Open Theism

[Huram Abi]

I think that is a fair assessment.

I think that it seems reasonable. How else would free will be possible?

 

[Huram Abi]

I think, essentially we are talking about Chaos Theory.

 

[Jpark]

If God can't change His mind, then He is powerless to stop His own will.

God changed His predestination/decree multiple times. One of the best examples is King Hezekiah, who God said would die but chose to extend his life.

Also consider when God sent an angel to punish David.

Although this is true:

So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

Notice Without accomplishing what I desire. Also notice without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

If God's desire changes, His word changes. This is basically Jeremiah 18:7-10, 2 Chronicles 7:14.

The only ones exempt from this grace are:

-those who sincerely betray Him (not like Judas. If he had repented, he could have been saved)
-those who kill too much (i.e. Hitler, Osama). God doesn't want these saved but will have to (since they would inevitably repent) if one should betray Him.
-those who know repentance and don't do it until they die and expect to go to heaven.
-those who commit sins of knowledge willingly. It's in Hebrews 10:26-27, 31, Matt. 12:32, and Matt. 10:28.
-the Antichrist and his followers

That said, I think Open Theism misinterprets truth to mean that God is not Omniscient. God is Omniscient.

 

[glen55]

If God can't change His mind, then He is powerless to stop His own will.

God changed His predestination/decree multiple times. One of the best examples is King Hezekiah, who God said would die but chose to extend his life.

Also consider when God sent an angel to punish David.

Although this is true:

So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

Notice Without accomplishing what I desire. Also notice without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

If God's desire changes, His word changes. This is basically Jeremiah 18:7-10, 2 Chronicles 7:14.

The only ones exempt from this grace are:

-those who sincerely betray Him (not like Judas. If he had repented, he could have been saved)
-those who kill too much (i.e. Hitler, Osama). God doesn't want these saved but will have to (since they would inevitably repent) if one should betray Him.
-those who know repentance and don't do it until they die and expect to go to heaven.
-those who commit sins of knowledge willingly. It's in Hebrews 10:26-27, 31, Matt. 12:32, and Matt. 10:28.
-the Antichrist and his followers

That said, I think Open Theism misinterprets truth to mean that God is not Omniscient. God is Omniscient.

Its not that God had to change his mind concerning anything, or that he was unaware that it would happen. Its the condescension of God stooping down to relate to man on his level, baby talk in other words, just like God ask where adam was in the garden, He knew where he was.

Plus Judas isn't beyond Gods love and mercy, and is included in the universal reconciliation of all things, Jesus paid for all sin, and that will be manifested in due time.

 

[Jpark]

Its not that God had to change his mind concerning anything, or that he was unaware that it would happen. Its the condescension of God stooping down to relate to man on his level, baby talk in other words, just like God ask where adam was in the garden, He knew where he was.

No, it's God acting in relation to His children: a father.

Adam wasn't an infant. He had some knowledge of God's commandments. Therefore, Adam was a child.

 

[cupid dave]

The question isn't if Elijah is a part of the fifth cup tradition, but when it was first suggested that he could be the one to settle the dispute..

EXACTLY.


The fifth cup is about the promised land.

The argument was unsetled and apparently, not subject to a compromise.

So, the ancient, ancient agreement was to set it aside for the day of Elijah's return.
Hence, it came to be symbolized by the cup itself.

Over time, jews began referring to that cup itself, a chalice which Jesus obviously must have had on his table, as the Elijah Cup.

The major point is that Christ settled the matter with is eucharist ritual of passing it around the table for all to sip, as if it was the blood of the lamb the Jews were about to sacrifice.

 

[cupid dave]

If God can't change His mind, then He is powerless to stop His own will.




2X

6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7And the LORD said, I (change my mind and) will destroy man

 

[Huram Abi]

EXACTLY.


The fifth cup is about the promised land.

The argument was unsetled and apparently, not subject to a compromise.

So, the ancient, ancient agreement was to set it aside for the day of Elijah's return.
Hence, it came to be symbolized by the cup itself.

Over time, jews began referring to that cup itself, a chalice which Jesus obviously must have had on his table, as the Elijah Cup.

The major point is that Christ settled the matter with is eucharist ritual of passing it around the table for all to sip, as if it was the blood of the lamb the Jews were about to sacrifice.

Your synopsis is vague enough that it is close enough for me to not concern myself with filling in the details. You already know that Elijah didn't come into play until after the 10th century.

However, your last statement is a new claim that is simply false.

The Eucharist was the 3rd cup; "I will redeem."

