ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
RobE said:
No. For man's choice to be real it must have more than one possible outcome.

Rob
Rob,

I have to tell you that I nearly fell out of my chair when I read this single sentence response from you!

WHO ARE YOU AND WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH ROBE???!!!!

:D I'm only teasing, of course! That's exactly the right answer!

So why wouldn't that answer suffice to answer any questions about why the bad things in this world happen? They don't happen because God planned them out or because God decreed that they must happen but because if make a world populated with people that would want to love and you want them to love you back then the only way to do that is to make them with the ability to reject you. Thus bad things can happen against God's will and the universe still makes perfect sense. For the open theist there very simply is no "problem of evil".

The best that the Calvinists theodicy can do is to say that God is the arbitrary author of evil and He does whatever He wishes for His own "good" purposes and we don't know and don't need to know what those purposes are nor do we even have the right to ask what those purposes might be! All I can say to that is, "YIKES" :shocked:

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
RobE said:
Then why do we constantly hold the position that if God foreknows the actions then He is responsible for them?


We do? I am not sure you are following the arguments given.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hilston said:
Knight,

You should spend more time reading what I actually write, rather than react with such knee-jerk eagerness that you completely miss the obvious.

Eric, please re-read my post and realize that the second quote, in its entirety says: "It is the Open Theist mantra: If God ordained evil, then blame God for committing sin. If God desires evil things to happen (like the slavery of Joseph and the murder of His Son), then 'God is responsible.'"

I didn't contradict myself. Are you so desperate to force a flaw in my reasoning that you have to quote me out of context? If not, then it is obviously you who are massively confused.

Please try again.
Jim
Jim I admit I have a hard time following what you are saying.

I have told you that fact for years and of course I have always taken responsibility for it.

Apparently.... God didn't decree that you effectively communicate with me. :)
 

Hilston

Active member
Hall of Fame
Knight said:
Jim I admit I have a hard time following what you are saying.
What's so hard to follow? I'll break it down:

(1) I am saying that you've quoted me out of context. I have said for years that no one holds God responsible, that He is not responsible to anyone for anything. So when you read my words as saying, "God is responsible," in "quotes" no less, that should tell you something.

(2) It is clear that I was speaking for the Open Theist. That's what "It is the Open Theist mantra:" preface to the statement means.

(3) Therefore, I have no contradicted myself. My statement was to demonstrate how Open Theism contradicts logic and scripture.

Knight, I've asked you some very important questions, the answers to which I'm eager to learn and understand regarding the Open View. Instead of answering them, you persisted with that assisine potter question, and continue to betray a major disconnect in your reasoning faculties.

Are you going to answer any of my questions?
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hilston said:
Are you going to answer any of my questions?
Jim, apparently we both have questions left unanswered.

Would you like to separate out the exact question(s) you were asking me to answer? Believe it or not conversing with you (all be it fun) is not the only thing I have going on. :)
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Jim, based on recent posts you have made I would assume you would agree with the following two statements? (correct me if I am wrong)

1. God is not responsible for marring vessels.

2. God has decreed every event that has ever happened for all of history.


Does this apparent contradiction boil down to how you define "responsible"?
 

RobE

New member
godrulz said:
We do? I am not sure you are following the arguments given.

Well, we have said on many occassions that if God foreknew of evil and ordained creation knowing evil would exist then God would be responsible for evil, haven't we? Or was that someone besides ourselves? ;)
 

RobE

New member
Clete: What in your view would be the consequences if God did not allow people to do evil?

I mean, just forget about forknowledge and predestination for the time being and lets look at this issue of God allowing evil for a bit. What if God did not allow evil? Would it be possible to be morally good?

Rob: No. For man's choice to be real it must have more than one possible outcome.​

Clete: :D I'm only teasing, of course! That's exactly the right answer!​

I would challenge you to consider this is true if foreknowledge exists.

So why wouldn't that answer suffice to answer any questions about why the bad things in this world happen? They don't happen because God planned them out or because God decreed that they must happen but because if make a world populated with people that would want to love and you want them to love you back then the only way to do that is to make them with the ability to reject you. Thus bad things can happen against God's will and the universe still makes perfect sense. For the open theist there very simply is no "problem of evil".​

Nor for the closed theist. Wouldn't that answer suffice for them as well? They don't happen because God acted evil or had any evil in Him. They happen because God decreed love would exist and choice would exist and evil is the neccessary rejection of love through your choices. In other words, God created the situation where evil would increase through the law in order to achieve a greater purpose. Thus bad things happen against God's will, but in accordance with His Divine Knowledge and allowance to achieve that same greater purpose. The univers makes perfect sense because it is perfect. For the traditional Christian there is simply no "problem of evil".

