 |
| 
Pseudo-Intellectual
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 58
| Posted 7/18/2001 7:07 PM (GMT -6) |   | Somewhere (in the "problem of pain" i think) C.S. Lewis said that in order for a game to be real it must be possible to lose.
Is spritiual warfare a real war? don't open theists believe that God will win? don't open theists believe that God MUST win? yet if that is so is it a real war? if we knew ahead of time who whould win WW1 would it still be a real war? I understand that none of the battles are gimmies, but the overall war still is? whould an ot say that the battles are real but the war is just an illusion?
looking for a brain
dudechild
"If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" -Art Hoppe
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 7/18/2001 8:47 PM (GMT -6) | | I would say that God does both win and lose. If one takes the verses in scripture that state that God desires all to be saved, then obviously God does not always get what he wants and, in certain instances, God does lose out. As Sanders shows in The God Who Risks," in many instances God does not get what he wants. However, He also promises that those who love him he will bring home one day. I would put it this way: God loses battles but not the war. John 17:3 Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Dr. John Sanders
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 4
| Posted 7/19/2001 7:59 AM (GMT -6) | | Yes, it is a genuine war. God took the risk that none of us would respond in love to the divine love. However, in the Bible and in our lives we see that God has indeed been victorious in lives of many people. So, do open theists believe God "must" win. Not in the sense that God forces our will. If you mean "must" in the sense that God has promised a new heaven and new earth, then, yes, God must win that for it is a question of divine power not human will.
John Sanders
Dr. J | | Back to Top | | |
|
Pseudo-Intellectual
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 58
| Posted 7/19/2001 9:05 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Yes, it is a genuine war. God took the risk that none of us would respond in love to the divine love. However, in the Bible and in our lives we see that God has indeed been victorious in lives of many people. So, do open theists believe God "must" win. Not in the sense that God forces our will. If you mean "must" in the sense that God has promised a new heaven and new earth, then, yes, God must win that for it is a question of divine power not human will.
John Sanders
Dr. J
Hey second Doc (Doc #2, Doc J, oh no now i'm confussed) glad you could find the time for a couple of posts. First off let me say that i really REALLY appreciate your books. i also appreciate your resonses on this thread. to that i know turn.
Is it a real war? i never really said it but the war i'm wondering about is not so much the risk that God takes in creating humans, or the risk he takes in his divine project. Rather i was thiking about the war with satan and whether there are any risks involved in satan acctually winning it. If there are not then does satan really have any freedom?
hope you have a good vacation.
d.c.
dudechild
"If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?" -Art Hoppe
Edited by - Pseudo-Intellectual on 07/19/2001 2:06:39 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Mephi2K
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 713
| Posted 7/19/2001 8:41 PM (GMT -6) | | Nice Question!
Now that's something I find interesting. Something I've been thinking about for a while now. Many times, emotional analogies are made with human experience when talking about God. "Wouldn't THIS God be much more worthy of praise?" "Doesn't this match more with our human expererience of what we know to be glorious?" and so on... So it should fit here too.
What real risk is there ULTIMATELY SPEAKING if it's GUARANTEED that you will win? If your ultimate goals are always assured. Does that risk have any meaning? To me, it's like having a war that for whatever reason you know without a shadow of a doubt that you WILL win. The only real think up for grabs is how many soldiers you will lose in the war, NOT the war itself. Is this really "risking"?
Let's make it more personal and vivid. What if I came up to you and I told you that I wanted you to come see me box in a title bout tomorrow. My opponent is a big bad boxer who's pretty much my equal, all things considered. You say you will. As an aside, I tell you that I'm going to win, even though my opponent may seem somewhat formidable. You think I'm just being cocky...but then I reveal to you certain things that I have already set in motion that will ASSURE that I will win. Now of course, I'm gonna take some punches, maybe even get a black eye or busted nose...but in the end, I'm guaranteed the victory. Would you think that I REALLY competed? Would you think that I REALLY laid my career on the line in this fight? Would you think that I was praiseworthy? I just don't think so.
