ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 3

[chrysostom]

It is either not 'extra-'ordinary or all our existence is. Romans 8:28?

How did you do that link?

 

[Lon]

Where's my leap? Can you show me?

I'm saying that if God knows the future, then its either because He can "see" it, or because He caused it. Is there another option?

If He can "see" it He must be somehow "beyond" time. Right?

If He is beyond time and is able to "see" past-present-future, then time is a "thing" or aspect of the universe and must have been created. With me?

If time was created, then it has a creator. If God is not its creator, then God is not God. If God is its creator, then He created each "scene" that is played out on the timeline-- some good, some evil. Is there anything wrong with that?

On the other hand, maybe God knows the future because when He created the heavens and the earth, He knew exactly which events would follow from His initial act of creating. Possible?

If that's so, then He knew when He created, all the good and evil actions that would result from His initial action. Correct?




Am I missing anything so far?

"Is time a thing?" Yes. Why? Its a noun.

Is it created?

Col 1:16 For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.
Col 1:17 And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.

So, I'm following your premise so far. Let's get to your leap.

 

[Lon]

Not all are lazy, but many are ignorant of basic truths due to adopting a preconceived system and reading it back into Scripture.

The battle between Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, Molinism, etc. is centuries old, without definitive resolution, despite all claiming biblical support and due diligence. It is as much a paradigm issue as a proof text one.

I know, but a simple nod toward those works and history isn't as helpful as doing a bit of scholasticism. You don't 'have' to, but it was the challenge. It is merely assertion otherwise ( I agree with AMR btw, that you shoe-horned OV into that mix. You aren't trying to rewrite history?).

 

[Lon]

Where's my leap? Can you show me?

If God knows the future with 100% certainty, then He either created it directly (as in being outside of time) or He created it indirectly (as a sure result from His first cause). Those are the only two options because He is the Creator God.

Objection #1: Speculative. We don't know the mechanism by which He foreknows. Your's is but a 'possibility.' Your leap: you are making a possibility the only option.

If you don't like those two options then you can alter the conditions of the statement in two ways. First, maybe He's not the Creator. If that's so, then certainly, He could be outside of time and viewing as much of the future as He wants without having a hand in it. But if that's the case then someone else must be the Creator God.

Objection #2: I don't entertain that He isn't Creator, but more to the point, you've stated this awkwardly and are making conclusions without the connections that link them. God is both without and within time parameters. He is unconstained by, yet relational to our existence.

Second, maybe he doesn't know the future with 100% certainty. If that's so, then certainly, He must not be the one determining the entire future.

Objection #3: Hasty. This is the OV premise and it assumes both.

In short, IF He is the Creator AND He knows our choices with 100% certainty THEN He created (caused) those choices by one means or another.

Agreed, but not to the implied end which you'd take it. He made every firing synapse in your brain, He knows how it works implicitly. You cannot make a choice without Him knowing about it. We, as we 'choose' to learn, make the connections. God made the parameters of our choice. That the synapses are connected is 1) knowable 2) our doing.

 

[King cobra]

I don't think it matters if it is a vision or physical. The fact is, he interacted in that future with an elder. We are not talking at the moment but typing back and forth. Does this mean we are not having a real conversation? I see no distinction as to physical or whatever else. It was as real as your and my conversation here. I'm not imagining you am I?

A revelation of future events is exactly that, a revelation. Not a transportation. A Delorean and lots of electricity aint gonna get ya there.

Answer this question for me, even in speculation: Was the elder a real being? Does he or will he exist in the future?

Your question: Was the elder a real being?
My answer: No, the vision of him was just a representation.
Your question: Does he exist in the future?
My answer: Yes, but not until then.
Your question: Will he exist in the future?
My answer: Yes.



And now I would like to ask you some simple questions but I don’t think you will answer them as succinctly as I did yours. So I will answer them according to what I think you might say if you did not choose to be elusive.

My question: Does God know the future exhaustively?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Does God know exactly where Clinton Portis (running back) will breach the line on the very next play against the Bears?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Could God tell Brian Urlacher (linebacker) where Clinton Portis will breach the line on the very next play?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Will Brain Urlacher go to that spot and wait for the play to begin?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Will Clinton Portis, upon seeing Urlacher’s position, choose a different route or will he leap like a Russian ballerina into the arms of the Bears defender at the exact spot where God said he would be?
Answer: You tell me…please.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You are right. I would love to take the time to rebuttal you point for point. But I am at work for most of the day and i dont have enough time to go point to point. I would be alot more easy for my to talk about one point. I am not trying to dodge any of your pionts, I promise!:cheers:

Fair enough!

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

But Joseph comforted his brothers saying "do not bedistressed, or angry with yourselfs.." right? I not being a smart alick but why shouldent we comfort all who do evil acts in the same way? Unless this was an extreme case.

Should we not forgive those who trespass against us? Our forgiveness in no way let's them off the hook for the justice they deserve and will reap from God. You are making a leap in your logic that is unsupported by Scripture.

AMR

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Should we not forgive those who trespass against us? Our forgiveness in no way let's them off the hook for the justice they deserve and will reap from God. You are making a leap in your logic that is unsupported by Scripture.

AMR

Did Jesus not pay the price for all the sins of the world? Did he not die for all people? Given that your avatar says calvinist, you probably believe 'no'. What bothers me about that answer is the view of God it paints. It makes God the grim reaper, the slayer, the executor, ultimately the bad guy. Isn't this the opposite of what Jesus is like? Isn't he our true and most completerevelation of God? Doesn't he show what God is really like?

Jesus sought out those who didn't seek him. He went to those who were rejected. He healed all he met. Shouldn't we be communicating this message to everyone? That Jesus loves them? That Jesus died for them? That Jesus seeks them out? That Jesus doesn't reject them?

Given that we do not know the hearts of people, the minds of people, the experiences of people, should we not conclude that we have no right to condemn them? Who made us judge over them? (1 Corinthians 5:12) And the only judge of the world has clearly communicated through his life and death that he is all about healing, reconciling, and serving.

If our job is to look like Jesus, sound like Jesus, think like Jesus, talk like Jesus, we should be doing a whole lot more loving, and a whole lot less condemning. Jesus never told anyone they were going to hell. Only that they should be on their guard, and even that was to the pharisees who were wrapped up in their theology. Jesus never question the person who needed healing before healing them. He never made them confess their sins before being made well. Should we not also live in that way? We, being the body of Christ, ought to be the most loving group on the planet. Instead, we are viewed as the most judgmental and probably least loving. We need to wake up and put on our serving shoes and start living like Jesus. We need to serve, heal, restore, help, comfort, encourage, and better, everyone we can--just like Jesus did. That is our call, and anything that stands in its way is of the devil.

 

[Lon]

A revelation of future events is exactly that, a revelation. Not a transportation. A Delorean and lots of electricity aint gonna get ya there.

Your question: Was the elder a real being?
My answer: No, the vision of him was just a representation.
Your question: Does he exist in the future?
My answer: Yes, but not until then.
Your question: Will he exist in the future?
My answer: Yes.



And now I would like to ask you some simple questions but I don’t think you will answer them as succinctly as I did yours. So I will answer them according to what I think you might say if you did not choose to be elusive.

My question: Does God know the future exhaustively?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Does God know exactly where Clinton Portis (running back) will breach the line on the very next play against the Bears?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Could God tell Brian Urlacher (linebacker) where Clinton Portis will breach the line on the very next play?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Will Brain Urlacher go to that spot and wait for the play to begin?
Your answer: Yes
My question: Will Clinton Portis, upon seeing Urlacher’s position, choose a different route or will he leap like a Russian ballerina into the arms of the Bears defender at the exact spot where God said he would be?
Answer: You tell me…please.

Yep. I would have answered, you didn't have to answer for me. I would have been succinct.

Situation: You are running a scenario much like David did
1Sa 23:10-13

Note several things, 1) what would happen if he did one thing 2)what actually happened. 3) that God is not 'guessing' here. It is not predictive, but absolutely known. 4) that interacting with and outcome changes it, yet God still knows the outcome and intervenes to ensure that outcome. 5) that interaction of God changes the story in His favor.

 

[Lon]

How did you do that link?

Oh, go to www.BibleGateway.com

type in your verse, copy the address. Highlight a word or series and hit the 'insert link' (world icon above).

