Theology Club: What is Open Theism?

[godrulz]

Did God create my computer and my car? Yes or No. Did God create the atomic bomb? Did God create the knife that an evil person used to kill an innocent person?

God created Lucifer, not Satan. God created innocent Adam, not fallen Adam.

Allowing is not the same as desiring, intending, causing.

You are reading Rom. 9-11 with a deterministic lens, not an appropriate free will theism one. God providentially using something or mitigating evil is not the same as desiring or causing it.

God is omnicompetent, not omnicausal.

God gives us inherent ability to procreate. He does not manufacture billions of people and plops them down on earth.

I reject Deism. My point is that the context of creating all things excludes creating Himself, creating Jesus (JW view), creating computers, creating moral evil, creating Satan (Lucifer, yes), etc. God is not an aloof Deist, but is transcendent and immanent.

His sovereignty is providential, not meticulous. You have a wrong worldview/paradigm that you foist on the text to change its meaning.

:banned:

 

[Nang]

Did God create my computer and my car?

Wow . . . Do you really fail to discern between "create" and "make."

God created humans to make things such as computers, etc.

:duh:

Gads . . .

 

[godrulz]

Wow . . . Do you really fail to discern between "create" and "make."

God created humans to make things such as computers, etc.

:duh:

Gads . . .

You are implying that God creates all things. Now you are recognizing my point that we also can make things. I assume we agree on creation ex nihilo, but we seem to disagree that God does not cause/make all things. A computer is something brought into existence that is not eternal, not directly created or made by God. Your initial implication was not defensible. Did we make computers with free will and creativity, or were we passive puppets directly controlled by God? Your view seems to make God vs man the author of pornography?

 

[Nang]

You are implying that God creates all things. Now you are recognizing my point that we also can make things. I assume we agree on creation ex nihilo, but we seem to disagree that God does not cause/make all things. A computer is something brought into existence that is not eternal, not directly created or made by God. Your initial implication was not defensible. Did we make computers with free will and creativity, or were we passive puppets directly controlled by God? Your view seems to make God vs man the author of pornography?

The intelligence behind the making and usage of man-made devices, was created by God and their existence will fulfill the purposes of God.

Your theory would posit that God created man and yet is surprised by the technology that man has produced.

I say not.

I say all the works issuing from the mind and will of created beings were ordained by God.

Even your e-mails.

 

[godrulz]

The intelligence behind the making and usage of man-made devices, was created by God and their existence will fulfill the purposes of God.

Your theory would posit that God created man and yet is surprised by the technology that man has produced.

I say not.

I say all the works issuing from the mind and will of created beings were ordained by God.

Even your e-mails.

God delights in giving man creativity, free will, etc. He told Adam to name the animals and did not put a predestined memory chip in his head to do so. God delights in our creativity that reflects His image. We can use it to make art or pornography. In your theory, it sounds like he ordains a painting of nature just as much as he ordains immoral, evil art that glorifies Satan, not God. Jesus came to oppose evil, sin, sickness, suffering, death, etc. as contrary to God's will. You and Calvin wrongly affirm it as God's will?!

I also gave birth to my kids. This does not make me the cause or one responsible if they make wrong choices like drunk driving, fornication, murder (your parallel argument).

Your view impugns the character and ways of God, yet you think it is all for His glory and Him being grieved and surprised is just a meaningless figure of speech.

I do not dispute that we are in the image of God, but it is fallen and marred, so much of what we see in groaning creation was never God's will, desire, intention. He will ultimately triumph over evil, but this does not mean He ordains it (you must say this because you wrongly deny that we are significant others in His image with a say so, good, bad, ugly...this does not threaten His sovereignty/glory, just your wrong concept and a view that does not understand His love/holiness).

Compatiblism is a wrong philosophy.

:deadhorse: Bah, bah...cmon, Nang, are you really this thick?

 

[Nang]

I am not a compatibilist.

