I recently watched another Open Theist, Realityisnotoptional (Chris Fischer) do a partial response to the above video, here:
I enjoyed his breakdown, but felt there was a lot left on the table that needed to be addressed, and since I'm not much of a talker, but I can type up a mean post on a forum, I figured I may as well address what's on the table here on TOL.
In order to keep things clear, I will put a timestamp range, followed by what was said, within a box, and then respond to what was said in the section followed by the box. It will look like this:
| time:stamp-second:timestamp - "This is an example of what the transcription of what was said will look like." |
This is an example of what my response will be. Blablabla, yadda yadda yadda, this is a point I want to make, and here's why it matters.
------------------
I encourage readers of this thread to watch the original video, as well as Chris's response to it, in full before responding to this thread, or at least follow along by going to the timestamps in the video that I provide. I hope to provide a convincing argument in favor of Open Theism, or to be shown (by replies) that I'm wrong in part or in whole.
My response will start with post #2, since this post was only meant to be an introduction.
Remember to keep things civil, and may the most rational position win!