quote:

---

1. What is freedom under the OV? Are we talking about freedom of the will? What limits has God placed on this freedom?

I say this, b/c if there is an interventionist God, by definition He would sometimes have to interfere with someone's freedom in order to accomplish His purpose. Someone replied to me - yes, well we don't have that kind of freedom. So what kind of freedom do we have?

If at some times, God does have to interfere with freedom, then how can it be that freedom is the most important value? B/c wouldn't he have to at all times and places respect that freedom- if you're trying to build your argument on the fact that love REQUIRES freedom - any time freedom is interefered with, God is lessening his love then.

---

I love my children. My children have freedom to do what they want. Sometimes I restrict their freedom. My restricting their freedom shows my love. My allowing them freedom shows my love.

quote:

---

2. Does or does not God know the future?

---

The future is not knowable. It is not yet done, hence it's called the "future". God declares that He will do some things, but they aren't done yet. "Declaring" does not equal "knowing".

quote:

---

I've seen it argued here that knowing the future is impossible - b/c the future is not yet here. So it is not a contradiction to omniscience to say God does not know the future.

---

Yes.

quote:

---

HOwever, other OVer's have said here that God CAN, at some times, know the future, i.e., prophecy, etc. So if he can at some times, why is it hard to believe he can at all times?

---

They are wrong. Prophecy is God telling you what He will do. Not what's already done in the future.

quote:

---

4. Could God determine the universe if he so chose?

---

Yes. He would have to have designed us differently, NOT in His image.





Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

quote:

---

I'm trying to get some consistency here though. That's why this stuff is so difficult...

---

Good luck.

quote:

---

You say, "My restricting their freedom shows my love"- so you're saying both restricted and unrestricted freedom shows love - so then why can't maximizing restriction in order to comply with a perfect plan show love as well?

---

I want my children to grow up into mature adults who can decide what is wise themselves. Continual, total control of them would not allow this and would not show love. I think God treats us the same way. The Law is an example, it was a tutor that lead us to Christ. When you're young, you often have, what seems, arbitrary rules, "don't cross the street", as you mature you understand the issues better and have more freedom.

quote:

---

OK, so you say God could have determined the universe if he created us differently. So then he could know the future, right?
So therein lies the rub - since he is allpowerful, he COULD have determined the universe- w/ people created differently. But then he COULD have known the future. But you say the future is inherently unknowable...You see the contradiction here, right?

---

I don't think it's a contradiction. "know" is passive, it "sees" something that's already actualized. "determine" is active, it only "sees" as potential actualization.

I don't "know" I'll wear white socks tomorrow. I "determine" to wear white socks tomorrow. I may say "I know I'll wear white socks tomorrow" but that does not mean I'm seeing that I've already worn white socks tomorrow.



Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

quote:

---

how do you know that you aren't Totally Depraved, and how do you know God desires that sort of a realtionship with us?

---

Here's some reasons why I don't think I was totally depraved from the start:

1. God commanded Israel to keep the Law, why would He do this if they couldn't? Lookit Job, he made continual sacrifices and had this testimony:
8 The LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, fearing God and turning away from evil." That's God speaking.

2. If I sin because I was born a sinner, and Jesus didn't sin because He wasn't born a sinner, how can He be my high priest? This scripture, then, is wrong:
Hebrews 4
15 "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin."
He was tempted "as we are", how could He if He was born sinless and I was born a sinner? I believe we're born without sin, but at a certain age started making choices, our choices become habits and our habits become our nature. If Jesus could not have chosen to sin, then He wasn't tempted like I was and He couldn't be my high priest.

3. "We sinned in Adam" hinges on an incorrect translation of a Latin version. In Romans 5:
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned--

A Latin version added "in Adam" to this verse so it said "because all sinned in Adam". But that was incorrect. See an appendix in Roger Forster's book "God's Strategy in Human History" about the wrong translation of "eph ho"

Also note
a. Through one man sin entered the world. It doesn't say sin entered every person.
b. Death spread to all men. It doesn't say sin spread to all men.
c. Death spread to all men "because all sinned". Here is how all became sinners, they "sinned".

"Sin" is an action. It is not inheritable. My dad was a farmer because he farmed. I am not a farmer because my dad was a farmer. I'm only a farmer if I farm.