Now, tell me. What's the real difference between this scenario and that of God? See, it would be one thing if God's assurance was SOLELY based on his self-perceived ability. If God were just making a "prediction" based on what he thought he could do. Heck, then we could still say that there is a distinct possibility that God is underestimating the competition and He could actually lose this whole thing theoretically. But that's not what is being said. What I hear being said is that it is a 100% CERTAINTY that God will triumph. No questions. No doubts. God has orchestrated the parameters of non-divine freedom ITSELF to allow for this, so there is absolutely NO possibility of God losing. So think about it. What is God really risking here besides the amount of damage He AND his creation takes before his ultimate purposes are realized? If he is ASSURED his main goals (an eternal Church bride and victory over ALL evil and chaotic forces) then where is this "glory"? There's a statement: To conquer without risk is to triumph without glory. Doesn't this apply well here?
Now, process theology has some risk, bud. Process theologians can admit the fact that we could actually ANNIHILATE ourselves as a species. No eschaton. No second coming. We could blow ourselves off the map before any of that stuff could take place (if it did) In other words, God has to work as hard as possible, given his parameters, and it's still not guaranteed that he can pull it off. THAT, my friend, is what I call risk.
So I would really like to hear some answers to this. It seems to me that Satan has been denied a signficant freedom: the freedom to triumph. Alas...
Note to Dr. J:
It's great to have you here, sir. I've had the pleasure of reading some of your works. Interesting and insightful. I hope that you have a restful break. And welcome to the board! 
Love God. Love People. Love Truth. Dedicate your all to that which you love.
Edited by - Mephi2K on 07/20/2001 01:55:02 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Modes of Thought
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817
| Posted 7/20/2001 3:53 AM (GMT -6) | | Meph my man... Check this out...
Here is where SK is vastly superior to Hegel. SK sees that God's creation is not simply the general reality that we know as our universe. But rather God has created countless beings in God's own image! The battle rages FOR REAL in aech one of them, will they come to faith or will they be offended? There is a complete risk for each one, but alas, it rests in the power to the contrary.
Hegel could speak of God becoming human to save humanity.
SK insists we speak of God becoming a particular individual human person (not a man, but THAT man), to save each and every particular individual human person via direct encounter with their Lord. What will they/we do? ALL is at stake in this! THIS is what God wants more than anything, for us to come to repentance and enter into the triune dance of Love for eternity! NOT the abstract concept humanity, but each one as an individual...
As for Satan, perhaps he is lost. And as much as could be lost is lost as Lucifer resists the Lord. Likewise for each of us. As we know, each time one sinner come to repentence, the whole angelic host rejoices as if the war was won!! Indeed, it is won. God did not create abstract wholes for us to categorize reality, God created specific creatures each another telling of the WHOLE story of God's love.
Edited by - ModesofThought on 07/20/2001 08:56:54 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 7/20/2001 3:53 AM (GMT -6) | | dudechild:"Rather i was thiking about the war with satan and whether there are any risks involved in satan acctually winning it. If there are not then does satan really have any freedom?"
Here's what came to my mind when reading all of the postings to this topic: God DOESN'T win all the wars with Satan. Each time one of His creatures rejects Him eternally and ends up in eternal damnation -- God has lost a war. It's as though each human is an individual country, hence some countries are won and some lost to the enemy. The risk involved in Satan winning is the eternal loss of one of the beings that God longed to be in relationship with. The war, as I see it, is not one war but many, many wars. The question is "Who wins the war in each individual life?" God definitely does NOT win every war against Satan with all of His creation.
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Mephi2K
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 713
| Posted 7/20/2001 5:02 AM (GMT -6) | | Cool stuff, Modes. Individualizing the concept of war for each person. That's interesting, but I thing it's missing my central point. The immense struggle within individuals is important, but not as important in this discussion here as the ultimate praiseworthy, glorious nature of God that has been espoused. The infinitely intelligent God who can work out his ultimate plans despite OPPOSITION. To me, God structuring reality and FREEDOM the way he has constituted a "fixed fight" and I believe that Doc has stated as much. In the context of a fixed fight, where God truly doesn't stand to lose his ultimate goal, wherein is the "glorious" victory? It may be a "glorious" victory for each individual to overcome their offense, but we are not talking about individuals. We're talkng about God.
Moreover, given what Doc talks about, the individual people would not consist of "wars" in and of themselves, but BATTLES in the major war. I am going by what Doc says is the PREORDAINED plan of God. 1) To have a Bride and 2)To defeat ALL evil and chaotic forces. Remember, supposedly God has been fighting these evil, chaotic forces since before humanity came on the scene. THIS is the main goal, for which glory and praise are trying to be given.
