Open Theism Discussion Board

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

Forum Quick Jump

54 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3

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

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 8/26/2002 4:30 AM (GMT -6)

I think it's time to network open view pastors, leaders, academics, and churches.

We need to encourage this. I am finding more resistance in the AG and it makes no sense (unless perhaps the explosive idea of having coherent theology of God linked with our practice is a warfare thing in the "heavenlies").

I would love to work in a church like that, a fellowship like that, etc. And if my A/G outright rejects open theism, I will actively take part in it.

All to Jesus I surrender

Blessings,

Shelby

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 8/26/2002 7:16 AM (GMT -6)

I feel the flames licking at our feet brother.

I'll vote you in as an executive officer.

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 8/26/2002 9:44 AM (GMT -6)

TGB I'm entertained -- as long as you are the director of world missions or general secretary

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 8/26/2002 9:47 AM (GMT -6)

or the general super apostle

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 8/26/2002 10:36 AM (GMT -6)

I prefer to be the Treasurer! Lemmi howd da poise! (Just say it out loud like it's written.)

Tom

Give up? OK, it's "Let me hold the purse."

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 8/26/2002 11:37 AM (GMT -6)

Since Meph maybe won't run for the job I'll raise my hand for "Devil's Advocate."

I will show up at every conference meeting, public or back-room, where the main speaker is a "STRAWMAN." At least that is my big 'ta-do' today!!!

For the confrontation of it all!

Stare-man

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/4/2002 3:50 AM (GMT -6)

seriously though has anyone been thinking about this? It is a natural developement. Usually movements try to be accepted, then they are rejected, start their own organisms, and eventually leverage the older organizations into accepting changes.

This is the case in politics, it has been the case with us pentecostals (I remember when contemporary worship was just something the wierd (charismatic) churches in town did--now everyone has this Spirit-influenced desire for interactive worship).

Anyway, just looking for some serious conversation on the issue of a new fellowship.

S...

Alan Rhoda
Registered Member

Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680

Posted 9/4/2002 10:50 AM (GMT -6)

I like the idea, Shelby, though as a non-pentecostal (I'm actually a former AG-er like Doc

) I would like to see something cross-denominational. I think the OV is compatible with a wide range of theological commitments. In another thread a couple months back I argued that the OV is even compatible with a Calvinist monergistic soteriology (albeit not with the whole Calvinist block-universe package). If the OV as such becomes too closely aligned with any particular denomination or with more specialized theological commitments I fear that may only aid its opponents in marginalizing the OV. If you and TGB want to set up a pentecostal OV church my prayers will be with you all the way, but it would still be nice to see OV churches from different denominational backgrounds get networked. And it would be nice to see the AG maintain some openness to the OV.

God bless,

Alan

Tiggers
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 219

Posted 9/4/2002 1:34 PM (GMT -6)

quote:

I like the idea, Shelby, though as a non-pentecostal (I'm actually a former AG-er like Doc ) I would like to see something cross-denominational. I think the OV is compatible with a wide range of theological commitments. ... If the OV as such becomes too closely aligned with any particular denomination or with more specialized theological commitments I fear that may only aid its opponents in marginalizing the OV. If you and TGB want to set up a pentecostal OV church my prayers will be with you all the way, but it would still be nice to see OV churches from different denominational backgrounds get networked. And it would be nice to see the AG maintain some openness to the OV.

God bless,

Alan

Hey Alan,
As a United Methodist and Open Theist, Alan, I completely agree with your assessment regarding networking different denominations together and not becoming "too closely aligned with any particular denomination."

Warmly in Christ,
Tiggers

“The notion that God uses evils as a means to such higher goods is, … incompatible with the doctrine that he is omnipotent, and therefore does not need to use deplorable means to achieve his ends” (J.L. Mackie).

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/4/2002 1:53 PM (GMT -6)

hey I agree! I was not going for an AG like open view fellowship. But rather an open open view fellowship, if you will.

I think the fellowship should based on this model of God and a big, charity-filled tent for other various fine points. A post-denominational fellowship that still provides accountability, resources, and networking.

It certainly should not be pentecostal, but not cessasionist either!

maybe this church could base its core beliefs on an open view interpretation of the nicene (pre-filoque) creed.

hmmm...

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 9/4/2002 5:03 PM (GMT -6)

The history of denominationalism: "It is a natural developement. Usually movements try to be accepted, then they are rejected, start their own organisms, and eventually leverage the older organizations into accepting changes." Fewer denominations than MCDonalds has served hambergers. Older than McDonalds. But they are growing more and more alike each day.

