 |
| 
Magneton
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 132
| Posted 2/9/2003 1:13 PM (GMT -6) |   | Good point, Brett. Their view is not necessarily more reverent, but they do put a great deal of emphasis on a high view of God. It would be more accurate to say they have a high view of God’s capabilities, but at the expense of knowing God’s character, which rests on greater purposes which are not revealed to us.
Magneton
“Let your religion be less of a theory and more of a love affair.” Gilbert K. Chesterton
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 2/9/2003 6:10 PM (GMT -6) | | II: All I will reply in response is that I am not espousing any new view. I stand clearly within the pale of the Reformation tradition...
Doc: Which was altogether new when first proposed by Augustine (though it was anticipated by the Manicheans, ironically)... and, of course, all the "Protestant distinctives" were regarded as new when they were first put forth... not only by Calvin and Luther, but the anabaptists, Wesley, and every other unique "twist" on the Reformation.
As to II's belief that as one grows in their relationship with the Lord they will be more inclined to abandon the Open View and embrace the Reformed view... almost all Open Theists I know, including myself, give the opposite testimony. Many of us were once Calvinists.
Magneton: Better to be called naïve on that day, than to discover one has insulted the Lord. In the spirit of "better safe than sorry," attributes such as exhaustive foreknowledge and actions such as the ordaining of evil events for higher purposes are proposed, to give God the maximum credit or glory.
With BJS, I would sooner stand before God having "accused" him of loving too much and having refused to ascribe, even by implication, any evil to him, than to stand in the wrong having attributed, even by implication, all evil to him.
Blessings
Greg
"In Christ...the ONLY THING that matters is faith energized by love." Galatians 5:6 | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 2/10/2003 2:24 PM (GMT -6) | | Doc quote:
As to II's belief that as one grows in their relationship with the Lord they will be more inclined to abandon the Open View and embrace the Reformed view... almost all Open Theists I know, including myself, give the opposite testimony. Many of us were once Calvinists.
AMEN!!! Preach it Doc! The more I grow in my relationship with the Lord and allow the Lord to renew me ... the more I abandon the Reformed view and embrace the Open View. The more I embrace the Open View the more sense it makes and the more biblical passages seem to pop out at me from the bible. The more I grow in my relationship with the Lord, the more I find myself wanting to defend the Open View.
I guess I stand too with BJS and with Doc in accusing God of loving too much. GOD IS LOVE!
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
GODesteem
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 34
| Posted 2/12/2003 3:42 PM (GMT -6) | | Mr. Boyd writes:
"With BJS, I would sooner stand before God having "accused" him of loving too much and having refused to ascribe, even by implication, any evil to him, than to stand in the wrong having attributed, even by implication, all evil to him."
Before I ask a question or two, let me quote what Greg wrote in a response to an article by Bruce Ware:
"Second, one must be very careful about dismissing a position—to say nothing of breaking fellowship with a group of believers—on the basis of the implications they think follow from that position. After all, to many Arminians and open theists, the Calvinism Ware defends seems to deny the glory of God, the universal love of God, the wisdom of God, the urgency of prayer, the genuineness of God’s interactions with us, human moral responsibility, the need for missions, and many other things. Yet, since Calvinists themselves don’t deny these things, they are accepted as sisters and brothers in Christ. Arminians and open theists may judge them to be (fortunately) logically inconsistent, but we shouldn’t ascribe to them conclusions which we think follow from their position but which they themselves deny."
Okay - so here, Greg Boyd has rightly stated that we need to do our best to represent the issues, and to provide the best statement of a person's position that we disagree with. However, in the opening paragraph we seem to have a digression from this principle. Speaking of the Reformed position, Greg writes that those who believe that God uses the evil actions of men for a greater purpose might very well "stand in the wrong having attributed, even by implication, all evil to him."
Greg, you may "think" that Calvinists attribute all evil to God, even by implication, and this necessarily "follow(s) from their position", yet I succinctly state that Calvinists "deny" this. Numerous reformed writers have painstakingly exegeted several passages which are seemingly unambigous about the intentions of God through the evil intentions of men, such as Genesis 50 (spec. v. 19-20), Acts 2:22 ff., and Acts 4:27-28 (context from start of chapter), yet also clearly attribute responsibility to the people who commited the sins.
Greg - do you mind clarifying how your characature of the Reformed Position fits with the excellent principle you outlined in response to Bruce Ware? Can you also provide me with reference to some of your detailed exegesis (not philisophical arguments) of such texts as mentioned above, which deal with God's control of the evil actions of His created beings?
God loves Himself more than anything... He is our greatest treasure! | | Back to Top | | |
|
BJS
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 587
| Posted 2/12/2003 6:56 PM (GMT -6) | | Easy now, GodEsteem. Retract claws, bro. We just don't buy the compatibilism doctrine, that's all. We know that you do. That's where we part ways. Doc was merely stating how we free-willers view the deterministic mindset. If we say that God determines all evil as well as good, it seems to us that we are attributing evil to God. We know that Calvinists think that God can cause the evil without being responsible for it. That's the big debate, right?
But, although there is a lot of serious disagreement between the two sides, we know that you agree with us that God is good and not evil. Nobody is saying that Calvinists think God is evil.
So ease up on ole Doc, GodEsteem. You know he means well. 
Brett
"Siste viator et memento mori." | | Back to Top | | |
|
GODesteem
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 34
| Posted 2/13/2003 3:55 AM (GMT -6) | | Brett writes: "Retract claws, bro."
No claws extended - just wishing for consistency!
Brett continues: "Doc was merely stating how we free-willers view the deterministic mindset."
Exactly my point! He was stating how he views the deterministic mindset, not what "determinists" actually believe. Thank-you for reaffirming my concern. It is unfortunate that both sides of the issue are apt to portray the other side in a poor light - of course, Reformers have been misrepresented for centuries. Open Theists have only had to deal with it for a few years...
God loves Himself more than anything... He is our greatest treasure! | | Back to Top | | |
|
BJS
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 587
| Posted 2/13/2003 4:45 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Brett writes: "Retract claws, bro."
No claws extended - just wishing for consistency!
Brett continues: "Doc was merely stating how we free-willers view the deterministic mindset."
Exactly my point! He was stating how he views the deterministic mindset, not what "determinists" actually believe. Thank-you for reaffirming my concern. It is unfortunate that both sides of the issue are apt to portray the other side in a poor light - of course, Reformers have been misrepresented for centuries. Open Theists have only had to deal with it for a few years...
God loves Himself more than anything... He is our greatest treasure!
Boy, if we can't even explain why we don't agree with exhaustive determinism, it might be a little difficult to dialogue, don't you think? I thought the point was that we shouldn't claim that just because we see determinism as ascribing evil to God, doesn't mean that determinists think God is evil? I don't think anything Doc said was inconsistent with that. Let's move on.
Brett
"Siste viator et memento mori." | | Back to Top | | |
|
Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
| Posted 2/13/2003 1:43 PM (GMT -6) | | Gen 50…ye thought evil against me; [but] God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as [it is] this day
Act 2…by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God
Act 4…to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.
And here is another one I like about the determined counsel of God, Benjamin.
Luk 1:15-17For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.
http://www.geocities.com/cfpchurch/freeoffercalvin.html
God is Love,
Tim
1Jo 2:16…the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father…
Edited by - Tim on 02/13/2003 7:00:11 PM | | Back to Top | | |
| 108 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 7:38 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 |
|
|