Will Duffy YouTube Debate v CJ Borns Open Theism 11/23/19

[Derf]

a Calvinist does not believe God is stone idol but that is what open theist say Calvinist believe every time
do open theist say God is guessing, of course not , but it is the natural conclusion of what open theist teach




not mischaracterization but natural conclusion




sooo not guessing but then you say could be guessing .




no lies to repent of .

God is prophesying the punishment and the unrepentance
and you an open theist say God is guessing that he may or may not punish & they may or may not repent.

Rev 16:8 And the fourth angel poured out his vial onto the sun. And it was given to him to burn men with fire.
Rev 16:9 And men were burned with great heat. And they blasphemed the name of God, He having authority over these plagues. And they did not repent in order to give Him glory.

I agree with Clete that open theists, for the most part, don't think God is guessing. In the case of prophecying unrepentance, which is a valid argument, I think I could almost do as well, as I watch the United States devolve into not just a non-Christian nation, but an anti-Christian nation. And God would have much, much, MUCH more knowledge and foresight into what men will do under the circumstances He is preparing than I ever could.

Rev 16:9 doesn't say "everybody" blasphemed God. Some might actually repent, but it is very likely many will not. In fact, I can imagine firefighters, for instance, trying to fight out-of-control fires in California recently, blaspheming often, specifically using the name of Jesus Christ, but specifically NOT calling on Him to help. My daughter volunteers as a firefighter, and she can attest that firefighters don't have the cleanest language.

 

[Clete]

Good points, Clete. You should you this wisdom in your discussions with way 2 go.

Every word we have both said is all still here for everyone to read. I'm not here to persuade anyone. That ended a great many years ago. In fact, it's getting harder and harder to justify being here at all. The reason I'm still here is a combination of force of habit and something of an innate desire/hunger for substantive discussion about theological issues. I just keep hoping that I'll find someone willing and able to scratch that itch. It does occur on rare occasion but those occurrences have gotten so to be so few and far between that I've pretty much given up hope. I do however always begin any exchange with substance and respect in the hopes that this new discussion will be different. It almost never is anymore.

Bottom line is that I really couldn't care less how I'm received here. Those who I care anything about know who I am and my reputation is safe with them, everyone else can take a flying leap for all I care. If anyone here is offended by my posts then I suggest that they don't read them.

 

[Clete]

I agree with Clete that open theists, for the most part, don't think God is guessing.

For the most part?

Can you cite a single example of any open theist who has even said that God guesses, never mind one who actually believes it?

In the case of prophecying unrepentance, which is a valid argument, I think I could almost do as well, as I watch the United States devolve into not just a non-Christian nation, but an anti-Christian nation. And God would have much, much, MUCH more knowledge and foresight into what men will do under the circumstances He is preparing than I ever could.

It's cool that you say this. I was just thinking the exact same thing this last Saturday on my way home from work.

Rev 16:9 doesn't say "everybody" blasphemed God. Some might actually repent, but it is very likely many will not. In fact, I can imagine firefighters, for instance, trying to fight out-of-control fires in California recently, blaspheming often, specifically using the name of Jesus Christ, but specifically NOT calling on Him to help. My daughter volunteers as a firefighter, and she can attest that firefighters don't have the cleanest language.

I think that it is even more certain that "very likely". There are going to be supernatural things happening all over the place. The biblical record shows that this is pretty much the surest way to make people who already hate God start gnashing at Him with their teeth. In addition to that, you'll have the antichrist directly in play drawing people away by his false miracles which people tend to breathlessly flock toward. It's just not a pretty picture. Just as it was in the days of Noah, people aren't going to repent in mass. Those that do and are killed physically will find themselves in a better place and those that don't will, with their death, leap from the frying pan into the fire.

Clete

 

[Derf]

For the most part?

Can you cite a single example of any open theist who has even said that God guesses, never mind one who actually believes it?

No. But neither can I say categorically that none ever says that.