Questioning
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 37

Posted 9/8/2002 1:30 AM (GMT -6)

quote:

hey I agree! I was not going for an AG like open view fellowship. But rather an open open view fellowship, if you will.

I think the fellowship should based on this model of God and a big, charity-filled tent for other various fine points. A post-denominational fellowship that still provides accountability, resources, and networking.

It certainly should not be pentecostal, but not cessasionist either!

maybe this church could base its core beliefs on an open view interpretation of the nicene (pre-filoque) creed.

hmmm...

Sboese,
This whole thing sounds very similar to the idea of the Willow Creek Association. The association is very inclusive. Any Christian church can join by agreeing that they are a "seeker" church. Denomination is not an issue. How a church defines "seeker" is left up to the church.
kc

Some people are like cement. All mixed up and permanently set.

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/10/2002 4:47 AM (GMT -6)

sounds fine, I think some doctinal positions (e.g. openview camps) should be made explicit.

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 9/10/2002 6:53 AM (GMT -6)

SURE.

Package it. Give it a name-brand. Develop name-brand loyalty. Develop animosity towards other brands. (That kid on the back window of pickups pee-ing on "Ford" or "Dodge" could...) and what have you got.

Certainly there will be "infrastructure" at stake and at risk every time someone like Meph comes along to shake things up. Changes will be made to prevent a reoccurrence...

Most likely people will only read literature published by "Open-View House Publishing." (Located in some Chicago suburb, or if there is enough money in it, in Colorado itself.) TV, and radio shows. An OpenView magazine. Bumper Stickers. ("Honk of your own Open-ly free determination if you are...")

Calcification.

Remember the sermon illustration about the guy who helped the Monarch butterfly out of its cocoon, only to discover that the struggle is what makes health.

Edited by - Al2Si2H4O9 on 09/10/2002 4:42:06 PM

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/11/2002 4:34 AM (GMT -6)

i do not believe we need to cut short the struggle. HOWEVER if one believes that this model of God gives answers to many of the questions asked of Christianity, is a Biblical model (if that matters to you) and you believe it should be accessable to the masses, as it were, I don't think having a newly evolved organism is such a problem.

The issue here is should there be a place that allows and even promotes this model of God as it developes or should there not be such a thing? Of course it will interact with the larger culture, by it's nature it cannot become insular.

I feel insulted, but perhaps you have no idea what it is like doing this theology in the pastoral trenches of fellowships and denominations.

unity in essential things, diversity in non-essentials, love in all things.

Shelby

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/11/2002 10:33 AM (GMT -6)

when do you think such an organism would emerge? At what point does one pursue such a thing? What kinds of opposition are a NC for creation of such a network?

These are the questions I have, I guess.

For pentecostals, it was when we were thrown out of our old-line churches and holiness movements. And/ or called demonized or insane. And in some cases run out of town and beaten, etc.

Hmmm some of the rhetoric is there...

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 9/11/2002 11:15 AM (GMT -6)

When does the MARTYR COMPLEX open? And does it have free parking? Maybe it can have an outlet in the Mall of America.

(This is satire

, Shelby, not a personally directed comment.)

God is glorified in his "witnesses." (That's "martyr" translated into English.)

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/11/2002 11:23 AM (GMT -6)

I know I know, but I really would like to hear some thoughts on the idea if there is any serious thought about this.

I walk a fine line whenever the issues of God come up in my working experience. Being a free-will theist. And my own fellowship is just beginning to debate the issue openly.

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 9/11/2002 11:29 AM (GMT -6)

I WISH YOU SUCCESS IN YOUR INVESTIGATION, SHELBY.

I'm just a serious Scandinavian who believes in not only looking on the optomistic side. Otherwise why would the Norwegians have invented Ludfisk? (Cod cured in lye.) I intend to prod. But not interfere!

GregBoyd
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818

Posted 9/16/2002 4:09 AM (GMT -6)

dear sboese,

I appreciate your interest and concern. CV is hosting a meeting with some top openness advocates this fall and we will be discussing, "where do we go from here?" I'm hoping an informal network of people and organizations get linked together.

Side note: I have in the last several months come in contact with a dozen or so well known leaders who espouse the open view but who choose to "stay under the radar screen" because it would hurt there ministries to "come out." I can understand and appreciate their concern. One has to choose their battles carefully, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But its at least encouraging to know that they're out there. In another couple of decades, I suspect, it will be "safer" to hold this view.

