Open Theism banned!

[Crazy Liz]

Did anybody notice this?

http://www.christianforums.com/t1138103-open-theism.html

They put the rule in a very obscure place, considering it is announced as applying to all CO forums.

 

[wishfulthinking]

interesting

 

[Kaonashi]

Doesn't make sense, I see nothing in the Nicene Creed that denies Open Theism

 

[CaDan]

A quick Google search has given me a bibliography of books to get.

Looks like it's time for another trip to IKEA--the religion bookshelf is full!

 

[Crazy Liz]

Doesn't make sense, I see nothing in the Nicene Creed that denies Open Theism

Me neither.

Of course, I would never promote it, though.

 

[Dryotriorchis]

Theism.: n. Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

I'm kinda confused, that included christians too right?

~Dry

 

[cygnusx1]

Did anybody notice this?

http://www.christianforums.com/t1138103-open-theism.html

They put the rule in a very obscure place, considering it is announced as applying to all CO forums.

Good !!!

Open Theism is just a logical outworking of Arminianism gone mad.

 

[cygnusx1]

A quick Google search has given me a bibliography of books to get.

Looks like it's time for another trip to IKEA--the religion bookshelf is full!

[font=Lucida Grande, Geneva, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]Open Theism and the Undermining of Biblical Christianity
[/font] is the best book on this quirky subject ...



want a quick intro and read ...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1581344627/002-1856826-4624061?v=glance

also Their God Is Too Small by Bruce Ware

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1581344813/ref=pd_sim_b_3/002-1856826-4624061?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance


Everyone who believes in God at all believes that He knows what you and I are going to do tomorrow.
C. S. Lewis

 

[CaDan]

[font=Lucida Grande, Geneva, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]Open Theism and the Undermining of Biblical Christianity
[/font] is the best book on this quirky subject ...



want a quick intro and read ...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1581344627/002-1856826-4624061?v=glance

also Their God Is Too Small by Bruce Ware

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1581344813/ref=pd_sim_b_3/002-1856826-4624061?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

Thank you. As I said, I did a quick Google search to get an idea of what the concept is. Of course, on the web, you tend to get an oversampling of those in opposition. It looks interesting, but I express no opinion on its validity.

Of course, I think Paul Tillich is pretty interesting, too.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Although I don't consider myself an open theist, my statements about open theism are going to have to be much more restricted under the new rules. My own objection is more to the "theism" part than the "open" part. Like Calvinism, open theism still begins with the assumptions of classical theism that originated from Greek philosophy, and adjusts them according to biblical revelation, rather than beginning with the Incarnation and filling in the details through what God has chosen to reveal. Bottom line: both classical theism (in the tradition of Aquinas and/or Calvin) and open theism begin with philosophical assumptions about God. Either view is only as good as its assumptions. The value of open theism is that it exposes one of these primary assumptions as questionable in light of scripture. I recommend studying it as an exercise in beginning to examine your theological assumptions.

[bible]hebrews 1:1-2[/bible]

 

[McCravey]

I would appreciate a summary of what it is if someone could refer me to a link, or perhaps write one.....sounds interesting.

 

[McCravey]

Open Theism


It has been discussed amongst staff and ruled on that there is to be no promotion of Open Theism in the Christian Only areas. This is due in part to staff agreeing that is denies part of the Nicene Creed, but not a part essential to salvation. This is much like full pretersim. Those that support Open Theism can still wear a Christian icon, but cannot promote this doctrine in the CO areas.

How could Open Theism deny part of the Nicene Creed? What part does it disagree with?

Sounds like a shared power arrangement between God and Man....predestination with free will and consequence.

If so, I can't find another explanation that describes our current reality....does anyone know of one?

 

[Crazy Liz]

I don't know, either. Maybe we could post in GT and ask the Administrator who posted the new rule to explain.

ISTM, many Christians do conflate the assumptions of classical theism with the scriptures and the creeds. For example, if we say, "I believe in one God, the Father almighty..." this must mean "almighty" entails certain things, like all the "omnis" of classical theism. But neither the scriptures nor the creeds demand such a definition of "almighty."

Open theism actually does not conflict with the usual definition of "almighty," as far as I can see. It does conflict with the usual definition of omniscience, but omniscience does not appear anywhere in the Nicene Creed.