One more thing. Let's think about this from Satan's position. If what we are saying is true, then Satan has either got to be the most stupid individual in existence. He should rightfully be the ULTIMATE fatalist! Absolutely NOTHING He or any of his cohorts can do will stop his end. Nothing. Satan could get to the point where he almost things he can win and then WHAM! Devastation. And anyone who aligns themselves against God in any way would be in the same boat. How is this war not ultimate JUST as much a sham as what some classicalists believe? Example. Remember the Road Runner and Coyote from Looney Tunes? There would be sometimes where the Coyote would be running after the Road Runner as fast as he could. To the point where he would ALMOST catch him. All of a sudden, the Road Runner would leap up in the air and mockingly go "Beep, beep!" and SCORCH the road at supersonic speeds, leaving the Coyote in the dust. It becomes obvious the Runner was just toying with him. The Coyote stops and stares blankly, obviously seeing the ultimate futility of his plight. But the idiotic Coyote still attempts to try to catch the Road Runner by various means, sometimes getting close, but ALWAYS failing. It's the same thing, man.
I think my main issue is still here, bud. What is so "glorious" about a warrior who fixed his fight where the MAIN ESSENTIAL THINGS that ultimately matter are always assured though the particular may not be? I don't think much at all, from many OVs perspectives.
PS: Just thought of something else. Why is the battle so real for individuals in the first place? Could it be because of the MAGNITUDE of the stakes up for grabs. Either they will choose the Absolute and gain eternal life or be offended and LOSE it. That's major stakes. That's about as MAJOR as any individual can get. How come it can't be like this for God?
Edited by - Mephi2K on 07/20/2001 10:10:13 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Modes of Thought
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817
| Posted 7/20/2001 7:21 AM (GMT -6) | | The distinction I made holds for me, though perhaps not for other OV'ers. The fight was surely not fixed, though it is now (after all, some have been saved). I, as more nominalistic, do not relativize the individual battles into the "cosmic" which seems to correspond to your "MAIN ESSENTIAL THINGS". Rather it is the opposite, the "cosmic" is actually merely the abstracted. If humans are the "crown of creation", then lots of them are not more relevant than one of them. An ininfite God relates to each as if they were the only. So we, individually, ARE the main, essential things. As per my other post in response to Dr. Sanders in the Christ/cross thread, the remote possibility that ALL would reject is one superficial way of measuring "victory" for God. At least one who, given the prevenient grace and encounter with the Lord, responds in faith--constitutes victory. The encounter of God with the individual, reveals the heart of the individual, this IS the main thing.
Incidentally, I agree with you, granting your portrail of Satan in terms of the cosmic scope of things. It would be very much like the road runner/coyote deal.
Let me offer some quotes from SK to illustrate my first point point:
...this life becomes a time of testing for each individual and the Christian Church here in this world is always a militant Church. To apply such a term "congregation"...to this life is really an impatient anticipation of the eternal. The term "the single individual" corresponds to struggling--that is, when it is struggling in the spiritual and Christian sense, not in the physical sense of engaging in a pitched battle, where it does not depend so much on the single individual as on how many thousands there are, how many cannons they have, etc. Christianly, struggling is always done by single individuals, because spirit is precisely this, that everyone is an individual before God, that "fellowship" is a lower category than "the single individual," which everyone can and should be...
Amazing! He who invites all and wants to help all--his method of treating the patient is just as if intended for each one individually, as if in each patient he had only this one patient...
What infinite sadness when he who came to save all, he who divinely had no concern for acquiring honor and esteem (what madness and blasphemy!) but every day, every hour, every moment of his life had thought only for others--what infinite sadness when he now looked out upon the human throng and saw everything else, but not faith or faith's understanding, saw curiousity, which misunderstands, light-mindedness, which misunderstands, instability, self-importance, conceit, prejudice, in short, total misunderstanding of him who certainly had no need of them (what madness and blasphemy!) but whom everyone undconditionally needed: the Truth and the Life! What infinite sadness that on the day of visitation those who had gone astray did not know what makes for their peace--what infinite sadness for him who is himself the visitation and wanted to bring peace! What suffering and sadness when he who gazed at--at whom?--at the single individual, at every individual, in order to see for whose sake it was that he had come into the world and then saw this blind, narrow-minded, sinful individual human being who would not even let himself be helped! Humanly speaking, what an insane misrelationship: between an individual human being who will not even let himself be helped--and--him! No human being could endure this misrelationship; only the God-man can do that; indeed, no human being can form a conception of this sadness.
