ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[lee_merrill]

Hi everyone,

Clete: Of course it was a sinful act on the man's part and of course God planned it!

Yes, I agree.

How much better at such planning do you suppose an omniscient God would be than you are, or is it that you really do believe that such planning would be too difficult for God to accomplish?

It seems you misunderstood me, I was arguing that God did plan this.

Lee: And if others have an ability (even by your decision) to thwart your will, then you are not at that moment omnipotent, you don't at that moment have all power.

Clete: If this is what it meant to be omnipotent then God never has been omnipotent since He created the first living being.

What then does omnipotent mean? And I will also need an outside source to be referenced, given that we may not redefine such terms.

Lee: Let us note "The Lord took away," and Job did not sin in saying this.

Patman: It means Job thought God took away. The story tells us the behind the scenes, what Job couldn't see, that SATAN did it.

Then how did Job not sin in what he said? You seem to hold that Job did not sin here in his attitude, yet the Bible says his words were not sinful.

Job 2:10 He replied, "You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?" In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.

(more comments concerning your reply further down, Patman)

Lee: Then did God only "permit" the gifts that Job received? For the verbs both have the same forms here, active forms, and so God is an agent, and an agent in both.

Clete: The comment Job made concerning God having taken away was a statement of faith not a statement of fact. It was a figure of speech.

So it seems this boils down to reading here “In all this Job did not sin in what he meant.” He meant he trusted God, and said words that were incorrect in expressing this. However, the text reads that Job did not sin in what he said.

I would consider it probable in fact that some of his thoughts and intents were even tinged with sinfulness, even while he said this, I daresay he was in doubt and turmoil.

Clete: I know for a fact that he was using a figure because the Bible teaches that God's power is founded upon His righteousness and so if God is not righteous His omnipotence is meaningless.

So in which lexicon do we see this phrase as a way people would understand as saying “I trust God”? We can’t just say it’s a figure of speech willy nilly, such expressions have to in fact be an idiom in the language.

Clete: You believe it wasn't a sin because the accusation was true!

No, I believe it wasn’t a sin to say this because the Bible says Job did not sin in what he said.

God does not do evil.

I agree, yet “The Lord took away” is plainly stated, as is “Shall we not receive trouble from the Lord?”

IT’S A FIGURE OF SPEECH, LEE!!!!

Exclamation points do not however, constitute an argument. Which grammar says this expression also is a figure of speech? “Raining cats and dogs” is one in English, and “Shall we not receive trouble?” is one in Hebrew? Where this is documented, is what I now need to know.

That's the question I answered in the affirmative.

So then “the Lord took away” is quantitative? What does it quantify, may I ask?

Can you read Lee or am I just completely wasting my time?

Insults also are not arguments.

The NIV is not even a Bible as far as I am concerned. I couldn't care less what it says. You may as was well be reading the Koran.

This is an extraordinary claim. Where have you studied Hebrew and Greek? What scholarship do you bring here to overturn their conclusions? I happened to meet Walt Liefeld in Chicago, who was one of the translators, a man of integrity and a fine scholar, who loved Scripture.

The word nacham does not mean relent it means repent…

But let’s check the Hebrew dictionaries:

“Niph. be sorry, console oneself, etc. (only in der. species) -- Niph. 1. be sorry, moved to pity, have compassion…” (BDB)

“Unlike man, who under the conviction of sin feels genuine remorse and sorrow, God is free from sin. Yet the Scriptures inform us that God repents (Gen 6:6-7; Exo 32:14; Jud 2:18; 1Sam 15:11 et al.), i.e. he relents or changes his dealings with men according to his sovereign purposes.” (TWOT)

… no matter how you slice it, nacham is a word that indicates change and that cannot make any rational sense in a world where God either knows the entire future or predestined it from "before the beginning of time".

I agree that God can change his response, why does it have to mean a change of overall plan, though?

Lee: … the people who crucified Jesus sinned, their intent was the essence of their sin, to murder an innocent person.

Patman: I agree their intent was sin, but God did not intend for them to intend to sin. He knew they would, just because people are and always have been evil, but God didn't make them sin.