Blessings

Doc

"In Christ...the ONLY THING that matters is faith energized by love." Galatians 5:6

eaglecam
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2002
Total Posts : 12

Posted 9/16/2002 11:27 AM (GMT -6)

I am delighted, Greg, that you are planning such a gathering. It is so good to hang out with those of like mind, exploring God together. Out of that exchange the truth will certainly go forth and multiply as Shelby is hoping.

At the same time, we humans tend to get into structure all too easily, worshipping the creation of our hands more than the Lord.
We, like Peter on the mountain in face of a most extraordinary revelation, ask "Shall I build three structures over here or over there?"

The fellowship I am part of is struggling with the very issue of freedom, "how-to-do-church" and the form of structure which is needed to move us all forward. Yesterday they talked about the idea of scaffolding which is a non-permanent construction for the purpose of building something true and lasting. In our case, we want to build Christain character and release of potential and not focus on programs which take on a life of their own. The intention is to build sufficient scaffolding, all the while realizing it is intended to be temporary. It is an interesting challenge as we are on the journey together. (If we ever get this one solved I shall report back!)

In the meanwhile, this forum is a major blessing allowing OV people an opportunity to exchange ideas and a little cyber-fellowship. Thanks much for establishing it.

..."for him to see me mended, I must see him torn..." Luci Shaw

sboese
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 55

Posted 9/18/2002 4:18 AM (GMT -6)

Doc thanks for your response. I would love to be a "fly on the wall" during that discussion. However, it's great to hear a discussion of structure and "where do we go from here" quest is moving along. Sometimes I am frustrated that those who have posited this model of God have given birth then abandoned the child on the mountainside. Fortunately out of weakness God's love is made manifest and grows.

Or maybe it needs to grow up in the woods, then come out?

later

Mephi2K
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 713

Posted 9/18/2002 6:20 AM (GMT -6)

Doc said:

quote:
I appreciate your interest and concern. CV is hosting a meeting with some top openness advocates this fall and we will be discussing, "where do we go from here?" I'm hoping an informal network of people and organizations get linked together.

Side note: I have in the last several months come in contact with a dozen or so well known leaders who espouse the open view but who choose to "stay under the radar screen" because it would hurt there ministries to "come out." I can understand and appreciate their concern. One has to choose their battles carefully, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But its at least encouraging to know that they're out there. In another couple of decades, I suspect, it will be "safer" to hold this view.

It could be sooner than a couple of decades, I think, if we seriously hammer out some of these issues we've been discussing on this board. By formulating these things more solidly, we then have something more to present to both openness AND non-openness people that I really believe can help bridge the gap a bit. Through PRAYERFUL(!!!!!) good spirited dialogue with non-openness people, I really think we could learn from each other and present some ideas, while losing the COUNTERPRODUCTIVE rhetoric (on both sides). If non-openness people were to really see:

1) how much control OVT REALLY allows God to have

2) how God facilitating non-divine freedom does NOT endanger God's position as LORD, presently or eschatologically

3) how God is NOT prisoner to human wills

4) how God is NOT metaphysically limited (ala process) but SELF-limited.

5) how OVT does NOT overemphasizes God's love in opposition to God's other attributes

6) how OVT CAN coherently explain prophecy, meaning divine FOREtelling of events CERTAIN to occur(!)

7) how OVT can give a more plausible and comprehensive of BOTH more "free" and more "deterministic" texts...rather than an either/or

8) basically that OVT is different from some of Calvinism's ideas in DEGREE, not KIND as far as being VARIATIONS of the "greater good" theme.

...I genuinely think that it would be more readily accepted. Frankly, it would give the Geislers, Wares, and Frames something to really chew on. They seem to MAINLY be concerned about God's lordship and not promoting an ANTHROPOCENTRIC (or CREATION-CENTERED) view. The reconstructions that are emerging on this board can DO this. Now I'm not naive. Of course, it's going to take some time, lots of patience, and reclarifications. But I believe it's possible. With God anything is possible...right? Just a thought.

Holla,

gguskid
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 32

Posted 10/10/2002 10:27 AM (GMT -6)

Most recently made aware of this site and having been looking for such a resource for quite some time, I am excited to have found it. However, I find it disturbing, although not necessarily unexpected, that others are expressing difficulties in holding to an OV without having the support for "coming out," so to speak.

I find myself in the same boat. As a minister in a conservative reformed tradition, I am ever seeking as much wiggle room as I can in avoiding the discussion altogether for fear of any negative repercussions as one having even a hint of leaning toward an OV.

