Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
shiloh357

The Error of Open Theism

18 posts in this topic

The issue of Open Theism was raised in another thread and I felt it was something that needs to be addressed because Open Theism is a very problematic theological position that needs to be addressed particularly in the postmodern culture that seems to reject the notion of absolute, objective truth.

 

Open Theism is the view that God knows only what is knowable.  It is view that infringes on the issues of both God's sovereignty and His omniscience.  Omniscience simply means that God knows everything.  It doesn't mean that God only knows what is knowable. 

 

There is a lot at stake here because even though some will argue that it is not a salvation issue and thus not important, it should be pointed out that what we believe about how God relates to the world affects the whole of our theology, not just salvation.   We as Christians MUST have a coherent theology and that means that we have to abandon the cop out of assuming that the only important teachings that the Bible contains are those with directly impact eternal salvation from sin. 

 

Theology is far more organically related to each other that we often realize. They are, as I said in the past, an interlocking and interdependent system of progressive revelation God and His character/nature to the world.  That they are so interrelated and interdependent means that if we reformulate one doctrine it affects other areas of theology.

 

So evaluate Open Theism, the question we need to ask is, "Is it biblical?"   When I ask if something is biblical.  I am not asking if you can find Scriptures to use as proof texts that seem to say that Open Theism is in the Bible.  Anyone can take any kind of false doctrine and do that.  What I am asking is, "does it do justice to all of Scripture?"  Another question to propose is, "does it agree with, or is it consistent with other doctrines in the Scriptures??

 

When carefully examined one will see that Open Theism is at odds with numerous biblical doctrines  It is inconsistent with how God's omniscience is presented in the Bible.  There is no place in Scripture where God is presented as not knowing something.  There is never any uncertainty with God as to how the future is going to play out.  The Bible doesn't teach that God is waiting to find out along with us what decisions world leaders will make in years that lead up to the events in Revelation.

 

Open theism claims that God knows what could happen, but that the future isn't knowable and so God can't know who will or will not be saved or how things will eventually turn out. But what does the Bible say about God's omniscience?

 

I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done. (Is.

46:9)

 

Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether. (Ps. 139:4) 

 

Those two verses according to an open theist, can't be true.  God can't know what you are going to say before you say it because the future can't be known by God with any certainty.   God, according to an open theist, can't declare the end from the beginning and things that haven't happened.   Those things, to an open theist are not knowable.

 

For God to be able to know the end from the beginning He would have to transcend time.  God created time and He is outside of time.  For that reason, he is not limited as we are to the cage of linear time.  To use a crude example, it is like the difference between watching  a parade on the street where you only see what is in front of you vs. watch the same parade atop a 10 story building where you can see the entire parade from from start to finish and you know well in advance of the parader viewers on the street what is ahead.   God sees all of time.  He created it and He is the architect of the ages.

 

So that leads us to the second doctrine that such a view violates that is the inerrancy of Scripture.  The open theist is in the uncomfortable position of having to explain why the Bible is wrong when it says that God knows the end from the beginning and he knows things in the future not yet having happened.   To have to reject the truth of those passages means that one must deny the inerrancy of Scripture and by extension the authority of Scripture.  This in turn leads to the view that the Bible is true when it needs to be.  It leads to erroneous and heretical view that the Bible can be true, but not really accurate or trustworthy.

 

This brings to the third doctrine that Open Theism violates and that the doctrine of God's sovereignty.  The Bible presents a God who is sovereign and this sovereignty is unqualified, unlimited and unconditional.  Sovereignty means that God is in control.  If God is NOT sovereign, if He can't really know the future and how things will turn out, then Bible prophecy is meaningless and cannot be trusted.

 

The prophecies given to us in Scripture are very detail oriented.   They are not general or vague projections about the future.   For example, Jeremiah predicted that the Jews would return to their ancient homeland.  He predicted they would purchase the land and he foretold exactly what the parcel of land would be and what its borders would be.    In the 20th century, the Jews returned to their land, they purchased the land from absentee Turkish landowners, and the swamp and desert they initially purchased is exactly where the nation of Israel proper is located. 

 

If open theism were true, God could not have known down to the detail that such an event would happen.  God doesn't give us the option of claiming that God knows all possible outcomes or futures.  The Bible tells us exactly often in detail what will happen.  The prophecies concerning Jesus are fulfilled down to the minutest details.   Not only that but how people would react and the choices and decisions they would make are known by God as well in defiance of the claims of the open theist.

 

So those just some reasons to avoid the open theistic teaching as it is incongruous with sound biblical doctrine and it is at odds with how God has revealed Himself in Scripture and it is an assault on the integrity and authority of the Word of God.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote: Open Theism is the view that God knows only what is knowable.  Quote

 

In this statement, God only knowing what humans know, they admit God is not smarter than man and therefore could not create this world or anything living on/in it, as man can not.

I do not need to see more of their theory. I see it wrong in one statement.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote: Open Theism is the view that God knows only what is knowable.  Quote

 

In this statement, God only knowing what humans know, they admit God is not smarter than man and therefore could not create this world or anything living on/in it, as man can not.

I do not need to see more of their theory. I see it wrong in one statement.

Well, open theists are not saying that God only knows what humans know, but they are saying that God doesn't know the future.  The open theist would argue that God doesn't know who will or will not accept Jesus as Savior.  They would not deny that God knows your thoughts as you think them, but they would deny that God knows what you will be thinking about tomorrow.  It is a clear denial of his omniscience.

 

But it really gets worse than that.  Open Theism is a backlash against Calvinism and the notion of God's sovereign control of the universe.  While I am not Calvinist, I do believe in the sovereignty of God and the Bible teaches that God is sovereign.  God has the power to give and take life at any time He chooses.  He has the power to create natural law and he has the power to miraculously override those laws.    God also has the power to see into the future and know not only the events He has predestined to occur, but the Scripture demonstrates that He also knows how people will respond to those events.  The book of Revelation is full of prophetic claims that Open Theism claims God could not possibly know for certain.

 

Open Theism leaves God open to error They claim that God knows all possible futures, but doesn't know what future will occur.  The means that prophecies might be in error, as something that God didn't anticipate happening makes certain prophecies obsolete.  For example, God, through the prophet Jeremiah predicts that the Jews will return to the Land of Israel and they will purchase it and settle upon it and Jeremiah gives the precise dimensions of the Land.  And that came to pass in the early part of the 20th century.  They returned, settled the land they purchased from absentee Arab landowners and the dimensions of Israel proper match what Jeremiah predicted.   Open Theism would argue that God could not have known this would happen.

 

In response the Open Theist would argue that God knew the possibility of such a prophecy of Jeremiah coming true.  But if God only knew it was one possibility, if it was only one of any number of possible outcomes, why prophesy about it and none of the others?

 

For the open theist, if they are honest and consistent, nothing God prophesys is really a certain thing.  The Bible says in Revelation that after Satan and sin are destroyed we will live out the rest of eternity in a New Heaven and New Earth and no one will ever commit a sin or choose to rebel against God, that no angel in the future will mount a sinful rebellion like Satan did and start the whole thing all over again.   But for the Open Theist, God can't know that no one will, in the future choose to bring sin into the new world.  The Open Theist sees  the predictions in Revelation 21 and 22 as a possible outcome.  So our future with God isn't a done deal. God's plans for the future and the New Heavens and New Earth might be thwarted by something happening that He could not have anticipated, a choice or decision that God didn't know would be made by someone.

 

Open Theism produces a low view of God and it is a denial of the some of the most basic doctrines of Scriptures and doctrines about the Scriptures.  It is an assault on God, personally.  It challenges His integrity.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue of Open Theism was raised in another thread and I felt it was something that needs to be addressed because Open Theism is a very problematic theological position that needs to be addressed...

 

(snip)

Aww, you beat me to it! Thanks for getting it started, though.  I was out of town for my cousin's baby gender reveal party (it's a girl!), and I didn't get home 'til tonight. Did some digging on the subject since I'm still fairly new to it, but I need to organize my notes, so I'll leave you with this.  I'll try to post more tomorrow.

Points mentioned in the posts above regarding Open Theism:

* OT claims that the future isn't knowable or controllable

Not exactly true.  The future is not exhaustively settled.  Sort of in between completely settled (Classic Theism) and completely open (...process theology?).  Those unsettled future events don't actually exist, yet.  It's a mind-bender, I know.