But their deeds expressed their intent, they carried out their intent, and were not the deeds also planned by God? So then God (with a different intent) had as part of his plan those deeds which were indeed, sins.

Patman: Has there been no intent to sin, God still could have arranged the death of his son to save the world.

But the prophecy was that Jesus would be betrayed and afflicted, all of this involved sin.

Isaiah 52:14-15 Just as there were many who were appalled at him--his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness--so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.

This is the difference, you say God did intend for them to sin, thus making God, again, the author of sins!

Isaiah 10:15 Does the ax raise itself above him who swings it, or the saw boast against him who uses it? As if a rod were to wield him who lifts it up, or a club brandish him who is not wood!

This ax was referring to the invasion of Israel by sinful Assyrians.

Isaiah 10:12-13 When the Lord has finished all his work against Mount Zion and Jerusalem, he will say, "I will punish the king of Assyria for the willful pride of his heart and the haughty look in his eyes. For he says: ‘By the strength of my hand I have done this, and by my wisdom, because I have understanding. I removed the boundaries of nations, I plundered their treasures; like a mighty one I subdued their kings.’”

But I say God did not need sin to do his will, and never author sins, thus he did not arrange for sin in the crucifixion.

But the cross was God’s plan for our redemption, and Jesus prayed “Father, forgive them,” and so it was a sin, and in the plan of God.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days…

God bless you,
Lee

 

[Bob Hill]

"The Open View of God is growing in America, praise the Lord!!

However, Calvinists do not like it one bit.

The most important thing that I would advise anyone who is an OV, is this: Be sure you are focusing on God and striving to love Him. Then, as we allow Him to fill us with love and His fruit by means of the Holy Spirit, we will enabled to continue in our love for others, Christians and unbelievers, even thogh they may disagree with us.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

Why do OV believers see that God changes His mind and even understand that God does not know all of the future actions of man?

Here are a few passages that show God has emotions similar to ours, at times.

Genesis 6:6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

Genesis 22:12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”

Exodus 13:17 Then it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, “Lest perhaps the people change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.”

Exodus 16:4 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you. And the people shall go out and gather a certain quota every day, that I may test them, whether they will walk in My law or not.

God sometimes has threatened His wrath upon Israel. Then He changed His mind.
Exodus 32:7-13 And the LORD said to Moses, “Go, get down! For your people whom you brought out of the land of Egypt have corrupted themselves. 8 “They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made themselves a molded calf, and worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, ‘This is your god, O Israel, that brought you out of the land of Egypt!’ ” 9 And the LORD said to Moses, “I have seen this people, and indeed it is a stiff-necked people! 10 “Now therefore, let Me alone, that My wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them. And I will make of you a great nation.” 11 Then Moses pleaded with the LORD his God, and said: “LORD, why does Your wrath burn hot against Your people whom You have brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 “Why should the Egyptians speak, and say, ‘He brought them out to harm them, to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth’? [Moses pleaded with God to change His mind.] Turn from Your fierce wrath, and repent from this harm to Your people. 13 “Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants, to whom You swore by Your own self, and said to them, ‘I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven; and all this land that I have spoken of I give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.’ ”

What was God’s response???

Exodus 32:14 So the LORD repented from the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Praise God for His tenderness,
Bob Hill

 

[Clete]

I see no basis for Jesus Christ being forsaken by the Father while on the cross.

I am hoping and trying to understand whether God rejected Jesus while on the Cross or if Jesus was just left alone to do His thing. Please notice my tentativeness.

When I look at the whole account in all of the gospels, I see that Christ died spiritually for our sins before He died physically. That’s the main reason why I do not believe that Father forsook Him while He was on the cross. How could He cry out and say it is finished, before He died?

It may be that this was the time in Matthew and Luke when the 6th through the 9th hours took place and the darkness signified His spiritual death. I think this is the time Christ felt separated from the Father, but I don’t think He was, in reality.

