Open Theism: Who Is Flirting With It?

That is a gem of a quote.

 

Most Christian book stores do.

 

I think the name it and claim it crowd would be consdered open theists. I don't know how many times I heard a Hinn, White, Meyer, etc. claim that in order for God to bless us or do anything, He is waiting on our asking.

 

Would they? God could already know we were going to ask and that He were going to give.

This isn't one of my smart-mouthed answers. I'm really asking.

Since I don't agree with either, it's just a big puzzle.

 

The way I understand it is like this

God: I want to bless you, but I can't until you ask. I don't know how it will end up unless you ask.

Us: bless us, Lord.

God: OK...since you asked

 

Isn't "angry Calvinists" redundant? :laugh: :laugh: Okay, just kidding...but I couldn't resist. So shoot me.

 

1. Influence by ancient Greek philosophy and by extension Greek culture is not necessarily bad thing. I consider my understanding of God to be heavily influenced by many cultures and philosophies including Jewish, Greek, Roman, European, British, American, Canadian, Chinese and most recently Australian. Paul and all the NT writers were heavily influenced by the dominant philosophies of their time which were largely Hellenistic and to a lesser extent Jewish. The words they used, their lines of reasoning and writing styles were in line with the cultural norms of its day, that of a Greco-Roman empirialistic one.

2. The omnis are greek words we have historically used to describe God. The concepts may have predated the greek words, but our understanding of the three omnis have been heavily influenced by what it meant to the ancient greeks. That doesn't make them wrong or untrue. It is just an acknowledgement of the dominant historical influence that Greek culture and philosophy has had on our understanding of God. If it was arab or asian culture and philosophy that dominated at that time, we would be using different words with slightly different nuanced meanings to describe God today. And they would also be true with limitations. The limitations are as you so nicely put it "our finite reasoning" and the limitations of all human language and words.

I'm not sure where you get the I idea that I think we need to tame the infinite God. Infinite is also an interesting word with a numerical origin. Why do we express God in numbers? Just throwing that out there.

I am trying to use the historico-grammatical hermeneutic to make an honest interpretation of scripture. And a large part of the historico-grammatical hermeneutic is recognizing the biases or "pretext" that I bring to the text and trying hard to see what the context of the verse actually says. The omnis are a pretext that I bring with me to the text to understand those verses to be anthropomorphic. They could still very well be anthropomorphic, but I would need to work harder to see that they are actually in the text rather than simply just in my mind.

Maybe. I would say the same about may sure-headed Calvinists who make some pretty appalling statments about God. I think a little agnosticism would do well for many of us.

You are welcome to your opinion on the motivation of Open Theists.

Regarding the Joan Osborne song, I was disturbed and intrigued when I first heard it. I see the song as expressing the thoughts of what it would be like to have an intimate encounter with God in the spiritually dead world that we live in today with a strong element of cynicism.

I'm not sure how that relates to Open Theism or domestication of God.

I'm not sure what you mean by either of these comments. Romans 11:33-36 is an awesome passage that should humble us all when we think we have God and his character all figured out.

 

I'm just trying to explain my views which agree with some of the arguments brought up by Open Theists. I believe they are right about many of the problems they see with Classical theism. But I don't subscribe to their resolution to those problems.

So no, I don't believe the writers of the NT were expressing Open Theism. That wasn't why I brought that up. I'm just trying to acknowledge cultural and philosophical influence and the evangelical tendency to demonize such influences.

I believe those are good questions to struggle with that don't have clear answers in the text of scripture. And that is why I appreciate the Open Theist contribution to that discussion. As you said, it is good to be a little agnostic about things we aren't so sure about.

You can insert Pentecostals, Arians, Premillenialists, Baptists, or any other group into that statement. It wasn't about Calvinism but about theological arrogance.

I'm still not sure of what you are trying to say here, but ok.

 

My Calvinism would be mild at best. I don't get into the debates.

Open Theism is open heresy - pure and simple. A god who doesn't know all is not God.

 

It seems to me that claiming to know everything about God's thought processes and approach towards all situations is to claim to know the "mind of God." In my view, this is impossible because He is so much superior to us that we simply cannot understand the way He operates. The Bible says that:

Isa 55:8 For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa 55:9 For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

And yet, many here claim to understand God's thoughts and His ways. Personally, I put God's thoughts, motivations and processes in the area of something we cannot comprehend except through what He gave us in the Bible. That's not completely black and white.

 

How about attributing tragedy to SIN. How about God doesn't cause sin. How about tragedy often causes people to blaspheme God rather than seek him.

Your line of reasoning doesn't help or hurt open theism.

I believe God is omniscient knowing and foreknowing everything that can be known. In the course of time, He is not surprised by anything but many of His "repentances" and "amazements" occurred when He foresaw how the creature He had created and blessed would one day act. I believe that in His foreknowledge, He was amazed at how effective Satan would be even among people whom God had blessed immeasureably!

How do you explain God's "repentances" and "amazements?" There must have been some point at which He learned something that He didn't expect.

skypair

 

Yup, that would be a Calvinist perspective, alright! :laugh:

skypair

 

So, you're explaining away scripture and claiming to know the nature of God? How are you so privileged?