It's cool that you say this. I was just thinking the exact same thing this last Saturday on my way home from work.

:thumb:

I think that it is even more certain that "very likely". There are going to be supernatural things happening all over the place. The biblical record shows that this is pretty much the surest way to make people who already hate God start gnashing at Him with their teeth. In addition to that, you'll have the antichrist directly in play drawing people away by his false miracles which people tend to breathlessly flock toward. It's just not a pretty picture. Just as it was in the days of Noah, people aren't going to repent in mass. Those that do and are killed physically will find themselves in a better place and those that don't will, with their death, leap from the frying pan into the fire.

Clete

And IF (big if here) God needed to learn from His experience with mankind before the flood to help with His predictions in Rev 16, then perhaps He was remembering the people cursing Him as the heavy rains began to fall and the waters began to rise, or as the brimstone began to fall in Sodom. Rev 9 actually seems like a softening of God's animus toward the unrighteous, compared with the flood (they had no recognition of anything starting to happen, according to Jesus, Matt 24:38), and compared with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, because it sounds like there is some opportunity for repentance in Rev 16.

 

[way 2 go]

Not every time but when we do it is not only based upon but almost always explained that a God that cannot change in any way whatsoever is describing a stone idol not a living, dynamic, loving God who becomes a human man so as to die and then rise from the dead.

In other words, it is not an intentional, made up out of whole clothe, total straw man argument where we actually are trying to make people believe that Calvinists ACTUALLY have idols made of rock in the living rooms and at their churches.

got it
Calvinists make god out to be like a stone idol
& open theist make god out to be like a man & guessing

What you are doing is something entirely different. You actually want people to believe that open theism teaches that God has no idea what anyone is going to do and that it's little more than a comic coin toss whether His prophecies will come to pass or not while in reality open theists actually believe the opposite and take the bible to mean precisely what it says that calls the end from the beginning.

its open theism , anything could happen

When you make plans to go on vacation and you book reservations on a cruse ship for next June and then in February the ship you thought you were going to Belize on ends up catching fire and sinking to the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, is it in ANY WAY accurate to say that you had been guessing about which ship you were going to be taking the cruise on?

Now that's an example from a human perspective but that only strengthens the argument because we humans don't have access to 1% of the information that God has nor do we have the power to protect cruise ships from accidental fires and sinking the way God could if He chose to do so and yet it STILL is not accurate to call what we were doing "guessing". That just isn't what it means to guess!

What's more is that YOU KNOW that this isn't what it means to guess and you make the accusation anyway and that's why it's a lie.

open theist say God has all the information but is still guessing what might happen


Rev 16:8 And the fourth angel poured out his vial onto the sun. And it was given to him to burn men with fire.
Rev 16:9 And men were burned with great heat. And they blasphemed the name of God, He having authority over these plagues. And they did not repent in order to give Him glory.

No! The potential for circumstances to change and therefore your intended plan of action to change with it is not at all what it means to be guessing and you know it!

circumstances change and therefore your intended plan of action change
means you were guessing you guessed wrong

Saying it doesn't make it so!

open theist portray God as guessing ,it is what they do

No, He isn't! He says IF not WHEN. IF the repent then so will He. IF they do not repent then the punishment will commence as prophesied.

actually God says "they did not repent" it is the open theist that adds the uncertainty , guessing.

Jonah prophesied that Nineveh would be destroyed in forty days. The entire prophesy is I think something like five words in the original language. There was no mention of repentance to mention of potential reprieve. God did NOT prophesy both the punishment and the repentance as you claim but only the destruction of Nineveh in forty days. Forty-one days later, Nineveh is still standing and thriving and in better shape than ever before because God did not do that which He said He would do in response to Nineveh's repentance.

Jonah 3:¹⁰ Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

so the open theist view is God was guessing

I have never said any such thing. God absolutely was not guessing and totally would have completely destroyed Nineveh just as He said He would do but didn't because and only because they repented which even Jonah fully expected them to do which is why he refused to go in the first place.

so Jonah knew but God did not.

