Is Open Theism a heresy then?

[Van]

Calvinism is based on Open Theism, as Calvinism denies God is author of Sin.

Did you see where a main stream Calvinist said God is the author of sin according to main steam Calvinism, and thus Calvinism denies Open Theism? Neither did I.

Did you see where an unstudied Calvinist claimed scripture does not say things happen by chance? Did you see any other Calvinist point out the error and cite the numerous verses that say things happen by chance? Neither did I. Calvinists will not defend truth when truth runs counter to Calvinism. Take that to the bank.

 

[JesusFan]

No, it is not a heresy. Denying Divine Omniscience would be heresy. They do not. They believe that creaturely free decisions are not knowable by definition. If it were knowable (in their view) it would not be a creaturely free choice. So, they maintain that God knows all knowable things, (which free decisions are not).
I disagree with them, but, it is not heresy.

yet they also hold that God cannot know the future until it actually happens, so would that not nullify Prophecy of the Bible then?
And does not God per Bible itself state that He knows all things, and that even if not directly causing them, knows what will be happening? Their view seems to make a God of their own image, one with limitations, they exalted our "free will" by deny His

Our life can be seen as a series of events, some of which we think we understand the cause, but other events seem to arise from chance or causes beyond our ability to grasp. If our choices are not predestined, and those choices alter the outcome of our lives, then we believe God is not the author of sin.

Both the wise person and the fool come to the same end, physical death. The Bible tells us this outcome is the wage of being a sinner, whether a made sinner or a volitional sinner. Some of us, however, will be physically redeemed, at Christ's second coming. But this altered outcome is contingent on God alone crediting our faith as righteousness.

Christ's gospel presents good news, the opportunity for our future salvation exists, but the other gospel presents futility, you were either saved or damned from all eternity for all eternity, and nothing you can do will alter that outcome for you or your loved ones. But to seize the opportunity you must believe in open theism, right down to your socks!


You should know Calvinism in incoherent, saying on one hand, God predestines everything (whatsoever comes to pass) while, on the other hand, saying God does not predestine our each and every sin. (And yes, we both should acknowledge that hyper-Calvinists do say God predestines our sin, but NOT main stream Calvinists.)

Thus, main steam Calvinism is based on Open Theism, God is NOT the author of sin, while incoherently claim God predestines everything.

Again, Only Hyper Cals see God determined directly everything

Calvinism is based on Open Theism, as Calvinism denies God is author of Sin.

Did you see where a main stream Calvinist said God is the author of sin according to main steam Calvinism, and thus Calvinism denies Open Theism? Neither did I.

Did you see where an unstudied Calvinist claimed scripture does not say things happen by chance? Did you see any other Calvinist point out the error and cite the numerous verses that say things happen by chance? Neither did I. Calvinists will not defend truth when truth runs counter to Calvinism. Take that to the bank.

And you have NO verses that states things just happen by "luck and chamce"

 

[Van]

Again, Only Hyper Cals see God determined directly everything

Agreed, the rest are Open Theists!

And you have NO verses that states things just happen by "luck and chamce"

If I listed three, this poster will still deny reality. Why has no Calvinist pointed out his error. Do you suppose none of them know enough to find the word chance in scripture?

 

[JesusFan]

If I listed three, this poster will still deny reality. Why has no Calvinist pointed out his error. Do you suppose none of them know enough to find the word chance in scripture?

No such thing as either chance or luck

 

[JesusFan]

Agreed, the rest are Open Theists!

No, open Theists deny God can fully know events until they happen, no Calvinists affirms that

 

[Van]

No, open Theists deny God can fully know events until they happen, no Calvinists affirms that

Horse feathers. One falsehood after another, with no substance. God can know the future He declared will occur.

And still not a single Calvinist has posted the verses where "chance" events occur. No one! Behold the true Calvinist.

 

[JesusFan]

Horse feathers. One falsehood after another, with no substance. God can know the future He declared will occur.

