Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

DLW
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457

Posted 8/14/2003 2:39 PM (GMT -6)

http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=18f9a536cc58cafbbd823f2e87e57f50&threadid=5138

I brought this up for fleetwood a while back but he said he didn't care for the forum setup.

It looks like CVTheism is taking a whoopin' in the debate.

dlw Bandit2

Niebuhr thought that sustained moral energy in politics depended on religion's power to mobilize reason along with self-transcending love. The prophetic tradition, meanwhile, gave Jews and Christians some protection against the temptation to identify their social causes with God's will. Lincoln's second inaugural address expressed the prophetic insight, "The almighty has His own purposes."

honorman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137

Posted 8/14/2003 7:21 PM (GMT -6)

I don't like the forum setup either (ohmygosh Shock

. I'm agreeing with Fleetwood!) Miracles do happen...

Chris Grant
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2003
Total Posts : 151

Posted 8/15/2003 11:10 AM (GMT -6)

On that forum, geebob wrote that "the issue of foreknowledge . . . is but one small part of the open view". The only book I own that was (partially) authored by an Open Theist is Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views, so perhaps my perspective on what Open Theism is all about has been skewed. Could someone who owns The God Who Risks, God of the Possible, and Most Moved Mover give me an estimate as to what fraction of the pages in those books are devoted to the topic of foreknowledge?

"I believe that, in the present divided state of Christendom, those who are at the heart of each division are all closer to one another than those who are at the fringes. I would even carry this beyond the borders of Christianity: how much more one has in common with a real Jew or Muslim than with a wretched liberalising, occidentalised specimen of the same categories."
(C.S. Lewis to Mary Willis Shelburne, November 10, 1952.)

DLW
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457

Posted 8/15/2003 11:27 AM (GMT -6)

I like how the other forum has a lot more non-Christians, especially at the Political Science 101 forum where I hang out...
dlw

geebob
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 94

Posted 8/20/2003 1:24 PM (GMT -6)

quote:
Could someone who owns The God Who Risks, God of the Possible, and Most Moved Mover give me an estimate as to what fraction of the pages in those books are devoted to the topic of foreknowledge?

my tgwr is out on loan and I have not read the God of the possible. But I'd like to mention that controversy regarding foreknowledge will have the most ink spilled on it because it is the most controversial aspect. But it is not the driving theme in open theism. There are three driving themes and they are the personhood of God, the free will of man, and the relationship of love between God and man.

another reason that it will be discussed most is due to the fact that it is a distinguishing feature held by open theism. But this does not make it more important than other aspects of the open view.

I believe discussion on foreknowledge is found throughout TGWR but it but I don't think it dominates the discussion.

I will gladly pay you teusday for a hamburger today.

-Wimpy

Chris Grant
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2003
Total Posts : 151

Posted 8/22/2003 3:32 AM (GMT -6)

quote:
Originally posted by geebob

I'd like to mention that controversy regarding foreknowledge will have the most ink spilled on it because it is the most controversial aspect.

Are the other less controversial views endorsed by Open Theists also endorsed by some non-Open Theist theologians (who are viewed as part of "mainstream Evangelicalism", for want of a better term)? If not what views besides the absence of EDF are unique to Open Theists (within the Evangelical community)?

geebob
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 94

Posted 8/29/2003 8:59 PM (GMT -6)

I suppose a high risk view would be unique to open theists in which it is a possibility that no one would respond to the grace of God. But I don't see that such a view is necessary to the open view. I think it would be reasonable to exclude this on saying it's a statistical impossibility.

I'm thinking that most of the other aspects of the open view are held by all sorts of different folks. Many non open theists hold to a temporal God, corporate election, a passible God, and so on. many of these people are to be found within mainstream evangelicalism.

Even some calvinists are in agreement with the ov'ers on this or that topic. Piper thinks God can change his mind. Sproul thinks that God has changes in his emotions.

I suspect that truth be known, the heart of evangelicalism is best expressed by open theism. Many evangelicals think of God in terms that are way to personalistic for the classical view.

I will gladly pay you teusday for a hamburger today.

-Wimpy

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:47 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

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual