:first:Originally posted by 1Way Add - Clete, nice to see you again, (and Godrulz and Lucky too) and thanks for the honor of remembrance and heartfelt service freely offered, especially Clete on that note. It was a riveting exchange, and I enjoyed it despite the vast differences of opinion. Hopefully by asking the right questions and challenging certain ideas, we will grow and learn in the Lord. In the mean time, we have Add. (Chuckles, just kidding, mostly.) Add, don't stop asking and searching, BUT, just don't forget, that once you get your question answered, then maybe the question ,,, has been ,,, answered. (Even if you don't like it very much.)
Add - Clete is right.Open theism restated is that the future is open to (it has at least some) options/contingency/uncertainty, etc., and this is true for God (from His perspective). Sure, OV theism has tried to present a unified theology, but it does a poor job of doing so based soley on the OV, but that is purely besides the point, the OV is correct dispite associated theological discrepancies it's constituents may have. Hence one of the biggest errors with people criticizing the OV is over the supposed lack of a consistent theology within the OV camp. But the defense against this charge is quite simple, OV is purely about the openness of the future to contingency verses it being closed to contingency, not about whatever else. And the fab 5 or whoever you want to pick on for promoting the OV do NOT have absolute lordship over the biblical teaching of the OV, so any and all references to their unique and sometimes dubious or contradictory theological perspectives and implications of the OV, have little or nothing to do with the accuracy or truthfulness of the OV. I have the greatest of respect for these men, they have done wonders for promoting biblical truth, but let the issue of the OV be what it is, and stop pretending that it is something different in order to attack it.The fact still remains that there was either a prophecy made that didn't happen or there was a prophecy made that did happen. Neither of which is a problem for Open Theism.
We can discuss and debate the how’s and why’s all day long, but in the end it doesn't matter. Open Theism isn't about God motivations or abilities but about the nature of reality. i.e. Is the future set in place or is it open? We believe it is open and there is nothing in the Bible to suggest otherwise, indeed quite the reverse.
All you need is for the future to be open once for it to be open always, because if it is open even only once, then it can not be closed ever. It is completely contradictory to say that the future can be both A and nonA, at the same time and in the same relationship. Which is essentially Add's view, which is nonsense.
Add, you said the following, and this after all this time!
I (,,, almost ,,,) find it hard to believe that you are so incapable of understanding my answer in light of your real question. Your question is not simply as you stated it. Your entire point, and the reason why you are asking that question is because you see this as a problem for the OV. It is not a problem what so ever, the problem is your inability to understand, or more likely, accept the truth about, the open view. THAT IS THE PROBLEM, it's with you, not the OV.quote: I would like to hear your explanation as to why God would counsel to enslave his own people for 400 years, 200 years before it happened!!!
1way quote - I give you the same answer that I have always, and will always give, He is wise and powerful and truthful and repents if necessary. The open view is the only biblically consistent view. If you ask for a more detailed explanation than that, then I would say that God is really and amazingly, wise and powerful and truthful and repents if necessary. Don’t underestimate God’s wisdom and power and right of divine repentance, and His truthfulness that refutes the closed view.
Here's my response to this - http://www.theologyonline.com/forum...9222#post359222
But, to add to this, you can see that 1way is talking about Gd repenting, which has nothing to do with the situation with slavery in Egypt, since it did happen.
God has many times, and clearly reserves the right to repent and do the opposite of what He said and THOUGHT He was going to do. That is a completely open and shut case, it leaves NO room for the closed view when you grant the bible's teaching on divine repentance from reversing His spoken and unspoken intended course of action. Because God's word is true and teaches us about God repenting as He plainly and consistently does, it is futile and against God's word to contradict this teaching with closed theism.
Your inability to comprehend all this is somewhat staggering considering the amount of detailed explanations generously given to you. We (who understand this post for example) are all looking at you wondering when you will stop the charade and admit that the problem does not lie with the OV, it lies with you.
To directly respond to your quote, my point was that God did not have to make good on His prophesy, God does not tend to punish those who love and obey Him, and He does not tend to bless those who hate and oppose Him, see Jer 18 and the entire bible for more info. The OV has no problem with yet future prophesies coming to pass, the difference between us and folks like you, is that we allow God's word to explain how it is that God completes yet future prophetic things. You closed view types go pagan and say that God knows the future exhaustively, and we OV bible believers trust God instead, see the following.
There is God's answer to your question Add, but since you reject it, who am I to hope that you would accept my answer, which is basically the same answer God said, adding His right to repent if He should, He said it is by His (implied wise) counsel combined His ability to carry it out that He takes care of things NOT YET DONE. Jer 18 rounds out this answer by teaching from God's word that if necessary, God may repent from doing what He previously said and thought He was going to do. And even though you reject it, as theologically rejectionable, here it is for everyone elses reading enjoyment.Is 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,' Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it.Interestingly, any closed theist must answer the Lord in verse 6 saying, no Lord, you do can not start to do one thing with a people and then repent and not do what you at first intended to do with them, you know everything that will ever happen even before it happens so for you to repent from what you were going to do is in complete contradiction to what we enlightened closed theists believe about the nature of the future which was well taught by the pagan classic thinkers who hated the God of the bible, Plato and Aristotle, and thus is warmly and generally accepted by many Christians even up to this present day, the basic precept that God knows the entire future, even though that idea is no where taught in scripture.Jeremiah 18
The Potter and the Clay
1 The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying: 2"Arise and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause you to hear My words." 3Then I went down to the potter's house, and there he was, making something at the wheel. 4And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make.
5Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying: 6"O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?" says the LORD. "Look, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel!
7The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will repent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will repent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.
You don't accept God's answer, so I feel somewhat less offended that you don't like mine. Actually, it's more like a comfort to me that you react the same way to my understanding as you do God's word.
Lastly, it would be at least somewhat encouraging of you had presented "something" novel, something original, something that has not already been answered a thousand times, if we were to take your supposed problem with the open view seriously, but so far as I can tell, you mostly brought an especially concentrated form of willful ignorance instead.
Good luck in all you do, including first understanding the idea before attacking it with so much blind enthusiasm!
[ context ]