|
Post by Jeffrey Olver on Sept 8, 2008 18:46:06 GMT -5
Don't know where this thought should go, so I put it here... and these arejust the musings I was thinking upon just now...
I don't understand the huge oppostion to "Open Theism."
If God is powerful enough to bring about the end that He has planned, why do men go so far as to declare heresy the idea that God does not know every future moment? Does it void God's promises? Does God lie when He says He will cause something to happen, and then does not do it, seemingly changing his mind?
If the Bible's accounts of God's grief over actions of men and/or suprise are just mere anthropormorphisms of God applied by those who were inspired to write by Him, then what kind of "person" is He? If He has no "personality," as such, why would men ascribe personality to him? Because it makes Him more relatable? But why would God decide that personality is something good for men to relate to, when He has none, yet created us in His image?
Just my rambling thoughts. Don't necessarily need an answer
|
|
|
Post by pete777 on Sept 28, 2008 2:44:45 GMT -5
Mr. Oliver, The reason there is a lot of opposition to “Open Theism” is because it is error of the highest caliber. This is not to impugn the motives of the people that believe in this heresy. The people that believe in it are sincere but searching for answers, and this doctrine seems to make sense for them, but it does not harmonize with the deeper principles of the Bible. God knows all things! God is not bound by space or time! He can look into the future with exact detail forecast every molecular detail of His creation. The variable that seems to allude the believer in “Open Theism” is that God does not change! Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. KJV
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. KJV The Bible states that God does not change! This is an eternal truth! How does this truth apply to His dealings with “fallen mankind?” The answer is simple; God states His will for mankind and man is supposed to claim the promises of God and receive power to obey God’s will. God states His goal for man “IF” they will obey and do His will. God does not dumb down His will for degenerate man. He states the possibility through “divine empowerment” and it is man’s responsibility to have faith in His word to make it a reality. When man falls short of God’s will, it is the failure of man and not God. This process is seen over, and over, and over, and over and over again in Bible Prophecy. God states His will and the result is the failure of man to live up to His will, due to a lack of faith. The doctrine of “Open Theism” is heretical because it undermines God’s power and causes doubt in regards to Bible prophecy, and God’s ability to correctly forecast events. God has no lack of ability! His prophecies are true and correct. Some of the prophecies are divine statements and some are divine possibilities. When God sees a small remnant keeping His commandments by divine grace in Revelation 12:17 and 14:12, these are divine statements. The people that make up that remnant are possibilities. Meaning God will have a people to obey His law in the end of time as a witness for all nations of His exalted character as expressed in the divine precepts. But who those people are is based on their moral choices if they will comply with the conditions of fulfilling God’s will. God will have a people to obey completely (divine statement) but who will be a part of that group (divine possibility)? We are all called to complete victory, but only some will respond. “Open Theism” just makes it look as if God does not fully understand or just can not get it just right; when in fact the fault is with mankind. It casts a subtle blame on God as being incompetent and not able to accurately convey the truth, or fulfill His word. If God says man can walk on water, and no man ever does it, then God is not a liar, rather it is man that never learned how to have faith in God declaration of man’s possibility. God would be correct, and man would be in error for not seeking God and experiencing that which God had promised to him. Man’s failure does not preclude God from stating His will! It is up to man to come to God and find out how to do things and be empowered to fulfill God’s prophecies! Matthew
|
|
|
Post by joemccowan on Sept 29, 2008 7:46:14 GMT -5
Open theism undermines the Neo-Platonic dogma that has become the basis for Western theology. The notion that God lives outside of time is not even accepted by rational Reformed theologians;
Dr. John Frame of Reformed Theological Seminary notes, “…at present we may speak of consensus among theistic philosophers that God is in time.”
Even Nicholas Wolterstorff agrees that the idea of divine timelessness is absurd. He goes on to agree with open theist in saying that Scripture portrays God as changing with respect to his knowledge, his memory, his planning, and his personal relations to us.
