 |
| 
Alan Rhoda
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
| Posted 10/30/2003 11:05 AM (GMT -6) |   | For anyone who might be interested, today and tomorrow (10/30-31) on D. James Kennedy's "Truths That Transform" broadcast a Dr. Sam Lamerson gives a summary and critique of open theism. You can listen online at www.truthsthattransform.org/.
Lamerson gives a decent summary account of open theism (he quotes Boyd, Sanders, and Rice), though I think his "man locked in a room" analogy of the difference between libertarian and compatibilist freedom is defective. His critique of open theism centers on the predictions of Jesus that Peter would deny him and that Judas would betray him. Lamerson claims that either (a) Jesus could have been mistaken or (b) the open theist's view of libertarian freedom is wrong. I don't think these exhaust the options, but before giving my spiel I'd like to know if anyone else has listened to the broadcast.
Alan | | Back to Top | | |
 |
DLW
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 2457
| Posted 10/30/2003 11:17 AM (GMT -6) | | Sounds to me like that would depend on just how open the open theism was...
dlw | | Back to Top | | |
|
crpt_prgrmmr
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 4
| Posted 11/5/2003 9:58 AM (GMT -6) | | Now, here's the question. In all of life, what's the most important thing a person can do? Well as I'm sure all of you would agree, that would be accepting Jesus as your personal savior. But how can you do so when you have a sinful-nature, and so want to run and hide from the light so your deeds are not exposed? Answer, you can't. God is the one that gives the faith a person needs to be saved, so as much as the old-human-ego may sting, it's not my will that saved me.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God so that no one can boast. | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 11/5/2003 12:09 PM (GMT -6) | | | Assertion does not make it so. Asserting that your interpretation of scripture is correct does not make it so; if one checks out this site, one can see there have been many dialogues over the issue of salvation from all sides... | | Back to Top | | |
|
crpt_prgrmmr
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 4
| Posted 11/5/2003 12:52 PM (GMT -6) | | Honorman,
and neither does denial of an assertion make it false. My point was to see how you approach this.
I have gone over much of the site, and I still can't understand how you get to this point. Arguing for God's inability to work in the past based on quantom physics is one of the oddest things I've ever heard of, yet that's basically what is being used. Then using that supposed inability to argue for God's inability to see how the future WILL turn out, it just doesn't slide.
quote:
Originally posted by victoryword
Hi
Ephesians 2:8-9 (the passage you are quoting) refers to SALVATION as God's gift, not the faith itself. Even John Calvin in his commentary on this passage disputes those who interpreted this passage as the gift being faith. His followers do not seem to do as well in this as he did.
Anyway, other translations besides the King Jimmy Version makes it a little clearer:
I mean that you have been saved by grace through believing. You did not save yourselves; it was a gift from God (New Century Version).
God saved you through faith as an act of kindness. You had nothing to do with it. Being saved is a gift from God. (God's Word to the Nations)
For it is by free grace (God's unmerited favor) that you are saved ( delivered from judgment and made partakers of Christ's salvation) through [your] faith. And this [salvation] is not of yourselves [of your own doing, it came not through your own striving], but it is the gift of God; (Amplified)
Saving is all his idea, and all his work. All we do is trust him enough to let him do it. It's God's gift from start to finish! (Message)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Alan Rhoda
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
| Posted 11/5/2003 2:09 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Arguing for God's inability to work in the past based on quantum physics is one of the oddest things I've ever heard of, yet that's basically what is being used.
Beg your pardon, but I don't think anybody on this site argues for open theism that way. Open theism has no essential connection with quantum physics. Where did you get that idea?