But I believe God predestined all His purposes, to be worked and realized in and through the creation of this world.

 

[godrulz]

I am not a compatibilist.

But I believe God predestined all His purposes, to be worked and realized in and through the creation of this world.

You are not a libertarian free will affirmer either, so you are likely compatibilistic or raw determinist.

 

[Nang]

You are not a libertarian free will affirmer either, so you are likely compatibilistic or raw determinist.

"Determinist," yes .

Raw?

What does that imply?

 

[godrulz]

"Determinist," yes .

Raw?

What does that imply?

Some consider themselves soft determinists. Not to many (beloved57) would want to be identified as radical determinists. Raw was not the best word, but I meant those who deny free will.

 

[Nang]

Some consider themselves soft determinists. Not to many (beloved57) would want to be identified as radical determinists. Raw was not the best word, but I meant those who deny free will.

"Biblical determinist" would be the label I would choose for my beliefs.

Since I do not see scripture giving man the credit for creating the world, I do not see reason to give man credit for determining, or having the powers to choose his own fate.

Almighty God is the beginning and the end; the Alpha and Omega. All things have been created by Him, for Him, and through Him.

By HIS WILL, and according to HIS purposes, all things will work according to HIS sovereign design.

If a man is given grace from God, that enables him to live in knowledge of God's will, all glory be to God for such condescension to such a sinner.

But God forbid any sinful man taking such honors upon himself, and claiming credit for being able to willfully excuse his own deserved condemnation.

Only God can determine the deserved fate or forgiveness of any created soul . . .

 

[godrulz]

Your view is devoid of love, relationship, holiness, but you fail to see this.

 

[Nang]

Your view is devoid of love, relationship, holiness, but you fail to see this.

Who are you to so judge my views?

I testify that I am beloved by God the Father, in God the Son Jesus Christ, and am in covenant relationship with Him by His grace; sanctified by the indwelling and sealing of God the Holy Spirit.

Because I declare and worship God as Sovereign Creator and determiner of all things, is no cause for you to so condemn me and my beliefs.

 

[godrulz]

Who are you to so judge my views?

I testify that I am beloved by God the Father, in God the Son Jesus Christ, and am in covenant relationship with Him by His grace; sanctified by the indwelling and sealing of God the Holy Spirit.

Because I declare and worship God as Sovereign Creator and determiner of all things, is no cause for you to so condemn me and my beliefs.

If your beliefs are wrong and impugn the character and ways of God, we should not condone them.

TULIP is wrong and makes God's love limited and arbitrary. You can be thankful you are the elite elect, but lack compassion for the lost who can also become part of your group if they would only hear and believe. God wants them saved, but you accuse God of not wanting them saved (contrary to I Tim. 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9; Jn. 3:16, etc.).

 

[Nang]

If your beliefs are wrong and impugn the character and ways of God, we should not condone them.

TULIP is wrong and makes God's love limited and arbitrary. You can be thankful you are the elite elect, but lack compassion for the lost who can also become part of your group if they would only hear and believe. God wants them saved, but you accuse God of not wanting them saved (contrary to I Tim. 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9; Jn. 3:16, etc.).

You seem to think you give God more glory, by claiming He is unable to save all those He supposedly "wants" to be saved.

How does making God so impotent, and unable to save, bring glory to His name?

Can His finite creatures really so thwart His infinite sovereign will and eternal decrees?

Are you a more spiritual man because you believe God cannot save as many souls as He would like to save?

Is it more loving and more holy, to declare God Almighty as not actually God Almighty,
for His will is rarely achieved and certainly not 100% effectual as He would prefer?

 

[Vaquero45]

You seem to think you give God more glory, by claiming He is unable to save all those He supposedly "wants" to be saved.

Who ever said He was "unable"? I'd like to know, do you have a quote you could post? Anyone who'd say that has not thought about this carefully. Who said that nang?