This prophecy is under the same sort of conditions as the Nineveh prophecy. If Israel repents then so will God.

actually God says "they did not repent"
Rev 16:9 And men were burned with great heat. And they blasphemed the name of God, He having authority over these plagues. And they did not repent in order to give Him glory.

The entire book of Jonah is dedicated to telling the story of but one of several biblical prophesies that did not come to pass. You say you reject Calvinism and Open Theism so that leaves little else except some form of Arminianism but when it comes to prophesy and God's foreknowledge, there's not a dimes worth of difference between them and the Calvinists, so how do you explain the prophesies in the bible that did not come to pass?

the open theist says Revelation chapter 4-22 is a guess

further more open theist portray God is always guessing when it comes to the future

 

[Clete]

got it
Calvinists make god out to be like a stone idol
& open theist make god out to be like a man & guessing

You're just a liar. Pure and simple.

its open theism , anything could happen

Liar

open theist say God has all the information but is still guessing what might happen

No we don't, liar.

circumstances change and therefore your intended plan of action change
means you were guessing you guessed wrong

Saying what you isn't so makes you a liar.

open theist portray God as guessing ,it is what they do

Lying is what you do.

actually God says "they did not repent" it is the open theist that adds the uncertainty , guessing.

I quoted the passage, liar!

Here, read it again...

Jeremiah 18:⁷ The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, ⁸ IF that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will repent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. ⁹ And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, ¹⁰ IF it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will repent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.

Go ahead and lie again abount what God said! I DARE YOU! LIAR!!!

so the open theist view is God was guessing

This is said in direct response to me having said the opposite!

Who do you think you're fooling here, liar?!

so Jonah knew but God did not.

I didn't say that.

Neither of them knew in the absolute sense but the point is that it wasn't hard to figure out because it wasn't any form of guessing whatsoever.

actually God says "they did not repent"
Rev 16:9 And men were burned with great heat. And they blasphemed the name of God, He having authority over these plagues. And they did not repent in order to give Him glory.

It's a predictive prophesy, not prewritten history. If God's prediction of their unrepentance happens as predicted, so will His subsequent punishments and if not then He will repent of the disaster that He thought to bring upon them just as He explicitly states in Jeremiah 18.

the open theist says Revelation chapter 4-22 is a guess

No it doesn't, liar!

further more open theist portray God is always guessing when it comes to the future

This is utterly and totally false even from your own intentionally deceptive use of the word "guess". There are a great many things that are absolutely going to occur by God's own power that are in no way contingent upon anything other than God's own will and power. There will be a New Earth and a New Heaven. The Body of Christ will be glorified and the Law will be shown to be honorable. There is nothing that can prevent these things and many more like them from happening because God has purposed to do them of His own will and for His own purposes and they are contingent on nothing at all other than God's own timing.

The fact of the matter is that you don't even know what Open Theism actually teaches and what's worse is that you don't care.You're very simply a lying fool. After this post, I doubt that you're even a Christian at all and the reason you reject both open theism and Calvinism is because you reject Christianity altogether.

Clete

 

[Derf]

On guessing: Clete complained about my characterization of Open Theists being less than comprehensive when I said that most don't believe God is guessing. I took his challenge seriously, and looked for instances where Open Theists might admit God is guessing. The charge is a common one among traditional theists, so I looked for a reference in their works (the works of the anti-Open Theists) to an Open Theist who admitted God was guessing when making a prediction about the future choices of men. Here's the one I found (stopped looking after this), from https://bible.org/article/examination-open-theism#P125_40685:

A New Testament passage that clearly demonstrates the classical view is Matthew 26:33-35, 69-75. In this passage Jesus predicts Peter’s future denial. Open theists explain the passage in terms of Christ predicting what Peter would do on the basis of His present knowledge of Peter’s character. This means that Christ used his exhaustive present knowledge of Peter to make an educated guess as to what Peter would do in the future.85

