The Danger of Open Theism

[TCGreek]

We? Are you SURE YOU are one of the saved? Let's see -- is God TOTALLY sovereign in YOUR life 24/7/365?? Are you ALWAYS doing His "good pleasure?" How sovereign is He in YOUR life?

skypair

How about telling me what Phil.1:6; 2;12, 13 mean? Thank you.

 

[PastorFaulk]

Removed post

 

[skypair]

1. In the words of Scripture, "Salvation is of the Lord."

And I, sir, am not saying that we "manufacture" salvation by our own will! Salvation is AVAILABLE because of the Lord. It is also EFFICACIOUS if we receive it.

2. We are willing to let God be God. Apparently you are not.

Finish the verse, TC -- "and every man a liar." And how do you claim to "letting God be God" if you make Him out to be the liar? Do you have sovereignty over your decisions or don't you? Over your family? Or does God come down and tell your kids to clean up their rooms? How about your kids. When you give them a gift, do you let them do pretty much as they please with it? Do you still have a measure of sovereignty over them so long as they live under your roof? You are making sovereignty out to be "puppet strings" with lifeless wood on the "world" end.

3. That which God has begun in us He will complete it at the coming of Christ (Phil.1:6), for it is Him who works in us both to will and to do according to His good pleasure.

I never disputed that. But like your child, it's not a "total sovereignty" thing, is it. You don't quit sinning and making decisions for yourself, do you.

In fact, I got to thinking the other night --- you guys are into describing everything is extreme terms aren't you? Totlal sovereignty -- total depravity. Did you ever learn the testing advice that the extreme is never the right answer to a question? Indeed, it isn't! Neither is man totally depraved nor is God totally sovereign. He simply does not make every decision for you and you KNOW it!

4. We are simply putting God where He belongs, while others are willing to dethrone Him.

What are you talking "dethrone?" Is He not sitting on His throne regardless of what we do down here? But down here, the object of Christianity is to ENTHRONE Him where He doesn't have sovereignty, right? Where He has no control over the masses of people. Sure, He controls the outcomes and knows where He is taking this world, but if you call this His sovereign kingdom, you are sadly deluded! It is specifically because it is NOT His kingdom and because He is NOT totally sovereign that Christ is coming back one day!

5. You continue to show your lack of understanding for the Sovereignty of God in all things when you continue to use that word "FATE."

Let me try to be more specific. You obviously do not understand why I make that the alternative to free will.

Likely, you yourself are guilty of saying that man does not have free will, right? He -- every one of us -- is/was a slave to sin. And how does your theology say that man is released from "the bondage of the will?" God decided before creation that you would be saved/"elect," right? Through nothing in you or that you did, He was going to save you. And regardless of anything in me or that I did, He was going to condemn me.

If we have no control over our destinies, our lives, that is what the Greeks called "Fate." We pretend we are good or bad, maybe go through the motions of being Christian even --- all of that is just "Greek theater." We are "beating the air" as Paul said because our destiny is out of our hands.

That is what I see that is so pathetic about Calvinists. They can only think they know their destiny. But according to their own theology, God chose and only God can know who He chose! Some Calvinists will even say, "It is wrong to inquire into this hidden counsel of God [regarding our eternal destiny]." Some will say we know it by our "holy living" (Boice). NO! That is just the motions we go through as if to prove we are "elect!" To "obey" the Father we may not, indeed, have! It is not this life that decides -- it is Fate.

Unless you can choose Him and not believe it is in vain, then you really worship another God. You don't worship the God who foresees who will believe and then predestines them to calling, sanctification, and glorification. (Would you at least admit that?) And maybe you are quite happy with that. The children of Israel were happy enough worshipping "the queen of heaven" that they said they wouldn't listen to Jeremiah's warnings, Jer 44:15-17. Yo mama* (my mama, too, I guess), the RCC, still worships such very happily. They KNOW that one day they will be in heaven -- but that is another god altogether, isn't it?

skypair

*MYSTERY BABYLON, MOTHER OF HARLOTS

 

[Mr.M]

Open Theism: Man's attempt to explain that for which he lacks capacity to fully grasp and articulate. Trying to reconcile the sovereignty of God and the human volition in a way that satisfies the intellectual wants of humans only diminishes God and without warrant increases the superlative view of man.

God is able at all times to know all possibilities of all things and all things that will be. Every divinely conceivable formula of events (infinitum) past (including before the creation of the Angelic and Human time lines often called eternity past), present and future (including beyond the end of the Angelic and Human time lines often called eternity future) are known by God at all times. Included in that are the decisions of both angelic and human beings by means of their volition given to them by God.

Attempting to explain how this is possible in such a manner that satisfies the intellectual lust to know all that God knows is not only foolish but sinful. Attempting to know and understand all we can about God is not but attempting to be on par with God and imagine we know as He knows is as foolish as it gets, and here you have Open Theism.