It is the Birkat Hamazon, the Grace After Meals. Jewish law mandates that this prayer follows eating bread.

When a group of men eat bread together, one man must "invite" the other men to eat the bread with him. During the following blessing the person leading recites the blessings over the cup of wine. During Passover the cup of blessing (the 3rd cup) is the only cup passed around and everyone present drinks from it. It is well known that communion is derived from the sharing of the 3rd cup during Passover.

From the invitation to eat bread, the blessing, and the shared cup, the Eucharist can only be the 3rd cup.

Furthermore, Christ couldn't have settled the dispute. It is against basic logic to conclude that anyone has settled an issue if it is still without resolve. Also, the dispute began with Tarfon. Jesus was dead before the dispute even began.

 

[hedrick]

The Bible treats God as someone who can bring good out of evil, but who changes his mind and reacts to people. The most literal reading is that God functions within our time stream, and thus is not capable of seeing the future. The usual reading is that this is anthropomorphism, and is an accommodation to how we typically speak.

If we take the literal reading (which I believe supports Open Theism), it raises interesting questions for things such as prophesy. How can the Revelation be an actual vision of the future if the future is uncertain? How can we know that God is in charge and will win in the end?

There are also issues for creation. If God is within our time stream I don't see any way that he could be the creator. The problem is that time is part of the 4 (or 10 or 11) dimensional space-time, which came into existence in the big bang. I don't see any way for God to be the creator unless he's outside of time. However I admit that there is a possible reading of Genesis saying that he brought order out of chaos, but did not create the universe from nothing.

But Open Theism has quite wide-spread effects on our concept of God, some of which impact the way Christians think of and treat God. I have so far not accepted it. I do acknowledge that it solves a number of problems.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Open Theism is merely a fluffed and re-stuffed Pan-entheism.

God alone is uncreated. Everything else is created and is external to Him. He EXhaled the Logos upon His breath, which was the outward procession (exerchomai) of the substance and identity of God that would be embodied in flesh. That Logos also created the sum of the eternal realm(s) and the temporal realm(s), in which the Logos was personified as Jesus Christ the Son.

Before God spoke, nothing had been external to God. All the dimensions of each/every realm of existence came from Him... OUT of Him. Satan, Hades/Gehenna, sinful flesh, etc. are most certainly not within God like He's some giant Dualistic terrarium or fishbowl of good AND evil.

God is Transcendent to all realms, yet penetrates, permeates, and pervades them... exernal to Him Self... His OWN Self. His existence is self-contained and self-sufficient, and not subject to any realm. If so, that realm of existence supercedes God Himself as a co-equal or superior "something".

Man always attempts to constrain God according to our his constraints. Neither time nor space nor matter nor any other element or dimension of any or all realms of any type constrain God or are contained by God. God is not a transcendent celestial pinata full of immanent stuff.

This whole premise is folly.

 

[cupid dave]

How can the Revelation be an actual vision of the future if the future is uncertain? How can we know that God is in charge and will win in the end?

For Christians we can know God will "win" in the end because he is the ideal we call Truth, and the Truth WILL always "out" in the end.


In regrd to prophecy, by which you really mean sociology, the outcomes from inputs of Human Behavior, it is like Chemistry.

For the Bible writer Sociologists, predicting the end times for evey nation which practiced sexual immorality was easy, and it always happened to come once homosexuals were no longer oppressed by the instinctual male patriarchic homophobia that is usually in a healthy society.




For example:


[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][SIZE=+0]Rev. 17:3 So he carried me away (in the spirit of thought), into the wilderness (of my imagination) and I saw (as if) a woman, (those who have Institutionized a system of sexual seduction into a failed matrimony), sit upon a scarlet coloured beast (of a brazen and corrupt sexually misdirected economic system: [Dan 3:1-5]), full of names of (Pagan) blasphemy, having seven heads:
(which existed in (1) Egypt, (2) Assyria, (3) Babylon, (4) Persia/Mede, (5) Greece, (6) Rome (7) the whole of Western Culture to follow) having ten horns upon these seven heads:
(1. Undivided Empire; capital Rome: [305 AD],
2. Western Roman Empire: (Romulus Augustus): [to 476 AD],
3. Eastern Roman: Byzantine Empire, [1453 AD]
4. Charlemagne, [800 - 1000 AD]
5. Holy Roman Empire, [1200 AD-1492 AD]
6. Italy, [Renaissance, 16th century]
7. Spain, [17th century]
8. France, [18th-19th Century]
9. Britain, [19th-20th century]
10. Nazi Germany, [20th century])
[/SIZE][/FONT]