The best that the Calvinists theodicy can do is to say that God is the arbitrary author of evil and He does whatever He wishes for His own "good" purposes and we don't know and don't need to know what those purposes are nor do we even have the right to ask what those purposes might be! All I can say to that is, "YIKES" :shocked:

Certainly, that is why I reject Calvinism. When it comes down to it, I do have to agree that God does everything according to His own desire since He is in control of the universe. I reject that God is the arbitrary author of evil in the way that I'm reading your statement. God authored creation which was bound to contain evil when God gave man free will. In that sense He 'authoritatively allowed' evil and planned for creation to contain evil; through His Divine Decree.

Would it be possible for Adam to be morally 'good' if God didn't allow evil from the moment of creation? Why would knowing of evil beforehand and allowing it be an evil act itself?
Rob
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
RobE said:
Well, we have said on many occassions that if God foreknew of evil and ordained creation knowing evil would exist then God would be responsible for evil, haven't we? Or was that someone besides ourselves? ;)


Not me? There is a difference between knowing the possibility of evil, but not expecting the depth of the Fall, and knowing for certain in advance. God is NOT responsible for evil. Those who chose contrary to God's intentions and plan are culpable. Just because Hitler's parents brought him into the world, does not make them responsible for his heinous evil. Hitler did not have to become what he did. Unless God is the causative source for evil, He is not responsible. He gave us wills and intellects, but we alone are responsible for misuing them, without excuse. Our wills, not God's will, is the source of evil. Evil is contrary to God's character and ways. This universe is NOT the way God desired or intended it to be.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hilston said:
How? Does He point His finger? Does He turn your head? Does He cause a Bible verse to float into your line of sight?

How? Does He speak to you? Is it audible or just in your head? And how can you tell it's His voice and not your own voice you're hearing?

How? Does He muck around in your memory? Does He make you forget whatever was bugging you? Does He distract you (perhaps by pointing again? Waving His arms?).

How does He do that? Does a bright light from heaven shine down on a wise action? Does He speak to you and say, "Hey, that's wisdom there"?

Like what? And how? Does He give you money? Does He give you food? Does He give you a map when you're lost?

Again, how?
I already responded to this about 20 pages ago. Why do you ask again? Nevermind, I don't mind answering again, heck I like answering questions.... it's fun! :up:

Like I said before, I believe that God - through the Holy Spirit - speaks to our soul/spirit.

Philippians 4:6 Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; 7 and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.​

How He does that (technically) I am not sure. Does it matter? Some say our brains act as our souls conduit or receptor to the Holy Spirit. I really don't know, and I really don't think it matters how He communicates with us as long as He does communicate with us. :cloud9:

As to our will...
There is simply no reason to think any of this would remove our will in any way shape or form.

Imagine I am in a library frantically looking for a book. You are watching me look for the book the building next to the library. You happen to know where the book is so you scream at the top of your lungs "It's in isle 3, row 5!!!!" To me your scream is nothing more than a faint whisper that I consciencely don't even notice. However, my sub-conscience picks it up and I poke around in isle 5 and I find the book.

You have effectively influenced my thought to the point I found the book. However, you have in NO WAY removed my will as I could have just as easily ignored the message and never found the book.

Now, the above is an example of how influencing a person does not take away their will. The above example IS NOT an example of how God communicates with us. God isn't screaming from the building next door or talking with our sub-conscience. God's directs our steps in a far more sophisticated way involving our soul/spirit to which I do not have the technical blue-print.

So there ya have it, my answer yet again. :)

Tell me Jim how do you think God works with us?

You have often stated God decrees every event for all of history. How does He do it? How does God make you do what you do?
 
Last edited:

RobE

New member
godrulz said:
Not me? There is a difference between knowing the possibility of evil, but not expecting the depth of the Fall, and knowing for certain in advance. God is NOT responsible for evil. Those who chose contrary to God's intentions and plan are culpable. Just because Hitler's parents brought him into the world, does not make them responsible for his heinous evil. Hitler did not have to become what he did. Unless God is the causative source for evil, He is not responsible. He gave us wills and intellects, but we alone are responsible for misuing them, without excuse. Our wills, not God's will, is the source of evil. Evil is contrary to God's character and ways. This universe is NOT the way God desired or intended it to be.

