ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[Nathon Detroit]

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

God elects corporately.

Except of course when God picks individual(s) for a task, i.e., Jonah, Joseph, The Apostles etc.

 

[Colossians]

God elects corporately.
What corporate body were you a part of that He elected?

 

[Colossians]

(Knight would have us believe that he is saved because God elected the group called "the Gentiles", and that for some strange reason, most of the Gentiles forgot they were elect and ran away.)

 

[Nathon Detroit]

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.

God is not, will not and cannot be responsible for anything, to anyone, ever.

:think: Interesting. It only follows then that you would also argue that God is NOT responsible for our salvation? God is NOT responsible for picking His elect? When someone gives his life to the Lord (however you believe that happens) God is NOT responsible?

Let me make a couple of statements and you tell me if you agree with them....

- God is NOT responsible for the salvation of His elect.

- God is NOT responsible for the good gifts that come from above.

Agree? Or disagree?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Yes, it matters. Because on your view, there are no miracles today and what you're describing is miraculous.

Do you believe that God has to perform a ongoing miracle just to maintain our soul spirit? Or do you believe that God designed us to have a soul spirit and it's ongoing existence is not a miracle?

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.

False dichotomy.

Seriously, Eric. Who are you talking to?

Jim, I am just doing the best I can to converse with you. I am trying to answer the questions you ask. If I have misunderstood your question, I apologize.

It seemed to me you have been trying to argue that (from my view) for God to answer prayer He would be controlling our will.

I am glad you don't think that.

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.​

OK, but how does He do that?

Does He manipulate the atoms in your brain to make you do what He wants? Or is your body like a robot (that's not meant to be an insult to your theology but I can't think of any other way to say it) that is following a program?

How do you believe that God "changes our will, according to His decrees"?

 

[Colossians]

It only follows then that you would also argue that God is NOT responsible for our salvation? God is NOT responsible for picking His elect?
No it does anything but follow.
You haven't understood that Hilston is showing you that your use of "responsible" is unwittingly ambiguous, and that you flip between the various shades of meaning willy nilly, without thinking. He was showing you that you cross-align the various meanings with the Creator and the creature.
Specifically, he was pointing out that you cannot use "responsible" in the sense of "accountable/culpable" when referring to the Creator, but only in the sense of "that which has oversight or that which has caused".

 

[godrulz]

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?

Do you?

 

[Hilston]

To Knight:

God elects corporately.

That's not what the text says. He elected a subset of individuals, using the plural pronoun "they", in reference to the members of Israel who were true Israel (Ro 9:6). For you to deny individual election is to contradict the obvious statements in the text. Do you agree that Paul is referring to individuals being elected as a subset of national Israel?

Except of course when God picks individual(s) for a task, i.e., Jonah, Joseph, The Apostles etc.

Among the "tasks" for which God elects individuals is to live a saved life doing the good works He decreed for us to do (Eph 2:10).

:think: Interesting. It only follows then that you would also argue that God is NOT responsible for our salvation?
God is NOT responsible for picking His elect?
When someone gives his life to the Lord (however you believe that happens) God is NOT responsible?
- God is NOT responsible for the salvation of His elect.
- God is NOT responsible for the good gifts that come from above.

This is correct, assuming you're using the word "responsible" biblically.*

*Please note: Eric, if you are even the slightest bit tempted to do something so "journalistic" and libelous as selectively quoting me in the above response, please, please, please reconsider. You and I agreed to be more cordial and friendly toward one another, but you've done this in the past. I trust you would not stoop to such behavior now.

Sincerely,
Jim

 

[Colossians]

How do you believe that God "changes our will, according to His decrees"?
By virtue of the same process He used to create us.
Or do you have a problem with His creating us without our consent?

But understand that if He created us without our consent, then He can modify us without our consent. For in Him we live and move and have our being.

Your problem is essentially that you think us to be external to God. We are internal to Him. Therefore He is simply moving Himself when He modifies us.

 

[Hilston]

Do you believe that God has to perform a ongoing miracle just to maintain our soul spirit?

No.

Or do you believe that God designed us to have a soul spirit and it's ongoing existence is not a miracle?

It's ongoing existence is sustained by supernatural means, but we do not perceive it miraculously. The Biblical definition of miracles involves what men perceive as out of the normal course of nature. God's sustaining power over the universe and every atom therein is in keeping with the normal course of nature as we perceive it.

Hilston wrote: 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.

False dichotomy.

Don't just assert, Eric. Give me the third option. Or fourth or whatever. If you hear His voice, it is miraculous, according to the Biblical definition. If you hear His voice, you need to write it down, because it should be added to the Bible (which, of course, would be unbiblical). If you don't hear His voice, or some other form of communication directly from God, then you have superstition, which is also unbiblical.

