 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Rom 8:28: an alterate interpretation? | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 5/4/2005 2:14 PM (GMT -6) |   | |
Thanks for the link, Matt.
I like the living hope found in the following quote:
"When we read Rom 8:28 in its context we can give a positive answer to the questions of pain and suffering in the world. We may see nothing good come of misery and disaster in this world, but this world is not all of reality. There is an ‘until’; there is a place beyond the horizon of what our senses can apprehend, and it is more real and more lasting than what we experience in this mortal shell. God is using the present, even the miserable present, to conform us to the image of his Son. If we define the good as only what we can see in this life, then we have missed the whole point of this text. For, as Paul said earlier in the same chapter, “For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us” (Rom 8:18, NET). Western Christians—especially American Christians—are prone to pervert texts such as Rom 8:28. If our lives are comfortable, if we have wealth, good health, that is fine and well. But it is not the good that Paul had in mind, and it is not the goal of the Christian life."
Peace,
Mark <!-- End of Main Content --> | | Back to Top | | |
 |
D.R.
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2005
Total Posts : 13
| Posted 5/11/2005 12:35 AM (GMT -6) | | In reading all of this, I think that there is no room in anyone's interpretation for a future good that is coming in eternal life. We are certainly not told that in Romans 8:28 that "all things" work together for good as far as we can see in this life. It is a promise, however, that this is what is occurring when Jane Doe's baby dies and when Christians in Sudan are killed. We certainly believe that the earlier Church martyrs were killed in order to spread the Gospel. We also see occasion after occasion when people are brought into a relationship with Christ through suffering. So when MattBrown argues that it is reality that good certainly doesn't always happen, then he 1) ignores the futuristic aspect of this promise that might possibly be fulfilled only after death and 2) that there are numerous examples of the certainty of good coming from terrible events like the ones mentioned above.
I think it takes actual faith to believe this promise and sometimes faith must look at the circumstances and still believe. If it wasn't hard to believe, then it wouldn't be faith and Jesus wouldn't have told us about that narrrow road/broad road, carry your cross, hate your mother and father stuff. Remember Hebrews 11:1 -- "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."
In the end, I remain very unconvinced of the Open Position. I find the classic theism position MORE compelling as I read these posts. What is see is cynicism, a lack of faith, and a continual reinterpretation of passages in order to fit into a worldview that comes really from a rejection of God's use of evil in the world and His election of people for salvation. I am not trying to be harsh, but to an outsider looking in, I just don't see anything that would make me want to worship the god of open theism. I love the sovereign God of the Reformed Faith. I love to ascribe to God what Job did -- "The Lord gives and the Lord takes away, Blessed be the name of the Lord." I just don't see those in Open Theism being able to do that. Sorry, just my opinion.
D.R. | | Back to Top | | |
|
D.R.
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2005
Total Posts : 13
| Posted 5/11/2005 12:45 AM (GMT -6) | | One more thing.
IN response to Matt Brown's quote:
In response to these situations (and all other bad/evil/painful situations) we hear christians quoting Rom 8:28, saying "God knows what he is doing, we may not be able to understand it but God works all things for the good, so your baby's death must have been for the best." What a load of hog wash! What possible good do they think God was working on?
I would say, that the baby that is in heaven does indeed understand that greater good. He or she is not complaining about his or her loss of life. God has every right to create it in order to destroy it. To me your statement reflects a view of God that is not only uncreative, but also so limited that you indeed place God as not much stronger than men. I do not want to worship that god -- he would not be able to keep me in salvation or to assure me that heaven is going to be any better than what I experience now on earth. Again, sorry, but my honest opinion. I just don't see the "wild excitement" of the god that Open Theists claim to see in him.
Additionally, my previous post was being worked on before the article before it. But I am glad to see some post finally directed toward heavenly good.
D.R. | | Back to Top | | |
|
MattBrown
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2004
Total Posts : 74
| Posted 5/13/2005 7:31 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi D.R.
Thanks for the thoughts.
First off, this thread has nothing to do with the open view. I am not sure where you are reading that into the discussion? I am simply trying to get feedback on the actual text in question. It has nothing to do with me making up an idea about the God I worship. I actually know some people who are classic theists and clearly not open viewers, yet hold to this alternate interpretation. Admittedly, I guess to accept this alternate view on the text one would not be able to read into it the traditional Reform thinking, but again, this thread is not in any way advocating anything about the open view, whether God is outside of time, or anything about what the definition of omniscience is.
Secondly, it seems like clearly you have an axe to grind about the open view (and all non-Reform views) and have come to this site not looking for honest discussion and dialogue but rather to attack those who disagree with you. Your response comes across as arrogant and attacking. You basically called me cynical, question the faith of someone you have never met, in addition to calling my God uncreative and limited. I just don't see the brotherly love here D.R.
Third, you are making huge assumptions about everyones views on this board. If you would read some of my other posts (like the ones on the Natural Evil thread) you would see that I agree with you on some points. I have no doubt that God works through rough circumstances, through pain, through death, to bring about His purposes and bring about good. I wouldn't question for a second that God, at times, either allows bad things to happen (like Job) or causes bad things to happen (like Sodom). I am also quite aware that this life is not all there is and that vindication of good/bad, right/wrong will come to pass in the next life. I am in full agreement that that baby who dies will get justice. Why you would assume that I would think otherwise I cannot figure out.
In conclusion, let me state that I don't come close to having all the answers. I am far from perfect in my actions and beliefs. I pray sincerely for an open mind and for the fuller Truth and to remain humble. I come here to this board to see that fuller Truth and to wrestle with issues I have. If you have something to contribute to this particular text please included it.
Be careful, lest in fighting the dragon you become the dragon. - Nietzsche | | Back to Top | | |
| 29 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:35 PM (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 |
|
|