I read what you are writing here and find myself wondering of the support that can be given to many who embrace the OV but have no outlet--other than to share, within our various traditions, the practical out workings of the model to laypersons without all the theological construction--for ministering openly a Biblical view of a relational God. Certainly it can be said this can be accomplished with laypeople today and in any tradition, though NOT WITHOUT RISK (no pun intended).

A network of resources would be a welcome help; resources that would help ministers find "fits" with certain congregations or ministry organizations that have no issue with OVT. It seems from these posts that this issue is of common concern amongst OVT's, whether high profile ministry leaders, like those mention by Dr. Boyd, or those of us, as in my case, involved in lower level ministries across the country. The reason I feel it is important to create a support network is for the very need we have to be engaging those who would put down OVT's as holding to "dangerous teaching" as is the case with those in my tradition.

For example, I have an opportunity to engage Dr. Millard Erickson at a small rural church in Quamba, MN this coming Oct. 20th. In order to talk openly with Dr. Erickson, as opposed to the layperson on the street, I need to engage him at both the theological and practical level. This of course would not work in favor of my job security. That is why I believe it is vitally important that some resource network emerge. It is important for the purpose of creating a sense of security in our ministries and thereby moving us to more ably and frequently, with greater numbers and passion, openly speak of OVT as a Biblically accurate model of God.

Until That Time

Edited by - gguskid on 10/10/2002 3:32:46 PM

John Earp
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715

Posted 10/30/2002 8:15 PM (GMT -6)

Hello,

I am a newcomer to this forum, but I wanted to add my 2c to this issue of an OV fellowship of some kind. I think it would be great, though I would bet that many who subscribe to OT now and are feeling the heat within their present denomination will not be in a big hurry to join in another group any time soon. But who knows?

As a minister within a Wesleyan Pentecostal denomination, I have gotten quite varied responses from people in my denomination when I have discussed Open Theism; some for, some vehemently against, and some sort of shrugging their shoulders. In fact, since "converting" to Open Theism about four years ago now, I have more than once seriously considered just going independent, but that would seem to be even MORE isolated than I already am.

My pastor (who I dearly love) has gotten really aggravated at me at times when he didn't know how to respond to the Open Theism arguments I gave him (in private, just him and me), and has effectively squelched my sharing of this view with others in our congregation (though he seems to have no qualms about regurgitating Copeland-Haginism--go figure). I lent him my copy of _The God of the Possible_ about two years ago, and haven't heard back from him about it yet. Once, he actually used the tired old, "You shouldn't try to use logic to explain God," argument with me. To which I can only reply in tongues.

Anti-intellectualism IS a perennial problem in Pentecostalism in particular and fundamentalism in general, to be sure, but I just cannot for the life of me understand why anyone who believes in the power of prayer and "faith to move mountains" so much would have such a problem with Open Theism. For me, it is like (nearly) all the theological and biblical "contradictions" which once plagued my mind are wonderfully clarified by the Open Theism paradigm.

At any rate, I have felt for some time that my days within this denomination are quite numbered (with apologies for the fatalistic sounding figure of speech)

I don't exactly no where to go from here, either, but one thing I do know is that Open Theism has made God seem so much more personal and personable to me, that I cannot ever imagine going back to the traditional (in many ways quite illogical) Arminian view of foreknowledge that I at one time believed.

I remember reading Genesis 6 as a young child of seven or eight and asking my father (I'm a PK) what it could mean for God to repent. I remember He replied that it was difficult to understand, but at least he didn't feel the need to attack me for asking such a probing question. Which is so much more than what many traditionalists apparently feel the need to do nowadays. I wonder why Open Theism is so threatening to some folks. Sorry to ramble. I should be getting to sleep.

Sincerely,

John Earp

P.S. By the way, I recently met Dr. Boyd and his assistant (Tyler, I think?) at the Evangelical Education Ministries Fall Conference in Indiana. What a great experience. Dr. Boyd, if you're reading this, please forgive me for chuckling and chortling so much during your lectures. I certainly didn't mean to be disruptive. I guess I just see the utter absurdities of classical foreknowledge so clearly now (thanks primarily to your great books), that I seem to have this involuntary response of chuckling when I hear them stated so well as you do. I really meant no disrespect. You are truly one of my favorite Christian authors/theologians.

May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.

Edited by - John Earp on 10/31/2002 08:57:52 AM

Edited by - John Earp on 10/31/2002 6:52:35 PM

54 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:50 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