This is what happens to the mind of the Open Theist if one allows the humanism and existentialist ideologies get inside and start cooking one's innards. Rationality becomes elusive, one's reasoning faculties begin shutting down, the ability to make sound judgments falls off competely, and one starts making insane and idiotic claims like Clete does above. The worst part ~ the absolute worst part ~ is that when the mind is so far given over to such a Satanic assault on God's very nature and character, it reaches a point where the truth is so deeply suppressed that statements such as Clete's are uttered without acknowledging the severity and irrationality of them. It is a disconnect from reality. It is a dysfunction of the mind. It is a disease of the soul. It is truly as tragic as it is insidious.

And it cracks me up. What else can one do but laugh in derision at the pseudo-intellectual pedantic pomposity of Clete and his co-sycophants.

Hypocrite, moron, jackass, liar, and tool,
Jim

Wow Jim!
You really are a liar and a tool aren't you!
Here is the real quote from Clete.

Time is not a thing it is an idea. Time is a linguistic construct used to reference duration and sequence. The idea of time being something that one is “in” is merely a figure of speech similar to when one says that they are "in" love. Love is not a place or a thing, and yet we talk about it in those terms as a way of expressing an idea. It is the same with time. Anything that has a history can be said to experience time or be "in" time. But outside of a thinking mind, time itself does not exist.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[themuzicman]

Open Theism is just plain Theism. Theism is the aknowledgement by man that there is a creator force greater than himself,ie., a god; but this force remains inpersonal and aloof to any of man's activities. Therefore man is open to be active in doing anything.

If you studied Open Theism at all you'd know how far from the truth this statement is.

Muz

 

[themuzicman]

Moron,

If God is atemporal, then that means that relationships within the trinity are constant, right?

Is God the Father eternally accepting or forsaking God the Son?

Muz

 

[Delmar]

Au contrare. Your analogy shows how a person saves himself. He must grab the rope. He must hang on. He must want to live. He must believe that the rope will save him. All these things rely upon the person being saved. This undermines the Biblical analogies of one being dead, spiritually unresponsive, having dead ears unable to hear, needing to be given life, not merely resuscitated. It is the logical conclusion of your analogy. Show me I'm wrong.

The only thing you made obvious is that you're confused about the sufficiency of Christ's finished work. It really is finished, Michael. On your view, it's not. Jesus should not have said, "It is finished!" when He died, but rather, "Let's see if this works."



Since Lazarus was truly dead, how was he able to hear? What made his 4-days-dead ears function? Anyone?

His hair was perfect,
Jim

You don't even know that Lazarus heard the words! (though he may have) Jesus spoke him into life, just as he spoke the universe into exsistance!

 

[themuzicman]

:noway:

To those whose souls have not yet succumbed to the Luciferian poison of Unsettled Theism, please note: This is what happens to the mind of the Open Theist if one allows the humanism and existentialist ideologies get inside and start cooking one's innards. Rationality becomes elusive, one's reasoning faculties begin shutting down, the ability to make sound judgments falls off competely, and one starts making insane and idiotic claims like Clete does above. The worst part ~ the absolute worst part ~ is that when the mind is so far given over to such a Satanic assault on God's very nature and character, it reaches a point where the truth is so deeply suppressed that statements such as Clete's are uttered without acknowledging the severity and irrationality of them. It is a disconnect from reality. It is a dysfunction of the mind. It is a disease of the soul. It is truly as tragic as it is insidious.

And it cracks me up. What else can one do but laugh in derision at the pseudo-intellectual pedantic pomposity of Clete and his co-sycophants.

Hypocrite, moron, jackass, liar, and tool,
Jim

To those souls who have not read the entire thread, Jim has already stated that his purpose for being here is to mock OVT, and not to engage it intellectually.

So, don't take his posts seriously. He isn't.

Michael

 

[themuzicman]

You don't even know that Lazarus heard the words! (though he may have) Jesus spoke him into life, just as he spoke the universe into exsistance!