The footnote points to this:

85 Boyd, “The Open-Theism View,” 20.

That reference, according to a previous footnote, is actually referring to [Gregory Boyd, “The Open-Theism View,” in Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views, ed. James K. Beilby (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001), 20.]
The problem with the bible.org article is that Boyd doesn't use the word "guess", just as way 2 go suggested. But he also doesn't speak of something akin to guessing. Boyd is pretty clear in describing the scenario as one where Peter's character had "solidified" sufficiently in this area such that God/Jesus would know how Peter would behave under certain circumstances "(which God could easily orchestrate, if he needed to)".

So, in regard to God's "guessing", the word is used pejoratively by those wishing to find holes to poke in Open Theism, but is not a true characterization of the beliefs of Open Theists (at least the ones I've read).

 

[way 2 go]

I agree with clete that open theists, for the most part, don't think God is guessing.

me too, I agree open theists don't think God is guessing but
that is the conclusion I get from their teaching

the open theists conclude from the calvinist teaching that calvinist have a God that is like a stone idol

In the case of prophecying unrepentance, which is a valid argument, I think I could almost do as well, as I watch the United States devolve into not just a non-Christian nation, but an anti-Christian nation. And God would have much, much, MUCH more knowledge and foresight into what men will do under the circumstances He is preparing than I ever could.

an open theists says God guessing even with all his knowledge :idunno:

Rev 16:9 doesn't say "everybody" blasphemed God. Some might actually repent, but it is very likely many will not. In fact, I can imagine firefighters, for instance, trying to fight out-of-control fires in California recently, blaspheming often, specifically using the name of Jesus Christ, but specifically NOT calling on Him to help. My daughter volunteers as a firefighter, and she can attest that firefighters don't have the cleanest language.

actually God says "they did not repent"

 

[Clete]

On guessing: Clete complained about my characterization of Open Theists being less than comprehensive when I said that most don't believe God is guessing. I took his challenge seriously, and looked for instances where Open Theists might admit God is guessing. The charge is a common one among traditional theists, so I looked for a reference in their works (the works of the anti-Open Theists) to an Open Theist who admitted God was guessing when making a prediction about the future choices of men. Here's the one I found (stopped looking after this), from https://bible.org/article/examinatio...ism#P125_40685:

A New Testament passage that clearly demonstrates the classical view is Matthew 26:33-35, 69-75. In this passage Jesus predicts Peter’s future denial. Open theists explain the passage in terms of Christ predicting what Peter would do on the basis of His present knowledge of Peter’s character. This means that Christ used his exhaustive present knowledge of Peter to make an educated guess as to what Peter would do in the future.85

The footnote points to this:

85 Boyd, “The Open-Theism View,” 20.

That reference, according to a previous footnote, is actually referring to [Gregory Boyd, “The Open-Theism View,” in Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views, ed. James K. Beilby (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001), 20.]
The problem with the bible.org article is that Boyd doesn't use the word "guess", just as way 2 go suggested. But he also doesn't speak of something akin to guessing. Boyd is pretty clear in describing the scenario as one where Peter's character had "solidified" sufficiently in this area such that God/Jesus would know how Peter would behave under certain circumstances "(which God could easily orchestrate, if he needed to)".

So, in regard to God's "guessing", the word is used pejoratively by those wishing to find holes to poke in Open Theism, but is not a true characterization of the beliefs of Open Theists (at least the ones I've read).

I can assure you that there is not one single instance of any Open Theist that believes God guesses. Not even the term "educated guess" would be an accurate way to describe what God does when He makes predictive prophecies, although that phrase, if used properly, is far more tollerable than the stupid lie that way 2 go is spreading here.