"Blessed is he who is not offended at me!" Oh, if you could form a conception of his joy over every believer, then, saved, you would bypass the offense! His joy over the believer is like a human being's joy over becoming understood, completely understood, by another. He is indeed not like a human being; he cannot be understood or comprehended--he must be believed--but in faith you belong to him completely, and his joy is as great as that of the person who found someone who understood him.
Meph, sorry if these seem off point, but to me this does represent THE MAIN THING. And as you can see, it involves very real risk for God.
BTW: These SK quotes are from "Practice in Christianity"
Edited by - ModesofThought on 07/20/2001 12:29:23 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 7/20/2001 5:30 PM (GMT -6) | | Trosie says: God DOESN'T win all the wars with Satan. Each time one of His creatures rejects Him eternally and ends up in eternal damnation -- God has lost a war. It's as though each human is an individual country, hence some countries are won and some lost to the enemy. "
Substitute "battles" for "wars" and I give a hearty amen. There is no doubt that Satan will be defeated. But there is nevertheless much at stake.
The ol D-day/V-day analogy. The OUTCOME of WWII was decided on D-day (here, at least by the cross), but not fully manifested till V-day (here, the kingdom of God). There were nevertheless important battles to fight (and win or loose) leading up to V-day.
And, Mephi, note that the Germans actually intensified their efforts to exterminate the Jews after it became certain they were going to loose.
So it is with SAtan. There is a dark, demonic, nihilistic, self-deceptive passion that says "I will go down with as many as possible."
Doc
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Mephi2K
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 713
| Posted 7/20/2001 6:54 PM (GMT -6) | | Doc,
I understand the mentality of which you speak. And the point is duly noted. But the fact still remains about Satan being the victim of ultimate fatalism...defeated before he started. Moreover, this doesn't in any way answer the essential question about God's glorious victory against evil that was the main thrust of what I was saying.
Holla,
| | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 7/22/2001 12:19 PM (GMT -6) | | Meph asks: What is so "glorious" about a warrior who fixed his fight where the MAIN ESSENTIAL THINGS that ultimately matter are always assured though the particular may not be? I don't think much at all…"
Doc: If the Open View posits a less "glorious" God because it holds God created a universe in which he couldn’t be defeated, then there is no view of God, held by anyone, that is glorious
. The Open View is the only view among conservative Christians that posits ANY openness in the future. But even Process theologians, the Boston Personalists and other finite theists (Geisler’s term) hold that God CAN’T be ULTIMATELY defeated. (Check that, the early Lewis Ford suggested he could be defeated for an epoch in The Lure of God. Sorry).
It occurs to me that WE (Open Theists) CAN’T WIN. We get criticized for having a less glorious God BECAUSE we hold TOO MUCH openness of the future. NOW we get criticized for having a less glorious God because we hold TOO LITTLE openness of the future. Sheeesh.
So Mephi, what is YOUR view of a divine warrior who IS glorious?
Having said all this, let me register one final comment. What is NOT glorious about a warrior who KNOWS he’s going to win the over all war and attain his objectives (though he may loose particular battles – e.g. individual souls)? Were all the generals of the US and British Army less glorious after D-day than they were before D-Day – for, after all, the ultimate outcome was quite certain after this point? I just don’t get Mephi’s point.
Shalom
Doc
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Cibertus
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 57
| Posted 7/23/2001 5:55 AM (GMT -6) | | In response to dude child’s original question (cool name, BTW) I would say…
The primary condition for a real war is opposition. Who wins or looses is a secondary concern. Regardless of who wins or looses, within time, you must primarily have opposition. Not that bets on winning or loosing doesn't factor into the decision for initiating opposition—it does but the absolute certainty of it comes after one has already made a decision to oppose another.
So, I guess I would respond to the dissection of Lewis’ quote by saying there’s more in the picture than winning and loosing. The chance of winning and loosing is not all that makes a war real or not.