When we decide to abandon the philosophies of the Pythagoreans, Plato, Plotinus, Iamblichus and Augustine, we have two choices. Either 1) God exists in time, forcing us to do His will, deciding what the future holds by way of determination or 2) God exists in time, allowing created beings to exercise their free will, and then responding appropriately.
To quote Wolterstorff one more time;
In Rights and Wrongs, an Interview with Nicholas Wolterstorff (former professor of philosophical theology at Yale University and president of the American Philosophical Association (Central Division) and of the Society of Christian Philosophers)
No pastor should be ignorant of theology, for theology is the church’s systematic and critical expression of what it has to say about God. And no theologian should be ignorant of philosophy. For from the time of the church fathers onward, the reflections of theologians have been shaped by philosophical concepts and ways of thought--sometimes for good, sometimes for ill. A little philosophy is a bad thing, however. To my students who want to become theologians I say, be a theologian, honor the tradition of theology, don’t try to be an ersatz philosopher. But study enough philosophy to become surefooted in it. Otherwise you will be jumping on bandwagons that you ought to turn your back on and missing those that are going your direction. _____________________________________
Western Christianity jumped on the wrong bandwagon. The philosophy that Hartshorne deemed "Classical Theism" is not biblical theism.
As far as the heresy charge, the open view agrees with Theism Simpliciter;
God is a personal being, worthy of worship, self-existent, the free creator (ex nihilo) of all that is not God, separate from the world (and is immaterial), sustains the world, continually active in it, perfectly good, all-powerful, all-knowing, and eternal. This definition is from H. P. Owen, a recognized authority on the topic, and it has become commonplace in the philosophical literature.
"Classical Theism" (as it has become to be defined) adds immutability and impassibility to TS and redefines "timeless" as being "outside of time" instead of "everlasting". Standard Free-Will Theism denies that God is immutable and impassible, but retains the Neo-Platonic definition of "timeless". Open Free-Will Theism does not retain the Neo-Platonic definition of "timeless".
Is Open Theism orthodox? Define Orthodox. If we look to the Orthodox Church, they have a 2000 year history of denying impassibility. Is Calvin orthodox? Obviously no Reformer was orthodox. The schism in the Catholic Church had been preceeded by other schisms. The Orthodox Church retained the historical positions and is really the only group that can claim apostolic orthodoxy.
The Orthodox, along with Calvinists, rightly equate exhaustive foreknowoldege with exhaustive determiniation. The Orthodox historically have rejected both.
Desert Fathers
SERENUS: GOD forbid that we should admit that God has created anything which is substantially evil, as Scripture says "everything that God had made was very good." For if they were created by God such as they are now, or made for this purpose; viz., to occupy these positions of malice, and ever to be ready for the deception and ruin of men, we should in opposition to the view of the above quoted Scripture slander God as the Creator and author of evil, as having Himself formed utterly evil wills and natures, creating them for this very purpose; viz., that they might ever persist in their wickedness and never pass over to the feeling of a good will. The following reason then of this diversity is what we received from the tradition of the fathers, being drawn from the fount of Holy Scripture.
THEODORE: Preserving then these distinctions clear and fixed, and knowing that there is nothing good except virtue alone, and nothing bad except sin alone and separation from God, let us now carefully consider whether God ever allows evil to be forced on his saints either by Himself or by some one else. And you will certainly find that this never happens. For another can never possibly force the evil of sin upon anyone, who does not consent and who resists, but only on one who admits it into himself through sloth and the corrupt desire of his heart.
All this to say that the open view is an attempt to recover Biblical Theism by ridding our presuppositions of Neo-Platonic definitions of God. We can apply the law of first mention in the scriptures and see that; God exists in time, His will can be frustrated, He repents, has feelings, has emotions, responds to actions and prayers of men, can alter His course, is faithful and trustworthy, intervenes and appropriately responds to contingencies as they are realized.
|
|
|
Post by joeldad on Sept 29, 2008 12:09:17 GMT -5
AMEN! Awesome post, Joe!