Having said that, Jesus did not know, in the absolute sense of the word, that Peter would deny Him three times. Jesus knew Peter extremely well and the entire sequence of events was clearly orchestrated by God and so there was a very very high degree of certainty that Peter would do as Christ predicted because it was all about God teaching Peter something about himself and not about Jesus' ability to predict the future. Nevertheless, it was possible for Peter to repent and had he done so, it would not have broken God nor would it have made Jesus a false prophet. On the contrary, Jesus would have been elated at Peter's repentance and rejoiced that His prophecy had the desired effect.

In fact, if Peter could not have repented, then the whole story loses it's meaning. After all, it isn't difficult to know what a puppet will do when you're the one pulling the strings. So the resident liar in this thread, way 2 go, has a choice to make. Does he believe that Peter had a choice and thus could have done otherwise as Open Theism teaches or does he believe that Peter's actions were not chosen but were instead predestined and that he could not have done otherwise as the Calvinist teaches?

He, of course, will not take a stand here. He's not half as honest as it would require for that to happen. He'll likely ignore the point entirely and find some sort of way to repeat the lie he came here to propagate.

Clete

 

[Clete]

me too, I agree open theists don't think God is guessing but
that is the conclusion I get from their teaching

No it isn't! You know perfectly well that it is a false accusation.

You're a liar.

the open theists conclude from the calvinist teaching that calvinist have a God that is like a stone idol

Why are you willing to modify your claim about what we say about Calvinists but not what we say about God.

You began this stupidity by justifying your "God guesses" accusation by equating it with our claim that the Calvinist worships a stone idol. Now its that we say that "Calvinist have a God that is LIKE a stone idol".

Why do you have wiggle room for the Calvinist teaching and not ours?

I'll tell you why!

It's because you're a liar! That's the reason! You aren't doing anything here that resembles honesty. This "God guesses" nonsense isn't any sort of conclusion you draw from what we teach, it is a pejorative and nothing else. If you were even half as honest as you pretend to be, you'd have dropped this lie or at the very least modified it.

You're either a Calvinist or you're not a Christian at all. Not even Calvinists are typically this prone to stubborn lying and so I suspect the later.

 

[Derf]

I can assure you that there is not one single instance of any Open Theist that believes God guesses. Not even the term "educated guess" would be an accurate way to describe what God does when He makes predictive prophecies, although that phrase, if used properly, is far more tollerable than the stupid lie that way 2 go is spreading here.

Having said that, Jesus did not know, in the absolute sense of the word, that Peter would deny Him three times. Jesus knew Peter extremely well and the entire sequence of events was clearly orchestrated by God and so there was a very very high degree of certainty that Peter would do as Christ predicted because it was all about God teaching Peter something about himself and not about Jesus' ability to predict the future. Nevertheless, it was possible for Peter to repent and had he done so, it would not have broken God nor would it have made Jesus a false prophet. On the contrary, Jesus would have been elated at Peter's repentance and rejoiced that His prophecy had the desired effect.

In fact, if Peter could not have repented, then the whole story loses it's meaning. After all, it isn't difficult to know what a puppet will do when you're the one pulling the strings. So the resident liar in this thread, way 2 go, has a choice to make. Does he believe that Peter had a choice and thus could have done otherwise as Open Theism teaches or does he believe that Peter's actions were not chosen but were instead predestined and that he could not have done otherwise as the Calvinist teaches?

He, of course, will not take a stand here. He's not half as honest as it would require for that to happen. He'll likely ignore the point entirely and find some sort of way to repeat the lie he came here to propagate.

Clete

I assume when you talk about Peter's "repentance" you're talking about him not succumbing to the temptation in the first place, as he definitely repented afterward. If the future's not settled, then he didn't have anything to repent of until the moment it happened. Of course, if the future IS settled, then he would have had something to repent of, before he did it, which is a little ridiculous.

way 2 go
I don't think the future has to be settled for Jesus to have made the prediction confidently, as He did, without resorting to guessing. He knew Peter's heart, and that his bravado was mostly show. The aspect of Satan demanding to "sift Peter as wheat" harkens back to the book of Job, where a similar demand was made.

