ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[themuzicman]

Muz, are you on psychotropic medication? Or are you an Open Theist? The reason I ask is (a) there is no request in your post, and (b) I addressed your post directly. So either your medication is affecting your mind, or you're an Open Theist*.

For you, I suppose I should have been more explicit...

I think part of the problem is that you insist on using symbolic terms like "authored" rather than saying what you really mean. God obviously did not write an execution. That's simply not literally possible.

Meaning "define waht you mean by 'authored'."

OVT has no problem with God decreeing things, and no problem believing that He is able to bring them about.

Michael

 

[RobE]

Godrulz,

Creation was 'very good' and created perfect. God did not desire or intend for things to turn into a mess. When it did, He was grieved and implemented a plan of redemption.

And it is still 'very good' and remains perfect. God's creation continues whether some believe His creation has been destroyed by His enemies or not. God's purpose has not been overcome, foiled, ursurped, or in any way corrupted by His creations.

God hardened Pharoah's heart and destroyed the first born of Egypt to accomplish His purpose with Israel which He explained to Abraham before Isaac was born. Are we able to understand Divine Government or must we always 'feel' the truth?

He knew of the possibility of evil, but it was not a necessity or certainty in the beginning.

Then how could God accomplish His non-robotic future which some propound as His desire? How would love exist if you follow Clete's argument that you must be able to do or do otherwise? If 'it was not a necessity' then why did The Christ get tortured and killed?

Here are the unanswered questions from my previous post:

1) If He doesn't desire it then why does He allow it?
2) Where did man get the free will to murder from?
3) Might there be an intended reason for God to allow suffering?

Rob

 

[godrulz]

For you, I suppose I should have been more explicit...




Meaning "define waht you mean by 'authored'."

OVT has no problem with God decreeing things, and no problem believing that He is able to bring them about.

Michael

The key is that God decrees some vs all things (usually broad vs minute detail). Hilt wrongly extrapolates the proof texts about God ordaining specific things while ignoring reality and other verses that show that He does not decree everything. To maintain sanity, he thinks compatibilism resolves the issue (it does not without changing the meaning of genuine freedom) and that God has different kinds of wills (decretal systems are deductive, not explicit in Scripture...the two wills idea also is problematic and complex).

 

[RobE]

How can a loving God create a world like this, knowing what would happen.

The atheist's key argument given to them by the father of lies.

And I began to ponder on the future, if God knew everything that would happen as a result of his initial creation, how could he do it?

All we need do now is apply our current knowledge to the old questions.

I couldn't get past this question : "How can a God who could create anything decide to create a world like this(especially when he had the power to cause it to go in a different way)?" In that particular time in my life, bad things were happening, but that was only a taste of what life can really do. Wars and victims of abuse and uncounted lost innocence and suffering... God voluntarily created this?

Your suffering made you forget that life is good.

Then I took in the bigger picture. One day, all of this will be gone. Nothing I learned or went through on earth would matter because God was going to end it all anyway because of how "bad it was." What was the point of any of this?

Hang on and find out.

Why not just make it right the first time and make everyone be loved.

Because, my friend, love wouldn't truly exist if God didn't allow it to be chosen.

It was one thing to go through hardship. It was another to know God created it all like this, and my help was really my persecutor.

The pain made you forget the glory and goodness of creation.

It is my belief that at Creation, God did not know Adam would sin. Adam was free because of love and the sin that happened was not in God's plan for him.

A seed must fall to the ground to produce life.

I almost lost my faith.

Nonsense! Anger created a desire to escape, but the gift which is given and accepted isn't easily lost. The branch might not want to be grafted into the Vine, but only the Father might cut it away for not producing fruit; once it is there.

Patrick,

I feel the burden in your words..... Perhaps my favorite Bible book might help....

Sorrow of Man

1 Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:
I saw the tears of the oppressed—
and they have no comforter;
power was on the side of their oppressors—
and they have no comforter.
2 And I declared that the dead,
who had already died,
are happier than the living,
who are still alive.

3 But better than both
is he who has not yet been,
who has not seen the evil
that is done under the sun.​

And more...

