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 ]

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 10:55 AM (GMT -6)

Ok. I need a soapbox. I just can't understand how people live with the blueprint worldview. This stuff frustrates me to no end. Cognitive dissonance producing views of God's sovereignty - as God in total control - just don't sit well with how I believe God responds to us in genuine communion and how the mustard seed Kingdom of God moves forward until the day it is brought to fruition. Which, by the way, is SO odd! Think about it. God plans for God to be patient with Godself for God's own timing for God's Kingdom to come...

oh my Tom, help me.

selah

--
God is light and there is absolutely no darkness in Him.
1 John 1:5

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 3/12/2006 11:48 AM (GMT -6)

Bonjour Selah. Je comprends votre problème et je sens votre douleur!

Preach it Sista! I sometimes want to believe that hardcore determinists secretly doubt it all. But there's no way of knowing! I think we really do have fundamentally different worldviews at specific points, important points. It's amazing really.

But nobody makes adjustments in their worldview without being very motivated. I just don't get into debating it anymore where I can't see that somebody is motivated, where something is going on in their lives that's pressuring them to question the deterministic outlook. But if they're doubting, then they're open. That's worth giving time to. Otherwise you're just wasting your time. Don't let it bother you. Those who really believe the blueprint worldview are happy. None of them doubts that God is really related and personal. They just don't see that their determinism is incompatible with that being the case. Oh well. They're secure and satisfied. So the difficulty you and I have in conceiving of how they can interpret life in a deterministic worldview only bothers us. It's not like they're feeling pain and crying out for help. So just let it go girl. But if you find somebody who IS hurting and questions the traditional bludprint view, THEN you have an opportunity to offer an alternative. Like Morpheus and his team going around freeing minds one by one, we have to be patient!

Tom

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 12:06 PM (GMT -6)

And another thing...(comments mine): "It horribly skews the meaning of the cross when contemporary prophets of self-esteem say that the cross is a witness to my infinite worth (WHO would say such a thing?!!) , since God was willing to pay such a high price to get me. The biblical perspective is that the cross is a witness to the infinite worth of God's glory and a witness to the immensity of the sin of my pride. What should shock us, is that we have brought such contempt upon the worth of God that the very death of his Son is required to vindicate that worth (shame shame shame). The cross witnesses to the infinite worth of God and the infinite outrage of sin(since there is no real forgiveness only infinite hidden outrage)." ~John Piper

better... "It completely straightens out the meaning of the cross when sincere pastors shepherd people into clear/concrete understanding of their individual worth before God. God, for the joy set before him, endured the cross disregarding its shame...because he so LOVED the world. The biblical perspective is just that. God didn't have to do what God did if he was going to live in infinite rage for the kind of world he chose to create. I think we should be shocked when pastors don't get that the God-man came into the world as a baby in a manger instead of a power-over monster who el-kabonged us all over the head for what terrible things we were guilty of doing. We should be shocked when pastors alienate people from true love, acceptance, freedom, significance and life by telling them he has "infinite outrage over sin"

okey dokey. I better put myself in time-out before I say more.

selah

Post Edited (selah) : 3/12/2006 11:44:58 AM (GMT-6)

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 12:22 PM (GMT -6)

TGB said...
...Those who really believe the blueprint worldview are happy. None of them doubts that God is really related and personal. They just don't see that their determinism is incompatible with that being the case. Oh well. They're secure and satisfied. So the difficulty you and I have in conceiving of how they can interpret life in a deterministic worldview only bothers us. It's not like they're feeling pain and crying out for help. So just let it go girl. But if you find somebody who IS hurting and questions the traditional bludprint view, THEN you have an opportunity to offer an alternative. Like Morpheus and his team going around freeing minds one by one, we have to be patient!

Tom

bonjour Tom

Ok, I should have set this up by saying I'm in class with people who hold this perspective. The prof and (as far as I can tell) all but one (who secretly confessed on the side) hold to the blueprint WV. This is a preaching course. I am a female. There are no other females in the class. Piper is our text. According to the online discussion, the rest of the class loved it.
The response paper I'm writing (2500 words) is supposed to be my reaction to Piper's book. I have 500 words and one of each of these

get the picture?

Post Edited (selah) : 3/12/2006 11:51:15 AM (GMT-6)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 3/12/2006 12:42 PM (GMT -6)

Oh my. You're in the cooker. Not much you can do. Gosh. Just speak in tongues.