It seemed to me you have been trying to argue that (from my view) for God to answer prayer He would be controlling our will.

My argument (from your view) is stated immediately above. You assert that it's a false dichotomy. I would like to see your modification or addendum to the argument.

Hilston wrote: 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.​

OK, but how does He do that?

By decreeing those changes in advance. When I get hungry, I know it is decreed. When I choose Cap'n Crunch over Old Fashioned Rolled Oats, I know it is decreed. When I feel guilty for not eating the oats. I know it is decreed. When I decide next time to eat the right thing, I know it is decreed. My mind has changed, all according to God's decree. We are all following the Script. That's what "As it is written" means.

How do you believe that God "changes our will, according to His decrees"?

The changes occur according to His foreordained plans. It may involve chemical reactions in my brain that change my will, it may involve a manipulation of my circumstances that change my choices, but none of this is done on the fly. It is all according to plan.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

No.

:up:

Don't just assert, Eric. Give me the third option.

I have explained my view on this two times already, I don't think I should have to repeat it again.

But thanks for asking.

Hilston wrote: 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.​

By decreeing those changes in advance. When I get hungry, I know it is decreed. When I choose Cap'n Crunch over Old Fashioned Rolled Oats, I know it is decreed. When I feel guilty for not eating the oats. I know it is decreed. When I decide next time to eat the right thing, I know it is decreed. My mind has changed, all according to God's decree. We are all following the Script. That's what "As it is written" means.

The changes occur according to His foreordained plans. It may involve chemical reactions in my brain that change my will, it may involve a manipulation of my circumstances that change my choices, but none of this is done on the fly. It is all according to plan.

Interesting.

Thanks for your response.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

This is correct, assuming you're using the word "responsible" biblically.*

*Please note: Eric, if you are even the slightest bit tempted to do something so "journalistic" and libelous as selectively quoting me in the above response, please, please, please reconsider. You and I agreed to be more cordial and friendly toward one another, but you've done this in the past. I trust you would not stoop to such behavior now.

Sincerely,
Jim

Wow... Jim, so concerned! :shocked:

Please explain your concern. What might I do (give an example) that would be libelous?

 

[Hilston]

I have explained my view on this two times already, I don't think I should have to repeat it again.

Then suffice it to say that your explanation contradicts your espoused theology. You can't have it both ways. Either God works miracles today, or He has meticulously and exhaustively decreed all without exception.

Wow... Jim, so concerned! :shocked:

Of course. More than a decade of experience with Open Theists gives me sufficient grounds to be "so concerned." Have you forgotten your anti-Hilston signatures of the past?

Please explain your concern.

For those who understand my concern, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, any explanation would be irrelevant.

What might I do (give an example) that would be libelous?

An example of what you might do.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Of course. More than a decade of experience with Open Theists gives me sufficient grounds to be "so concerned." Have you forgotten your anti-Hilston signatures of the past?

Now who would have the nerve to put misleading comments about other posters in their signature???? :think:

So, Jim... if I said... "Jim Hilston says that God is NOT responsible for our salvation." would you find that libelous?

 

[Delmar]

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?

I would have liked to hear what he thought was inconsistent about what I said. Oh well!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I would have liked to hear what he thought was inconsistent about what I said. Oh well!

Sorry, there is only so much "dumb" a man can take.

 

[Hilston]

To Knight:

As I showed in an earlier post, Paul indicated in Romans 9 that God elected a subset of individuals, using the plural pronoun "they", in reference to the members of Israel who were true Israel (Ro 9:6). Do you agree that Paul is referring to individuals being elected as a subset of national Israel?

 

[Clete]

Jim's question is formulated on a false premise (intentionally). It's a trap. Don't answer it at all.

 

[lee_merrill]

Jim's question is formulated on a false premise (intentionally). It's a trap. Don't answer it at all.

Actually, the question is quite pertinent, and points to a weakness in corporate election. Which view says God is choosing groups, but which group may we say is being chosen here?

Also, it also seems this view says God first chooses one group, and then another, but isn't God choosing those who choose him? So then how (may it be asked) are the groups being chosen ... varying?

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Clete]

Actually, the question is quite pertinent, and points to a weakness in corporate election. Which view says God is choosing groups, but which group may we say is being chosen here?

His question is based on a false premise. It is formulated such that one must agree with this false premise to even answer the question at all. It is an intentional trap and tantimount to an outright lie. It is unfortunate that you cannot see it.

Resting in Him,
Clete