* OT infringes on the omniscience of God because it claims that there are things that God doesn't know (like the future)

Not true.  OT suggests that the unwritten parts of the future are unknowable because they don't exist.  If God doesn't know something that doesn't exist, that doesn't make him less omniscient.

 

Open Theism is more of a different perspective on the reality of time itself than it is about God, although it does change our understanding of God.

* OT infringes on the sovereignty of God by saying he doesn't have control of all things

Not true.  He chooses to let certain things play out on their own, allowing free agents (us) the ability to use the free will He gave us.  Sovereignty doesn't equal complete control.  It is the wisdom and grace and character of a good, intelligent leader and a worthy King who is willing to trust some element of control to others.  He doesn't need to micromanage in order to make things come out the way He wants.

 

Open Theism, IMHO, allows less control of things but requires far greater intelligence, and it reveals a greater, more sovereign God than Classic Theism.  (<--- my opinion)

 

* OT claims that God's prophecies are subject to error

Nah, Open Theism suggests that God's prophecies are subject to God changing His mind.  Example:

In those days Hezekiah became mortally ill. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came to him and said to him, "Thus says the LORD, 'Set your house in order, for you shall die and not live.'" - 2 Kings 20:1  God changed this prophecy a few verses later and Hezekiah lived fifteen more years.

 

But errors? No.

* OT is inconsistent with the rest of Scripture, including prophecies

Not true.  'Tis just misunderstood.

 

* OT violates the inerrancy of Scripture

Not true.  The verses that are commonly used to prove the Classic View are, I believe, taken out of context, or they can be taken another way.  Many verses are interpreted already assuming the Classic view, which can be problematic with other verses.  Open Theism doesn't go against any of these verses.  I will elaborate more on this later.

 

In fact, it could be argued that it's the Classic view that violates the inerrancy of Scripture.  I don't like that argument, though, in any situation.  Feels like a cheap shot.

 

* OT is at odds with how God has revealed himself in Scripture

Opposite, actually.    I will definitely elaborate on this more.

 

* OT claims that God doesn't know the thoughts you will have tomorrow

Sort of not true?    Does God know if you're putting peanut butter or honey on your toast tomorrow?  He knows both possibilities, as well as any other you might consider.  Sliced bananas are good, too.  Eggs and ketchup? Yum.  Which one you decide on is up to you, and that future event doesn't exist until you actually make the decision of what to eat on your toast.

 

God knows every thought you could possibly think.  Ever.  He knows every choice you ever made and every possible path you could have chosen.  He opens some doors and he closes others.  He also knows you to your deepest core.   Will you take the high road or the easy one?  He doesn't know until you make the choice, but he knows you well enough to have a pretty good idea.  And, while you may (rarely) surprise Him, you can never catch Him off guard.  He is just that good.

 

 

 

I will elaborate more on each of these.  Just throwing this up for now.

 

 

 

 

Hey, Shiloh.  I know we have a tendency to get a little snippy with each other.  I'll admit my pride rears it's ugly head every so often, and I have a hard time dropping the issue.  Can we keep this discussion friendly and save the mods a headache? ;)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Points mentioned in the posts above regarding Open Theism:

* OT claims that the future isn't knowable or controllable

Not exactly true.  The future is not exhaustively settled.  Sort of in between completely settled (Classic Theism) and completely open (...process theology?).  Those unsettled future events don't actually exist, yet.  It's a mind-bender, I know.

 

Right.  That's a distinction without a difference.  You are not the first open theist I have encountered.  I know what open theism teaches.  They don't believe the future is knowable on the basis that it isn't settled and doesn't exist.   God can only know what is knowable and according to Open Theism, the future isn't knowable and is thus outside of God's control.   God doesn't know what you will have for breakfast two days from now because that future doesn't exist. 

 

To argue that the future doesn't exist defies Scripture. 

 

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

(Heb 1:1-2)

 

In this context, the use of aion for worlds doesn't refer to mere physical planets alone.  It is used here to refer to the "ages" and all they contain including physical planets. 

