Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Question for Open Theists

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

  • Originally posted by BrianJOrr View Post
    I have answered this question, but you don't like the answer, which is why I put the ball in your court. However, when the question is directed at you, you can't provide a response. That has been the consistent issue in the OV forum; many can ask all the questions but can't/won't respond to any (with the exception of Desert Reign), or they answer little bits and just skirt around the issue, making jeers about Calvinism and the 'sophistry' it employs to come up with its doctrines, yet they fail to present an alternate interpretation with the very verses the Reformed tradition uses to support its theological distinctions. An assertion is not a refutation.
    What was the question?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BrianJOrr View Post
      I have answered this question, but you don't like the answer, which is why I put the ball in your court. However, when the question is directed at you, you can't provide a response.

      That has been the consistent issue in the OV forum; many can ask all the questions but can't/won't respond to any (with the exception of Desert Reign),
      Look, allow me to intervene. I'll do you a deal: I will answer your direct question. Within 24 hours of my answering it, you will answer Musterion's question. Directly and without 'flipping it'. No coming back to me with some discussion of what I said. No asking for clarification or complaining or other tangents.

      Is that a deal?

      For information I would remind you that your reputation for avoiding questions goes before you, as in the exchange I quote below for example. So now is your chance to set the record straight.

      Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
      So you are suggesting that if no one had misunderstood the Old Testament, then there would have been no need for a New Testament?

      Please answer directly as I feel your response is crucial.

      Or are you suggesting that the Old Testament was inherently incomprehensible?

      And if you are suggesting that, then why were the Jews considered blameworthy for not understanding it?
      Originally posted by BrianJOrr View Post
      And we have come to a point where any further discussion on this topic will be a waste of time—for me that is. ...

      I think what is quite obvious is that DR is being untruthful in his view that he is without influence,
      And by the way, this offer is open until your next post to this thread. It's a question of dignity I hope you understand. It's been a long time since Musterion first asked you his question and of course it's been quite a while since I asked you mine quoted above (and others that went unanswered or discussions left unfinished) so I and I daresay other open theists here would not want to be seen to be being soft or liberal about their beliefs. Our beliefs are serious and we expect you to take them seriously or not at all.
      Last edited by Desert Reign; March 27th, 2015, 08:35 AM.
      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


      • Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
        Look, allow me to intervene. I'll do you a deal: I will answer your direct question. Within 24 hours of my answering it, you will answer Musterion's question. Directly and without 'flipping it'. No coming back to me with some discussion of what I said or other tangents.

        Is that a deal?
        Nice try, but it won't happen. I was ready to make the same offer but realized he won't do it without continued avoidance...if you or I reply first, he'll focus ad infinitum on that and ignore his half of the deal. He can't afford to tackle that question head-on and he knows it. They all know it.
        "There is one thing worse than going to Hell. That would be going to Hell and having it be a surprise."
        Terence Mc Lean

        [most will be very surprised]


        Everyone who has not believed the Gospel of grace is not saved, no matter what else they believe or do.
        By that measure, how many professing Christians are on their way to the Lake of Fire?

        Comment


        • For the record, no I don't subscribe to Greg Boyd's and Jesse Morrell's view of God having knowledge of every possible future. I sympathise with their view but I not believe it is ultimately realistic.
          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


          • Originally posted by musterion View Post
            Nice try, but it won't happen. I was ready to make the same offer but realized he won't do it without continued avoidance...if you or I reply first, he'll focus ad infinitum on that and ignore his half of the deal. He can't afford to tackle that question head-on and he knows it. They all know it.
            I can, if need be. In a nutshell: To save you. Romans 9:22,23
            Originally posted by musterion View Post
            So did you ever get around to answering your dilemma of how God can damn those who refuse Christ on the specific grounds of refusing Him? I mean, if His irresistible, effectual calling is the only reason anyone can come to Him, then not coming to Him is evidence one was not called, which in turn is evidence God doesn't want them saved. Now I'll be the first to admit that that's logically consistent, as far as it goes. But the problem remains: how does God remain just for damning them -- not for sin generally -- but for fulfilling His desire that they reject Christ?
            It is a question that has been asked before so the answer is readily available. The longer version might need to be catered to your specific need without a long treatise, but long version links are available too.

