Open Theism Discussion Board
  HomeLog InRegisterSearch the ForumHelp
   
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > (No Subject)
 
Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

catalystgroup
Registered Member


Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2
 
   Posted 4/8/2003 1:19 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Can anyone please lend some suggestions to resources on the Openness View's understanding of the end times (something a little more substantial than Jesus is coming back)?

I can find ZERO on this.

Help?

-j
sccatalystgroup2001@yahoo.com

Back to Top
 

Alan Rhoda
Registered Member




Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
 
   Posted 4/8/2003 2:11 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
The open view doesn't require any particular view of the end times, but preterist and/or idealist positions on eschatology seem to be more in the spirit of the open view than futurist positions (e.g., premillenialism). For some discussion check out www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1690.

Hope that helps
Alan
Back to Top
 

catalystgroup
Registered Member


Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2
 
   Posted 4/9/2003 7:13 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Alan,

Thanks for the link, much appreciated. If there are any other comments on this I'd be really stoked to hear them.

Mahalo,

catalyst
Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 4/9/2003 11:12 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
My wife was making the comment today that God does not live in our timeline. That's a good point. For us to try to put God there is entirely wrong. Idolotrous.

She also expressed her feeling that perhaps "linear time" might be the result of the fall. Could be. Death and the progressive, downward path resulting from sin surely make it appear that way. Could be.

In the "confirming" collumn on her thoughts regarding "linear time" is comparison between that and two other models: Greek circular time, and an upward-helix model. The Bible's view of heaven, and of what we begin to participate in of heaven IN CHRIST fits that third model: growing "upward" yet not suffering change (participating in eternal life).

This bears directly on the games people play with "Creationism." Trying to second-guess how long God could "stand it" in this or that task is foolish--and perhaps a form of idolotry.

This bears, too, on our impatience with the end of things. It bears even more on game-playing with respect to speculations, and proliferation of publications.

God does not wear a watch!


Its fine that those who don't like the Greek model (circular) or outright reactions to it (nominalistic freezing of God in time in a deterministic role) want to avoid the pitfalls of the "classical view", or whatever.

Yet, neither the "classical" nor the "open" are necessary!

God is Personal. For our feeble and limited comprehension we can take some comfort in the model of growth-yet-without-change. Whatever the tension that brings along with it, we should be used to that tension by now. We DO confess of Christ's two natures: "two natures, without mixture and without change, without separation and without division ... without the distinction of natures being removed by such union, but rather that the peculiar property of each nature being preserved and being united in one Person and Hypostasis, not separated or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and only begotten, God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Prophets of old have spoken concerning Him , and as Jesus Christ has taught us, and as the Creed of the fathers has delivered to us. (Chalcedonian Definition)

If we can accept "without mixture, without change, without separation, and without division" (WHICH DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PRETNED TO "DEFINE" GOD--FAR FROM IT!!!) then "growth-yet-without-change" for our own destiny (starting as feebly as we do) and "Life" and "Eternal" for God aught to be comfortable-enough handles for now!


I'm aware of a "fashion" for maximizing the possitive "cataphic" elements of theology. But properly speaking, "theology" is a 'vision of God.' Those who would be wise do not pretend to "know" more than they have directly experienced. Christians, therefore, "know" that God is Love, and can say: "God is Love." And THAT is theology.

There is just LOTS that we don't, and can't know.

Thanks.



Edited by - PotOnWheel on 04/09/2003 4:16:52 PM
Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:24 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