Here is how I see it in a harmony of 3 of the gospels.
Luke 23:32-46 There were also two others, criminals, led with Him to be put to death. 33 And when they had come to the place called Calvary, there they crucified Him, and the criminals, one on the right hand and the other on the left. 34 Then Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do." And they divided His garments and cast lots. 35 And the people stood looking on. But even the rulers with them sneered, saying, "He saved others; let Him save Himself if He is the Christ, the chosen of God." 36 The soldiers also mocked Him, coming and offering Him sour wine, 37 and saying, "If You are the King of the Jews, save Yourself." 38 And an inscription also was written over Him in letters of Greek, Latin, and Hebrew: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. 39 Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us." 40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong." 42 Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom." 43 And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." 44 Now it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

Mat 27:45,46 Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" that is, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

John 19:28-30 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, "I thirst!" 29 Now a vessel full of sour wine was sitting there; and they filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on hyssop, and put it to His mouth. 30 So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

Luke 23:45,46 Then the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was torn in two. 46 And when Jesus had cried out with a loud voice, He said, "Father, 'into Your hands I commit My spirit.'" Having said this, He breathed His last.

God was with Him all the way.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

So then what does it mean "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"?

And why would Jesus have gone to "the City of Refuge and/or Abraham's bosom and/or Paradise (whatever you want to call it)? Was not this the place of the righteous dead who had to wait for Christ's sacrifice before ascending to heaven to be with God? Wasn't such a place necessary because their sin had not actually been atoned for prior to Calvary and thus were not in a condition which would allow them to be in the presence of God the Father? And how could there not be some separation from the Father of some sort if Jesus did indeed become sin for us as Paul explicitly stated?

Sorry to barrage you with so many questions but I just don't see how your position on this one holds up.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Someone whose judgment I trust suggested that this post was below par for a man of my ability. I have therefore recanted and deleted it.

However, my avoidance of SS is still in full swing BUT I am making a brief exception so that my conversation with Bob Hill will not be cut off prematurely.

 

[swanca99]

Bob and Clete, in case this may contribute to your conversation, here's another explanation I have either read or heard about Jesus' quoting of Psalm 22:1. I'm not sure I buy into it, but here it is:

The Psalm was understood by the Jews of Jesus' day to be Messianic. By quoting the opening verse of the Psalm, Jesus was not necessarily stating that God the Father had deserted him, but claiming to be the fulfillment of the Psalm.

Again, I'm not saying that I agree with this interpretation, but for what it's worth, there it is...

I get lost in these long threads. In case this has been mentioned already, please forgive the redundancy.

 

[patman]

Lee,

I do not understand why you expect anyone to buy your Job example. The bible plainly says who was afflicting Job. Who cares what Job said? He was wrong. You can be wrong and not sin, Lee.

You could say the world was flat because some verse somewhere said the sun sets, and that person didn't sin in saying that. So does that mean the world is flat?

God knew people were going to be sinning during the crucifixion, and God used that sin to produce the cross, but God didn't make them sin, nor did he require it to accomplish the cross.

Why do you say God needs sin to bring about good? That again is blasphemy.

 

[lee_merrill]

I do not understand why you expect anyone to buy your Job example.

Because Scripture says Job did not sin in what he said, and what he said is just what you hold cannot happen, what he said is what you call blasphemous when I say it. The Bible says that saying this is not a sin.

The bible plainly says who was afflicting Job. Who cares what Job said?

Yet what the Bible says about Job's comments tells us whether he was right or not, Scripture says this was not a sinful statement.

We even have a direct statement in Scripture which is not a comment on what Job said:

Job 42:11 All his brothers and sisters and everyone who had known him before came and ate with him in his house. They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.

You could say the world was flat because some verse somewhere said the sun sets, and that person didn't sin in saying that. So does that mean the world is flat?

But the point is whether the statement itself constitutes sin, not what the person may have thought or meant. A false statement is a lie, so yes, that statement is a sinful statement, because of that.

1 John 2:21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth.

Psalm 141:3 Set a guard over my mouth, O Lord; keep watch over the door of my lips.

Proverbs 8:7-8 My mouth speaks what is true, for my lips detest wickedness. All the words of my mouth are just; none of them is crooked or perverse.

God knew people were going to be sinning during the crucifixion, and God used that sin to produce the cross, but God didn't make them sin, nor did he require it to accomplish the cross.

But how then did God plan the cross, where he knew people would sin, and bring it about, without being an agent in that sinning happening?

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days…

Why do you say God needs sin to bring about good? That again is blasphemy.