            Ask Mr. Religion has answered it here on TOL as well, if I remember rightly.
            My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
            Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
            Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
            Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
            No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
            Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

            ? Yep

            Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

            ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

            Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Lon View Post
              I can, if need be. In a nutshell: To save you. Romans 9:22,23
              No. Romans 9 deals with the objection that self-righteous Jews were sure to raise upon being informed that they as a nation were at risk being set aside by God. Thus the chapter focuses on God's historical use of nations for His own purposes...starting with Abraham...then Jacob and Esau, representing the nations they'd father, Gen 25:23...then unrepentant Pharaoh representing Egypt, dashed to pieces to demonstrate God's power...then a timely reference to Isaiah's warning to Israel. The chapter is not about individuals chosen, or not chosen, to soul salvation. That's called eisegesis; for if you are correct, then Rom 9:33 not only makes no sense but is a lie, unless you're willing to dip your toe in the rank puddle of the gnostic's secret knowledge of God's reprobative will. But I think you already said you're not willing to go there.

              Ask Mr. Religion has answered it here on TOL as well, if I remember rightly.
              No. As I recall, he was offended that it was even asked but didn't address it.

              Nor have you.
              Last edited by musterion; March 28th, 2015, 12:05 PM.
              "There is one thing worse than going to Hell. That would be going to Hell and having it be a surprise."
              Terence Mc Lean

              [most will be very surprised]


              Everyone who has not believed the Gospel of grace is not saved, no matter what else they believe or do.
              By that measure, how many professing Christians are on their way to the Lake of Fire?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Lon View Post
                I can, if need be. In a nutshell: To save you. Romans 9:22,23

                It is a question that has been asked before so the answer is readily available. The longer version might need to be catered to your specific need without a long treatise, but long version links are available too.

                Ask Mr. Religion has answered it here on TOL as well, if I remember rightly.
                What was the question?
                Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                E≈mc2
                "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                -Bob B.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                  What was the question?
                  Yeah, Lon didn't really address it either:
                  If I secretly compel you to perform an act, then publicly condemn you for performing it as if YOU CHOSE to do it (which you did not because you didn't HAVE the power of choice), what words would describe me and my actions in this illustration?
                  Or to put it back in Bore's terms:

                  How does God remain just for condemning those who refuse to breathe when He chose in eternity past that they would never receive lungs?
                  The mic is yours, Lon. And please don't say "Well, I don't personally subscribe to that aspect of Calvinism." You said you'd answer it, so please do or don't. But don't claim you did when you did not.
                  "There is one thing worse than going to Hell. That would be going to Hell and having it be a surprise."
                  Terence Mc Lean

                  [most will be very surprised]


                  Everyone who has not believed the Gospel of grace is not saved, no matter what else they believe or do.
                  By that measure, how many professing Christians are on their way to the Lake of Fire?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                    What was the question?
                    Stripe, see underlined portions.

                    Originally posted by BrianJOrr View Post

                    How is God just if there are those who die as sinners and go to hell that never got a chance to hear the gospel? Unless . . . you don't believe that we are all by nature sinners and under God's wrath for our sin.

                    How would that be any different? If God elected a people from every tribe, tongue, and nation according to his divine purposes (Ephesians 1:4-5; 1 Peter 1:1-3; Rev. 5:9b) and only saving those any different than God not revealing his gospel to parts of the earth where people have never heard it and die in there sins?