Allright, I haven't looked but I'll take your word for it. If God foreknew of evil entering the world before creation then He is not responsible even though He continued with that creation. We are in agreement.

Since God decreed creation did God decree everything within it?

What proof do you have the the universe isn't just as God had intended it to be?

Rob
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
RobE said:
Allright, I haven't looked but I'll take your word for it. If God foreknew of evil entering the world before creation then He is not responsible even though He continued with that creation. We are in agreement.

Since God decreed creation did God decree everything within it?

What proof do you have the the universe isn't just as God had intended it to be?

Rob


Evil, sin, suffering, sickness, death are all negative consequences of the Fall. Jesus, God in the flesh, did not affirm these things as God's exhaustive will. He OPPOSED them as contrary to God's will and revealed character. Jesus does not oppose the Father. What more proof do you need? Satan, not God, desires suffering and sin and hell.

Exhaustive, meticulous control or decrees is simply flawed. God's rule and control is responsive and providential. These concepts are self-evident if one does not read the Bible with preconceived lenses. I thought you were an Arminian/simple foreknowledge type, yet you seem to always defend Calvinistic ideas?!
 

Bob Hill

TOL Subscriber
The most important aspect of this discussion is God and the time that He is sure a certain thing will happen. When He is sure, He determines it. If He doesn't, sometimes we see He repents.

When God repents, it shows that He can change His mind. That makes it clear to me that God does not know with certainty all the future actions of man.

In Christ,
Bob Hill
 

RobE

New member
godrulz said:
Evil, sin, suffering, sickness, death are all negative consequences of the Fall. Jesus, God in the flesh, did not affirm these things as God's exhaustive will. He OPPOSED them as contrary to God's will and revealed character. Jesus does not oppose the Father.

Ok.

What more proof do you need? Satan, not God, desires suffering and sin and hell.

Matt. 26:42 He went away a second time and prayed, "My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done."​

Mark 14:35 Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. 36"Abba, Father," he said, "everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will."​

Did God will for Jesus to be tortured, mocked, and killed for you? Weren't these 'suffering and sin'? Didn't God create hell?

Exhaustive, meticulous control or decrees is simply flawed. God's rule and control is responsive and providential. These concepts are self-evident if one does not read the Bible with preconceived lenses. I thought you were an Arminian/simple foreknowledge type, yet you seem to always defend Calvinistic ideas?!

I defend foreknowledge through foresight. Obviously if foresight is true then God foresaw the evil and continued with creation anyway because creation was His will. My questions pertain to 'why' was it His will even though He foresaw it? Hilston's position is the same except Hilston emphasizes the point that God decrees/speaks His will.

Calvinism as I understand it says that God created some to be reprobate specifically according to His desire to create free will agents which would choose to love Him or reject Him.

My position says that God created knowing which ones would become reprobate despite His desire that all would be saved and according to His desire to create free will agents which would choose to love Him.

Open Theism says that God created knowing nothing; and hoping that things would be ok. His desire to create free will agents which would choose to love Him turned into a miserable failure when Adam fell against His expectations. Since then God has been attempting to clean up the mess which His creation has thrust upon the universe. Out of kindness God allows man to continue to pro-create and the majority of mans progeny ends up in eternal torment. God didn't know them beforehand, but is unwilling to put them out of their misery for one reason or another.

Do you see the difference between my position and Calvinism?

Rob
 

RobE

New member
Bob Hill said:
The most important aspect of this discussion is God and the time that He is sure a certain thing will happen. When He is sure, He determines it. If He doesn't, sometimes we see He repents.

When God repents, it shows that He can change His mind. That makes it clear to me that God does not know with certainty all the future actions of man.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

Bob,

The future changes when God changes His mind. God knows what the future will hold from that moment on. I, for one, have always maintained that God is able to change His mind. But the o.v. seems to ignore that it is God plan and decree which is being changed. The future must be known beforehand to be changed from one outcome to another.