In Job, Satan makes some interesting statements that confirm open theism, or at least confirm that he (Satan) thinks the future is open.

[Job 1:9-11 KJV] 9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.

Satan didn't hesitate to make a prediction about Job that would have been utterly foolish if Satan thought God either 1. could see into the future to know exactly how Job would react (Arminianism), or 2. had ordained exactly how Job would react (Calvinism). There still exists the possibility that Satan was ignorant about God's decrees or about God's ability to see into the future, but he actually had relationship with God, adversarial though it was, so it seems he would know at least something about how God perceives the future.

And when Satan's first plan came up empty, he didn't say, "Drat! I forgot that you can see into the future." Rather he said,[Job 2:4-5 KJV] 4 And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.

You might protest that we don't want to get our theology from Satan, but we do something similar when we say the Pharisees confirm the Trinity when they put Jesus on trial for making Himself equal to God.

One more thing. Satan confirms that he thinks people in general (though he was wrong about righteous Job) will "curse [God] to [His] face" when 1. they lose all they have or 2. when they are hit with serious disease or other physical oppression, similar to Rev 16. If both God and Satan think that, and Satan acts like an open theist in the book of Job, doesn't that make it possible for God to be an open theist with respect to Rev 16?

 

[way 2 go]

No it isn't! You know perfectly well that it is a false accusation.

open theism teaches God is guessing it's practically in the title .

You're a liar.


You're either a Calvinist or you're not a Christian at all. Not even Calvinists are typically this prone to stubborn lying and so I suspect the later.

you've run out of substance and all you have is ad hominem

 

[Clete]

open theism teaches God is guessing it's practically in the title .

Go one repeating the lie, liar!

you've run out of substance and all you have is ad hominem

No, you stopped debating from the very start of this. An ad hominem is a fallacious form of argument that takes the following form...

way 2 go is a liar (or other pajorative)
Therefore, way 2 go's position is false

I am making no such argument. Actually, it is you who have been putting forward an ad hominem argument this entire time. Your entire tactic is based on the negative connotations inherent in the idea of "God guesses". It's nothing at all but a pejorative designed to elicit an emotional response, the very opposite of an intellectually honest or rational argument. There was some possibility that you came about the notion honestly which is why I started this exchange the way I did. Since then, you have proven yourself to be anything but honest and are in fact intentionally lying. My ONLY purpose for being here now is to point that fact out. So no, I am not making an ad hominem, I'm simply calling you what you are, a lying fool who isn't interested in debating doctrine or in the truth of what someone else believes. You are here to lie about Open Theism and that's the only reason you are here.

Since you clearly think that ad hominems are bad, you should repent!


So let's all sit back and see whether way 2 go is both a liar and a hypocrite!

He totally is! The future is open and way2go is free to do whatever he chooses but God's fiery judgment will leave the Earth a burning cinder before he ever repents of his foolishness.

Clete

 

[Clete]

I assume when you talk about Peter's "repentance" you're talking about him not succumbing to the temptation in the first place, as he definitely repented afterward. If the future's not settled, then he didn't have anything to repent of until the moment it happened. Of course, if the future IS settled, then he would have had something to repent of, before he did it, which is a little ridiculous.

That's a great point!

And yes, I was thinking it terms of Peter not having denied Christ or perhaps, having done so one or even twice, repenting before he got the third denial out of his mouth. The point being that Jesus' prophecy did not have to come to pass as stated.

way 2 go
I don't think the future has to be settled for Jesus to have made the prediction confidently, as He did, without resorting to guessing. He knew Peter's heart, and that his bravado was mostly show. The aspect of Satan demanding to "sift Peter as wheat" harkens back to the book of Job, where a similar demand was made.

In Job, Satan makes some interesting statements that confirm open theism, or at least confirm that he (Satan) thinks the future is open.

[Job 1:9-11 KJV] 9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.