The whole "it's all about God and God's worth" is one big begging of the question. Of friggin COURSE God's worth and value are infinite. Of COURSE God is more valuable than us. Of COURSE God always acts in ways that redound to his own glory and honor. So what's that prove? Nothing but that God always acts in gloriously wonderful ways, that God is infinitely more valuable that a human being--things open theists have NO problem in affirming. It just begs the question of what sort of world a God of infinite worth and glory could/would in fact create.

Yes, yes, yes. God is central, his glory ultimate, and his worth and value are alone infinite. None of this means we mean nothing to God or that the cross is not also an expression of how much we mean to God. For God demonstrates his LOVE FOR US in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. This worth we have for God is determined BY God. It's not forced upon him. But we can read that worth off the extremes to which God goes to win us for himself.

See, now you got me p'od Selah. The Piperian coopting of "God's glory and worth" as something only embracable via a deterministic theology is so bogus. They really do believe that only THEY can fully affirm the infinite value of God, only THEY are able to recognize the centrality of God and his GLORY, only THEY truly exalt God. In fact, indeterminists can equally affirm the infinite value of God above created beings, the centrality of God's own glory and honor in ALL God's actions, and the relevant worth of human beings. Our worth may be relevant, but we are worth something to God, and our worth is relevant to God's own determinations--that is, GOD gets to decide how much we are worth to him, not John Piper. And it's just wrong for somebody to say the cross doesn't demonstrate of how much God decided we are worth to him.

Tom

Post Edited (TGB) : 3/12/2006 11:49:57 AM (GMT-6)

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 12:52 PM (GMT -6)

right? Let's just go off!

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 12:54 PM (GMT -6)

I'm going to Piper's church right now. I'm going to interrupt whatever's goin on! that's it.

(knowing me I'll hand him a note that says ... you are a meany... and walk out) hahhahaha

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 12:57 PM (GMT -6)

btw I'm clipping and pasting your paragraph beginning at "The Piperian coopting..." because I need words ...

just kidding

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 3/12/2006 1:04 PM (GMT -6)

You go get him girl. Tell him I sent ya!

Tom

Corey
Five with a Four-wing

Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1893

Posted 3/12/2006 3:21 PM (GMT -6)

For my part, I wasn't looking for open theism, or particularly dissatisfied with my worldview at the time. A friend of mine started going to WHC and just mentioned open theism in passing. I was curious and pursued it. I'm glad he didn't judge me as a waste of time.

Not intending to coopt this thread. But this is a good example of the "pearls and swine" thing. We have to be profoundly serious about who we entrust our pearls to; entrust you spiritual guidance to Piper and you'll get trampled underfoot. He doesn't value your soul in the way that Boyd does, for example. (Am I judging? If so, I think it's in accordance with Matt 7.) Be careful what you build your life on; when the storms come, it will all come crashing down.

"You are too skilled in the art of talking in generalities about everything without letting yourself be personally involved." SK in Either/Or.

Post Edited (Corey) : 3/12/2006 2:36:23 PM (GMT-6)

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 3/12/2006 4:34 PM (GMT -6)

I think you're right Corey. We have to be careful who we put ourselves under for spiritual guidance. For sure!
Regarding Piper, I guess I always hold out hope that he's clueless about the implications of his theology. I want to
believe that as he tramples people underfoot, he remains unaware somehow...

Call me an idealist... and I'll answer the phone

selah

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 3/12/2006 4:48 PM (GMT -6)

Like Corey, when I first ran accross the OV, it resonated with me a bit. Then I investigated. I guess my "don't waster your time" comment had to do with people who want to debate the OV for the sake of converting me. They've studied it and have no questions. They just want to disprove it. It's those folks I won't give time to. Now, that doesn't rule out public debates like Greg's. He's debating for the sake of the audience as much as anything else. That's cool.

Tom

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/12/2006 4:51 PM (GMT -6)

two-cents: People say things that they know from experience, sometimes. Other times they say what they know will sound good. And still other times they say things that are shapped in reaction to other things. And finally, people sometimes say things that are reactions to other people's reactions. And at least at that point, if not before, religion and politics become bedfellows. . . and we all begin to feel strange.

