 |
| 
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 12/11/2003 9:38 AM (GMT -6) |   | Laika, be easy on the Polyman. I remember he gets upset when called to accountability... | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 12/11/2003 9:57 AM (GMT -6) | | So how's the weather on this thread?...
I think we’re drifting off the road by debating whether or not the Father could have sent the storm which Jesus rebuked. Surely the larger question isn’t answered in any one particular passage. The point the WWV makes (I thought) is that it is true both that God is responsible for creating our world with its regularity, seasonal rains, tides, etc., AND that this wonderful world is under attack by demonic forces who seek to sabotage God’s purposes for creating the world in the first place. The war is real, and we’re caught in the middle. If this is close to being the truth about the situation we find ourselves in, then we can expect the weather to be fundamentally regular and beneficial yet unpredictably destructive as well. Is ALL destructive weather that entirely wipes villages off the map and buries hundreds and thousands of people demonic in its source? Well, we know of at least some such instances (e.g., the flood) where God was specifically judging people or nations. God can, has, and probably will do this more. Does this fact require us to view ALL destructive weather as God’s judgment? No, it does not.
Could God have sent the storm that Jesus calmed so that Jesus could rebuke it and show the disciples his authority? I suppose so. I mean, yeah, no doubt the Father and the Son worked together on things. And though I don’t think that’s what’s happening here (how is it a display of “authority over” something or someone if the person exercising the authority also arranges the show?) I wouldn’t make it a hill to die on. My point is, both its being directly commanded by the Father AND it’s being a demonic attack on Christ and his disciples fit the WWV, for we see both sorts of things going on constantly.
Weather or not God is thought to specifically and unconditionally determine all weather patterns, constructive and destructive, is, I think, part of the larger question of God’s overall providential rule. If one believes the general tenor of Scripture, reason, and spiritual experience combine to confirm God’s all-determining and unconditional control of the minutia of the universe, then there’s no question about who’s responsible for the weather (constructive and destructive). But if one believes the general witness of the Bible, reason, and experience combine to tell us God was interested in sharing with others (angels and humans) to a limited degree the decisions that determine how the world turns out, and if a percentage of those entrusted with the freedom to participate lovingly in ruling the world (both angelic and human) are now committed to opposing God, then the cosmos is at war and we shouldn’t be surprised to find that cosmos working predictably wonderfully and beneficial, say, most of the time, but also occasionally becoming a battlefield. The cosmos IS the battlefield.
If you can’t buy the possibility that God was capable of or willing to go the latter route, then forget arguing about specific passages describing weather patterns to prove your point. There’s nothing to clinch the determinist’s case here regarding the weather. Nor is there any specific mention of the WWV regarding the weather in these passages either. There is no one passage that declares unequivocally that God directly decrees every weather phenomenon, nor is there one passage which unequivocally spells out a WWV of the cosmos. Seems to me that the belief that the passages Chiam has mentioned are evidence that God unilaterally determines all the weather is a consequence of (not evidence for) the belief that God is an all-determining God. It’s bits and pieces. No one piece tells it all. We have to do the best we can in fitting the pieces together in a coherent whole. Personally I think the WWV is the best thing going. If you disagree, cool. You’ve found in Scripture a God you can worship. So have I! So let’s worship!
Tom 
Chiam, I didn't get an answer yet on my question: If God equally determines all the weather unconditionally, and if all God does is praiseworthy, then why do you thank God only for the nice weather and refuse to thank him for the destructive weather that snuffs out the life of whole villages? Shouldn't you equally praise God for both? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Polycarp
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 44
| Posted 12/11/2003 10:21 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by honorman
Laika, be easy on the Polyman. I remember he gets upset when called to accountability...
Don't worry, Honorcarp. Why should I be upset? Laika's grammar skills would surely expose the grammatical ignorance and exegetical incompetence of scholars such as D. A. Carson or N. T. Wright. So, who am I that I should be anything but soundly rebuked and corrected by Laika, the grammar wizard? Besides that, Laika's wondrous Christian kindness and love quells every conceivable or potential distress. Any inclination to be upset with Laika has utterly dissolved in the wake of Laika's kind manner and gentle words that well up from his compassionate and loving heart. Surely you recognize Laika's love and kindness expressed so eloquently toward me. Don't you?
Bye!  | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 12/11/2003 10:28 AM (GMT -6) | | The idea that the merits of Christ's atoning death are automatically, unconditionally conveyed is nowhere to be found in the Bible.
From Genesis to Revelation, the biblical teaching on forgiveness of sins is expressedly conditional, as in: IF we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
The unconditional view of the atonement, to be coherent, requires belief in universalism, for the Scripture is quite plain in saying that the atonement of Christ was for all mankind.
The conditional view harmonizes with Scripture's universal call to repentance, faith, and perseverance.
"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
| | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 12/11/2003 11:04 AM (GMT -6) | | | AS I remember your wanderings in our discussion of your Isaiah passage, Polyman, the knife cuts both ways. But it seems you are bailing again, so perhaps you won't read this. At any rate, people can call others on issues without being unloving. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Polycarp
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 44
| Posted 12/11/2003 11:18 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by honorman
AS I remember your wanderings in our discussion of your Isaiah passage, Polyman, the knife cuts both ways. But it seems you are bailing again, so perhaps you won't read this. At any rate, people can call others on issues without being unloving.