Satan didn't hesitate to make a prediction about Job that would have been utterly foolish if Satan thought God either 1. could see into the future to know exactly how Job would react (Arminianism), or 2. had ordained exactly how Job would react (Calvinism). There still exists the possibility that Satan was ignorant about God's decrees or about God's ability to see into the future, but he actually had relationship with God, adversarial though it was, so it seems he would know at least something about how God perceives the future.

Of course, the Calvinist would say that Satan was predestined to act as though the future was open, although they would never put it those terms because their stupidity would show through too easily but that is exactly what they believe. In spite of the fact that every aspect of reality presents itself consistent with Open Theism, they believe it all to be an illusion. Reality looks, swims and quacks just like an Open Theism duck but the Calvinist insists that its actually a settled future ostrich (or whatever the opposite of a duck is).

And when Satan's first plan came up empty, he didn't say, "Drat! I forgot that you can see into the future." Rather he said,[Job 2:4-5 KJV] 4 And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.

You might protest that we don't want to get our theology from Satan, but we do something similar when we say the Pharisees confirm the Trinity when they put Jesus on trial for making Himself equal to God.

Another excellent point and you're right, some might object but they'd be silly to do so. All true doctrine is consistent with reality. That's what it means for it to be true. Thus any true thing will find itself in harmony with correct doctrine, including the factually accurate actions of Satan.

One more thing. Satan confirms that he thinks people in general (though he was wrong about righteous Job) will "curse [God] to [His] face" when 1. they lose all they have or 2. when they are hit with serious disease or other physical oppression, similar to Rev 16. If both God and Satan think that, and Satan acts like an open theist in the book of Job, doesn't that make it possible for God to be an open theist with respect to Rev 16?

Now that is truly a brilliant argument. Wouldn't this be a terrific website if people who disagreed with Open Theism actually engaged such arguments and attempted to refute them in some sort of intellectually honest and intelligent manner? TOL used to be that way. Now, all way2go will do with this is less than nothing, if he even reads it to begin with. Disappointing.

Clete

 

[way 2 go]

And when Satan's first plan came up empty, he didn't say, "Drat! I forgot that you can see into the future."

Rev 20:7 And whenever the thousand years are ended, Satan will be set loose out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 and he will go to mislead the nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to assemble them in war, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Rev 20:10 And the Devil leading them astray was thrown into the Lake of Fire and Brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet were. And they were tormented day and night to the ages of the ages.

about satan

here satan will fight against God & God said he will be defeated

but maybe satan might be open theist & think God is guessing

 

[Derf]

Rev 20:7 And whenever the thousand years are ended, Satan will be set loose out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 and he will go to mislead the nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to assemble them in war, whose number is as the sand of the sea.
Rev 20:10 And the Devil leading them astray was thrown into the Lake of Fire and Brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet were. And they were tormented day and night to the ages of the ages.

about satan

here satan will fight against God & God said he will be defeated

but maybe satan might be open theist & think God is guessing

Satan may still somehow think he can outsmart God, and thus cause the prophecies not to come to pass. If you take the prophecies as God saying what He will bring about in the future, no matter how bad the opposition gets, you can see why the opposition keeps trying. Again, that's not God guessing, that's the opposition not willing to submit to the idea that God is powerful enough to do what He proposes.

Your obsession with the guessing idea is leading you astray.

 

[way 2 go]

Satan may still somehow think he can outsmart God, and thus cause the prophecies not to come to pass. If you take the prophecies as God saying what He will bring about in the future, no matter how bad the opposition gets, you can see why the opposition keeps trying. Again, that's not God guessing, that's the opposition not willing to submit to the idea that God is powerful enough to do what He proposes.

You said satan did not acknowledge whether God had foreknowledge in Job
& I showed you that satan has foreknowledge of his demise in revelation and is still going to go out the way God said he would.