 

In Isaiah 9:6 Jesus is also called "avi ad"  In the original Hebrew it means, "the Father of eternity."   The use of father in that verse is not a paternal usage, but denotes a point of origin.  Jesus is the "father of eternity" much the same way we refer to Alexander Graham Bell as the "father" of modern telecommunications.   Jesus is the architect of the ages, as it were.  He created time and eternity and as such He is outside time and He transcends time. 

 

To claim the future isn't knowable or isn't settled is a philosophical claim, not a biblical claim.  To support Open Theism, you have go outside the Bible to support your claim on philosophical grounds.   That is the inherent weakness  of Open Theism.  It is not Scriptural.  It cannot be supported by Scripture alone.

 

 

* OT infringes on the omniscience of God because it claims that there are things that God doesn't know (like the future)

Not true.  OT suggests that the unwritten parts of the future are unknowable because they don't exist.  If God doesn't know something that doesn't exist, that doesn't make him less omniscient.

 

Again, that is a philosophical claim.  The Bible doesn't say any of that.  You cannot mount a biblical argument for the future not existing.  You are imposing a philosophical claim on to the Bible.   The Bible treats the future both as existing and as knowable. It demonstrates a God who knows the future and who is sovereign over all of it.

 

 

* OT infringes on the sovereignty of God by saying he doesn't have control of all things

Not true.  He chooses to let certain things play out on their own, allowing free agents (us) the ability to use the free will He gave us.  Sovereignty doesn't equal complete control.  It is the wisdom and grace and character of a good, intelligent leader and a worthy King who is willing to trust some element of control to others.  He doesn't need to micromanage in order to make things come out the way He wants.

 

That isn't how sovereignty works.  God isn't conditionally sovereign or only sovereign over part of what happens in the world.  Now I am not saying that God controls every decision you make down to the most mundane things.  I don't think God controls what shirt I put on in the morning or what I choose to eat.  I stay from the hyper-sovereignty stuff that gets rather insane.  

 

More to the point, if God has some things some future events set as inevitable, then it stands to reason that for those things to happen when and how God has determined them to happen, God MUST sovereignly guide precipitating events in that direction.   God has several things set in place for the future and He isn't going to change His mind about them.  They are inevitable.

 

* OT claims that God's prophecies are subject to error

Nah, Open Theism suggests that God's prophecies are subject to God changing His mind.  Example:

In those days Hezekiah became mortally ill. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came to him and said to him, "Thus says the LORD, 'Set your house in order, for you shall die and not live.'" - 2 Kings 20:1  God changed this prophecy a few verses later and Hezekiah lived fifteen more years.

 

But errors? No.

 

I am not talking about that kind of personal prophecy where the outcome is conditional upon man changing His behavior and thus averting judgment.  Jonah prophesied to the Ninevites that God was going to destroy Nineveh in 40 days.  They repented and God relented.   Those kinds of prophecies where God relents and withholds judgment occur in the Bible in more than one place.

 

The prophecies that I am speaking about are about future events, particularly those linked to God's plan of redemption.   If God cannot know the future on the basis that the future doesn't exist for Him to know it, then prophecies about the future can't be trusted to be true or accurate.  They might be wrong if you are internally consistent.  If the future is not settled yet and is not knowable then we have no ability to place any faith in what God says about our future, or eternal state as believers.  Maybe God doesn't know that one day in the future, He will change His mind and revoke salvation.   Maybe, since God doesn't know the future, Satan will do something that takes God surprise and thwart God's plan to take back the earth.    Your position, if you are willing to be consistent has a definite effect on our ability to trust what God says.

 

How we can put our ultimate faith in God that we will one day live with Him forever, if He doesn't really know the future?  He is unqualified to make any such promise of eternal salvation if He doesn't know the future and can't guarantee a future that He can't really say exists.

 

* OT violates the inerrancy of Scripture

Not true.  The verses that are commonly used to prove the Classic View are, I believe, taken out of context, or they can be taken another way.  Many verses are interpreted already assuming the Classic view, which can be problematic with other verses.  Open Theism doesn't go against any of these verses.  I will elaborate more on this later.

 

Can you provide a list of those verses and can you provide an open theist understanding of them based on their immediate/literary context?   I would  be interested in seeing that.