This, too, then?

Romans 5:20-21 The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 11:32 For God has imprisoned everyone in disobedience so he could have mercy on everyone.

And again, the prophecy was that Jesus would be betrayed and afflicted, all of this involved sin.

Isaiah 52:14-15 Just as there were many who were appalled at him--his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness--so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Bob Hill]

I believe “the angels who did not keep their proper domain”, God “has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day”.

They attempted to contaminate the generations of the Messiah. Gen 6:2-9 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. 3 And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.

1 Pet 3:18-20 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.

2 Pet 2:4-6 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly.

Jude 6,7 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

They will be judged.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

Clete,

In addition to Christ's "My God why have you forsaken Me?", it seems to me that the Son visited the spirits in prison. When did He do it? I believe He did it while His body hung on the cross, dead, and while His body was in the tomb.

What do you think?

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

Clete,

I do hope you realize that the ideas I'm presenting are extremely difficult to be sure they are completely correct. I think you would agree that we can only make good guesses at some things.

Your brother In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[patman]

Because Scripture says Job did not sin in what he said, and what he said is just what you hold cannot happen, what he said is what you call blasphemous when I say it. The Bible says that saying this is not a sin.


Yet what the Bible says about Job's comments tells us whether he was right or not, Scripture says this was not a sinful statement.

We even have a direct statement in Scripture which is not a comment on what Job said:

Job 42:11 All his brothers and sisters and everyone who had known him before came and ate with him in his house. They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.


But the point is whether the statement itself constitutes sin, not what the person may have thought or meant. A false statement is a lie, so yes, that statement is a sinful statement, because of that.

1 John 2:21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth.

Psalm 141:3 Set a guard over my mouth, O Lord; keep watch over the door of my lips.

Proverbs 8:7-8 My mouth speaks what is true, for my lips detest wickedness. All the words of my mouth are just; none of them is crooked or perverse.


But how then did God plan the cross, where he knew people would sin, and bring it about, without being an agent in that sinning happening?

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days…


This, too, then?

Romans 5:20-21 The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 11:32 For God has imprisoned everyone in disobedience so he could have mercy on everyone.

And again, the prophecy was that Jesus would be betrayed and afflicted, all of this involved sin.

Isaiah 52:14-15 Just as there were many who were appalled at him--his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness--so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.

Blessings,
Lee

Lee, Job didn't know he was mistaken. You have no excuse.

You can try all you ant to convince me that you are not dragging our savior's and our creator's name through the mud by calling him the author of sin and evil, but who am I?

It is God you disgrace.

 

[patman]

Lee,

You have a problem with comprehending what you read too, btw.

No matter how many verses I show you that prove WHO did the bad things to Job, you will always blame God. Be glad you are under grace, you have become a blasphemer.

 

[patman]

Job 1
12 And the LORD said to Satan, “Behold, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on his person.”
So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD.

Job 2
6 And the LORD said to Satan, “Behold, he is in your hand, but spare his life.”

Job 36
1 Elihu also proceeded and said:
2 “Bear with me a little, and I will show you
That there are yet words to speak on God’s behalf.

3 I will fetch my knowledge from afar;
I will ascribe righteousness to my Maker.

4 For truly my words are not false;
One who is perfect in knowledge is with you.

5 “ Behold, God is mighty, but despises no one;
He is mighty in strength of understanding.

6 He does not preserve the life of the wicked,
But gives justice to the oppressed.

7 He does not withdraw His eyes from the righteous;
But they are on the throne with kings,
For He has seated them forever,
And they are exalted.

8 And if they are bound in fetters,
Held in the cords of affliction,

9 Then He tells them their work and their transgressions—
That they have acted defiantly.

10 He also opens their ear to instruction,
And commands that they turn from iniquity.

11 If they obey and serve Him,
They shall spend their days in prosperity,
And their years in pleasures.

12 But if they do not obey,
They shall perish by the sword,
And they shall die without knowledge.[a]

13 “But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath;
They do not cry for help when He binds them.

14 They die in youth,
And their life ends among the perverted persons.[]

15 He delivers the poor in their affliction,
And opens their ears in oppression.

16 “ Indeed He would have brought you out of dire distress,
Into a broad place where there is no restraint;
And what is set on your table would be full of richness.