... unless you are an open theist

Your obsession with the guessing idea is leading you astray.

how so?
guessing is how God is portrayed in open theism, its OPEN

I don't think the future has to be settled for Jesus to have made the prediction confidently, as He did, without resorting to guessing. He knew Peter's heart, and that his bravado was mostly show. The aspect of Satan demanding to "sift Peter as wheat" harkens back to the book of Job, where a similar demand was made.

you had a point until Jesus added the details which made it foreknowledge and not an open theism "guess"

Mar_14:30 And Jesus said to him, Truly I say to you that today, in this night, before the rooster crows twice, you shall deny Me three times.

 

[Clete]

It is proven!

way 2 go gives people a hard time about commiting ad hominems when they aren't doing so but then persists in doing so himself.

He is a proven liar and hypocrite. He must believe that God predestined him to be so.

I suspect he is also an unbeliever.

 

[way 2 go]

open theist have God in their image who is really smart but guessing .

Calvinist have God in a box called fate with no choices .

 

[Derf]

You said satan did not acknowledge whether God had foreknowledge in Job

I said Satan didn't acknowledge God could see into the future. That's not the same thing as having foreknowledge. Is 46 explains the main source of God's foreknowledge:
[Isa 46:10-11 KJV] 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: 11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken [it], I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed [it], I will also do it.

This is one of the strongest passages for Open Theism, despite settled theists trying to claim it, because it explains God's prophetic power. Since God doesn't purpose everything you do, you can still pick a different cereal for breakfast tomorrow.

This is different than the Peter denial scenario. I disagree with Clete that Peter could have stopped the denials--I don't think he could have--not because God was forcing him to deny, and not because the future was already settled, but because that was the kind (and timing and number) of temptation God had approved for Peter, and that was the state of Peter's character.

I agree with you that if Peter might have stopped denying prior to the last denial, then Christ/God was guessing.

The denial prediction was not of the same flavor as many prophetic passages whose very purpose is to elicit repentance. The purpose of the denial prediction, along with its fulfillment, was to bring about a realization in Peter of his faults, so that he could fully trust in Christ instead of himself.

& I showed you that satan has foreknowledge of his demise in revelation and is still going to go out the way God said he would.

... unless you are an open theist

Satan has foreknowledge of God's plan based on reading the bible. But Satan hasn't yet agreed that it is his settled future.

how so?
guessing is how God is portrayed in open theism, its OPEN

Does God guess at what He wants to accomplish? Surely you will have to say "no". Does God accomplish what He wants to accomplish? "Yes." If He knows what He wants to accomplish, and is able to accomplish it, then there's no guessing on His part. There's just power.

Let's think about Peter's denial. Did God want Peter to deny Jesus?..........I think the answer is "no", but I can see a purpose (as described above) for the denial. But if God is the forcing power behind Peter's denial, then His kingdom seems to be a divided one. In other words, if God is somehow forcing Peter to deny Christ, then He's not being an encouragement to Jesus during a very tough time, and Peter doesn't have to accept responsibility for his denials. This is the Calvinist settled view. No good purpose is served unless Peter denies on his own--and then Peter can see his sin, being broken, and allow Jesus to build him back up to be a true leader of the church.

The other option is that God did not force Peter to deny Jesus, but could somehow see into the future to see what Peter would do. This is the Arminian settled view. But it is untenable once God needs to change anything in that "settled" future, which He would have to do before the foundation of the world. Then it slips back into Calvinism.

you had a point until Jesus added the details which made it foreknowledge and not an open theism "guess"

Mar_14:30 And Jesus said to him, Truly I say to you that today, in this night, before the rooster crows twice, you shall deny Me three times.

Details of Peter's actions can still be seen to be a description of Peter's character. Foreknowledge, yes. But the basis is the question.

Knowing when the rooster will crow is possibly an act of God's power, again (timing the natural actions of a bird), rather than just seeing into the future.

This is also the difference between divination and asking God for the outcome of a battle or other event.