Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Battle Royale VIII applicants wanted!

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Re: debating

    Originally posted by Knight

    Wouldn't you do the same?

    After all... perfect exhaustive foreknowledge is by definition perfect... right
    I think you asked add this question but I would like to throw my two cents in, if you don't mind.

    Strictly speaking Armenians are closed theist but only because they are afraid to suggest that God doesn't know the future. The Open View seems to me to be a subset of Armenianism in many repsects although I definately do not consider myself an Armenian. I guess the point I'm driving at is that a debate between an Armenian and an Open Theist would not have the scope that it might otherswise have because there are more points of agreement between them than there are points of disagreement.
    sigpic
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Re: Re: debating

      Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

      I think you asked add this question but I would like to throw my two cents in, if you don't mind.

      Strictly speaking Armenians are closed theist but only because they are afraid to suggest that God doesn't know the future. The Open View seems to me to be a subset of Armenianism in many repsects although I definately do not consider myself an Armenian. I guess the point I'm driving at is that a debate between an Armenian and an Open Theist would not have the scope that it might otherswise have because there are more points of agreement between them than there are points of disagreement.
      I agree mostly with what you are saying.

      The bottom line is Arminians claim an open view but preach a closed view.

      I think most Arminians don't realize how much they have in common with Calvinsts.
      Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
      TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

      Comment


      • #48
        kids today

        IYGTTUAS quote -- Ever read Beyond the Bounds?

        No, but I have read some of Piper's thoughts on it. Instead of worrying about how he thinks this will affect the church, he should spend more time exegeting.



        Knight quote - Wouldn't you do the same?

        After all... perfect exhaustive foreknowledge is by definition perfect... right?


        Knight, this is where you show your ignorance. Modern Arminians, esp. have no set in stone definition of foreknowledge, as is evident when you read F. Leroy Forline's "The Quest for Truth". And so, my spacetime theory where God manipulates spacetime would still be Arminian.

        "perfect exhaustive foreknowledge" if one defines it as "certain foreknowledge" then there is no problem. Even if God was able to see all times at once, he sees the past as past, the present as present, and the future as future. Depending on how he sees all these things, you could argue that he blocks out the past and present from view. Also, God seeing future things is the same as Him seeing Past things. So, his seeing them has no effect on their freedom.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Re: Re: Re: debating

          Originally posted by Knight

          I agree mostly with what you are saying.

          The bottom line is Arminians claim an open view but preach a closed view.

          I think most Arminians don't realize how much they have in common with Calvinsts.
          You are definately right! But that's why I think that the debate should be against a Calvinist or a Catholic or something that is more clearly antithetical to the closed view. The distiction is much clearer and a Calvinist would be able to be more consistant in his argumentation.
          sigpic
          "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: debating

            Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

            You are definately right! But that's why I think that the debate should be against a Calvinist or a Catholic or something that is more clearly antithetical to the closed view. The distiction is much clearer and a Calvinist would be able to be more consistant in his argumentation.
            That's very true.

            As evidenced by....
            "perfect exhaustive foreknowledge" if one defines it as "certain foreknowledge" then there is no problem. Even if God was able to see all times at once, he sees the past as past, the present as present, and the future as future. Depending on how he sees all these things, you could argue that he blocks out the past and present from view. Also, God seeing future things is the same as Him seeing Past things. So, his seeing them has no effect on their freedom.

            - add yasaf
            Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
            TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: debating

              sigpic
              "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

              Comment


              • #52
                who the

                OOOh. error I meant blocking the past and future from view.


                Clete quote - The distiction is much clearer and a Calvinist would be able to be more consistant in his argumentation.


                Every Arminian has a view of what they think foreknowledge is, so in their own way they would be consistent.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: who the

                  Originally posted by add yasaf
                  Clete quote - The distiction is much clearer and a Calvinist would be able to be more consistant in his argumentation.


                  Every Arminian has a view of what they think foreknowledge is, so in their own way they would be consistent.
                  Perhaps, but not as consistant. And the distinctions aren't nearly are profound.
                  sigpic
                  "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Knight,

                    Based on this...

                    Originally posted by Knight

                    Lion... POTD
                    I nominate Lion to argue the Open View!

                    Clete
                    sigpic
                    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      crazy kids

                      Clete quote - Perhaps, but not as consistant. And the distinctions aren't nearly are profound.


                      If they are not as consistent, you would have to prove that, not just say it. Listen, if Knight is going to lump us in there, I think it is only fair that if an able person of that ilk is available, they should be given a fair chance. Also since I have read more Calvinist books and am going to the premier Reformed seminary in the world, I could argue from that angle also.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        no way hosea

                        quote:
                        Originally posted by Knight

                        Lion... POTD

                        I nominate Lion to argue the Open View!

                        Clete


                        Based on my reply...http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...157#post436157
                        and the whole previous discussion with Lion, and the fact that he/she doesn't know Hebrew, I definitely don't nominate Lion!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: no way hosea

                          Originally posted by add yasaf

                          quote:
                          Originally posted by Knight

                          Lion... POTD

                          I nominate Lion to argue the Open View!

                          Clete


                          Based on my reply...http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...157#post436157
                          and the whole previous discussion with Lion, and the fact that he/she doesn't know Hebrew, I definitely don't nominate Lion!

                          I don't know a thing about Hebrew and you nominated me!
                          sigpic
                          "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            whoa nelly

                            Clete quote - I don't know a thing about Hebrew and you nominated me!


                            I was taking what I thought was the best representative from this site. You are more consistent than Lion overall. I don't believe that there is anyone else here who is an open theist and knows Biblical Hebrew anyways. PLUS, I was referring more to Lion's post, which made it glaringly obvious that he/she doesn't know it. I wasn't sure if you knew Hebrew or not, Clete.

                            Now if I were to go outside the site here, my pick would be Greg Boyd.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: whoa nelly

                              Originally posted by add yasaf
                              Now if I were to go outside the site here, my pick would be Greg Boyd.
                              Me too!
                              sigpic
                              "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

                                Knight,

                                Based on this...



                                I nominate Lion to argue the Open View!

                                Clete
                                Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
                                TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X