                    Either way you slice it, he elected someone. Either he left a group to perish in sin, or he chose a group to be "be holy and blameless before him" (Eph. 1:4). I think the Scriptures more clearly demonstrate that God pro-actively elected a people unto salvation. It is obviously hard to grasp this, so we have to look at what the Scriptures show us and leave the 'why' up to God. Man is guilty for his sin and Christ is the only way. (John 14:6; Romans 1:20-32; 6:23)

                    But if we just assume that those who never hear the gospel receive an automatic pardon from God, then it seems that it would be logical that we should never share the gospel with anyone. Think about it, what better way to ensure salvation than to not share the gospel with anyone!

                    However, we have the Holy Spirit in us, guiding us to reach those whom Christ died for that have been scattered out abroad to be called into fellowship with him (John 11:52). God's purposes will come to fruition, for no one can thwart his plans.
                    Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
                    Look, allow me to intervene. I'll do you a deal: I will answer your direct question. Within 24 hours of my answering it, you will answer Musterion's question. Directly and without 'flipping it'. No coming back to me with some discussion of what I said. No asking for clarification or complaining or other tangents.

                    Is that a deal?
                    Sure!

                    Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
                    For information I would remind you that your reputation for avoiding questions goes before you, as in the exchange I quote below for example. So now is your chance to set the record straight.
                    Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post

                    So you are suggesting that if no one had misunderstood the Old Testament, then there would have been no need for a New Testament?

                    Please answer directly as I feel your response is crucial.

                    Or are you suggesting that the Old Testament was inherently incomprehensible?

                    And if you are suggesting that, then why were the Jews considered blameworthy for not understanding it?
                    I shall answer these. However, shall I expect you to go back through my questions and do the same?

                    1) No. I am suggesting that the New Testament enables us to see the proper context of God’s plan of redemption. Because of the NT we are able to better understand the OT. The Jews failure to understand the OT is quite prevalent all through the NT, particularly in Christ’s interaction with them.

                    2) It was not imcomprehensibe; rather, the Jews failed to connect it with Christ, what he came to do, and the Abrahamic covenant (Paul had to spell it out in Romans 4). If they were of God they would have realized the Scriptures spoke about him (John 8:42-43; 7:28). Romans 10:2; Luke 24:44-49; John 5:39; Acts 13:27

                    3) I point to: Romans 11:7-11; 1 Peter 2:4-10; [again cf. Luke 24:44-49; John 5:39; Acts 13:27] not to mention they delivered up their Messiah to be crucified.


                    Originally posted by Desert Reign View Post
                    And by the way, this offer is open until your next post to this thread. It's a question of dignity I hope you understand. It's been a long time since Musterion first asked you his question and of course it's been quite a while since I asked you mine quoted above (and others that went unanswered or discussions left unfinished) so I and I daresay other open theists here would not want to be seen to be being soft or liberal about their beliefs. Our beliefs are serious and we expect you to take them seriously or not at all.
                    I have nothing to hide nor do I intend to avoid anything.
                    —Romans 11:36


                    http://therantingreformer.com
                    https://columbiaseminary.academia.edu/BrianOrr

                    Comment


                    • Originally Posted by Stripe
                      What was the question?
                      Originally posted by BrianJOrr View Post
                      How is God just if there are those who die as sinners and go to hell that never got a chance to hear the gospel?
                      You think you're sly, lying cultist, but we've dealt with your brand of subterfuge and deception before.

                      God condemning those who never hear was NOT the question.

                      The question was about your cult's depicting the holy, just and righteous God of the Bible as damning for unbelief those you claim He predestined to be unbelievers.

                      THAT is the issue NONE of you on TOL will address.

                      You might want to consider finding a board with opponents down on your level. You can't cut it here. We know your doctrines at least as well as you do, probably better.
                      "There is one thing worse than going to Hell. That would be going to Hell and having it be a surprise."
                      Terence Mc Lean

                      [most will be very surprised]


                      Everyone who has not believed the Gospel of grace is not saved, no matter what else they believe or do.
                      By that measure, how many professing Christians are on their way to the Lake of Fire?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by musterion View Post
                        You think you're sly, lying cultist, but we've dealt with your brand of subterfuges before.

