ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[Lighthouse]

There could be a conditional aspect to it. God said he would die. God did not lie. This is what His intention was. God changed His mind in response to believing prayer. This shows that we were created for reciprocal vs unilateral relationships and that we are significant in our freedom, prayers, and influence. This is the type of creation God freely chose. Even if He decided it was final (my impression), it just shows how responsive God is to prayer (we agree the future is open, not fixed).

God decided that David and Bathsheba's first child would be stillborn, and no amount of prayer changed that. It was final.

 

[godrulz]

what makes you think he repented?



what verse are you referring to? Jesus said that it would have been good if the person who betrayed him had never been born.

Matthew 26:24
"The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born."



Jesus loved Judas. do you accept that Judas may have been saved and then fell away (became unsaved) ?



if that is so, why do we have Jesus saying it would have been good for Judas (the betrayer) to have never been born?

Judas was a genuine disciple of Christ who fell away and became a son of perdition. He was not born or predestined to be a devil. He fulfilled a prophecy, but someone else would have fulfilled it if he would have repented (God's desire or God would be responsible for his damnation from all eternity). Judas exhibited remorse, not repentance and died an unbeliever, though he once was in Christ's inner circle (Jesus did not chose a betrayer after praying all night...Judas became one over time).

 

[godrulz]

God decided that David and Bathsheba's first child would be stillborn, and no amount of prayer changed that. It was final.

It is a case by case issue. I Sam. 15 shows that God changes His mind sometimes, but not at other times. It is not that He cannot change it, but that He will not change it. He decides whether and when to exercise mercy or judgment. Sometimes it is conditional (Jonah), whereas other times it is unconditional and too late for mercy (Revelation judgments).

 

[elected4ever]

The question isn't moot e4e. It's at the very heart of the whole debate. Without the ability to do otherwise there is no freedom and without freedom there is no responsibility for one's actions.

And I wasn't focusing on the wrong thing. You presented your wife's knowledge as being analogous to God's foreknowledge. I happen to agree that it is in fact analogous but not in the sense you are trying to make it work. God can know my actions before I make them in the exact same sense that my wife can know my future actions. She can know my actions because she knows me. But even as well as my wife knows me and my ways, she still gets it wrong sometimes because there are things which she cannot know.
It is the same with God. The only difference is two fold. First, God is far wiser than my wife and second, there is far less information that God cannot know. So with increased information and dramatically increased wisdom, God is able to know the future in much greater detail and with much better precision than is any mere man. But note that this position that I've just laid out preserves genuine freedom of choice. It does so because it allows for the fact that God created us in such a way that there are certain aspects of our will that cannot be known. That is not to say that God doesn't want to know or that if it were knowable that He couldn't figure it out but that God cannot figure it out because it is not rationally knowable.
Would you agree that God is capable of making the world in such a way? If not, please explain.

And finally, you said...

First of all I wasn't calling you a Calvinist in a pejorative way; I was simply stating the facts. Secondly, I have not assigned any traits to God that are not depicted in Scripture. You act as though we all sat around one Saturday after a football game and came up with a god we all felt like we could get along with. I can assure you that is not the case. If you can demonstrate where my beliefs are wrong by the Scripture and sound reason, I will recant them. And lastly, everything you said from "God is creator" on, I completely agree with. Does that surprise you?

Resting in Him,
Clete

No I did not present my wife's knowledge as analogous to God's foreknowledge.I was illustrating the fact that I was free to choose in ether case. After the decision was made it could not be undone. A new decision has to be made. Just as I could not change my mine after eating the clam chowder nether could I change my mind after God had honored it. The salvation I received is God's salvation. So the question of would I, could I or should I is not one that can be changed so I refuse to indulge in a hypothetical exercise. It serves no purpose and does not honor God.

Can you explain why you are so set on making God fallible? Why is it so important to you that God not know? Why does God's foreknowledge threaten you personally?

 

[Lighthouse]

GOD'S NOT FALLIBLE, E4E! And open theism doesn't teach that.

 

[Clete]

Judas was a genuine disciple of Christ who fell away and became a son of perdition. He was not born or predestined to be a devil. He fulfilled a prophecy, but someone else would have fulfilled it if he would have repented ...

I'm not certain any of this is true. He did fulfill Scripture, there's no doubt about that, but none of the "prophecies" that he fulfilled were actual prophecies when they were written down. That is to say, that if Judas had never existed or had repented or whatever, no one would go back in the Old Testament and say, Ah-ha! Here's a prophecy that went unfulfilled! If they looked they would search in vain because they just wouldn't be there. Psalms 109:8, for example would not send off blinking red lights calling attention to itself as an unfulfilled prophecy had Judas not done what he did. It would simply be read and taken to mean what the context requires. It only came to light as any sort of prophecy at the point at which Judas fulfilled it. Bob Enyart called such prophecies, "non-prophecies" in Battle Royale X, but I think I would prefer to say simply that Judas fulfilled the Scripture in the sense that there are things that he did which are paralleled in the Old Testament Scriptures that were not specific prophecies.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Lighthouse]

That's some food for thought, Clete.