 

[skypair]

Open Theism: Man's attempt to explain that for which he lacks capacity to fully grasp and articulate. Trying to reconcile the sovereignty of God and the human volition in a way that satisfies the intellectual wants of humans only diminishes God and without warrant increases the superlative view of man.

First of all -- I'm not so sure I like your obvious disdain for studying scripture to find out what God HAS told us, friend. If you think you rise above us all with willful ignorance, I pity you. I have seen similar elitist snobs among Calvinists, though. Reminds me of Sproul's explanation of how sin entered into the world -- he said, "I don't know and I don't know anybody who does know." Well, if you want to box yourself up in ignorance, I don't know too many folks who will try to come let you out! :laugh:

God is able at all times to know all possibilities of all things and all things that will be.

Absolutely!! That's why He doesn't sin. He knows every outcome of that futility!

But knowing the possibilities is NOT knowing which will be chosen by another sovereign being! How did another being become sovereign? God created them thus! Angels, man -- He allowed them their own decisions! Not their own outcomes -- their own decisions. See, man DOESN'T know all the outcomes or he would no doubt choose as God does and never sin!

You want to see a life where God is TOTALLY sovereign? Look at Christ and Christ alone! There is no such animal as the total sovereignty of God that you idealize.

Included in that are the decisions of both angelic and human beings by means of their volition given to them by God.

Of course He foreknows these! I think Calvinists struggle with the combination of God and time. See, God is eternal. He isn't in time. However, He created time in order to bring to Himself a family of angels and men who are like Him. In that He created time and gave men and angels "volition" in time, He had to respect time by not knowing their choices at some point.

That "point" was before He foresaw the "previews" for the movie. :laugh: Actually, if God SOVEREIGNLY DECIDED to create man, He would at that point know all the possibilities but not all the individual choices. Remember, "man" the idea, came before man the individual. Same thing with angels who came before man. In fact, man is God's "lesson in love" to the faithful angels. So we see God respecting time and individual moral freedom among His intelligent creation, right?

Attempting to explain how this is possible in such a manner that satisfies the intellectual lust to know all that God knows is not only foolish but sinful.

Oh yeah --- let's don't go there, "Mr Mysticism!" The secret to a good religion is that it can hide what it doesn't account for under the name of "sin."

Attempting to know and understand all we can about God is not but attempting to be on par with God and imagine we know as He knows is as foolish as it gets, and here you have Open Theism.

I think the Catholics tried to quash this before you guys did. They claimed supreme "Magesterial Authority."

But to the Christians out there --- God is about revealing Himself and remaking us in the image of His Son, "the fulness of His stature" in all things. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to "lead us into ALL truth." People who deny truth that can be found in scripture are basically denying the Spirit of God and Christ and would seem NOT to have the "mind of Christ," 1Cor 2:16.

skypair

 

[Mr.M]

First of all -- I'm not so sure I like your obvious disdain for studying scripture to find out what God HAS told us, friend. If you think you rise above us all with willful ignorance, I pity you.

First allow me to assure you I do not think I rise above anyone and it is good you began your statement with "If you think" or I might be persuaded your arrogance rises far above that which you implied of mine. Secondly I did NOT demonstrate disdain for studying scripture to find out what God HAS told use. It appears instead of responding you are reacting because the latter part of my post clearly says:

Attempting to explain how this is possible in such a manner that satisfies the intellectual lust to know all that God knows is not only foolish but sinful. Attempting to know and understand all we can about God is not (foolish)but attempting to be on par with God and imagine we know as He knows is as foolish as it gets

So your accusation of my disdain for studying Scripture is not only without warrant but reckless.

I have seen similar elitist snobs among Calvinists, though. Reminds me of Sproul's explanation of how sin entered into the world -- he said, "I don't know and I don't know anybody who does know." Well, if you want to box yourself up in ignorance, I don't know too many folks who will try to come let you out! :laugh:

Oops, maybe I spoke too soon about my possible persuasions. It appears now I am fully persuaded that whatever elitist arrogance you are accusing me of has already been surpassed by you with this silly charge. First, I am not a Calvinist. Secondly to what box you are referring, I know not and your illustration lacks application. But why quibble when you are busy finding demons where none exists. Don't let me interrupt your hunting party. Thirdly, you stated you "pity" me, I do believe it is the elitist that pities those underneath him. Find a mirror please.

Remember, "man" the idea came before man the individual. Same thing with angels who came before man. In fact, man is God's "lesson in love" to the faithful angels. So we see God respecting time and individual moral freedom among His intelligent creation, right?

I don't see anyone arguing this point, particularly me. And I would further state that in fact the creation of man is directly a response to the angelic fall/conflict that preceded human history but whose ending is co-terminus with human history.

Oh yeah --- let's don't go there, "Mr Mysticism!" The secret to a good religion is that it can hide what it doesn't account for under the name of "sin."

The best I can say is that this response is bizzare. I simply stated that:

Attempting to explain how this is possible in such a manner that satisfies the intellectual lust to know all that God knows is not only foolish but sinful.