 

* OT claims that God doesn't know the thoughts you will have tomorrow

Sort of not true?    Does God know if you're putting peanut butter or honey on your toast tomorrow?  He knows both possibilities, as well as any other you might consider.  Sliced bananas are good, too.  Eggs and ketchup? Yum.  Which one you decide on is up to you, and that future event doesn't exist until you actually make the decision of what to eat on your toast.

 

God knows every thought you could possibly think.  Ever.  He knows every choice you ever made and every possible path you could have chosen.  He opens some doors and he closes others.  He also knows you to your deepest core.   Will you take the high road or the easy one?  He doesn't know until you make the choice, but he knows you well enough to have a pretty good idea.  And, while you may (rarely) surprise Him, you can never catch Him off guard.  He is just that good.

 

That just brings us back to square one, though.   If the future isn't settled then God doesn't know and can't know what you will have for breakfast two days from now.  It isn't "sort of not true."   Either He knows or He doesn't know.

 

Furthermore, to say that God knows all of the possible choices you could have made has a huge implication on Bible prophecy.   This is an argument you have used on a grander scale to say that God knows all of the possible futures that can be. 

 

The problem here is that God prophesys about the future as if there is only one possible outcome;  the one He says will happen.   He acts and talks like a God who is sovereign over everything and that includes the future.   How can God issue prophetic words about the future in proleptic style in some cases, where he speaks of a future fulfillment as if it has already happened?   In Revelation 11:15 for example:

 

And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

(Rev 11:15)

 

Now at that point in the book of Revelation, God has not yet taken back the world, but the prophecy is  claiming it has already become the Kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ.   Yet there are still seven bowls of judgment yet to be poured out before God actually has made v. 15 a reality.   So here God is making what we call a proleptic prophecy.   He is speaking of future events as if they are already fulfilled.

 

Even more look at what was said to John in Revelation:

 

After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

(Rev 4:1)

 

Note that the voice calls to John and says he is going to see what MUST happen shortly. These inevitable things that must happen, what John will see.

 

If God cannot know the future, then such a prophecy cannot be trusted if we follow the open theistic logic to its logical conclusion.  And as I pointed out in another post, if there are several possible futures why prophesy about only one of them?  Why not prophesy about everything that could possibly happen instead of only present prophesy about one possible outcome or one possible future?

 

Hey, Shiloh.  I know we have a tendency to get a little snippy with each other.  I'll admit my pride rears it's ugly head every so often, and I have a hard time dropping the issue.  Can we keep this discussion friendly and save the mods a headache? ;)

 

 I think we can.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John 3:20  God knows ALL THINGS

ISAIAH 46:9B-10  I AM GOD AND THER IS NONE LIKE ME, DECLARING THE END FROM THE BEGINNING, AND FROM ANCIENT TIMES THINGS THAT ARE NOT YET DONE, SAYING, MY COUNSEL SHALL STAND, AND I WILL DO ALL MY PLEASURE,  

 

SINCE GOD IS ETERNAL. THE "I AM" OR THE STATE OF SIMPLY BEING, HAVING NO BEGINNING AND NO END,  HE KNOWS THE END FROM THE BEGINNING OF HIS EXISTENCE from [eternity], SO HE ALREADY KNEW THAT HE WOULD CHANGE HIS MIND AND HE FOREKNEW THE CONSEQUENCES  OF HIS CHANGE OF MIND.    He allows things to happen and uses them to fulfill His plan.  Joseph told his brothers who sold him into slavery the they meant it for evil but God meant it for Good.  He allowed satan to enter Judas to betray Jesus so that His perfect plan of our Christ dying on the cross for our sins could be fulfilled.  Likewise God foreknew all who would humbly yield to the call on their lives to repent and receive Christ by faith.  He even prepared good works in advance that they should walk in them.

He causes all things to work together for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose.  So He doesn't micromanage inconsequential things that do not have a bearing on His plans.  He does use all things for our benefit in a opportunistic way.  And He does micromanage events to produce His purposes and so that all prophecy will be fulfilled.  

 

God is all knowing, even the future, because He lives outside our dimensions of time and space.  He created those things.  I think that limiting God to our understanding is creating a God in our own image.

The God that I worship is beyond my comprehension.  Therefor to limit God to the known is to make Him into another god that I cannot worship.  To say that the unknown future that is not in prophecy does not exist is to limit God to our own knowledge.  Not everything has been revealed to us.  Only those things that we must know are revealed to us.  That doesn't imply that God doesn't know a lot more about the future than He is telling us.  I am sure He sees every detail.