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Sept 29, 2008 13:27:28 GMT -5
I agree with Pete that Open Theism does not give much glory to God If God had a theology just like men, what would it be ? ....
|
|
|
Post by pete777 on Oct 4, 2008 21:38:39 GMT -5
Joe, You mentioned a lot of writings from man! I believe what we need is a "Thus Saith the LORD." "Open Theism" is not Biblical. God knows the future and we can not deny HIS ability to tell us of events that will happen. If you do deny the direct inspiration of the Bible you will not understand such important issues as the MARK OF THE BEAST. Open Theism is a subtle deception from Satan to cast a bad light on Bible Prophecy.
The group of people living in the end-time will have the perfect knowledge of the Bible Prophecy. The enemy knows this and he also knows that his devices will be exposed through a correct understanding of Biblical prophecy. Open Theism is his attempt to shaddow the brightest part of the Bible.
2 Peter 1:19
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: KJV
1) WE HAVE A MORE SURE WORD OF PROPHECY!!!!!!!!!!! 2) YE DO WELL THAT YE TAKE HEED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3) PROPHECY IS A LIGHT THAT SHINES IN A DARK PLACE!!!!! 4) Prophecy leads us to Christ, and causes FAITH to spring forth which allows the power of the Holy Spirit to flow into our hearts.
NOTE: No wonder Satan will try anything to down-play the role of Bible Prophecy in the lives of God's people. We need to take the WORD of GOD and ask for the help of the Holy Spirit to understand the difficult passages. We need to follow the instructions that are already in the WORD, and by so doing we will lose many false concepts and see the truth in the light of God's approval. We do not need to come up with theories that are extra-Biblical and supported by man. We need a "THUS SAITH THE LORD."
Matthew
|
|
|
Post by Evan Schaible on Oct 10, 2008 4:28:09 GMT -5
Which would you rather believe: 1. That God knows every future possibility and is sovereign and omnipotent enough to still, despite unnumbered rebels and vehement rebellion, cause His grand eternal purposes to come to pass... or 2. That God is a bit nervous and has to literally hold the strings on every little movement and determine it all? Even who is regenerated and who is not. I am not claiming either stance, but logically, scripturally, and within all reason those are the only two stances. Middle ground is really presuppositions without proper conclusions. - Evan 3Nails.co.ccPS - No I am not what is commonly known as open theist, nor am I classical theist. I will just say that.
|
|
|
Post by joemccowan on Oct 10, 2008 6:26:55 GMT -5
Which would you rather believe: 1. That God knows every future possibility and is sovereign and omnipotent enough to still, despite unnumbered rebels and vehement rebellion, cause His grand eternal purposes to come to pass... or 2. That God is a bit nervous and has to literally hold the strings on every little movement and determine it all? Even who is regenerated and who is not. I am not claiming either stance, but logically, scripturally, and within all reason those are the only two stances. Middle ground is really presuppositions without proper conclusions. - Evan 3Nails.co.ccPS - No I am not what is commonly known as open theist, nor am I classical theist. I will just say that. Sounds like you understand the debate pretty well. When I accept the label Open Theist, it is not because I accept everything that other Open Theists believe. I simply don't believe in exhaustive foreknowledge of what does not yet exist or divine timelessness as defined by Plato and others.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Oct 10, 2008 11:06:27 GMT -5
Great points.
God is able to plan the future and to bring to pass His plans. But the planning of the future presupposes or implies that the future was previously open. If God is going to determine the certainties of the future, God must first see the possibilities of the future, from which God is able to choose from.
But if the future was already exhaustively determined and eternally foreknown, God could not plan any of it.
In the Bible, we clearly see God making plans and changing plans as circumstances occur. If God already knew He wasn't going to do something, like take Hezekiah's life, then He was lying when He said that He would. But if God simply changed the future, by adding fifteen years to his life, then God never told a lie but always told the truth. Hezekiah really was going to die, but then God actually changed His mind about it and therefore changed Hezekiahs future.
Another great point.
God is a person. As a personality God has an intelligence, emotions, and a free will. The fact that we were made in God's image means that we are personalities like God is, with an intelligence, emotions, and free will.
God actually has thoughts! God actually has emotions! God actually makes decisions!