(o)

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/12/2006 5:13 PM (GMT -6)

"It horribly skews the meaning of the cross when contemporary prophets of self-esteem "

There ARE prophets of self-esteem, who set their goals so low, and think that if you fix the present world that all is hunky-dorry. But that's whot the Gospel. There is a war on, with sin, and a radical solution in the cross and resurrection. And the gospel does not kindly incorporate evil into the big picture -- but it fights against it.

"say that the cross is a witness to my infinite worth "

Floevsky pointed out -- contra to Nygren -- that humans HAVE infinite worth because they are created BY God and in God's image. So...we must conceed that the cross does witness that infinite worth -- after the fact. But God's act of creation witnesses it in its own self.

"since God was willing to pay such a high price to get me."

(an aside: does this take the cross too much just by itself, without the resurrection. What is made of the ENTIRE incarnation and all, all, all of the suffering of God in the flesh from the moment of conception?)

"The biblical perspective is that the cross is a witness to the infinite worth of God's glory and a witness to the immensity of the sin of my pride."

Yes. It does witness to the immensity of sin.

BUT... that really tells us about the infinity of God. One even smallest step away from LIFE is death. . .from fellowship is estrangement...etc. Salvation in Chirst is SO vast that no measurement of the sufficiency of the Cross and Resurrection is possible.

"What should shock us, is that we have brought such contempt upon the worth of God"

We should ALL remember that it is impossible for us to measure the 'worth of God.' We should all "fall down" and worship.

"that the very death of his Son is required to vindicate that worth "

Does this actually suggest that it is "God's" worth that is vindicated. Snipping it like this I was going to read that it is OUR worth that is vindicated. And that would be OK only IF it had the qualification I put above.

God's "WRATH" is his ZEAL. Heaven and hell are the same "place" but facing different directions -- running towards God or running away from him.

In God's "IMPASSIBILITY" he is unaffected -- in Essence -- by sin. So Mr. P. appears all wet on this one. Neat twist of notions to use impassibility and Athanasius and Cyril to counter him. Huh?

Yet, God is not determined by essence, nor bound, nor forced. God LOVES and the Father and Spirit as well as the Son (who is the only one to suffer IN the flesh) SUFFERED over our sin. God CHOSE to suffer over our sin.

Rather than this focusing on the offense to God, sin is an offense to the LOVE of God put in us at creation. (Donte's "the love that moves the stars.")

The cross witnesses to the infinite worth of God and the infinite outrage of sin." ~John Piper

Change to "infinite LOVE of God, and the persistence of the Zeal of his Love.

BTW -- explore the connection between grace and judgement!

(o)

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/12/2006 5:16 PM (GMT -6)

selah said...
... I just can't understand how people live with the blueprint worldview. ...

D. Hart

"God's infinite transcendence makes room in itself for the real being of finite creatures..."

(o)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 3/12/2006 11:22 PM (GMT -6)

I ordered Hart, OK? But if it's line after line of this stuff I'm gonna be disappointed and offer to sell it for whatever I can to recover my loss.

"God's infinite transcendence makes room in itself for the real being of finite creatures."

I don't even know what that means.

Tom

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/13/2006 7:12 AM (GMT -6)

TGB said...
I ordered Hart, OK? But if it's line after line of this stuff I'm gonna be disappointed and offer to sell it for whatever I can to recover my loss.

"God's infinite transcendence makes room in itself for the real being of finite creatures."

I don't even know what that means.

Tom

God's will, and what we from our point-of-view would have to term 'ultimate goals', and his character with regards to us "love" do not get altered just because all of his creation get sent to hell in a handbasket by sin and rebelion. And THAT is because of the way the creation was created in the first place -- with "room" for sub-creators to create within what was created exnihilo. God's will "transcends" all that we may or may not do. And God works to make possible our salvation, and accomplishes the means of our salvation and offers it to us, THAT we might also participate in the doing of that salvation via the help of his grace through the work of our faith. By design ALL of this has both God and us as workers. And God always willed the "room" for "finite creatures" (us) to actually live as "real beings" with free will and free actions.

Specifically, we were told to "be fruitful and multiply" and to "fill the earth." And in that we changed God's creation and began to change it (till and tend). Both creation and God's transcendent will had "room" for that all within whatever boundaries we would be comfortable describing them with. Then with sin, we were told "sweat" and "pain" and "crush the serpant's head." That did not constitute a change in God's transcendent plan, in fact it revealed a constancy that certain fathers identify when they say that there was a "cross in the heart of God before the foundation of the world." Paul said much the same thing in other wording.