17 But you are filled with the judgment due the wicked;
Judgment and justice take hold of you.

18 Because there is wrath, beware lest He take you away with one blow;
For a large ransom would not help you avoid it.

19 Will your riches,
Or all the mighty forces,
Keep you from distress?

20 Do not desire the night,
When people are cut off in their place.

21 Take heed, do not turn to iniquity,
For you have chosen this rather than affliction.

22 “ Behold, God is exalted by His power;
Who teaches like Him?

23 Who has assigned Him His way,
Or who has said, ‘You have done wrong’?

Job 40
3 Then Job answered the LORD and said:
4 “ Behold, I am vile;
What shall I answer You?
I lay my hand over my mouth.

5 Once I have spoken, but I will not answer;
Yes, twice, but I will proceed no further.”

Lee, you constantly say God authors sin. May God rebuke your heart since you do not take mine seriously. Stop trusting in job's word and listen to GOD.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

I know this dialogue is between you and Patman, yet I just wanted to point some things out.

Because Scripture says Job did not sin in what he said, and what he said is just what you hold cannot happen, what he said is what you call blasphemous when I say it. The Bible says that saying this is not a sin.

Something can be wrong and yet not be a sin. Job didn't sin, yet he was wrong. They are compatible statements.

Yet what the Bible says about Job's comments tells us whether he was right or not, Scripture says this was not a sinful statement.

No it does not. It speaks to Job's attitude and heart, not the truthfulness of his statement. It is only when we speak what we know is wrong as a truth, and what we know is a truth as a wrong, do we sin. Being mistaken is not a sin. Job was wrong, but he did not sin.

We even have a direct statement in Scripture which is not a comment on what Job said:

Job 42:11 All his brothers and sisters and everyone who had known him before came and ate with him in his house. They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.

Did God kill Job's family? Did God wipe out his animals? Did God take away his health? The book of Job declares that it was Satan and not God who did all these things. That verse reflects the reason the family came: they believed God had done them. It doesn't mean they were right!

But the point is whether the statement itself constitutes sin, not what the person may have thought or meant. A false statement is a lie, so yes, that statement is a sinful statement, because of that.

A false statement is not a lie Lee. It is only a lie if you know it's false and yet portray it as true.

But how then did God plan the cross, where he knew people would sin, and bring it about, without being an agent in that sinning happening?

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days…

The cross isn't mentioned there Lee! There is suffering, a guilt offering, being crushed etc. but no specific mention of a cross! There are numerous other ways that verse could have been brought to fulfillment.

 

[Clete]

Clete,

In addition to Christ's "My God why have you forsaken Me?", it seems to me that the Son visited the spirits in prison. When did He do it? I believe He did it while His body hung on the cross, dead, and while His body was in the tomb.

What do you think?

In Christ,
Bob Hill

Well I think that while His Spirit was still present with His physical body (i.e. while He was still physically alive) that He was fully present there on the cross and not in any other place. I do however completely agree that He "preached to those in prison" as Peter put it after His physical death during the time He was in Paradise.

Do you agree with me that this Paradise of which Jesus spoke while on the cross is the same place as Abraham's Bosom?

I do hope you realize that the ideas I'm presenting are extremely difficult to be sure they are completely correct. I think you would agree that we can only make good guesses at some things.

I totally agree! In fact, any time you say anything I disagree with, it has become my habit to assume you are more correct than I and so I take such times as opportunities to learn. If in my lifetime I learn the Scripture one tenth as well as you, I'll have done very well indeed!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[elected4ever]

There are two types of rationality. Human rationality and Godly rationality. Open Theism smacks at human rationality. Human rationality tends to apply the law for human conduct. Open theism gives humans the choice of believing in or rejecting God initially or remaining in the belief or rejecting the belief in God after the initial belief. Once saved always saved is irrational in true Open Theism. Bob Hill, Clete, Knight and a few others cannot possibly be true Open Theist and believe that they are once saved always saved. That is illogical in that they have lost the freedom to choose after being saved. I believe that Open Theism is nothing more than an attempt by humans to rationalize God and explain christian behaviour after salvation. Why do we do what we do after salvation is what is being addressed. A person must come to some conclusions about christian behavior in order to remain sane and have a productive human life.