Should we invite Flesh99 to explain?

 

[McCravey]

I don't know, either. Maybe we could post in GT and ask the Administrator who posted the new rule to explain.
Should we invite Flesh99 to explain?

It would be nice to hear from him. I find it very interesting that there is a theology that differs from classical Christian thought and yet doesn't seem to openly violate the Creed.

I also find it interesting how they're dealing with it.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Want to invite him here, or post a new thread in GT?

If anyone does start a new thread, or if you see one, please post a link here.

 

[Treasure the Questions]

I'm still none the wiser. Don't know if I am an open theist or not. Do we have to define things so narrowly?

I try to be accepting of all those who call themselves Christians, but admit that I would struggle with someone who doesn't believe in God as a real Person or who doesn't believe that Jesus was the Son of God. However, I was struck by Steve Chalke saying that there are many moving towards God although we cannot see it, and many others who appear to be Christians yet are in fact moving away from God.

I was also struck by these lines:

Today I shall try to make peace​

in practice and poetry.​

I shall choose words and images carefully,​

avoiding all that proscribes, restricts,​

oppresses, destroys, humiliates, patronises, enslaves.​

I shall fight no fights, not even ‘good’ ones.
I shall not stand up for Jesus

or be a soldier of anything –​

not even the cross;​

I shall not​

wave any flaming swords;​

I shall address no-one as Lord​

or mighty conqueror;​

I shall not put on any sort of armour,​

not even the armour of Christ​

or the dressings of power.​

I shall not march for Jesus​

or anyone else.​

I shall parade no nationalistic flags,​

nor bang any triumphalist drums.​

​

​

I shall be a pilgrim​

and try to walk lightly​

for the sake of the earth,​

and the life it sustains;​

They come from this book http://ionabooks.com/moreinfo.asp?ID=221

Sometimes I think it is right to stand up for what I believe, but I'm not sure that is what Jesus would do. He said blessed are the peacemakers, not blessed are those who insist they are right and everyone else is wrong.

Karin

 

[cygnusx1]

Basically it is a denial that God is all Knowing , He is said not to know the future exaustively for that would mean the future is certain , so in order to uphold man's autonomy , God's Omniscience has been dumped .........


I have several books on the subject (from both sides) , it's basically trying to get to grips with the problem of SIN being allowed by God's permissive will , some don't even like that! They would rather have a "blind " god than a Sovereign God ........

 

[Crazy Liz]

Basically it is a denial that God is all Knowing , He is said not to know the future exaustively for that would mean the future is certain , so in order to uphold man's autonomy , God's Omniscience has been dumped .........

...or at least qualified. I agree.

However, I can't find omniscience in the Nicene Creed.

I have several books on the subject (from both sides) , it's basically trying to get to grips with the problem of SIN being allowed by God's permissive will , some don't even like that! They would rather have a "blind " god than a Sovereign God ........

I also don't see what the above statement has to do with sovereignty.

adj.
Self-governing; independent: a sovereign state.

Having supreme rank or power: a sovereign prince.

Paramount; supreme: Her sovereign virtue is compassion.

Of superlative strength or efficacy: a sovereign remedy.

Unmitigated: sovereign contempt

Another synonym mentioned in another dictionary entry was "autonomous." Basically God can do whatever God wants. As far as I know, this doesn't mean the future has to be fixed and unchangeable. In fact, one could argue that God has more freedom and autonomy if the future is not fixed.

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

This decision was made much like the decision that full preterism cannot be promoted in the CO areas. We are not saying those adherents are not Christian, and this is not up for deabte. It has been decided that limiting God to be inside time, i.e. not know the future for certain denies that God is in fact "Allmighty" as the Nicene Creed states. We have also decided that this is not a salvation issue so while it cannot be promoted we are not making anyone change their icons over it.

NOTE: I DO NOT MODERATE THIS FORUM
Debating this decision would be a violation of Rule #7. If you wish to debate it please PM a moderator.

 

[BigToe]

I don't think anyone was meaning to debate the rule but ask for clarification as to what it is exactly so they better understands how it breaks the rules. Like trying to educate themselves on how to be better members of the community?

Though I could be wrong, I tend to be the eternal optimist.