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Did Jesus not pay the price for all the sins of the world? Did he not die for all people? Given that your avatar says calvinist, you probably believe 'no'. What bothers me about that answer is the view of God it paints. It makes God the grim reaper, the slayer, the executor, ultimately the bad guy. Isn't this the opposite of what Jesus is like? Isn't he our true and most completerevelation of God? Doesn't he show what God is really like?

You are straying off topic and inserted yourself into a conversation between two members that you apparently are not following closely. Nothing in my previous posts with POARW have anything to do with the atonement.

If you want to discuss the notion of universal atonement versus the Biblically warranted limited atonement there are many threads on this you can chime into.

AMR

 

[King cobra]

Yep. I would have answered, you didn't have to answer for me. I would have been succinct.

Situation: You are running a scenario much like David did
1Sa 23:10-13

Note several things, 1) what would happen if he did one thing 2)what actually happened. 3) that God is not 'guessing' here. It is not predictive, but absolutely known. 4) that interacting with and outcome changes it, yet God still knows the outcome and intervenes to ensure that outcome. 5) that interaction of God changes the story in His favor.

Now I'm really confused. Did you just make my point by quoting 1Samuel?

 

[Lon]

Lets use Saul as an example to see how it fits our theology.

1 Samuel 13:13 And Samuel said to Saul, "You have done foolishly. You have not kept the commandment of the LORD your God, which He commanded you. For now the LORD would have established your kingdom over Israel forever.

God chose Saul to be King, and it was obviously God's will for Saul's kingdom to be established forever. God anointed Saul and he became another man, but his heart had become profane.
God knew that Saul was going to blow it, but he didn't ordain it.
And so, Saul's will overruled God's will, and his kingdom was not established forever.

There is every indication God already knew. We can agree that had Saul been made of different fiber, his kingdom would have been established.

1Samuel 8:9 begins to give us a perception against such.
1Samuel 8:18 indicates a future problem.
1Samuel 13:13 the prophecy is made that Saul's kingdom will not carry on.

This will be your sign that the LORD has chosen4 you as leader over his inheritance.5
1Sa 10:2 When you leave me today, you will find two men near Rachel's tomb at Zelzah on Benjamin's border. They will say to you, 'The donkeys you have gone looking for have been found. Your father is no longer concerned about the donkeys but has become anxious about you two!6 He is asking, "What should I do about my son?" '
1Sa 10:3 "As you continue on from there, you will come to the tall tree of Tabor. At that point three men who are going up to God at Bethel7 will meet you. One of them will be carrying three young goats, one of them will be carrying three round loaves of bread, and one of them will be carrying a container of wine.
1Sa 10:4 They will ask you how you're doing and will give you two loaves of bread. You will accept them.
1Sa 10:5 Afterward you will go to Gibeah of God, where there are Philistine officials.8 When you enter the town, you will meet a company of prophets coming down from the high place. They will have harps, tambourines, flutes, and lyres, and they will be prophesying.
1Sa 10:6 Then the spirit of the LORD will rush upon you and you will prophesy with them. You will be changed into a different person.

Notice it all came about as Samuel said. God knows the future acts of me.

 

[Lon]

Now I'm really confused. Did you just make my point by quoting 1Samuel?

Yep. The difference? You believe God cannot know the future acts of men. Your own argument suggests otherwise. God can determine an outcome or foreknow it without intervention.

How do we know this? Because God gave both the outcome without His intervention and the one with to David.

 

[andyc]

There is every indication God already knew. We can agree that had Saul been made of different fiber, his kingdom would have been established.

1Samuel 8:9 begins to give us a perception against such.
1Samuel 8:18 indicates a future problem.
1Samuel 13:13 the prophecy is made that Saul's kingdom will not carry on.


Notice it all came about as Samuel said. God knows the future acts of me.

So we could say that God's perfect will did not come to pass because his original chosen king did not try to appreciate the spiritual implications of his reign, as David did. However, God's will was still accomplished through David.
I believe God sees everything from eternity, but because we are created in his image as having dominion over this world, he allows us to make our own choices. Saul was called, but wasn't chosen because he was profane regarding the spiritual implications of the kingdom.