 

[patman]

There are two types of rationality. Human rationality and Godly rationality. Open Theism smacks at human rationality. Human rationality tends to apply the law for human conduct. Open theism gives humans the choice of believing in or rejecting God initially or remaining in the belief or rejecting the belief in God after the initial belief. Once saved always saved is irrational in true Open Theism. Bob Hill, Clete, Knight and a few others cannot possibly be true Open Theist and believe that they are once saved always saved. That is illogical in that they have lost the freedom to choose after being saved. I believe that Open Theism is nothing more than an attempt by humans to rationalize God and explain christian behaviour after salvation. Why do we do what we do after salvation is what is being addressed. A person must come to some conclusions about christian behavior in order to remain sane and have a productive human life.

elected, why?

Why is open theism so pro human to you? Did Adam, through freewill, bring about sin on earth or did he not? God simply let him, though he could have stopped him with his endless power.

The difference in the S.V. and the O.V. (well, one of them) is the S.V. teach God knew the outcome as he created man, thus (and many SV have said it on here) making God the author of sin.

Why does the O.V. get such a bad rap? We believe God created the universe just like you, if he can do that, he can do anything he pleases without the need of exhaustive future knowledge.

Why do the S.V. say God is weak without total future knowledge? Why does future knowledge trump massive power and wisdom?

 

[elected4ever]

elected, why?

Why is open theism so pro human to you? Did Adam, through freewill, bring about sin on earth or did he not? God simply let him, though he could have stopped him with his endless power.

Adam was a sovereign creation given the ability to choose by God. That is by design and to say that man does not have the ability to choose is to deny God's design. In this the closed view is simply wrong. Man's ability to choose was not and is not conditional. God never took that ability away from man when it comes to the human endeavor. Man did however choose himself over God and his sovereignty over God's sovereignty. Man did inter into a condition called sin and God did limit man to the creation that God gave him sovereignty over. All that is under man's jurisdiction is effected by man's sinful state of existence. As lone as man remains on earth, he will remain in a sinful condition and will by his nature choose against God. This is referred to as the flesh nature and we will have this nature until we physically die. Saved or unsaved this nature will remain regardless.

The difference in the S.V. and the O.V. (well, one of them) is the S.V. teach God knew the outcome as he created man, thus (and many SV have said it on here) making God the author of sin.

God's foreknowledge is not causal. In this the OV and the CV are wrong. To make god's foreknowledge causeal is to say that god did not make man a sovereign creation and is a slap in the face of God, makeing God the author of evil.God did not author evil but God does know how to use evil. He has even said so.

Why does the O.V. get such a bad rap? We believe God created the universe just like you, if he can do that, he can do anything he pleases without the need of exhaustive future knowledge.

That is where you are wrong. God governs Himself. God limits Himself by His own word but that word was spoken before the earth was. God had a plan and God has executed that plan and continues to execute that plan regardless of the actions of man or of Satan. God will preserve witnesses on the earth until He returns.

Why do the S.V. say God is weak without total future knowledge? Why does future knowledge trump massive power and wisdom?

Because to deny future foreknowledge is to deny the revealed word. Both the OVer and the CVer hold that foreknowledge is casual. The OVer says that if God has foreknowledge then God causes everything so they reject the revealed truth. The CVer says that God does know everything and causes everything so all the destruction and misery in the world is god's fault and design.. Both take this to the extreme and both are equally wrong. Foreknowledge is not casual.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Bob Hill, Clete, Knight and a few others cannot possibly be true Open Theist and believe that they are once saved always saved. That is illogical in that they have lost the freedom to choose after being saved.

There is nothing illogical about our choices being limited.

Once a man chooses to become married he can never choose to be a man who was never married. His freewill has not been taken away but his past choices have somewhat limited his future choices. The man still has a complete freewill, he can choose to go left, or choose to go right, he can even choose to get a divorce but he can never choose to be a man that was never married. Nothing about any of that is illogical.

e4e you constantly confuse freewill with freedom. Until you can tell the difference you will never understand the debate.