What has this to do with soteriology? Are you claiming that Lazarus has already gone through the resurrrection?

Muz

 

[Delmar]

What has this to do with soteriology? Are you claiming that Lazarus has already gone through the resurrrection?

Muz

No, I don't even know what soteriology is. I'm just claiming that Jim is talking out his backside again! So I think we are in agreement.

P.S. If it seemed I was granting him credablity I humbly accept your rebuke.

 

[Clete]

To those souls who have not read the entire thread, Jim has already stated that his purpose for being here is to mock OVT, and not to engage it intellectually.

So, don't take his posts seriously. He isn't.

Michael

Don't let him fool you Michael. What he's doing here is not significantly different than he's ever done, except that it's slightly more honest. What you've seen from Jim in these last several posts is all he's got. If he had more there's no way he could resist slamming us with it and he wouldn't have to resort to blatant misquotes to refute the points made against his pedantic ranting. It took me way too long to figure that out. He strung me along for literally years. Don't make the same mistake I did and think he's got anything of any real substance because he doesn't. All he knows how to do is ask one obscurant (to use one of his favorite words) question after another, and run you in circles until you are no longer discussing open theism but rather the definition of common words.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[themuzicman]

No, I don't even know what soteriology is. I'm just claiming that Jim is talking out his backside again! So I think we are in agreement.

P.S. If it seemed I was granting him credablity I humbly accept your rebuke.

I was just chalking it up to a misunderstanding between us.

Michael

 

[GerladVon]

This is getting really old!

This is getting really old!

To those souls who have not read the entire thread, Jim has already stated that his purpose for being here is to mock OVT, and not to engage it intellectually.

So, don't take his posts seriously. He isn't.

Michael

Looks to me like Hilston has tried to debate OVT by using the scriptures and sound logic. But how can he be expected to engage in debate when the peanut gallery would rather collectively point and sing the "nyah-nyah's"? I'd love to see some OV proponents step up to the plate and TAKE HIS "ASSERTIONS" TO THEIR LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS!!!

If he's just making noise then there should be nothing to fear. Does anyone from the Open Theism camp have the FAITH to step up?

GerladVon

 

[themuzicman]

Looks to me like Hilston has tried to debate OVT by using the scriptures and sound logic. But how can he be expected to engage in debate when the peanut gallery would rather collectively point and sing the "nyah-nyah's"? I'd love to see some OV proponents step up to the plate and TAKE HIS "ASSERTIONS" TO THEIR LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS!!!

If he's just making noise then there should be nothing to fear. Does anyone from the Open Theism camp have the FAITH to step up?

GerladVon

Already did that. (If there's one that was missed, let me know.)

Besides, he's here to mock by his own admission. Why shoudl we take him seriously?

Michael

 

[RobE]

1) The question isn't whether foreordination is a cause, but whether all causes are foreordinations. This is one point where you're imposing your presuppositions.

2) "Prearrange" is not the same as "arrange". To "prearrange" means "To arrange in advance." (www.dictionary.com

"Arrange", on the other hand, means "To plan or prepare for: arrange a picnic." Arranging can happen before or during a particualr process.

So, you're assumption that "arrange"="prearrange" and "cause"="foreordination" is a complete non-sequitor.

Ok. So you don't believe foreordination is a cause. If it's a non-sequitor, why do you have a problem with Calvinism?

In the case of Judas "arrange" would equal "prearrange" and is not an assumption on my part. Is God able to carry out His own plans and in this case cause(arrange, preorder) the events of Judas' betrayal?

Rob :angel:

 

[Philetus]

You don't even know that Lazarus heard the words! (though he may have) Jesus spoke him into life, just as he spoke the universe into exsistance!

Perhaps the difficulty in grasping the concept that God can speak and the 'dead' hear Him, is due to the fact that the one contesting it has never experienced it.

Whether or not Lazarus literally 'heard the words' ... he got up.
​

Someone posted:

Are you claiming that Lazarus has already gone through the resurrrection?

Take it from one named Philetus, you don't want to go there. :nono:​