Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will Duffy YouTube Debate v CJ Borns Open Theism 11/23/19

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

  • Will Duffy YouTube Debate v CJ Borns Open Theism 11/23/19

    Sat nite open theism YouTube debate & you're invited! DBC member Will Duffy, after debating popular theologian Matt Slick last year, will again debate Is Open Theism Biblical?, now against newcomer CJ Borns. You can keep updated with any changing details at https://opentheism.org tune and view the live YouTube debate at https://youtu.be/Yjk664I4e4E.

    duffy-borns-open-theism-debate.jpg
    The Bob Enyart Live talk show airs at KGOV.com weekdays at 5 pm E.T. Also, same time, same station, check out Theology Thursday (.com) and on Fridays, Real Science Radio (.com) a.k.a. rsr.org. All shows are available 24/7 and you can call us at at 1-800-8Enyart.

  • #2
    can they both be right ?
    can they both be wrong ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by way 2 go View Post
      can they both be right ?
      can they both be wrong ?
      No
      "The most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" - Ronald Reagan



      Check out the "rightest" of all right wing moms. FarRightMom


      Upgrade your TOL membership.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by way 2 go View Post
        can they both be right ?
        can they both be wrong ?
        If Will is an Open Theist, and CJ is a Calvinist, then both being wrong should lead one to Arminianism.

        If both are right, it will lead one to confusion (otherwise known as a less-than-5-point Calvinist).

        I suppose that two opposing views can both be wrong, but never both be right. I was presented with such a question once before by a non-believer that said that existence of multiple opposing views on God (like Hinduism vs Paganism vs Islam vs Christianity) mean that none are right, which is an obvious fallacy.

        I listened to the first part of the debate, and Will did a good job. CJ admitted up front that this is his first debate, and it showed. He'll get better, just as Will has gotten better. I just hope he listens more to the opposing view while trying to defend his own. It's pretty rare that anyone in a debate like this ever admits being wrong about anything. And it seems that getting to be stronger debater on a wrong position is actually bad for the holder of such a position, whatever the position is.

        I feel kind of bad arguing Open Theism against Settled Theists, because the Open view is really pretty easy to justify (which was one of Will's arguments). I think I could argue Calvinism, but it would be a hollow victory. Who would be swayed? (Yes, I know, that's a caricature of Calvinism.)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Derf View Post
          If Will is an Open Theist, and CJ is a Calvinist, then both being wrong should lead one to Arminianism.

          If both are right, it will lead one to confusion (otherwise known as a less-than-5-point Calvinist).

          I suppose that two opposing views can both be wrong, but never both be right. I was presented with such a question once before by a non-believer that said that existence of multiple opposing views on God (like Hinduism vs Paganism vs Islam vs Christianity) mean that none are right, which is an obvious fallacy.

          I listened to the first part of the debate, and Will did a good job. CJ admitted up front that this is his first debate, and it showed. He'll get better, just as Will has gotten better. I just hope he listens more to the opposing view while trying to defend his own. It's pretty rare that anyone in a debate like this ever admits being wrong about anything. And it seems that getting to be stronger debater on a wrong position is actually bad for the holder of such a position, whatever the position is.

          I feel kind of bad arguing Open Theism against Settled Theists, because the Open view is really pretty easy to justify (which was one of Will's arguments). I think I could argue Calvinism, but it would be a hollow victory. Who would be swayed? (Yes, I know, that's a caricature of Calvinism.)
          I'm somewhere in between settled & open

          example the book of revelation

          Rev 16:8 And the fourth angel poured out his vial onto the sun. And it was given to him to burn men with fire.
          Rev 16:9 And men were burned with great heat. And they blasphemed the name of God, He having authority over these plagues. And they did not repent in order to give Him glory.

          the Judgement God is not guessing at that we all know but

          open theism says God is guessing that "they did not repent" result

          Comment


          • #6
            Ok, I finished listening. I appreciated Will's grasp of the Open Theism arguments. And I appreciated CJ's openness to hear Will's arguments and try to respond to them. I think most books I've read arguing against OT, the authors start out trying to give a good representation of the OT view they disagree with, but then they argue against a different view of it. CJ seemed to genuinely not understand some of Will's argument, and he discussed them well.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by way 2 go View Post
              can they both be right ?
              can they both be wrong ?
              open theist have God in their image who is really smart but guessing .

              Calvinist have God in a box called fate with no choices .

              Comment

              Working...
              X