Cibertus
Edited by - cibertus on 07/23/2001 11:09:52 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/23/2001 7:56 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
The primary condition for a real war is opposition. Who wins or looses is a secondary concern. Regardless of who wins or looses, within time, you must primarily have opposition.
Right. Like if Iiiee were to play Kasparov a game of chess. Real game. Real opposition from me. NO chance he's gonna loose the "match" even if he does loose a piece or two. I can't win. I think Lewis was wrong.
Tom
"The will to prepare to win is greater than the will to win." Bobby Knight | | Back to Top | | |
|
Cibertus
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 57
| Posted 7/23/2001 10:30 AM (GMT -6) | | I'd probably not go so far as to say Lewis is wrong but rather that we may be trying to wring too much out of his statement.
Cibertus | | Back to Top | | |
|
churchmouse522
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 163
| Posted 7/23/2001 5:04 PM (GMT -6) | | The war sure feels real to me these days.
Mouse-with-tail-in-trap
"Gonna get me a little oblivion, baby: try to keep myself away from me." Counting Crows | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/24/2001 1:11 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
I'd probably not go so far as to say Lewis is wrong but rather that we may be trying to wring too much out of his statement.
Cibertus
Or that. OK.
Tom
"The will to prepare to win is greater than the will to win." Bobby Knight | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/24/2001 4:29 AM (GMT -6) | | Hmmmmm. ...the end of the "war with Satan"...
I would like to contribute a snippet from a book by Evdokimov. When I'm down in the basement throwing pots I cooperate with the clay. Offering this one graphic paragraphic is my way of curating this discussion a bit, for a moment. Not entirely original; but as I said, I like combining things and efforts and seeing what comes out. So, unless told that this is inappropriate........here goes a view of the end of the "war with Satan", its meaning, and how that all fits together:
_ In the end, Satan finds himself deprived of the world, which is the object of his desire and limited to his own being which unlike that of God is not limitless. Pure Satanism disappears when the subject is without an object. On the other hand, the heart of the Church, her maternal intercession is without limit. St. Isaac of Syria speaks of a heart burning with such love for all creatures, for reptiles, even for the demons. Such compassion is universal and extends to every creature made by God: "He who descended into the lower parts of the earth, also ascended far above the heavens, that he might full all things," says St. Paul (Eph. 4: 9-10). The balance=sheet lies in the hands of God. In Hebrew Jesus means "Savior." Liberator, and as Clement of Alexandria says so magnificently, "even the will of God is an action, and this i called the world, thus his intention is salvation and this is called the Church" (p.30, "In the World, of the Church", SVSP)
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Cibertus
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 57
| Posted 7/24/2001 6:49 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/24/2001 8:26 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Sorry TGB,
I'm being anal.
Cibertus
Not at all! You're right on. I suppose if Lewis had a chance to comment on his own statement in light of the discussion today he'd qualify it a bit. Who knows?
Blessings,
Tom
"The will to prepare to win is greater than the will to win." Bobby Knight | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 8/14/2003 8:55 PM (GMT -6) | | Evdokimov has a good way of putting it!
quote:
Originally posted by PotOnWheel
Hmmmmm. ...the end of the "war with Satan"...
I would like to contribute a snippet from a book by Evdokimov. When I'm down in the basement throwing pots I cooperate with the clay. Offering this one graphic paragraphic is my way of curating this discussion a bit, for a moment. Not entirely original; but as I said, I like combining things and efforts and seeing what comes out. So, unless told that this is inappropriate........here goes a view of the end of the "war with Satan", its meaning, and how that all fits together:
_ In the end, Satan finds himself deprived of the world, which is the object of his desire and limited to his own being which unlike that of God is not limitless. Pure Satanism disappears when the subject is without an object. On the other hand, the heart of the Church, her maternal intercession is without limit. St. Isaac of Syria speaks of a heart burning with such love for all creatures, for reptiles, even for the demons. Such compassion is universal and extends to every creature made by God: "He who descended into the lower parts of the earth, also ascended far above the heavens, that he might full all things," says St. Paul (Eph. 4: 9-10). The balance=sheet lies in the hands of God. In Hebrew Jesus means "Savior." Liberator, and as Clement of Alexandria says so magnificently, "even the will of God is an action, and this i called the world, thus his intention is salvation and this is called the Church" (p.30, "In the World, of the Church", SVSP)
PotOnWheel
| | Back to Top | | |
| 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 |
|
|