And of course, a linear existence in succession is required for the functionality of these faculties of personality. You cannot have thoughts, emotions, or decisions if you are in a frozen stand still existence that Plato and Augustine said God existed in.
I choose #1.
To say that God accomplishes His purposes, while at the same time granting man free will, glorifies God's wisdom and power more than saying that God has to micromanage everything.
Besides, if God's foreknowledge did not consist in any possibilities, but only certainties, then God could predetermine and plan nothing at all. In God's mind, it would all be eternally settled and certain and therefore not even God could plan the future.
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Oct 10, 2008 22:15:42 GMT -5
Joe is it your position that God has limited foreknowledge?
Is the falling away here concerning individual or a group prophecy? And if it is individuals that God knows, how does that relate to the freewill of man unless they are reprobated by falling away?
2 Thess 2: 1-4 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
Thanks, John
|
|
|
Post by joemccowan on Oct 12, 2008 11:37:16 GMT -5
Joe is it your position that God has limited foreknowledge? Is the falling away here concerning individual or a group propecy? And if it is individuals that God knows, how does that relate to the freewill of man unless they are reprobated by falling away? 2 Thess 2: 1-4 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Thanks, John God foreknows all that can be foreknown, which includes that which He has determined to be certain (a judgment day for example) and He knows every possible contingency (that you and I can warrant His condemnation or redemption for example). I believe that He predetermined to redeem a people, not individuals. He desires everyone to be redeemed, but knows that few will seek redemption on His terms. The story of redemption is God's response to the reality of sin, not the inevitability of sin. The future does not exist beyond what God has determined. What He has left open, remains truly open. What He has determined, remains truly determined. His sovereignty allows Him to work presently to bring about a desired outcome, just as it allows His will to be frustrated. He is not threatened by contingencies nor is He bound by fate or foreknowledge. He is free to make decisions presently, respond to our free decisions presently, alter His course and have original thoughts that alter His future and present actions. God is not static. Hope this helps. Blessings, Joe
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Oct 12, 2008 13:35:02 GMT -5
A couple thoughts about 2 Thess 2: 1-4:
1. It talks about the plans of the devil. The devil is a major player in end times events and has been making plans himself. The future is partly determined because the devil has already determined things that he and his demons are going to do.
2. The day of Christ will not come unless the falling away occurs first. God has delayed the day of Christ, in the hope that more men will repent, not willing that any perish. But the day will come when the world becomes reprobate, when they will not repent, and that is when the day will come. God is waiting for that day to come. The "falling away" is when the world is in a state of apostasy. This will be after the gospel has been preached to all nations. It is not determined when that time will come and it is not determined who will be the apostates. But it is just a matter of time until such a state comes.
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Oct 12, 2008 20:28:57 GMT -5
Thanks guys, I appreciate you taking the time for your answers.
God Bless you, John
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Oct 12, 2008 21:09:33 GMT -5
So, do you think that the Father knows the day and the hour of when Jesus return?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Oct 12, 2008 21:21:58 GMT -5
I believe it is the authority of the Father to determine the day. It is not the authority of the Son or of the angels, but of the Father.
The Father may have appointed a specific day and hour. The Father might think to Himself (since nobody else knows the day and the hour) that He will do it at a certain time. Nevertheless, since God is longsuffering and wanting all to repent, He might push the date back if He chooses to. The reason God is longsuffering regarding His promise is because He wants more men to come to repentance - 2 Peter 3:9. So God could decide to add more time before the end if He wanted to, just as He added fifteen years to Hezekiah's life.
It would be perfectly consistent with the moral character of God to delay Judgment Day so that more could come to repentance. If the result of pushing the day back would result in more souls being saved, it would be inconsistent with the very heart of God not to do so.
Maybe the reason that only the Father knows the day and the hour is so that He can decide to change it if He ever wanted to. Since we don't know the day and the hour, if God ever did change it, we would never even know.