1 Remember your Creator
in the days of your youth,
before the days of trouble come
and the years approach when you will say,
"I find no pleasure in them"-​

Remember, that life is good. A living dog is better off than a dead lion. Enjoy your days under the sun while they remain. Don't weary of your toil and troubles put them in God's hands and allow Him to bring about good.

Friends,
Rob

 

[godrulz]

Godrulz,



And it is still 'very good' and remains perfect. God's creation continues whether some believe His creation has been destroyed by His enemies or not. God's purpose has not been overcome, foiled, ursurped, or in any way corrupted by His creations.




Then how could God accomplish His non-robotic future which some propound as His desire? How would love exist if you follow Clete's argument that you must be able to do or do otherwise? If 'it was not a necessity' then why did The Christ get tortured and killed?

Here are the unanswered questions from my previous post:

1) If He doesn't desire it then why does He allow it?
2) Where did man get the free will to murder from?
3) Might there be an intended reason for God to allow suffering?

Rob

Creation now groans and needs redemption. Heinous evil exists whereas it did not exist when God pronounced things 'very good'. Creation is fallen, marred. Satan runs around. Hitler kills Jews. God was grieved after the Fall (it is still not perfect/very good). Creation is still 'good', but it is not the way God intended. Paradise is no longer.

Christ's death came after the fact of the Fall. It was a necessity WHEN the Fall happened, not BEFORE the Fall. You are looking in retrospect. The POSSIBLE plan of redemption became certain after the Fall (not trillions of years ago) and was actualized in the first century.

Q1: I do not desire my kids to get drunk, fornicate, etc., but I do allow it by not killing them or locking them in their room forever. If God is to allow genuine freedom in order to have reciprocal love relationships, then the possiblity vs necessity of evil is the double-edged sword. He could have not created or created robots, but this was a lesser good than risking creating significant others. His wisdom also had a plan to deal with the possibility of a fall and he quickly implemented it despite the consequences and suffering that man introduced into His perfect creation. Mormons say that the Fall was a necessity. There theology is mixed up and you should not follow in their footsteps on this subject.

Q2: Free will is from God. We are in the personal, moral, spiritual image of God. We are self-determining creatures (compared to rocks and plants). We have will, intellect, and emotions, just like God. The Fall marred vs destroyed the image of God. Lucifer and Adam fell by wrongly using their God-given wills. This does not make God responsible for their wrong choices. Just because I give birth to my kids, I am not responsible if they do things as adults (when I am dead or in a nursing home) that are evil. Even Israel disobeyed God, the perfect parent. It is not God's fault or responsibility if we unnecessarily abuse our freedom. We will be accountable if we do so.

Q3: Suffering and death were not God's intentions (despite Catholic ideas that suffering is meritorious). They are a negative consequence of the Fall. Notice that the future will have no more suffering, tears, death, pain, etc. This is God's intention and ideal. Satan, the enemy of God, comes to kill, steal, destroy. Man's selfishness brings much suffering. Jesus comes to give abundant and eternal life, free from the groanings of a fallen, sin-cursed world.

SInce suffering is introduced into tranquil creation, God now works redemptively to bring some good out of it (Rom. 8)...after the fact. He allowed it rather than not create or creating robots. He is able to mitigate against it. It can build character and trust and maturity in man. Jesus suffered things as a man. God is not insulated from suffering. Giving us grace to endure inevitable suffering does not mean God intends, desires, causes, etc. suffering. He could end all suffering (and He will), but that would mean killing us all or turning us into robotic slaves.

I do not intend or desire suffering for my family, but the very act of letting them live in a fallen world and take risks makes it possible that they may be beaten, in an accident, get sick, etc. I could lock them up in a bubble and unduly control their lives and circumstances...but at what expense. Suffering is dealt with in the wisdom of God and parents. These contingencies are responded to, but it is not proof they were blueprinted by God (Jesus shows us a warfare model vs blueprint model of God's sovereignty...Satan and God are clashing for the souls of men...God triumphs in the end, but not without casualites...some go to hell, contrary to the plan and heart of God).

John Sanders: "The God who risks...a theology of providence" does a service by showing that a risk-free view of sovereignty is not biblical and problematic. You have the wrong filter on and it is clouding your understanding of God and His ways.

