 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
a_theist
"Thy will be done."
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 286
| Posted 12/26/2002 5:59 PM (GMT -6) |   | Are these the 5 rudimentary laws that make up the Calvinist dogma?
1.Total depravity (Original Sin)
2.Unconditional election (God's Election)
3.Limited atonement (Particular Redemption)
4.Irresistible grace (Effectual Calling)
5.Perseverance of the Saints
To adhere to this belief, would one have to basically give up everything that they believe in Openness in order to accept these? If so, I don't think it is worth the risk. How does everybody else feel about these views, and can anyone shed some light on the subject or lead me to any old posts which might talk about it.
Blessings,
Paul
"The Creator's power (by which I mean the capacity to influence the world) is made manifest paradoxically in the vulnerable defenselessness of crucified man."
-John F. Haught | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 12/27/2002 9:38 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey A_Theist,
You might do a search on TULIP or something similar. We've discussed some of this before, for sure!
Me? Well, I'm not learned in Calvinism, so I can't talk intelligently about it. However, I don't know that we have to toss everything to consider Open Theism. If, for instance, Total Depravity--and here's where I have no idea what Calvin or the theology that developed from him is on the topic--is defined as the total fallen state of mankind; the total inability of man to reach God of his own accord, then I can believe that and still be an Open Theist. Similar, I can be a persevering saint, but, again, I'm not sure what Calvin meant by this.
I've added absolutely nothing to this question, I'm sure!
Starkman
| | Back to Top | | |
|
a_theist
"Thy will be done."
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 286
| Posted 12/27/2002 10:34 AM (GMT -6) | | You get an E for effort, Starkman.
Blessings,
Paul
"The Creator's power (by which I mean the capacity to influence the world) is made manifest paradoxically in the vulnerable defenselessness of crucified man."
-John F. Haught | | Back to Top | | |
|
Alan Rhoda
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
| Posted 12/27/2002 11:15 AM (GMT -6) | | Paul,
Back in May I started a thread on this issue:
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1198
My basic argument there was that TULIP is consistent with open theism. TULIP rules out openness in soteriological contexts (i.e., when it comes to salvation) because God settles who will and who will not be saved, but it doesn't imply that God settles ALL THINGS and therefore it doesn't rule out openness in other contexts. Now in fact many Calvinists, including Calvin himself, think that God does settle ALL things. If so, THAT would rule out openness, but that goes beyond TULIP, which only says that SALVATION is settled by God.
That said, I do think there is some tension between TULIP and openness, particularly with (U)nconditional election and (L)imited atonement. For it seems like genuine openness in other areas (e.g., decisions about whom to marry, where to live, what flavor ice cream to buy, etc.) could have significant repercussions impacting matters of soteriology. For example, if I am genuinely free to marry and to father a child or not, then it is to some extent up to my spouse and I whether a particular person (our child) exists to be saved. Suppose this is the case and that God elects (in Calvinist fashion) to save my child. This election will not be ENTIRELY unconditional because it is contingent upon an earlier free choice by my spouse and I. And it is hard to see how limited atonement could work if Jesus' atoning work was truly finished in the past and yet it still be an open question which individuals will exist to be atoned for. This tension between TULIP and openness may create pressure to either give up some elements of TULIP or to limit openness to a point that one has to take a significant step in the direction of full-blown Calvinism, in which God settles ALL things in his eternal decree.
Hope that clarifies some things.
Alan | | Back to Top | | |
|
a_theist
"Thy will be done."
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 286
| Posted 12/27/2002 12:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Thanks for that information. I think I have a better view of the issue at hand. And now I am a bit more knowledgable.
Blessings,
Paul
"The Creator's power (by which I mean the capacity to influence the world) is made manifest paradoxically in the vulnerable defenselessness of crucified man."
-John F. Haught
Edited by - A_Theist on 12/27/2002 5:10:42 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
SIM
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2002
Total Posts : 90
| Posted 12/28/2002 9:39 AM (GMT -6) | | Norm Geisler's book, "Chosen But Free", is a very well thought out, logical address of both extreme Calvinism (the 5-point TULIP belief of Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, Perseverance of the Saints)), and extreme Arminianism.
Geisler's book has a chapter, "Vewing The Alternatives", that summarizes Extreme Calvinism. He defines the view as: "predetermination is independent of foreknowledge"
He says that in this view, God's predetermination is done independent of His foreknowledge of human free acts. He also states that the problem with this view is
first that it involves a denial of human free choice, which is supported by both Scripture and good reason.
Secondly, Geisler says that "irresistible grace" (the U-Unconditional Election- in TULIP)on unwilling people is a violation of free choice. I.e., "forced love" is a contradiction in terms.
Third, he says that the extreme Calvinistic view leads logically to a denial of God's omnibenevolence (all-lovingness). The Bible says "God is love" (1 John 4:16) and that He "loves the world" (John 3:16). If God is one indivisible being without any parts, then His love extends to all of His essence, not just part of it, and cannot, then, be partly loving. But if God is all-loving, then how can He love only some who He has given the desire to be saved, and not all?
The implications for the extreme view of man's Total Depravity is seen below, and differs from the balanced view that Geisler holds on the left:
Moderate Calvinist View
Corruption of Good
Effects of Sin Are Extensive
Born With Propensity to Sin
Human Will Is Diminished
Extreme Calvinist View
Destruction of Good
Effects of Sin Are Intensive
Born With Necessity to Sin
Human Will Is Destroyed
Geisler postulates a Third Alternative to the two extreme views : Moderate Calvinism: definition: God's predetermination is in accord with His foreknowledge. He goes on to explain this view.
Happy New YEAR!
SIM
Edited by - SIM on 12/28/2002 11:17:34 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 12/29/2002 10:49 AM (GMT -6) | | Last week I read Dave Hunt's book What Love Is This? which is his assault on Calvinism. If you're looking for a trenchent, if somewhat angry, refutation of Calvinism, this is a good place to start. Unfortunately, the book exhibits the kind of animosity that is all-too-typical of fundamentalist literature. Hunt doesn't always take the high road is his argumentations. Also, his audience is clearly a more-fundamentalist sectarian type of Protestantism which makes some of his arguments odd to "outsiders." For example, he spends a good deal of time doing a "guilt-by-association" sort of thing between Calvin and Catholicism. In his mind, if he can show that Calvin inherited some of his beliefs from Catholicism, this is as good as showing that Calvin flirted with the Devil.
Still, packaged in all this vitriolic/odd stuff are some straightforward solid arguments against Calvinism.
Also, about the compatibility of Openness and TULIP, just FYI, for about two years I held to a sort of "Openness-Calvinistic" position (I was transitioning from Calvinism to Openness). I held to TULIP, but thought everything EXCEPT salvation was open. (My reasons for holding to this odd position are too complicated [and irrelevant] to go into). I have since met three pastors and two teachers who hold similiar views (all of them, I believe, were IN TRANSITION -- though only two recognized this fact).
Blessings
Doc
"In Christ...the ONLY THING that matters is faith energized by love." Galatians 5:6 | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:48 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|