From my position God knew you and loved you before you existed. You weren't an evolutionary accident thrust into God's creation by nature. You are His purpose and He desired you despite the evils which have been done throughout history. I find great joy in knowing that. If God foresaw you dying at the age of 40 and allowed you through His action to live to the age of 140 then it is a gift based upon foreknowledge. It is also according to His will and not yours.

Rob
 

Hilston

Active member
Hall of Fame
To Knight:

Knight said:
Jim, based on recent posts you have made I would assume you would agree with the following two statements? (correct me if I am wrong)

1. God is not responsible for marring vessels.

2. God has decreed every event that has ever happened for all of history.
Correct.

Knight said:
Does this apparent contradiction boil down to how you define "responsible"?
There is no contradiction, apparent or otherwise, as long as the word is understood correctly. And it's not how I define "responsible." It is a concept that has existed in all languages since the creation of time itself. There is no contradiction according to the way the word is defined biblically and within the God-ordained languages that have existed for millennia. The now-common idea of "responsible" as merely meaning "who did it" is typical of the dumbing down of language that pervades our culture. It is similar to how words such commonly used as "hope" and "sarcasm" are so widely misunderstood by the people who use them. If one dares to use the word "irony" instead of "sarcasm," which is what is typically meant by those who use the latter, one risks being misunderstood. If one dares to get out the dictionary, one is viewed as a pedantic know-it-all. The word "responsible" is merely one of many words like this. Sometimes people do use it correctly, such as when someone says, "I take full responsibility for this project," meaning they recognize their culpability. But such usage is not consistent.

The definitions of 'responsible'*
responsible adjective [ predic. ].
  1. having an obligation to do something, or having control over or care for someone, as part of one's job or role : the department responsible for education.
  2. being the primary cause of something and so able to be blamed or credited for it : the gene was responsible for a rare type of eye cancer.
  3. [ attrib. ] (of a job or position) involving important duties, independent decision-making, or control over others.
  4. [ predic. ] ( responsible to) having to report to (a superior or someone in authority) and be answerable to them for one's actions : the team manager is responsible to the league president.
  5. capable of being trusted : a responsible adult.
  6. morally accountable for one's behavior : the progressive emergence of the child as a responsible being.

With the exception of number 5, none of the definitions apply to God. Note that each of the entries with bold portions cannot apply to God, because God does not answer to anyone, is not held accountable by anyone, and submits to no authority that could rightly or even logically blame Him for anything. Furthermore, the lone exception, entry number 5, is NOT what Open Theists mean when they complain that the Settled View would make God responsible for evil. Moreover, on the Open View, even number 5 cannot be applied to God, which will be demonstrated below.

The origin of the English word 'responsible'

1. Oxford Dictionary's discussion on where the word (not the concept, just the word) comes from:
ORIGIN late 16th cent.(in the sense [answering to, corresponding] ): from obsolete French, from Latin respons- ‘answered, offered in return,’ from the verb respondere (see respond ).​

2. Further discussion of 'responsible':
Responsible is an adjective that applies to anyone who is in charge of an endeavor or to whom a duty has been delegated, and who is subject to penalty or blame in case of default :) responsible for getting everyone out of the building in the event of a fire).

The Oxford Thesaurus discussion of 'responsible':
responsible adjective
  1. who is responsible for the prisons? in charge of, in control of, at the helm of, accountable for, liable for.
  2. if an error's been made, I'm the one who's responsible accountable, answerable, to blame, guilty, culpable, blameworthy, at fault, in the wrong.
  3. a responsible job important, powerful, executive.
  4. he is responsible to the president answerable, accountable.
  5. a responsible tenant trustworthy, sensible, mature, reliable, dependable.

Again, note that each of the entries with bold portions cannot apply to God, because God does not answer to anyone, is not held accountable by anyone, and submits to no authority that could rightly or even logically blame Him for anything. The exceptions, numbers 3 and 5, may indeed apply to God, but these meanings are not what Open Theists intend when they allege that the Settled View would make God responsible for evil. See below.

The Open Theist's use of 'responsible' in reference to God
Open Theists will ask "Is God responsible for [their evil actions], or is the fallen human being responsible?" But note that given the above definitions, God is not, will not and cannot be responsible for anything, to anyone, ever. Any other usage of this word is unwarranted and does violence to language.

