Hilston (10:16:49) Would you agree with this statement?: The similarity between Greek pagan Heraclitean philosophy and Open Theism is a cause to reexamine Openness Theology, but it is not proof that it is wrong.
Picture two people in the Business field named Sam and Owen. Sam has just got his MBA and is about to break off from his current employer to start his own company. When asked how he is going to run his business he replies that he will use all the business theories and teachings that he learned in college from his professors.
Owen is a seasoned business professional with a high up executive job at a successful company. He never went to college but worked his way to the top gaining experience and respect on his way.
Owen meets Sam one day and the two begin talking about their business strategy. Sam tells Owen about all the theories and business models he learned about from his professors. Owen, having never been to college, has never heard anyone explain these theories before, but he listens to them and tells Sam that they are true. Owen's real life experience has confirmed them.
I'm using this analogy to try to show the difference between
agreement and
influence that Hilston didn't seem to understand. Sam (representing the Settled View) is going out to develop his business using a business plan that is based on the theories he has been taught. The professors business ideas have
influenced Sam and he is drawing up his plan under their
influence. Which will work out just fine
if the ideas of his professors turn out to be true. But since Sam is doing everything
from their influence, he is not looking to see if they are true or not, he is
using them to decide what should be true.
Owen, on the other hand (representing the Open View), is not deciding his course of action based on the teachings of others. He has real business experience of what works. His business plans are based on what is really true in his marketplace. So when Owen looks at the theories that Sam learned from his professors he can judge them according to truth. He can be in
agreement with them without ever having been
under their influence.
Likewise, if Sam had professors that didn't know what they were talking about Owen would be able to look at their ideas, judge them according to truth, and
disagree with them. Sam might have a hard time accepting that the professors that had so influence him were wrong. But if he will hear Owen out and listen to the truth that his experience can tell without reading into it what the professors would say, then he might be able to decide on an appropriate business plan that would not set him up for any major hardships.
Basically, Jim's link from the Open View to Heraclitus is meaningless. Even if an OVer could look at Heraclitus' teachings and agree 100%, it still is just an agreement. It is an evaluation based upon our truth: the Word of God. It's not even a comparison to the clear line of
influence that Plato and the like had over Augustine and most any Settled View theologian since.
