Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Open/Closed Conundrum.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Frank Ernest View Post
    Mark 13:23 (KJV)
    How could Jesus foretell them all things yet not know the day or the hour?

    Obviously Jesus fortold them all things He knew.

    Comment


    • #32
      I must admit, this concept of open/closed theology is somewhat new to me. I think I am beginning to get a picture for the reasons behind open view theology and the implications that would result from this view. If I misrepresent the idea in any way in future posts, please be kind enought to let me know.
      Cursed is he that does the work of the LORD deceitfully, and cursed is he that keeps back his sword from shedding blood. Jer. 48:10

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by surrender View Post
        Nothing finite becomes less accurate for an infinite God.
        What about that which is infinite?

        Originally posted by Frank Ernest View Post
        Mark 13:23 (KJV)
        Context Frank, context.

        Jesus didn't tell them everything; He told them all things related to the subject.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Lighthouse View Post
          What about that which is infinite?
          ??

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by surrender View Post
            ??
            Can that which is infinite become less accurate?
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Lighthouse View Post
              Can that which is infinite become less accurate?
              No.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by oldhermit View Post
                I must admit, this concept of open/closed theology is somewhat new to me. I think I am beginning to get a picture for the reasons behind open view theology and the implications that would result from this view. If I misrepresent the idea in any way in future posts, please be kind enought to let me know.
                www.opentheism.info

                The main players are Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, Molinism (and Process Thought, less so).

                Open Theism correctly recognizes the two motifs in Scripture: some of the future is settled/foreknown, while other aspects are unsettled/known as possible vs certain in advance.
                Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

                They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
                I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

                Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

                "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

                The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Shasta View Post
                  If God were waiting for the right conditions then He would have no secret to which the Son was not privy. Jesus said that the Father knew the day and hour. He did not say that the Father "will know" the day and hour. He said the Father (already) knew it.
                  I understand your interpretation of Mark 13:32 & Matthew 24:36 for it is the view of the majority; but again I'm saying it does not deviate from the fact of God knowing the time, for when the time comes He will know based on whatever is entailed within His will for it to be the time, it doesn't change anything if Christ regards the conditions or seasons or requirements of that time, for even the believer is called to have wisdom and perceive such things. I can not differentiate between God having foreknowledge of said time when He will send Christ again, and God knowing now is the time to send Christ. It's all based on how you read it. An analogy is a wife asking her husband, when he will get a raise at work; the husband responds with, only my boss knows the day and the hour. Meaning the boss didn't exact a certain time and date, but will know when the time is right based on an assessment of the productivity of his employee, and will make the decision to up his pay. Either way the centrality of each view is based on the premise God knows the right time, whether He foreknew when He chose the right time to be, or He ordained when it would come about, or He decided after accessing the state of everything as being the right time; it's more just an argument of words, rather then any real dispute regarding His omniscience or sovereignty.


                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by oldhermit View Post
                    I must admit, this concept of open/closed theology is somewhat new to me. I think I am beginning to get a picture for the reasons behind open view theology and the implications that would result from this view. If I misrepresent the idea in any way in future posts, please be kind enought to let me know.
                    I wouldn't stress too much on stepping on any toes, for it is a fairly new view and is still open for expansion and consideration. I believe as long as you're within the realm of the future being open that would suffice; some will lean towards a less flattering depiction of God and others a more enhanced perception of His attributes based upon which side they stand within this premise. I lean towards the latter. I posted some vids of one man's views I regard as similar to mine, if you're seeking further enlightenment on the subject. Here's the link. Peace.


                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by 2COR12:9 View Post
                      I understand your interpretation of Mark 13:32 & Matthew 24:36 for it is the view of the majority; but again I'm saying it does not deviate from the fact of God knowing the time, for when the time comes He will know based on whatever is entailed within His will for it to be the time, it doesn't change anything if Christ regards the conditions or seasons or requirements of that time, for even the believer is called to have wisdom and perceive such things. I can not differentiate between God having foreknowledge of said time when He will send Christ again, and God knowing now is the time to send Christ. It's all based on how you read it. An analogy is a wife asking her husband, when he will get a raise at work; the husband responds with, only my boss knows the day and the hour. Meaning the boss didn't exact a certain time and date, but will know when the time is right based on an assessment of the productivity of his employee, and will make the decision to up his pay. Either way the centrality of each view is based on the premise God knows the right time, whether He foreknew when He chose the right time to be, or He ordained when it would come about, or He decided after accessing the state of everything as being the right time; it's more just an argument of words, rather then any real dispute regarding His omniscience or sovereignty.
                      The idea that "He WILL know" (at some point in the future) is not suggested in the verse. The word "know" is not conjugated in the future tense but in the perfect tense which indicates a PAST action that has been completed. Moreover it is about seeing and perceiving rather that the "experience learning" associated with the other word for know "ginosko" When Jesus was speaking of His coming He was saying the father already knew it and the matter was closed. This is just grammar,

                      Again the "sense" of the verse is that the Father had "a (specific) secret" not that He would at some undermined time in the future make a judgment call.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        The perfect tense often indicates something completed in the past, but with present results.
                        Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

                        They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
                        I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

                        Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

                        "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

                        The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Lighthouse:
                          If it can be shown that God absolutely knows the future, definitively, then the OV is shown to be false.
                          I completely agree with this.