By the point in time of the creation by the Word and Spirit, even that created a relationship between God and cosmos, in which God's transcendent will begins to be revealed: when God says "it is good" he is speaking of the created cosmos and not about Godsself.

btw -- Just read over the words you don't understand, or look for the root word. That's what I did. And I got along just fine.

But I hope that you will both ENJOY the places where Hart expresses the same concerns about various other views AND pause to at least identify the core of what he is expressing -- for instance where he says he's more comfortable with a Roman Catholic view on some things than a Protestant. And notice what use he makes of Aquinas.

For me, not having a philosophy background or literature, I really, really, REALLY appreciated the attention to Voltaire and to "Ivan" in Dostoevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov.'" Especially reading that -- which he returns to several times -- brought back memory of a lot of early threads on this board. Hart maks several pithy points!

Thanks,

PoW

(o)

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/13/2006 7:15 AM (GMT -6)

I said, "God's will, and what we from our point-of-view would have to term 'ultimate goals', and his character with regards to us "love" do not get altered just because all of his creation get sent to hell in a handbasket by sin and rebelion."

Along this line is the patristic opinion that the incarnation would have certainly happened even without the fall.

(o)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 3/13/2006 7:48 AM (GMT -6)

Ok. Serious devil’s advocate time.

Put yourself in this cognitive position…

1. God’s happiness is the CENTRAL, MOST IMPORTANT thing in a believer’s life. WHATEVER (I cannot stress this enough!!!) makes God happy should make us happy…because when God is happy, we find our greatest joy. This can ACTUALLY work out as follows. If it pleases God for me to end up in a fiery hell, I should find complete joy in that fact. Why? Because it makes God happy. And God’s happiness IS the ultimate and PRIMARY source of YOUR joy.
[Note: This is the MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR. This is the psychological driver that makes it possible to live this out existentially.

2. God is the Absolute, Creator, and Sustainer of all! You believe that God has the absolute right as God to do whatever God wants to do. All worth is derived specifically from Him and all things are HIS.
[Note: This is the main thing that undergirds the most important factor above]

3. You believe that God has ordained all things. You believe that NOTHING can thwart God’s will at any time. God doesn’t “lose”!

4. You believe that gratuitous evil does NOT EXIST. You believe that ALL occurances of evil and suffering have some meaningful purpose behind it. God NEVER hopes that things go a certain way, but gets disappointed because of a complex “mystery-in-the-tornado” world. He KNOWS what is going to happen.

5. You believe that God could have created a universal hell, if he would have liked. And that the decision to allow ANYONE to be with Him forever is an immense act of grace and love. Really.

6. You hold the Piper/Edwardian view that God ordains evil in order to demonstrate more glorious facets of Himself to Creation.

Now, in my mind, if one were to totally take these ideas into the mind and live them out, I could see one virtually weeping DAILY at God’s majesty, grace and glory. Seriously. That God would create things such that absolutely EVERYTHING adds to God’s happiness. That NO action falls through the existential cracks of history. That a God who could have just as well put us on this rock and NEVER allowed any of us a chance of theosis with God...has decided to DIE for us??? What a wonderful God!

But add this following thing to the mix…and the deal is sealed.

7. You believe that, since God can do whatever God wants to do…AND you believe that God wants to ultimate save all people…that universalism IS TRUE and that God ends up saving ALL PEOPLE. You are inclined to believe this because this is the LOGICAL OUTWORKING of the idea that “God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.”

You have a person SET UP for ecstatic living in God.

What do YOU think?

Post Edited (MephEternal) : 3/13/2006 7:06:26 AM (GMT-6)

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/13/2006 8:21 AM (GMT -6)

Horrible, Meph. Glad you're saying it tongue-im-cheekem. (hope so)

You gonna read Hart too?

(o)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 3/13/2006 8:28 AM (GMT -6)

POW:
1) Yes, I'll read Hart, when I get some time. If the rest of his book is like that one chapter online that I read, I bet it'll be a nice read.

2) Why do you say this is horrible? You don't any way that this view could be existentially affirming and comforting to a believer in God?

The newest mantra:

God graciously FINDS us meaningful when God doesn't need to do it and we, in ourselves, can't do it.