                        God condemning those who never hear was NOT the question.

                        The question was about your cult's depicting the holy, just and righteous God of the Bible as damning for unbelief those you claim He predestined to be unbelievers.

                        THAT is the issue NONE of you on TOL will address.

                        Time you found a board with opponents down on your level. You can't cut it here. We know your doctrines at least as well as you do, probably better.
                        Keep it up Musty . . .

                        Brian Orr is on TOL to find out about the OV, and you are giving him the information he seeks. He is asking the questions, not you.

                        You are only making an intellectual fool out of yourself and showing your true colors.
                        "The immutable God never learned anything and never changed his mind. He knew everything from eternity."

                        " The difference between faith and saving faith are the propositions believed."
                        Gordon H. Clark

                        "If a man be lost, God must not have the blame for it; but if a man be saved, God must have the glory of it."
                        Charles Spurgeon

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by musterion View Post
                          No. Romans 9 deals with the objection that self-righteous Jews were sure to raise upon being informed that they as a nation were at risk being set aside by God. Thus the chapter focuses on God's historical use of nations for His own purposes...starting with Abraham...then Jacob and Esau, representing the nations they'd father, Gen 25:23...then unrepentant Pharaoh representing Egypt, dashed to pieces to demonstrate God's power...then a timely reference to Isaiah's warning to Israel. The chapter is not about individuals chosen, or not chosen, to soul salvation. That's called eisegesis; for if you are correct, then Rom 9:33 not only makes no sense but is a lie, unless you're willing to dip your toe in the rank puddle of the gnostic's secret knowledge of God's reprobative will. But I think you already said you're not willing to go there.

                          No. As I recall, he was offended that it was even asked but didn't address it.

                          Nor have you.
                          You lack of exegesis fails to see the broader, redemptive context of election.

                          I also posted in another thread (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...2&postcount=90) demonstrating that Romans 9 is not about nations. And you failed to interact with anything I said, which tells me, that you are not up to the task.
                          —Romans 11:36


                          http://therantingreformer.com
                          https://columbiaseminary.academia.edu/BrianOrr

                          Comment


                          • I quit reading your postings when you made it clear you wouldn't discuss the analogy of lungs/faith, which YOU initially brought up. Do so, then I'll be happy to instruct you on why you're wrong on Romans 9.
                            "There is one thing worse than going to Hell. That would be going to Hell and having it be a surprise."
                            Terence Mc Lean

                            [most will be very surprised]


                            Everyone who has not believed the Gospel of grace is not saved, no matter what else they believe or do.
                            By that measure, how many professing Christians are on their way to the Lake of Fire?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by musterion View Post
                              I quit reading your postings when you made it clear you wouldn't discuss the analogy of lungs/faith, which YOU initially brought up. Do so, then I'll be happy to instruct you on why you're wrong on Romans 9.
                              I have given responses, from Scripture, on the work of the Spirit in making one born-again already. I am not going to go back for you and dig them up.

                              You are just making excuses now.
                              —Romans 11:36


                              http://therantingreformer.com
                              https://columbiaseminary.academia.edu/BrianOrr

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by BrianJOrr View Post
                                I have given responses, from Scripture, on the work of the Spirit in making one born-again already. I am not going to go back for you and dig them up.
                                Because they don't exist.

                                You are just making excuses now.
                                Prove me wrong, here and now. Explain how God can be just for condemning the unbelief of those He intended to be unbelievers before they ever existed, and doing so as if they chose unbelief (which they didn't).

                                Go.
                                "There is one thing worse than going to Hell. That would be going to Hell and having it be a surprise."
                                Terence Mc Lean

                                [most will be very surprised]


                                Everyone who has not believed the Gospel of grace is not saved, no matter what else they believe or do.
                                By that measure, how many professing Christians are on their way to the Lake of Fire?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X