 

[RobE]

Patrick,

Many reject this for one reason. They love themselves higher than God. They would rather believe God ordained and loved them more than other sinners; enough to save them and damn others. It is comforting to them to think that their destiny is secured because God planned everything. Thus they would rather keep that belief and risk the implications it brings on God.

A friend of mine, Father Norman Weslin, put this more eloquently than anyone I've ever heard. Essentially Fr. Weslin said that those who will avail themselves of God's gift are ultimately the point of creation. That those who don't are essentially enemies of Our Lord and are nothing to Him. Fr. Weslin made the analogy that if God would have to create all of creation and would only achieve having you for eternity; it would be worth it to Him. That the one who is saved is of greater value than all that is not saved. He said that God created the stars, the earth, and all of the universe; but would destroy it to bring you into an eternal relationship with Him. This being true would not put us higher than God; it would simply point out that God loves us.

The 'implications' that are brought on God by o.v. logic are in reality non-existent. Maybe you could explain and support those implications logically and truthfully.

Rob

 

[RobE]

Creation now groans and needs redemption. Heinous evil exists whereas it did not exist when God pronounced things 'very good'. Creation is fallen, marred. Satan runs around. Hitler kills Jews. God was grieved after the Fall (it is still not perfect/very good). Creation is still 'good', but it is not the way God intended. Paradise is no longer.

We don't know this to be true.

Christ's death came after the fact of the Fall. It was a necessity WHEN the Fall happened, not BEFORE the Fall. You are looking in retrospect. The POSSIBLE plan of redemption became certain after the Fall (not trillions of years ago) and was actualized in the first century.

John 17:24"Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.

Ephesians 1:4For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace 8that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. 9And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.
11In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,

1 Peter 1:19but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.​

1) If He doesn't desire it then why does He allow it?

Q1: I do not desire my kids to get drunk, fornicate, etc., but I do allow it by not killing them or locking them in their room forever. If God is to allow genuine freedom in order to have reciprocal love relationships, then the possiblity vs necessity of evil is the double-edged sword. He could have not created or created robots, but this was a lesser good than risking creating significant others.​

This seems to say that there might be competing desires which would cause us to allow evil for a greater purpose. Doesn't this mean that we desire to allow the evil to achieve the greater purpose?

2) Where did man get the free will to murder from?

Q2: Free will is from God. We are in the personal, moral, spiritual image of God. We are self-determining creatures (compared to rocks and plants).​

Of course, but isn't that free will a cause allowing the ability to murder?

3) Might there be an intended reason for God to allow suffering?

Q3: Suffering and death were not God's intentions​

How do we know this?

He allowed it rather than not create or creating robots. He is able to mitigate against it. It can build character and trust and maturity in man. Jesus suffered things as a man. God is not insulated from suffering. Giving us grace to endure inevitable suffering does not mean God intends, desires, causes, etc. suffering. He could end all suffering (and He will), but that would mean killing us all or turning us into robotic slaves.​

These are good reasons to allow suffering.

I do not intend or desire suffering for my family, but the very act of letting them live in a fallen world and take risks makes it possible that they may be beaten, in an accident, get sick, etc. I could lock them up in a bubble and unduly control their lives and circumstances...but at what expense. Suffering is dealt with in the wisdom of God and parents. These contingencies are responded to, but it is not proof they were blueprinted by God (Jesus shows us a warfare model vs blueprint model of God's sovereignty...Satan and God are clashing for the souls of men...God triumphs in the end, but not without casualites...some go to hell, contrary to the plan and heart of God).​

Don't we foreknow that our children will suffer; all the while, we desire for them to exist. This isn't cruel it's love. We brought our children into the world with God's help despite foreknowing that they will suffer. Their lives are greater than suffering, just as our intentions are.

Rob

 

[patman]

Patrick,



A friend of mine, Father Norman Weslin, put this more eloquently than anyone I've ever heard. Essentially Fr. Weslin said that those who will avail themselves of God's gift are ultimately the point of creation. That those who don't are essentially enemies of Our Lord and are nothing to Him. Fr. Weslin made the analogy that if God would have to create all of creation and would only achieve having you for eternity; it would be worth it to Him. That the one who is saved is of greater value than all that is not saved. He said that God created the stars, the earth, and all of the universe; but would destroy it to bring you into an eternal relationship with Him. This being true would not put us higher than God; it would simply point out that God loves us.