"Hmm. Why not? What the hell. Let's try it."
--God

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 3/13/2006 8:40 AM (GMT -6)

In my opinion, the whole thing comes down on the ideas of "love" and "communion". OVTers just can't see how a loving relationship with God and/or communion with God can be a reality (and not just an apparent thing) unless there is SOME level of ontological relative autonomy from God. If there is no true "other" for God to interact with, then wherein genuine love or communion? It is this sense of contradiction, I believe, that the OVTers will not just let slide.

BUT...

Some people may ask what the big friggin deal is if a sentient creature cannot EXISTENTIALLY tell the difference between an EDF world or a LFW world. The only person who would really know the difference would be God. And if God would be cool with an EDF world, who would we be to say different? At some point, people would have to admit that belief in LFW does NOT make it so in reality. All a belief in LFW really does is influence our worldviews, thereby influencing our self-perceptions, plausibility structures, and behavior. But all this can be taking place while EDF is actually true!. Sure, we'd be believing a falsehood. But when do we NOT believe in SOME kind of falsehood sometime?

Heh.

At any rate, I could easily see a theological determinist not willing to make as big a deal over the what "genuine" love and communion are...and just going on their their interpreted EXPERIENCE of their relationality with God. Yeah, I know, I know...

But Meph, the way we live seems to TESTIFY to LFW being true! That's part of the point.

In my view, this idea is NOT as persuasive as people think it is. But that's just me.

The newest mantra:

God graciously FINDS us meaningful when God doesn't need to do it and we, in ourselves, can't do it.

"Hmm. Why not? What the hell. Let's try it."
--God

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/13/2006 10:32 AM (GMT -6)

MephEternal said...
Why do you say this is horrible?

PoW-
Sorry to be so blunt, really, but...

Its not that it looks like a patchwork of bracing from one side and then the other of disparate componants -- as a glance. Its that several of the componants are diametrically at odds with truths I'm holding dear. And from where I stand what is given up is way costly. Not ideas given up, but the truth behind them.

MephEternal said...
You don't any way that this view could be existentially affirming and comforting to a believer in God?

PoW-
Comfort. Why comfort?

Like my wife was saying last night, there is a differernce between happiness and joy. You can be beaten-down and still have joy inside. Kinda-in-that-way... we can lack comfort in oursevles but have strength in God.

I really found so many objectionable things that I thought you were just mocking-out the CV.

Ooops.

(o)

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 3/13/2006 10:44 AM (GMT -6)

MephEternal said...
Why do you say this is horrible?

PoW-
Sorry to be so blunt, really, but...

Its not that it looks like a patchwork of bracing from one side and then the other of disparate componants -- as a glance. Its that several of the componants are diametrically at odds with truths I'm holding dear. And from where I stand what is given up is way costly. Not ideas given up, but the truth behind them.

Well, I suppose that not every theological position held is consonant with yours. I'm not arguing that the position that I articulated is true. Just that I can easily see how someone could existentially hold such a position.

********************************

MephEternal said...
You don't any way that this view could be existentially affirming and comforting to a believer in God?
PoW-
Comfort. Why comfort?

Like my wife was saying last night, there is a differernce between happiness and joy. You can be beaten-down and still have joy inside. Kinda-in-that-way... we can lack comfort in oursevles but have strength in God.

Ok. I don't see your point.

***********************************

POW:
I really found so many objectionable things that I thought you were just mocking-out the CV.

There are plenty of people caricaturizing theological determinism. They don't need me addin' to that. All I did was articulate a variation of theological deterministic belief and what I believe would undergird it.

The newest mantra:

God graciously FINDS us meaningful when God doesn't need to do it and we, in ourselves, can't do it.

"Hmm. Why not? What the hell. Let's try it."
--God

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 3/13/2006 11:10 AM (GMT -6)

D - "I'm not arguing that the position that I articulated is true. Just that I can easily see how someone could existentially hold such a position."

B - I gotta stay on my toes with you. That's for sure. Even in your last post I beleived you held it, as your new view.

.

D - Ok. I don't see your point.

B - Parallel, that even as 'You can be beaten-down and still have joy inside'", so too you "can lack comfort in oursevles but have strength in God." I use the parallel because both joy and strength have their root in God, while comfort and happiness are dependent things and fickle. (Though nothing bad about either one, of course.)

.

D - All I did was articulate a variation of theological deterministic belief and what I believe would undergird it.

B - I gotta stay on my toes. (And I have no beginning of knowing why you would do that.)

(o)

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

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:40 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