Indeed! I'm very much aware of this. If the shoe fits, wear it. However, calling others on issues is hardly the problem here. I'm a big boy, Honorcarp. I'm quite capable of mixing it up on issues. But when Laika oozes so much love and Christian kindness everytime he responds to me, that's quite a different matter. Verstehen sie? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Polycarp
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2003
Total Posts : 44
| Posted 12/11/2003 12:10 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BJS
Polycarp, please just provide an actual response and stop playing the martyr.
I'm not playing the martyr nor am I going to play the game anymore. Ideas from non-open theists receive very short shrift from open theists on this discussion board. I don't find much response to my ideas in this thread. Instead, I find that respondents have imputed notions and beliefs to me that are far from my own beliefs and thus have failed to understand what I thought was a quite transparent point. If it's not transparent to you, I'm sorry. Right now I cannot take time to try to explain it beyond what I think is rather obvious. I've got a lot of responsibilities that cry out to me far more loudly than this threaded discussion. OK? Laika, true to form, has simply responded to my person rather than to my ideas, evidently 'cuz he loves me so much.
Have a wonderful Christmas everybody! 
P.S. For John. Why do you respond to my warm and generous wish with a condescending "holier than thou" speech? I also do not celebrate a pagan holiday. I celebrate the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ.
P.P.S. For Laika. Are you completely blind to the mean-spirited harshness and attitude you have toward me? I'm finished saying anything to you because I refuse to engage in disputes with people who wrangle about words and belittle people with such contempt. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 12/11/2003 4:32 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Polycarp
P.S. For John. Why do you respond to my warm and generous wish with a condescending "holier than thou" speech? I also do not celebrate a pagan holiday. I celebrate the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Where did I say I was holier than thou? And yes, you do celebrate a pagan holiday if in fact you celebrate Christ's mass. I responded as I did because I don't believe in celebrating Christmas. As a Calvinist, you of all people ought to know that Christmas is one of several paganistic holidays (like Easter/Ishtar) brought into the church through syncretism. This is all a matter of historical fact, and can be found in any encyclopedia.
The Bible nowhere instructs Christians to celebrate Christ's birthday. In fact, the Bible nowhere tells us that December 25th was his birthday. If it were of as supreme importance as most people make it out to be, one would think that the Bible would have clearly stated, "celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ on a specific day of the year, namely, Dec. 25th."
"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
| | Back to Top | | |
|
ataraxia
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2003
Total Posts : 67
| Posted 12/11/2003 5:28 PM (GMT -6) | | Be nice, people! Having been loving will matter far more in the end than having been right.
Let "ataraxia" reign.
ataraxia | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 12/11/2003 6:51 PM (GMT -6) | | John: the Bible doesn't forbid us from celebrating Christ's birthday on any date we choose as representive of the fact that he was born. So, sorry, I do not celebrate a pagan holiday. I celebrate his birth on this earth on a specific date that may or may not be his birthday, but to me, it doesn't matter because it is the fact of his birth that I celebrate because it is cause for celebration.
BTW, you may want to catch the link to the article on his birthday (I can't remember where it is now). Some believe the celebration was not pagan in origin but Christian. Then again, we Christians today do a lot of things the Bible doesn't command us to do. | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 12/12/2003 5:38 AM (GMT -6) | | John, it isn't the fact that one day is more holy than another, it is the fact of celebrating certain events that are pivital in the history of Christianity. The coming of Christ SHOULD be celebrated because it was beginning of the incarnation of God, the glorious miracle of the God-Man. Just as Easter in celebrated as the fulfillment of that promise. The day isn't holy; the event is.
On the other hand, we shouldn't judge the person who doesn't wish to celebrate them either; each person should make u-p his mind according to his own conscience. | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 12/12/2003 8:12 AM (GMT -6) | | John: it doesn't follow only if YOU do not understand what I am saying. Because no one knows for sure when Christ's birthday is, if IIIII (as in me) decide I would like to take one day and celebrate Christ's birthday then for me that day represents the day Christ was born. Is that too hard for you to understand?
Let me give you an easy example: our cats are very special to our children. Since they are from the shelter, we do not know when EXACTLY they were born. Because they want to celebrate the pets they love, we have a "birthday" date set aside to celebrate the event.
Finally, it is hard for to believe that everyday you celebrate Christ's birth. An event of such magnitude should be celebrated as much as possible, but it should also be celebrated in a special way as well.
It may be, however, that your mind is too literal to do such a thing.
BTW
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 12/12/2003 9:29 AM (GMT -6) | | John, YOU were the one that said that my post wasn't following reason. THerefore I tried to make it easy for you. Just because you don't agree with someone, doesn't mean it is unreasonable. But now that you are getting upset, I guess it is time to stop the dialogue. Yes, people do come from the emotional side, but apparently you are the one who is emotional about it.
Again, Merry Christmas | | Back to Top | | |
| 82 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:33 AM (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 |
|
|