How does making God so impotent, and unable to save, bring glory to His name?

I don't know anyone I respect who'd say this, did godrulz say it?

Can His finite creatures really so thwart His infinite sovereign will and eternal decrees?

Again, could you quote anyone saying this? No open theist with more than 3 brain cells firing would disagree.

Are you a more spiritual man because you believe God cannot save as many souls as He would like to save?

Are you more spiritual because you throw 5 different shapes of the same crap dishonest question at the wall hoping one will stick?

Is it more loving and more holy, to declare God Almighty as not actually God Almighty,
for His will is rarely achieved and certainly not 100% effectual as He would prefer?

Have you stopped drinking the blood of puppies and kittens?

Your poo-pooing of open theism is as bad as godrulz'ses' poo-pooing of Biblical dispensation.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Who are you to so judge my views?

I testify that I am beloved by God the Father, in God the Son Jesus Christ, and am in covenant relationship with Him by His grace; sanctified by the indwelling and sealing of God the Holy Spirit.

Because I declare and worship God as Sovereign Creator and determiner of all things, is no cause for you to so condemn me and my beliefs.

According to you, God has "determined" that we should "judge" and "condemn" you and your beliefs.

How odd that your God, not ours, should "determine" contradictory views of himself.

You should be able to see such a simple flaw in your argument, but this reveals the "emotional" and insecure nature of your faith.

--Dave

 

[Clete]

According to you, God has "determined" that we should "judge" and "condemn" you and your beliefs.

How odd that your God, not ours, should "determine" contradictory views of himself.

You should be able to see such a simple flaw in your argument, but this reveals the "emotional" and insecure nature of your faith.

--Dave

It's much worse than your post would suggest!

It isn't that she is unable to see the contradiction, its that she does see it and doesn't care. Indeed, she and many others who call themselves Calvinist, believe that to disregard the testimony of your mind is piety and to accept the irrational as truth is faith.

As such, any discussion with her or her kind must be consider a mere academic exercise, more for your own benefit and that of others reading the exchange than for her. In her present state of mind, a genuine rational discourse is a hopeless waste of energy and time.

You'd be better off attempting to teach Peano Arithmetic to Pee-Wee Herman.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Nang]

Who ever said He was "unable"? I'd like to know, do you have a quote you could post?

To say that God lacks knowledge, is to limit His ability to save souls. If you believe God IS able to save all, what stops Him?

The unbelief of men?

Then you are saying what I say. God is unable to save unbelieving men.

Anyone who'd say that has not thought about this carefully.

I agree completely . . .

I am wondering if you, or Dave, or Clete can answer how OT'ers come to the conclusion some things are not determined. Can you actually name and identify what God does NOT determine?

What part of creation is God unaware of? What part of creation was not designed and made by His hand? (Psalm 139; Ephesians 2:10)

What is your definition and explanation of predestination as taught in the creation as well as in the Holy Scriptures?

Nang

 

[Lighthouse]

You'd be better off attempting to teach Peano Arithmetic to Pee-Wee Herman.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Peano? Is that noir, or grigio?

 

[DFT_Dave]

To say that God lacks knowledge, is to limit His ability to save souls. If you believe God IS able to save all, what stops Him?

The unbelief of men?

Then you are saying what I say. God is unable to save unbelieving men.

I agree completely . . .

I am wondering if you, or Dave, or Clete can answer how OT'ers come to the conclusion some things are not determined. Can you actually name and identify what God does NOT determine?

What part of creation is God unaware of? What part of creation was not designed and made by His hand? (Psalm 139; Ephesians 2:10)

What is your definition and explanation of predestination as taught in the creation as well as in the Holy Scriptures?

Nang

God, as you should know, has determined that we should come to the conclusion that some things are not determined.

Once you have decided that God has determined "all things" there's nothing more for you to say, nothing we can say, no question you can ask, that has any other answer.

--Dave