No one said anything about hiding sin or not accounting for anything.

Frankly, in this case, the case of responding to my post, I believe you have reacted instead of responded. I have read many of your posts. To me they often are lively and adequate responses with decent challenges, however in this case I do believe you have opted for some assumptions about me that are erroneous.

I am not a Calvinist, let me make that clear. I accept both the clear Biblical teaching of the Sovereignty of God and the volitional capacity of man and angels and am confident that both are without contradiction because they are both presented in Scripture as true.

My contention is with the attempts of some to formulate explanations of how both are possible to the extent that they satisfy the intellectual lusts to know all God knows and explain all God is able to do in a way fails to acquiesce to and humbly acknowledge our finite capacity vs God's infinite capacity.

The mechanics of all that God does is in fact NOT explained in Scripture. And while the Scriptures do provide an inexhaustive revelation of God (of His essense and His work) to man, it is inexhaustive not because it is all inclusive of all God is and the mechanics of all God does but inexhaustive because we are so limited in our capacity to know and understand God. It does not mean we cannot know a great deal and come to be enlightened by His Spirit regarding the revelation of Scripture because the Scriptures declare we can move to spiritual maturity.

But to treat the Sovereignty of God and the volition of man in such a way as to attempt to fully explain it so that we satisfy the intellectual lust to be equal with or on par with God in our understanding and handling of how He works...is the greatest of arrogance, foolishness and sinful.

 

[skypair]

I apologize for my hasty accusation of your Calvinism. I get responses all the time from them pleading not to look into these things and I am saddened that people would claim that I "sin" in my endeavor to come to the truth. And claiming to know all there is to know even when questions remain defines the "box."

But why quibble when you are busy finding demons where none exists.

The "demon" is in the gist of your reply 1) ignorance in the name of keeping a "tidy" but false theological view and 2) in denying "open theism." If you accept that there was a point in time that God decided to create man and that man has sovereign volition at all, there has to be a decision that God did not make that He, therefore, did not know until He foresaw it (Unless, of course, rather than turn your back on the contradiction, you can explain it some other way.)

IOW, ignorance is no argument against "open theism." And neither are biblical generalizations without fully formed particulars to see whether they apply to the present issue. The generalization on omniscience presumes that the all is in existence or at least conceived of which would mean it existed before God. Does anything even conceivably preexist God, Mr. M??

To me they often are lively and adequate responses with decent challenges,

Please, you're making me blush! :laugh:

My contention is with the attempts of some to formulate explanations of how both are possible to the extent that they satisfy the intellectual lusts to know all God knows and explain all God is able to do in a way fails to acquiesce to and humbly acknowledge our finite capacity vs God's infinite capacity.[/quote] Which obviates any effort on our part to study. Why not just stay in ignorance about everything beyond salvation, M?? "Live and let live," right? It's obvious that religions are all around that preach false gospels but who are we to interfere, maybe even "pulling them out of the fire," hating even the garment [of our brothers] spotted by the flesh!"

The mechanics of all that God does is in fact NOT explained in Scripture.

Maybe obscured but not irrational, M.

But to treat the Sovereignty of God and the volition of man in such a way as to attempt to fully explain it so that we satisfy the intellectual lust...

NO! Not for lust, but because there are those out there that "explain" it in UNGODLY theologies! It's not enough to say that God knows everything so that man has no real volition! It's not enough to say that God already knew you were going to be in this crisis and knows what He is going to do about it and DOESN'T need or listen to your prayers for "advice!" IOW, the alternative to what I am describing in "open theism" is FATALISM so far as our lives are concerned.

skypair

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

First was Millenium Exclusion, then justifying the use of Marijuana, and now Open Theism. I am not sure that any amount of income could be justified by allowing such non sense.

 

[npetreley]

First was Millenium Exclusion, then justifying the use of Marijuana, and now Open Theism. I am not sure that any amount of income could be justified by allowing such non sense.

Amen.


.........

 

[skypair]

First was Millenium Exclusion, then justifying the use of Marijuana, and now Open Theism. I am not sure that any amount of income could be justified by allowing such non sense.

Perhaps there is another explanation that would suit you. Eternity is a tough concept and that Someone eternal would create time to operate with and appear in sounds pretty far out to our limited minds.

Are you a "free moral agent?" Like Adam? Like Lucifer before him?

skypair

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Perhaps there is another explanation that would suit you. Eternity is a tough concept and that Someone eternal would create time to operate with and appear in sounds pretty far out to our limited minds.

Are you a "free moral agent?" Like Adam? Like Lucifer before him?

skypair

I'm not sure hwere you get the idea that Adam and Lucifer were free moral agants but anyway. There are a number of tuff concepts. Making God out to be limited by knowledge in any way is wierd. But to then be dogmatic on it makes me wonder what is the underlying reason since scripture does not indicate such.

Job 38:2- 41