I think this is what the hyper Calvinists struggle to grasp. When someone puts little value on God's intervention, then they insult the Spirit of grace.
Pharaoh witnessed the power of God, but wasn't overly impressed because he saw himself as greater than the power he was witnessing. God hardened his heart because he was profane, and eventually God devasted his kingdom.

 

[andyc]

So we could say that God's perfect will did not come to pass because his original chosen king did not try to appreciate the spiritual implications of his reign, as David did. However, God's will was still accomplished through David.
I believe God sees everything from eternity, but because we are created in his image as having dominion over this world, he allows us to make our own choices. Saul was called, but wasn't chosen because he was profane regarding the spiritual implications of the kingdom.

I think this is what the hyper Calvinists struggle to grasp. When someone puts little value on God's intervention, then they insult the Spirit of grace.
Pharaoh witnessed the power of God, but wasn't overly impressed because he saw himself as greater than the power he was witnessing. God hardened his heart because he was profane, and eventually God devasted his kingdom.

I just thought I'd add, that Paul makes this interesting point.

Acts 13:21-22
21 "And afterward they asked for a king; so God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years.
22 "And when He had removed him, He raised up for them David as king, to whom also He gave testimony and said, ‘I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after My own heart, who will do all My will.’

God must have foreseen that David would do all God's will, but obviously he didn't ordain it, or he would never have originally chosen Saul.

 

[Lon]

So we could say that God's perfect will did not come to pass because his original chosen king did not try to appreciate the spiritual implications of his reign, as David did. However, God's will was still accomplished through David.
I believe God sees everything from eternity, but because we are created in his image as having dominion over this world, he allows us to make our own choices. Saul was called, but wasn't chosen because he was profane regarding the spiritual implications of the kingdom.

I think this is what the hyper Calvinists struggle to grasp. When someone puts little value on God's intervention, then they insult the Spirit of grace.
Pharaoh witnessed the power of God, but wasn't overly impressed because he saw himself as greater than the power he was witnessing. God hardened his heart because he was profane, and eventually God devasted his kingdom.

I'd like to see some of these thoughts expounded.

First, I'm struggling with His Will, and His perfect Will. How do you see the distinction?

Second, I too believe we have choices but that God knows them. No clarifier needed there (I don't think).

Finally, I think the danger of either hyper Cal or OV is problematic to His intervention.

 

[andyc]

I'd like to see some of these thoughts expounded.

First, I'm struggling with His Will, and His perfect Will. How do you see the distinction?

His perfect will was to establish the kingdom with Saul, which obviously did not come to pass. God chose Saul, but Saul blew it.

Second, I too believe we have choices but that God knows them. No clarifier needed there (I don't think).

Finally, I think the danger of either hyper Cal or OV is problematic to His intervention.

I was struggling with what word to use. I guess another word could be "manifestation". Hyper Calvinists would say that God hardened Pharoah's heart because that is what he had predetermined to do, but I see that God hardened his heart because he was too profane to acknowledge God as ALmighty.

In a sense, Pharoah was acknowledging that the God of the hebrews is mighty, whereas God was determined to make him acknowledge him as the almighty.

 

[King cobra]

Yep. The difference? You believe God cannot know the future acts of men. Your own argument suggests otherwise. God can determine an outcome or foreknow it without intervention.

How do we know this? Because God gave both the outcome without His intervention and the one with to David.

(1 Samuel 23:10-13)

And the LORD said, “He (Saul) will come down.”
And the LORD said, “They (the men of Keilah) will deliver you (to Saul when he comes down) .”

The LORD told David what He knew would take place in the future.

So…

"David and his men, about six hundred, arose and departed from Keilah and went wherever they could go. Then it was told Saul that David had escaped from Keilah; so he (Saul) halted the expedition."

God neither determined nor foreknew future events here because obviously what He verbalized to David did not come to pass.

 

[penofareadywriter]

Should we not forgive those who trespass against us? Our forgiveness in no way let's them off the hook for the justice they deserve and will reap from God. You are making a leap in your logic that is unsupported by Scripture.

AMR

On the contrary, I am getting my conclusion strait from the text. Genesis 45:8 NIV
"So then, it was not you who sent me here, but God.
It does not say anything about forgiveness(though Joseph surely forgave them)but rather makes the statement GOD SENT JOSEPH TO EGYPT. Or am I missing something?