 

[elected4ever]

I'm not certain any of this is true. He did fulfill Scripture, there's no doubt about that, but none of the "prophecies" that he fulfilled were actual prophecies when they were written down. That is to say, that if Judas had never existed or had repented or whatever, no one would go back in the Old Testament and say, Ah-ha! Here's a prophecy that went unfulfilled! If they looked they would search in vain because they just wouldn't be there. Psalms 109:8, for example would not send off blinking red lights calling attention to itself as an unfulfilled prophecy had Judas not done what he did. It would simply be read and taken to mean what the context requires. It only came to light as any sort of prophecy at the point at which Judas fulfilled it. Bob Enyart called such prophecies, "non-prophecies" in Battle Royale X, but I think I would prefer to say simply that Judas fulfilled the Scripture in the sense that there are things that he did which are paralleled in the Old Testament Scriptures that were not specific prophecies.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I think i was referencing what Jesus said not old testament prophecy.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

E4E,

you catch my post on the previous page?

 

[elected4ever]

That's some food for thought, Clete.

I thought about it for about two seconds. That is more thought than it deserved.

 

[Clete]

No I did not present my wife's knowledge as analogous to God's foreknowledge.I was illustrating the fact that I was free to choose in ether case.

After having been asked whether your action was free if God knew the action in advance. I'm not stupid e4e, give me a little credit here.

After the decision was made it could not be undone. A new decision has to be made. Just as I could not change my mind after eating the clam chowder neither could I change my mind after God had honored it. The salvation I received is God's salvation. So the question of would I, could I or should I is not one that can be changed so I refuse to indulge in a hypothetical exercise. It serves no purpose and does not honor God.

This is not the question. No one is asking you to indulge in anything remotely hypothetical.
I will ask you point blank. If God knew in advance that you would start the above quote with the letter "A", could you have done otherwise?
Yes or no?

Can you explain why you are so set on making God fallible? Why is it so important to you that God not know? Why does God's foreknowledge threaten you personally?

Excellent question, although your phrasing it in the most negative possible terms ends up misrepresenting my position but ignoring that for now...

If God knows my actions in advance then I cannot do other that what His knowledge has in store for me to do. I therefore am not free; I have no volitional will. Without volition all things moral are meaningless. Love is meaningless, good and evil are meaningless, justice is meaningless, etc. But we know that such things are not meaningless. Justice is real and by every definition of justice that mankind has ever known or conceived whether Biblical or otherwise, if a man did not choose his action he cannot be justly held responsible for that action. Yet we know that God does and will hold people accountable for their action and the idea that God is unjust is not only unacceptable it is irrational. Thus we can KNOW that not only do we have free will, but that God cannot know precisely what our free will actions will be because that is the only way existence can work and God be a just God.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

I think i was referencing what Jesus said not old testament prophecy.

Same difference.

 

[elected4ever]

what makes you think he repented?

Maybe repented is to strong a word but he certainly regretted what he did. I didn't see where he ask forgiveness for it.

what verse are you referring to? Jesus said that it would have been good if the person who betrayed him had never been born.

I don't think it exist. I looked for it. I think the statement was in a sermon referencing John 6:70 I am glad you caught that.

Jesus loved Judas. do you accept that Judas may have been saved and then fell away (became unsaved) ?

No Jesus called him a devil (deceiver) and he was picked for a purpose. Ne was never saved.

 

[elected4ever]

Judas was a genuine disciple of Christ who fell away and became a son of perdition. He was not born or predestined to be a devil. He fulfilled a prophecy, but someone else would have fulfilled it if he would have repented (God's desire or God would be responsible for his damnation from all eternity). Judas exhibited remorse, not repentance and died an unbeliever, though he once was in Christ's inner circle (Jesus did not chose a betrayer after praying all night...Judas became one over time).

What part of, "is a devil", do you not understand? Your diatribe is total bunk.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Maybe repented is to strong a word but he certainly regretted what he did. I didn't see where he ask forgiveness for it.

i agree. he regretted it and felt guilty for it, but i see no statement from him concerning forgiveness.

I don't think it exist. I looked for it. I think the statement was in a sermon referencing John 6:70 I am glad you caught that.

if you remember another one, just let me know what it is.

No Jesus called him a devil (deceiver) and he was picked for a purpose. Ne was never saved.

so you are saying he was intentionally picked for the purpose of betrayal? if so, what verses do you believe support that? and what of Jesus' statement that it woul have been good if that person (the betrayer) had never been born? how can it have been good if it hadn't happened, if they were picked for the specific purpose of betraying?

as for being saved, we both agree he didn't die saved, so i'll let it go.