                          Shasta:

                          The following is such an example. When the disciples asked Jesus when He was coming back The Master said that no one not even He that day and hour This was a secret known only by the Father. If Open Theism were true even the Father could not know anything so specific as the day and hour. God could for whatever reason pick a day and hour. He could say that the Son of Man will return to earth 6/6/2066 at 6:66 am CST. The probability of this happening would be 100% as long as His prediction was not conditioned upon the acts of free agents. This, however, is not the case.
                          Lighthouse:

                          This doesn't work. No one can change God's mind on the date except God, especially since He is the only One who knows. Thus it is possible for Him to know specifically without the OV being false. Since the OV doesn't say God can't know any future event for certain.
                          What the debate needs to account for is God's faithfulness. Prophecy is only very rarely about prediction of the future. Rather it is about announcing God's mind. God can plan to do something and if he wants to do it enough, then it is guaranteed to happen so the only doubt that can possibly exist over that future event is God himself changing his mind. If God knows some future thing 100% certainly, then he himself is bound to that future and hence loses his ability to do anything differently to what he knows with certainty will happen. He effectively becomes impotent. In open theism, the mechanism through which God can know the future is his own desire/intention to perform some action. So the openness of the future consists of God's ability to change it or to intervene at any time. This is what his sovereignty consists of; that is what sovereignty means.

                          But faithfulness means that God's creatures need to rely on God for provision, for consistency in the world and for love. His ability to change anything at any time is chacterised by his love for his creatures, which means that in his sovereign expression, he acts with consistency and predictability. So the uncertain future is rendered predictable. That means that we can get on with our lives and have purpose. It means that the future can be meaningful and not random.
                          Total Misanthropy.
                          Uncertain salvation.
                          Luck of the draw.
                          Irresistible damnation.
                          Persecution of the saints.

                          Time is an illusion; lunchtime doubly so.
                          (The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

                          RevTestament: It doesn't matter to me too much that the "New Testament wasn't written in Hebrew.
                          Dialogos: Calvin, as a sinner, probably got some things wrong.
                          Brandplucked: I'm shocked that other people disagree with me.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I was just thinking of the whole “only the Father knows the day and hour” so OV is false. Didn’t God know that Hezekiah would not recover from his illness and even tell him so? But Hezekiah’s prayers changed the date of Hezekiah’s death. After his prayers, God then said he’d have an additional 15 years. Sounds like Hezekiah’s death was conditional. Isn’t the day of Christ’s return conditional? So, even if the Father had an exact day and hour planned out, can’t He change it based on conditions not being met?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
                              Lighthouse:


                              I completely agree with this.

                              Shasta:



                              Lighthouse:



                              What the debate needs to account for is God's faithfulness. Prophecy is only very rarely about prediction of the future. Rather it is about announcing God's mind. God can plan to do something and if he wants to do it enough, then it is guaranteed to happen so the only doubt that can possibly exist over that future event is God himself changing his mind. If God knows some future thing 100% certainly, then he himself is bound to that future and hence loses his ability to do anything differently to what he knows with certainty will happen. He effectively becomes impotent. In open theism, the mechanism through which God can know the future is his own desire/intention to perform some action. So the openness of the future consists of God's ability to change it or to intervene at any time. This is what his sovereignty consists of; that is what sovereignty means.

                              But faithfulness means that God's creatures need to rely on God for provision, for consistency in the world and for love. His ability to change anything at any time is chacterised by his love for his creatures, which means that in his sovereign expression, he acts with consistency and predictability. So the uncertain future is rendered predictable. That means that we can get on with our lives and have purpose. It means that the future can be meaningful and not random.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by surrender View Post
                                I was just thinking of the whole “only the Father knows the day and hour” so OV is false. Didn’t God know that Hezekiah would not recover from his illness and even tell him so? But Hezekiah’s prayers changed the date of Hezekiah’s death. After his prayers, God then said he’d have an additional 15 years. Sounds like Hezekiah’s death was conditional. Isn’t the day of Christ’s return conditional? So, even if the Father had an exact day and hour planned out, can’t He change it based on conditions not being met?
                                As an Arminian, I used to think Christ did not know because of the limitations of the incarnation. Now, as an Open Theist, I believe that He did not know because the exact minute was not settled yet by the Father (future partially open). When the Father knows/decides, the Son will then know. When Jesus made this statement, the date was not even settled in the Father's mind and was contingent on the extent of evangelism, rejection by Israel, etc.
                                Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

                                They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
                                I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

                                Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

                                "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

                                The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X