Alan | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 11/5/2003 9:53 PM (GMT -6) | | | Crpt: you are correct. My point was simply the way you interpret that scripture is not the way many others do. | | Back to Top | | |
|
jpklcapp
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 3
| Posted 11/6/2003 3:52 AM (GMT -6) | | I heard the broadcast - the concept is one that I oppose - but I was dissapointed with the argument that Sam Lamerson made. He was really more effective in selling the questions that the points of open theism bring than the responses of biblical belief - the main exception to thta critique would be the point that the removal of God from the equation makes the challenges of human existance WORSE not better - by denying the role of God in the future we remove the potential for a Devine path that is going somewhere - you remove the possability for a reason for the suffereing - that truley makes the suffering and conflicts and struggle that we experience worse not better. Allest Begg from www.truthforlife.org did a much better job dealing with this overall issue some time ago - I thought that he was more compelling than the recent Lamerson broadcast but here is my 2 cents:
The root of this is the free will question - It is really not an issue if you understand that the KNOWLEDGE of what you will choose does not limit your ability to choose. The FACT that God knows what you will choose does not mean that you are not choosing it - If I know that my son will choose one movie or food item over another because I know him - because I love him a pay attention to him - that does not limit the ability that he has to choose - it mearlt means that I had knowledge of it in advance. God loves us too - more deeply and profoundly than I can even love my son - he understands and is aware of everything - always - about all of us (those past present and future). The idea that a caring, loving attentive God know what we will choose does not mean that we are not making the choice - nor does our making the choice make it impossable for Him to have know - they are not mutually exclusive. | | Back to Top | | |
|
jpklcapp
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 3
| Posted 11/6/2003 5:09 AM (GMT -6) | | Obviously I disagree - the concept that His knowledge of what you will choose does not alter the choice - God knows all that has been all that is and all that will be - lets say thjatyou decide to put that dog on your signature on p.1000 of the big book (the whole of history as God and only God sees it) - God has already seen it - knowing the whole sotry from begining to end so the choice still takes place - The knowledge that he has of it does not remove your choice - Think of it like this: He knows the whole of history - it is oipen and evident to him - like if you picked up yesterdays newspaper today - you would understand the choices that each person invloved in all of the stories made - that would not alter the choices that were made - He has all the stories - He knows your name and all the days of your life before you are born - that is the same thing - He has knowledge of all things that occured becasue He knows it all from beginning to end - the knowledge does not remove the possability for choice.
As far as removing God from the equation- The context was removing God's role in the unfolding of events - the events that occur must be part of a larger picture or the struggle becomes meaningless - when you remove the possability that God is somehow working through the events in your life for some reason (that you do not understand) then you remove all possablity for meaning - the strife becomes simply pointless and infinitely more difficult to endure. The p[lacing of God in the 'now' removes the possability of the meaning of life - the possability that anything you experience is anything but mere chance and that makes the overall human conditon WORSE by removing the potential of meaning. That seems like a solution that is more destructive than the problems (misunderstanding of man's role in the big picture) that you are addressing. | | Back to Top | | |
|
crpt_prgrmmr
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 4
| Posted 11/6/2003 6:28 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Laika
quote:
Originally posted by jpklcapp
As far as removing God from the equation- The context was removing God's role in the unfolding of events - the events that occur must be part of a larger picture.
But we don't remove God's role from unfolding events. He is involved in unfolding events. He is dynamically (as opposed to static) interacting with agents to progress towards a goal.
Let's say I sit down to play cards with my wife. Beforehand I plan out the entire game, what I will play each hand, what she will play each hand. I plan my victory this way.
Now we play the game and she can only choose to follow my plan. I WIN!!!!! What kind of victory was that?
Now we play again, regularly. She's a tough opponent but I'm dynamic, resourceful and can handle contingencies when they arise. If I do win, wouldn't that be a more REAL victory?
So now we must decide what qualifies as victory for God?
The fact is you do have free will, and that can be abused. You can decide to follow what God says is the way to go, or you can go your own way (not always clear-cut, but the Bible should be our lamp). If God knows which choice you will make, then your free-will is already factored in. As the Bible says, all things work together for the good of those who love God (trust me my family needs this promise right now). While all things are lawful for us, not all things are beneficial. So, you do have choices, you aren't a puppet, but we aren't are own, we are bought with a price, and are called to put on the mind of Christ. That means my will has to submit.
check out http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/index.asp?PageID=527
for this site's use of quantom physics for its argument for absolute linear time, you'll have to forgive me but I can't find the page that has a quote making the argument for God's not exhaustively knowing the future because of not being able to change the past at the moment, but I passed it just yesterday.
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/index.asp?PageID=507
Also has some really strange logic. So if God "changes" His actions based on how someone reacts to Him, then He obviously didn't know how they would react?
Into the tangibles, the site claims that this view can help Christians in things such as prayer. In what way? Consider how Abraham took his son as a sacrifice, though he indicated that God would provide another way, saying that God would provide a sacrifice and that they would both return. He was rewarded for his obedience and faith. Now, if I pray, knowing that God has an exhaustive plan for me, is my faith or my heart any less right than Abraham's? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 11/6/2003 6:45 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by crpt_prgrmmr
So now we must decide what qualifies as victory for God?
No, He has His goals in mind. He's working to achieve those goals through us.
quote:
As the Bible says, all things work together for the good of those who love God
Which is interesting because this verse pre-supposes a contingency. If everything is already all planned out (facts in God's mind), then why the verse about His reacting to contingencies and bringing good out of bad situations?
quote:
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/index.asp?PageID=507
Also has some really strange logic. So if God "changes" His actions based on how someone reacts to Him, then He obviously didn't know how they would react?
That's what a relationship entails, two agents interacting with each other, choosing actions based upon the actions of the other.
God knows all possible responses. The actual response is what is open.
quote:
Into the tangibles, the site claims that this view can help Christians in things such as prayer. In what way?