 

[elected4ever]

After having been asked whether your action was free if God knew the action in advance. I'm not stupid e4e, give me a little credit here.

You sure fooled me.

This is not the question. No one is asking you to indulge in anything remotely hypothetical.
I will ask you point blank. If God knew in advance that you would start the above quote with the letter "A", could you have done otherwise?
Yes or no?

The question is meaningless sense the deed is already done. It serves no useful purpose.

Excellent question, although your phrasing it in the most negative possible terms ends up misrepresenting my position but ignoring that for now...

Yes most excellent and i thought you would ignore it.

If God knows my actions in advance then I cannot do other that what His knowledge has in store for me to do. I therefore am not free; I have no volitional will. Without volition all things moral are meaningless. Love is meaningless, good and evil are meaningless, justice is meaningless, etc. But we know that such things are not meaningless. Justice is real and by every definition of justice that mankind has ever known or conceived whether Biblical or otherwise, if a man did not choose his action he cannot be justly held responsible for that action. Yet we know that God does and will hold people accountable for their action and the idea that God is unjust is not only unacceptable it is irrational. Thus we can KNOW that not only do we have free will, but that God cannot know precisely what our free will actions will be because that is the only way existence can work and God be a just God.

You make your own choices and God does know what they will be and he loves you anyway. Isn't that wonderful. He even saved you in spite of them.

 

[elected4ever]

God_Is_Truth

so you are saying he was intentionally picked for the purpose of betrayal? if so, what verses do you believe support that? and what of Jesus' statement that it would have been good if that person (the betrayer) had never been born? how can it have been good if it hadn't happened, if they were picked for the specific purpose of betraying?

Yes Jesus picked Judas for a specific purpose. The reference I use calls Judas "The Son Of Perdition" I think this is a specific reference to Judas, John 17:12 *While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

I also believe there are different punishments in hell just as there are deferent reward in heaven. Judas' punishment was particularly harsh I think.

God gets glory from all men. wither good or bad. Even those who hate God will wind up doing the will of God and God will get the glory. That is another study for another tread.

 

[godrulz]

I'm not certain any of this is true. He did fulfill Scripture, there's no doubt about that, but none of the "prophecies" that he fulfilled were actual prophecies when they were written down. That is to say, that if Judas had never existed or had repented or whatever, no one would go back in the Old Testament and say, Ah-ha! Here's a prophecy that went unfulfilled! If they looked they would search in vain because they just wouldn't be there. Psalms 109:8, for example would not send off blinking red lights calling attention to itself as an unfulfilled prophecy had Judas not done what he did. It would simply be read and taken to mean what the context requires. It only came to light as any sort of prophecy at the point at which Judas fulfilled it. Bob Enyart called such prophecies, "non-prophecies" in Battle Royale X, but I think I would prefer to say simply that Judas fulfilled the Scripture in the sense that there are things that he did which are paralleled in the Old Testament Scriptures that were not specific prophecies.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I concur. The NT application of OT verses seems odd if we think they were primarily predictive prophecies. John Sanders in "The God who risks" develops the sense in which they were fulfilled. It means more that the OT verses illustrated NT events (vs predictive absolutely). Enyart also developed this in his debate with Sam, did he not?

 

[godrulz]

Maybe repented is to strong a word but he certainly regretted what he did. I didn't see where he ask forgiveness for it.



I don't think it exist. I looked for it. I think the statement was in a sermon referencing John 6:70 I am glad you caught that.




No Jesus called him a devil (deceiver) and he was picked for a purpose. Ne was never saved.

Jesus called him a disciple when He picked him. He only later BECAME a devil. At that point, he was called a devil. He was not born a devil. He fulfilled a role, but was not predestined to do so. If you believe this, you must also believe that God predestines some to heaven and damns others that He could save if He wanted to (making His love and justice arbitrary and making a Holy God responsible for heinous evil). God uses wicked men and circumstances, but does not coerce or cause or predestine this. Judas chose His path; it was not chosen for him from eternity past.

Why would Jesus pick a devil to be entrusted to His inner circle and with His precious message after praying to the Father for wisdom? He did not. He chose disciples with flaws, but not a foregone conclusion of failure for another purpose.

cf. Calvinistic view of Pharaoh...Pharaoh hardened his own heart and God further hardened it. He was not predestined from all eternity to be evil or damned. He could have turned, but he did not.

 

[godrulz]

What part of, "is a devil", do you not understand? Your diatribe is total bunk.

When did he become a devil? From early on, but not from eternity, birth, nor his calling to follow Jesus in the inner circle. WHEN is the key. Reread the chronology and verses in context before you jump to support your preconceived theology.