Now Paul compares how sin came into the world with how righteousness came into the world:

19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

"as through one man's disobedience, even so through one man's obedience" It's a parallel comparison.

If you believe through Adam we all automatically became sinners, then you have to believe through Jesus we all automatically became righteous; Universalism.

But if through Jesus salvation came into the world and it has to be chosen, then so too did sin enter the world and it has to be chosen.
Sin is available for all to choose, salvation is available for all to choose.

"For all have sinned (that's an action all have chosen) and fallen short of the glory of God"

4. Another verse used to support inherited sinful nature is Psalm 51
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

But who were the active moral agents present at David's conception? David wasn't there. His biological father and biological mother were the active moral agents there. My mother was in sin when she conceived me is what David is saying. When Samuel went to Jesse to select the new king, why wasn't David brought out when Samuel asked to see all of Jesse's sons? Some parentage problems there?



Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?


Edited by - Laika on 05/19/2003 12:46:51 PM

quote:

---

What is the OV anyway? Shhhhh, quiet. I'll tell ya....

---

ROTFLMBO! Tooooo funny, T!




"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.

revivaltheology.net

quote:

---

well my response to that is that the only reason i know it, is because God has taken the scales of ignorance off of my eyes.

---

How do you know? If you're totally depraved, you could be fooling yourself into thinking the scales of ignorance are off your eyes, or that Satan has fooled you into thinking the scales of ignorance are off your eyes. In fact, if you're totally depraved, couldn't the idea that you're totally depraved be false? a contradiction

Here's some age of accountability texts:
Deut. 1:39
Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

Isaish 7:16
For before the children shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

Romans 9:
10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;
11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls





Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

Edited by - Laika on 05/19/2003 1:43:05 PM

quote:

---

the whole choosing salvation brings me to my hardenst problem with OT in that if Christ gave Himself as a general ransom

---

It is a general ransom:

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God is willing for ALL to repent. So if ALL don't repent is it because:
1. God is not willing?
2. God is willing but not able?
3. God is willing but people can reject His will?






Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

Edited by - Laika on 05/19/2003 1:50:19 PM

quote:

---

How does "total depravity" equal "total intellectual ignorance"? I believe people can be totally depraved morally and yet be able to be reasonable and logical as well. So just b/c we're totally depraved doesn't mean we can't be very intelligent.

---

So being totally depraved in body/soul/mind still allows you to recognize you're totally depraved in body/soul/mind?






Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

quote:

---

ReasonableDoubt, You mentioned that you're trying to get some consistency with the open view and what it is. You said, "That's why this stuff is so difficult..." (due to inconsistency). Would others agree that there is inconsistency? I have heard it said about the OV that it is hard to get a definitive definition based on inconsistencies. Have you found that among yourselves, you do not all agree on all the basics of the OV? Why do you think this would this be so?

---

Is Calvinism more consistent? Most people I talk to only hold a few of TULIP. Want to talk about Supralapsarianism & Infralapsarianism?




Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

quote:

---

Well would you say the devil is totally depraved? And yet he is diabolically brilliant - as are several evil leaders on our planet. Additionally - as James said, the devil and his angels believe in Christ - big deal. THey apparently know and reason that what Christ teaches is correct. The problem is they are not willing to follow that, but rather to live for themselves.

---

But when/how do you know you're regenerated? And why couldn't that be the devil or your own sinful nature fooling you?

You read Eph 2:8,9 but can't trust your sinful mind to comprehend that accurately.




Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

quote:

---

So you're saying that the only way I can know if anything is true is by becoming an OV'er who denies one of the basic tenets of the faith, original sin??

---

quote:

---

So you're saying that the only way I can know if anything is true is by becoming an OV'er who denies one of the basic tenets of the faith, original sin?? Wow, that's interesting.

---

No. I'm saying you can know truth, you can do good, right now. "Come and let us reason together says the Lord"

Original sin: what is it?
Is it Adam and Eve sinning? Yes
Is it a sinful human nature? Yes
Is it an inherited sinful human nature? No
Is it a sinful nature you developed? Yes

So I deny the inheritance part. Note: I don't know who else believes this, I may be on my own here, don't impute this to others.

Gotta go. Have a good day.



Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through?

Edited by - Laika on 05/19/2003 2:19:08 PM