One thing is for sure, when that Day actually does come, the world will be in a state of apostasy and reprobation, because it says in Revelations that they will not repent. The way God knows for sure that they will not repent is because He will not bring that time until the world is reprobate. It will be after the Gospel has been preached to all nations, and the world has resisted and rejected all of the influence and persuasion of the Holy Spirit which would have brought them to repentance. Once you grieve the Holy Spirit, resisting the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit abandons you, you become reprobate and hopeless, and therefore you will not repent. Because the only thing that brings us to repentance is the influence of the Spirit.
I personally believe that God is waiting until all possible efforts have been exerted to save as many people as possible. And only once all possibility of salvation have expired, then the Day will come.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Oct 12, 2008 21:29:59 GMT -5
Here is something to chew on. If God already knows who will unavoidably go to hell, why does the Spirit of God still strive with those people, influencing them to repent? Why does God still call all men to repent, if their impenitence and d**nation is already a certainty because of exhaustive foreknowledge? Wouldn't it be a wasted effort? Maybe the Spirit convicts them and the Father calls them because their d**nation is not an unavoidable and inevitable fixity, maybe it is not a settled certainty because the future can be changed.
|
|
|
Post by forgivenbyhim on Oct 23, 2008 13:13:35 GMT -5
Here is something to chew on. If God already knows who will unavoidably go to hell, why does the Spirit of God still strive with those people, influencing them to repent? Why does God still call all men to repent, if their impenitence and d**nation is already a certainty because of exhaustive foreknowledge? Wouldn't it be a wasted effort? Maybe the Spirit convicts them and the Father calls them because their d**nation is not an unavoidable and inevitable fixity, maybe it is not a settled certainty because the future can be changed. Jesse, God knows the outcome of everything but unless the event happens then there is nothing to know. The event must come to pass to foreknow it. Say that I had foreknowledge and you decided to test it. You decided to have me guess the outcome of every baseball game. The whole season I get it right. But then the final game of the season the baseball the MLB comes and takes me to the stadium because they heard that I could foretell the outcome of a game. The decided, why play the game when I could just tell them the outcome. All the fans and players are at the stadium waiting for me to tell them who would have been the winner. I step up to the microphone and say "I don't know". Why would I say I don't know? Because there was no game played to know the outcome of. The game must happen to foreknow the outcome. Thus like the reason God tries to get people to repent. He has to give them the chance to repent to foreknow that they were going to repent or not. Events must take place for their to be anything to foreknow. I hope all that makes sense. It took me a while to get my mind wrapped around it. God Bless!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Oct 23, 2008 16:56:23 GMT -5
If God knows an event because it is happening, how is this foreknowledge? Foreknowledge is to know before.
God knows events before they happen because:
1. He has determined the event to happen 2. The devil and the fallen angels have determined the event to happen 3. Man has determined the event to happen
For an event to be foreknown, it must be certain. And in order to be certain, it must be determined.
But not everything is determined yet. And since not everything is determined yet, not everything is certain. And since not everything is certain, not everything can be foreknown. That is why God does not merely foreknow certainties, but God also foreknows possibilities. Because of His free will and because of man's free will, the future consists in possibilities as well as certainties.
But if you are saying that God foreknows the future because the future already exists, then there are some serious problems. When did God begin to foreknow the future? Theologians say that God has always foreknown the future. If this is true, then God does not have a free will, the future has no possibilities but only certainties. If God has exhaustive foreknowledge of the future from all of eternity, then God cannot determine or change the future at all, it would all be exhaustively and eternally settled in His mind.
Some theologians say that God is in the past, present, and the future all at once, without experiencing any succession. This is eternal now theology. But if God experiences the past, present, and future all at once, and never began to experience it and will never stop to experience it, then EVERYTHING is just as eternal as God is. The past, present, and future are as eternal as God is, because God eternally experiences them. But it is not Biblical to say that everything is eternal.
There is no reasonable or scriptural alternative to open theism. "Eternal Now" is unreasonable and unscriptural. And "exhaustive eternal foreknowledge" is unreasonable and unscriptural. The only reasonable and scriptural understanding of this issue is open theism, that the future is partly determined and partly open, that the future has both certainties and possibilities, and that God lives in the present time experiencing events as they occur.
|
|