The 'implications' that are brought on God by o.v. logic are in reality non-existent. Maybe you could explain and support those implications logically and truthfully.

Rob

Rob, my implications do not apply to you nor were they aimed at the entire S.V., I guess I should have bolded the word 'some' so it made my accusations more clear.

I have simply encountered some like this, who would rather think themselves individually chosen of God regardless of what that means for the sinners who aren't chose. Those who aren't, undoubtedly, can never be chose under their system. Se what I mean? It makes them feel special.

And that feeling is more important than what it does to God's reputation in the eyes of the sinner they preach it too. Because even a sinner can recognize that God doesn't love the world when he only picked a few to be saved and not all.

Not you,, but many S.V. do this, if not unwittingly. I know of no O.V. who do this. Instead all are loved and called. God chooses those who choose him and predestined them as a whole to be saved. This is entirely different than those in the S.V. teach, and it fits in scripture!

 

[RobE]

Rob, my implications do not apply to you nor were they aimed at the entire S.V., I guess I should have bolded the word 'some' so it made my accusations more clear.

I have simply encountered some like this, who would rather think themselves individually chosen of God regardless of what that means for the sinners who aren't chose. Those who aren't, undoubtedly, can never be chose under their system. Se what I mean? It makes them feel special.

And that feeling is more important than what it does to God's reputation in the eyes of the sinner they preach it too. Because even a sinner can recognize that God doesn't love the world when he only picked a few to be saved and not all.

Not you,, but many S.V. do this, if not unwittingly. I know of no O.V. who do this. Instead all are loved and called. God chooses those who choose him and predestined them as a whole to be saved. This is entirely different than those in the S.V. teach, and it fits in scripture!

Well, Calvinism is rejected for this very reason. God doesn't foreordain who will be reprobate, He simply allows them to condemn themselves. This might be a mis-characterization of Calvinism though. I've heard that they believe this, but haven't studied Calvin's teachings.

Rob

 

[patman]

Well, Calvinism is rejected for this very reason. God doesn't foreordain who will be reprobate, He simply allows them to condemn themselves. This might be a mis-characterization of Calvinism though. I've heard that they believe this, but haven't studied Calvin's teachings.

Rob

As someone who believes God knows all of the future (and can change it as he sees fit), why (other than the above) don't you come to the same conclusion they do?

Ok, one, you are smarter than they, but, If God did know the future... he knew the countless millions that he would doom upon creation. You and I aren't among those, so it is hard to understand how they might feel that God's actions lead them to fall. Nothing will ever save them once they are gone. Like dominos, cause and effect through out the years has locked them to they way they choose, giving only an appearance of freewill.

Why do you not come to that conclusion?

 

[godrulz]

If suffering was such a necessary and higher good/purpose, then it would be from the beginning before the Fall and carry on into eternity (neither was/is the case). Love does not desire suffering. Suffering is introduced as a negative consequence of the Fall. God does redeem and bring as much good as possible out of it. This does not mean it was necessary or intended. The fact that it will be abolished and paradise will be restored without suffering shows God's true intentions/desires. Suffering cost Him a great price...more suffering. This is love, but not necessary to 'prove' love.

 

[RobE]

As someone who believes God knows all of the future (and can change it as he sees fit), why (other than the above) don't you come to the same conclusion they do?

In a sense I do come to the same conclusion. From the perspective that God knew who would be reprobate when He began creation. This would mean than God foreordained all by the act of creation to end up in heaven or hell according to their own free acts. It would not mean that He made them intentionally to be in hell, but made them to achieve a greater purpose through free will and love. His desire would be that all would be saved, but alas, that wasn't to happen because of the two-edged sword which free will creates. I would say that He did this because.....