Because we believe prayer really can change things. Future events aren't set in stone, so to speak. Look at an explanation of prayer Jesus gave us:
Luke 18:1 Now He was telling them a parable to show that at all times they ought to pray and not to lose heart,
2 saying, "In a certain city there was a judge who did not fear God and did not respect man.
3 "There was a widow in that city, and she kept coming to him, saying, 'Give me legal protection from my opponent.'
4 "For a while he was unwilling; but afterward he said to himself, 'Even though I do not fear God nor respect man,
5 yet because this widow bothers me, I will give her legal protection, otherwise by continually coming she will wear me out.'"
6 And the Lord said, "Hear what the unrighteous judge said;
7 now, will not God bring about justice for His elect who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them?
Prayer is banging on God's door until He reacts.
The alternative view of prayer has people saying things (to me) like "prayer really doesn't change God, it changes us". But that's NOT what Jesus taught in His explanation of prayer. Persistent prayer will get God to bring about justice and not delay in doing it.
I see you're also a programmer. Here's one way I look at it. The old kind of computer programs, batch programming, no user input, statically allocated memory at compile time, etc. weren't very powerful. If enough memory wasn't allocated ahead of time, they crashed. If too much was allocated, it was a waste. They ran through the path of execution and were done. Very limited user input.
Newer programs, with an event loop, dynamically allocated memory, etc. are more powerful and adaptable. Memory is allocated on a basis of need and can scale up and be freed when not needed. The program sits in it's event loop waiting for user input, it needs to be more robust but can also be more adaptable. A resourceful user can use it in new ways.
Now I associate the blueprint idea of God (everything is already mapped out and we're just hitting the targets as we go through life) with the old, static, batch programming. And I associate the Open View with the new, dynamic, adaptive, user controlled programming.
I don't know if that will help you but it has helped me understand it.
inside you the time moves and she don't fade
the ghost in you she don't fade | | Back to Top | | |
|
crpt_prgrmmr
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 4
| Posted 11/19/2003 5:17 AM (GMT -6) | | So now God is a finite-state-machine?
I don't think so, and this is where the analogy falls short. A computer doing batch jobs doesn't accept input. God does. It still doesn't mean He doesn't know what "contingency" is going to occur.
quote:
Originally posted by Laika
quote:
Originally posted by crpt_prgrmmr
So now we must decide what qualifies as victory for God?
No, He has His goals in mind. He's working to achieve those goals through us.
quote:
As the Bible says, all things work together for the good of those who love God
Which is interesting because this verse pre-supposes a contingency. If everything is already all planned out (facts in God's mind), then why the verse about His reacting to contingencies and bringing good out of bad situations?
quote:
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/index.asp?PageID=507
Also has some really strange logic. So if God "changes" His actions based on how someone reacts to Him, then He obviously didn't know how they would react?
That's what a relationship entails, two agents interacting with each other, choosing actions based upon the actions of the other.
God knows all possible responses. The actual response is what is open.
quote:
Into the tangibles, the site claims that this view can help Christians in things such as prayer. In what way?
Because we believe prayer really can change things. Future events aren't set in stone, so to speak. Look at an explanation of prayer Jesus gave us:
Luke 18:1 Now He was telling them a parable to show that at all times they ought to pray and not to lose heart,
2 saying, "In a certain city there was a judge who did not fear God and did not respect man.
3 "There was a widow in that city, and she kept coming to him, saying, 'Give me legal protection from my opponent.'
4 "For a while he was unwilling; but afterward he said to himself, 'Even though I do not fear God nor respect man,
5 yet because this widow bothers me, I will give her legal protection, otherwise by continually coming she will wear me out.'"
6 And the Lord said, "Hear what the unrighteous judge said;
7 now, will not God bring about justice for His elect who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them?
Prayer is banging on God's door until He reacts.
The alternative view of prayer has people saying things (to me) like "prayer really doesn't change God, it changes us". But that's NOT what Jesus taught in His explanation of prayer. Persistent prayer will get God to bring about justice and not delay in doing it.
I see you're also a programmer. Here's one way I look at it. The old kind of computer programs, batch programming, no user input, statically allocated memory at compile time, etc. weren't very powerful. If enough memory wasn't allocated ahead of time, they crashed. If too much was allocated, it was a waste. They ran through the path of execution and were done. Very limited user input.
Newer programs, with an event loop, dynamically allocated memory, etc. are more powerful and adaptable. Memory is allocated on a basis of need and can scale up and be freed when not needed. The program sits in it's event loop waiting for user input, it needs to be more robust but can also be more adaptable. A resourceful user can use it in new ways.
Now I associate the blueprint idea of God (everything is already mapped out and we're just hitting the targets as we go through life) with the old, static, batch programming. And I associate the Open View with the new, dynamic, adaptive, user controlled programming.
I don't know if that will help you but it has helped me understand it.
| | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:51 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 |
|
|