The word for "responsible" or "culpable" or "accountable" is defined by the concept it represents or signifies, regardless of language. Whether you want to label it "responsible" or "culpable" or "accountable" using its English equivalents, or whether you want to call it verantwortlich (German) or verantwoodelijk (Dutch) or accoutable (French) or responsabile (Italian) or responsavel (Portuguese) or ansvarlig (Norwegian), the concept of responsibility pervades the human psyche throughout history. This is because God designed man to understand standards of righteousness and justice, which informs man's understanding of the concept of accountability, responsibility, and culpability, regardless of language, leaving all mankind without excuse.
 

Hilston

Active member
Hall of Fame
To Knight:

In an earlier post I had written regarding Romans 9 and the claim that individuals are not in view in that passage:

Knight said:
Yet more importantly none of this is pertaining to individuals as Lee is trying to demonstrate.
But it is. "They" is a plural pronoun. Corporate entities take singular pronouns. For example, in Ro 11:7, Israel is regarded corporately:
What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.​
Note the singular masculine pronoun "he." Paul did not say, Israel hath not obtained that which THEY seek for ..." Instead, he spoke of Israel corporately and used a singular pronoun, "he." But throughout Romans 9, Paul repeatedly uses the plural pronouns "they" and "them" when he is referring to individuals, in particular, the individual elect of Israel (i.e. they are not all Israel, which are of Israel, Ro 9:6).

Knight said:
After-all not ALL Jews will be saved (Romans 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved) clearly this all pertains to corporate Israel in that God will fulfill His promise to them.
But recall Ro 9:6, which I cited above. "THEY are not all Israel, which are of Israel." This is not corporate, but individuals that are elected as individual members of a subset of corporate Israel.

Do you now see that God elects individuals, and not corporate entities only?
 

Hilston

Active member
Hall of Fame
Knight said:
Like I said before, I believe that God - through the Holy Spirit - speaks to our soul/spirit.
This is inconsistent with your theology. You admitted earlier to believing that there are no miracles today. There are few things more miraculous than hearing the voice of God. Maybe you can point to a non-miraculous example in scripture that is analogous to the way God speaks to you.

Philippians 4:6 Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; 7 and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.​
On my view, this verse makes sense. On your view, it doesn't, because there is no peace where there is uncertainty. And if things are truly random, as the Open View claims, such that God does not use the evil in our lives for good purposes, then you can only have artificial and contrived peace; not peace based on the Rock of scripture.

Knight said:
How He does that (technically) I am not sure. Does it matter?
Yes, it matters. Because on your view, there are no miracles today and what you're describing is miraculous.

Knight said:
Some say our brains act as our soul's conduit or receptor to the Holy Spirit. I really don't know, and I really don't think it matters how He communicates with us as long as He does communicate with us. :cloud9:
What you say "doesn't matter" is the crux of the issue. For you to be consistent with your espoused theology, one of two things must be true: (a) He doesn't speak to you, or (b) He is in total meticulous and exhaustive control by way of His decrees.

Knight said:
As to our will...
There is simply no reason to think any of this would remove our will in any way shape or form.
Who is talking about removing our will?

Knight said:
Imagine I am in a library frantically looking for a book. You are watching me look for the book the building next to the library. You happen to know where the book is so you scream at the top of your lungs "It's in isle 3, row 5!!!!" To me your scream is nothing more than a faint whisper that I consciencely don't even notice. However, my sub-conscience picks it up and I poke around in isle 5 and I find the book.

You have effectively influenced my thought to the point I found the book. However, you have in NO WAY removed my will as I could have just as easily ignored the message and never found the book.
Um ... what are you talking about? Who here believes God removes the will? Who is making the argument that God removes the will?

Knight said:
Now, the above is an example of how influencing a person does not take away their will.
Seriously, Eric. Who are you talking to?

Knight said:
Tell me Jim how do you think God works with us?

You have often stated God decrees every event for all of history. How does He do it? How does God make you do what you do?
He changes our will, according to His decrees.
Php 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ;

Php 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.​
 

Delmar

Patron Saint of SMACK
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Hilston said:
Yes, it matters. Because on your view, there are no miracles today and what you're describing is miraculous.
I don't think what he is describing is miraculous at all! I believe it is a simple description of how God designed us to be able to "hear from" the Holy Spirit.
 

Colossians

New member
I don't think what he is describing is miraculous at all! I believe it is a simple description of how God designed us to be able to "hear from" the Holy Spirit.
You have a consistency problem. Do you attend a fellowship?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top