A friend of mine, Father Norman Weslin, put this more eloquently than anyone I've ever heard. Essentially Fr. Weslin said that those who will avail themselves of God's gift are ultimately the point of creation. That those who don't are essentially enemies of Our Lord and are nothing to Him. Fr. Weslin made the analogy that if God would have to create all of creation and would only achieve having you for eternity; it would be worth it to Him. That the one who is saved is of greater value than all that is not saved. He said that God created the stars, the earth, and all of the universe; but would destroy it to bring you into an eternal relationship with Him. This being true would not put us higher than God; it would simply point out that God loves us.​

....the ones He foresaw as choosing to be reprobate were neccessary to acquire the ones who would choose life. We don't know who's who. St. Augustine proclaimed that if you don't know if you are in the elect then act as if you are and become the elect! The process to the future must still be enacted even if God foreknows the outcome. Run the good race, etc..... Run to live and hope for life. He who seeks will find. Are the elect elected until the day of judgement and all things have come to pass? Was Jesus Christ(as fully man) found without flaw before He was tested? Known to be flawless is different than proven to be so.

Rob

 

[RobE]

If suffering was such a necessary and higher good/purpose, then it would be from the beginning before the Fall and carry on into eternity (neither was/is the case). Love does not desire suffering. Suffering is introduced as a negative consequence of the Fall. God does redeem and bring as much good as possible out of it. This does not mean it was necessary or intended. The fact that it will be abolished and paradise will be restored without suffering shows God's true intentions/desires. Suffering cost Him a great price...more suffering. This is love, but not necessary to 'prove' love.

Free will in the hands of an immature being requires suffering. Trial and error. Love requires free will and therefore suffering. God suffers because of His love, why wouldn't we?

You failed to answer my response to your analogies. Do you see the truth in them especially in regards to you bringing your own children into a world where suffering abides?

Rob

 

[godrulz]

Election is corporate in Christ, not individual. It is a wrong assumption that God knew which individuals would be in heaven or hell from the beginning of creation.

Parental analogies are limited, but illustrative.

God had perfect love and freedom in the relations of the triune God from all eternity. Suffering is not germane to love.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Careful. Figures of Speech have expiration dates.

By the way, I'm running low on both Anthropomorphism™ and Hypocatastasis™. Do you all have any extra in stock?

:chuckle: Yeah, and RobE reminded me to say....

Only $19.99!

[super quiet voice] just three easy payments [/super quiet voice]

 

[RobE]

Election is corporate in Christ, not individual. It is a wrong assumption that God knew which individuals would be in heaven or hell from the beginning of creation.

Parental analogies are limited, but illustrative.

God had perfect love and freedom in the relations of the triune God from all eternity. Suffering is not germane to love.

It is however germaine to free will which causes suffering if used incorrectly. i.e. sin

And I'll take your non-response to this question......

Do you see the truth in them especially in regards to you bringing your own children into a world where suffering abides?

.....means that this is a valid argument against the o.v. unless you are able to prove an error in the comparison.

Rob

 

[RobE]

:chuckle: Yeah, and RobE reminded me to say....

Only $19.99!

[super quiet voice] just three easy payments [/super quiet voice]

What? No free(will) stuff for ordering right now! What a rip off!

:greedy: Rob

 

[godrulz]

It is however germaine to free will which causes suffering if used incorrectly. i.e. sin

And I'll take your non-response to this question......

Do you see the truth in them especially in regards to you bringing your own children into a world where suffering abides?

.....means that this is a valid argument against the o.v. unless you are able to prove an error in the comparison.

Rob

I don't see the point of your question. God's rulership is not identical to parenting humans.

 

[RobE]

I don't see the point of your question. God's rulership is not identical to parenting humans.

The point is the parallel. :doh:

We decided to create children foreknowing the fact that they will sin and suffer in achieving a greater purpose; just as, God gave us free will foreknowing that it would cause sin and suffering for His greater purpose.

Enough,
Rob

 

[godrulz]

The point is the parallel. :doh:

We decided to create children foreknowing the fact that they will sin and suffer in achieving a greater purpose; just as, God gave us free will foreknowing that it would cause sin and suffering for His greater purpose.

Enough,
Rob

We do not create children with the hope and expectation that they will become serial killers and homosexuals. There is no good purpose in heinous evil. Sin and suffering and death are enemies and contrary to God's will. He created despite the fact that these things would happen. He has a plan to eventually wipe them out and restore paradise. If they were inherently good and a greater purpose, we would see these things in eternity or from minute one in the garden of Eden.