And still not a single Calvinist has posted the verses where "chance" events occur. No one! Behold the true Calvinist.

Does anything ever happen outside of God being able to control it if he should choose to do such then?

 

[JonC]

No, open Theists deny God can fully know events until they happen, no Calvinists affirms that

Should read contegent events" (Open Theism redefines omniscience to mean "knowing all that can be knuwn"). They hold God does not know truely contengent event until they happen.

It is a take on Calvinism, which also redefines divine omniscience (God is all knowing because God decreed everything). This is how Arminianism comrades into being (Arminius disagreed that God decreed evil).

 

[37818]

Open Theism disallows infinite omniscience.
Genesis 22:12 is a deliberate case of finite knowledge on the part of the Son on balf of our infinite omniscient God the Father.

 

[kyredneck]

And you have NO verses that states things just happen by "luck and chamce"

Ecclesiastes Chapter 9

11​	I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

 

[Van]

Does anything ever happen outside of God being able to control it if he should choose to do such then?

Yet another question, but the poster's false claim, that Open Theism denies God can know the future means his claims are without merit.

 

[JesusFan]

Yet another question, but the poster's false claim, that Open Theism denies God can know the future means his claims are without merit.

Open Theism does deny that God knows all thing in an absolute sense, as they see Him as limiting himself to know the future same way we do, as linear time unfolding

 

[JesusFan]

Should read contegent events" (Open Theism redefines omniscience to mean "knowing all that can be knuwn"). They hold God does not know truely contengent event until they happen.

It is a take on Calvinism, which also redefines divine omniscience (God is all knowing because God decreed everything). This is how Arminianism comrades into being (Arminius disagreed that God decreed evil).

Actually its Arminian theology taking to its logical ending, as to uphold granting us a full libertine will, God has to chose to restrict His own

 

[JesusFan]

Open Theism disallows infinite omniscience.
Genesis 22:12 is a deliberate case of finite knowledge on the part of the Son on balf of our infinite omniscient God the Father.

The ONLY time Gof limited Himself was during the Incarnation, as he assumed freely limitations of human flesh, but the Father and Holy Spirit still at that time were stilly fully all knowing , as is Jesus now ascended

 

[37818]

The ONLY time Go[d] limited Himself was during the Incarnation, as he assumed freely limitations of human flesh, but . . . .

We do not agree. John 1:18, John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, . . .
John 1:1-2. Was before His incarceration.

 

[JesusFan]

We do not agree. John 1:18, John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, . . .
John 1:1-2. Was before His incarceration.

The Word was Omniscient before the Incarnation

 

[37818]

The Word was Omniscient before the Incarceration

God was always Omniscient. The Word was always also someone other than God being someone who was always with God. And was also always God too.

. . . and the Word was God.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, . . .
. . . The same was in the beginning with God.

Again the Word was always both.

Now the Word bring also other than God can actually be not omniscient.

 

[JonC]

Actually its Arminian theology taking to its logical ending, as to uphold granting us a full libertine will, God has to chose to restrict His own

No, Arminianism holds a stricter view than Calvinism on divine omniscience (everything being predestined to occur as God knows it will occur depends on omniscience as opposed to God knowing all that will occur because He predestined it to occur).

 

[JesusFan]

No, Arminianism holds a stricter view than Calvinism on divine omniscience (everything being predestined to occur as God knows it will occur depends on omniscience as opposed to God knowing all that will occur because He predestined it to occur).

Classic Arminian affirms God only foreknows, does not direct cause at all salvation

 

[JonC]

Classic Arminian affirms God only foreknows, does not direct cause at all salvation

No, Classic Arminianism affirms God is omniscient and the direct cause of salvation.

Unlike Calvinism, Arminianism believes that divine omniscience is an attribute of God (not that God predestined all so He knows all). But Classic Arminianism believes that the only way nan can come to God is that God draw that man to Himself.

Read the Five Articles (that 8s Clasdic Arminianism).