 

To limit the nature of God is to create a false god of your own understanding.  

You keep saying that you will expand on things later, so there is no way to refute what we don't know.  We are not our all knowing God.  Just because we don't know your other ideas doesn't mean that you have none.   Were you flying over me in a plane you might be able to see that a mud slide has washed out the road around the bend in front of me.  Just because I can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.  God did not prophecy that specific disaster, either.   By existing in another dimension's perspective He is able to see and foresee everything.  All of His purposes are foreordained.  

Willa

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hey, Shiloh.  I know we have a tendency to get a little snippy with each other.  I'll admit my pride rears it's ugly head every so often, and I have a hard time dropping the issue.  Can we keep this discussion friendly and save the mods a headache? ;)

 I think we can.

 

Glad to hear it. :D

 

Can you provide a list of those verses and can you provide an open theist understanding of them based on their immediate/literary context? I would be interested in seeing that.

 

 

Of course.  I have every intention of backing this up with the bible.  It's going to take me some time to dig them up, though, so I'm going to start by explaining a few things.

 

 

  I first heard about this view when I was about seventeen.  I discovered a new book by a trusted author (God of the Possible by Greg Boyd) at a college visit, and I picked it up eagerly.  I could tell it was going to be a controversial subject, but the author's previous book was an excellent lesson in apologetics that really shaped my faith as a young person and helped me answer the tough questions of my friends and peers.  I thought I'd give the author a chance to explain his ideas, so I bought the book and skimmed through it on the way home.  I made the mistake of trying to explain to my mom and sisters what I was reading when I really didn't understand it well, myself.  They immediately jumped on it as heresy.  Their reaction sort of freaked me out, and I set the book aside, but the idea of Open Theism stuck in my head. 

  I found the book again several years later and started reading it, prayerfully asking God to protect me from any lies of the enemy.  I realized that much of what the book taught I actually already believed about God, and the things that I disagreed with were actually preconceived notions and assumptions that weren't actually specified clearly in the bible.  The parts that made me want to scream "heresy!" were actually little heresies of their own added by the church centuries ago, based on the popular philosophies of the day.

  I've been mostly on the fence about this subject since then, mainly due to my attachment to those assumptions about reality and God ingrained in me since childhood.  I've committed to this view only recently, within the last few months, and I'm still working out the details.

 

Much of what I post here comes from Boyd's book, some comes from other sources that I will try to cite if I can remember where I got it.  Some of it is my own understanding of the reality of time, God, and Scripture.  I will admit that I am a newbie when it comes to debating this topic, so I hope I do it justice. I have a feeling, though, that I'm in way over my head.

 

  For clarification in my posts, all scripture quotes will be bold and colored teal (my favorite color).  These hold the most weight in any theological argument, and I want them to have the most emphasis.  All other quotes will be faded gray.  I use these if I feel like they explain a point better than I can, or for purely anecdotal purposes.

 

One thing to clear up real quick: God doesn't need the future to be completely settled in order to make an accurate prophecy.  God doesn't need all his prophecies to be fulfilled accurately (see verse I posted about Hezekiah), though most of them are.  He can and does change His mind on things, which isn't possible for someone who knows everything about a completely settled future.  There are things that he won't change His mind on, like the major redemption promises or things he says we should test Him on, and those things won't change or fail.

 

There is a whole lot more I'd like to say on this, but I have to be somewhere soon.  I'll be back online tomorrow. 

 

God bless  ^_^

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will respond when you have posted all of Boyd's remarks

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are we continuing this discussion, or what?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I'm not prepared to debate this topic, yet.  As I said, I'm still a newbie.  I know enough to know that I agree with it, but I'm not able to present it adequately to others.  Please allow me some time to gather some information.  I was on vacation last week and had more time to spend here (because that's what I do on vacation, apparently...lol), but that ended yesterday, and I have far less free time.  Please be patient.

 

Btw, "all of Boyd's remarks" consists of, at the very least, an entire book.  I want to include all of his points and arguments, but I need to trim the information down to a manageable level.

 

I don't want my post to get deleted on account of it being too long...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0