book_wirm Posted November 10, 2005 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 219 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 16 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/28/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted November 10, 2005 (edited) While I can appreciate your desire to understand God the OVT (Open View Theology) fails in number of points and dabbles in heresy. Ultimately it fails 4 basic tests: 1. Logic- Time cannot be an attribute of God as time must have reference points and no such thing exists in infinity. Furthermore, if God were simultaneously infinite and subject to time then we could not have possibly come to this present point Edited November 10, 2005 by book_wirm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godrulz Posted November 10, 2005 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 885 Content Per Day: 0.11 Reputation: 8 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/25/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/19/1960 Share Posted November 10, 2005 book wirm: 1. Logic: Confusing intervals and instants leads to a false logical problem. The classic philosophical argument that an arrow can never reach its target (always an infinitely smaller interval) has been resolved by exposing false assumptions. "Eternal now"/simultaneity/B-theory of time is more logically problematic to a personal being's existence than endless time/sequence/duration/presentism. 2. Prophecy is not a problem. The closed view makes God a liar when He says He will do something and then does not do it, or says He will not do something and then does it. Changing contingencies result in different possible outcomes consistent with God's character. The judgments in Revelation are certain since God will bring them to pass supernaturally with or without man's choices. The Second Coming, lake of fire, etc. are also fully under God's control and thus knowable. This does not mean that these events are already in the past and fixed so God can 'see' them. Much of prophecy is broad, sweeping themes that could be fulfilled in various ways (hence the myriad of interpretations of Revelation). Exact dates, names of individuals, countries involved, etc. are not revealed since there is an openness to the future. God can providentially guide history to His desired fulfillment without controlling or knowing every irrelevant detail along the way. 3. God does not make 'mistakes', but knows reality as it is. He is fully trustworthy, despite an open future that He chose to create by creating other free moral agents. He correctly distinguishes past, present, and future (they are not identical: the potential future becomes the fixed past through the present...creation, incarnation, and Second Coming are separated by divine-human intervals/time). He correctly distinguishes possible, probable, actual/certain, necessary, etc. (modal logic). The type of creation God sovereignly chose does introduce vulnerability and risk into the universe. The incarnation is illustrative of God's humility and vulnerability. He does not have to meticulously control or know every moral and mundane choice to govern by His superior omnicompetence. There is rebellion in the universe. It will ultimately be dealt with. Despite our wholesale rejection of God, He is still able to culminate history and raise up a people who have significant freedom and can enter into reciprocal love relationships. John Sanders: "The God who risks" is a readable, biblical introduction to God's providence, vulnerability, and risk (have fun refuting it if you dare...my experience with anti-OV books is that they confuse Process Theology=error with OV; assume Calvinism is the only option and also argue against Arminianism; reject a straw man caricature of the open view by misunderstanding and misrepresenting it). 4. All relevant verses relating to 'repent' can be shown to mean that God can and does change His mind in response to changing contingencies. He does not repent from sin (obviously), but He can regret making Saul King (He appointed him king, but demonstrated regret when Saul turned out bad) and creating mankind who became evil (he was grieved, disappointed, and went from 'very good' creation to wanting to start over...but Noah= grace saved the day). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
book_wirm Posted November 11, 2005 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 219 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 16 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/28/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted November 11, 2005 godrulz, 1. Logic: Confusing intervals and instants leads to a false logical problem. The classic philosophical argument that an arrow can never reach its target (always an infinitely smaller interval) has been resolved by exposing false assumptions. Yes, but not in like manner to our discussion. Distance travelled equals rate of travel times amount of time travelled. In the classic example of the arrow never making its mark the distance is not infinite, just infinitely divided. The answer, then, is simply to infinitely divide the finite amount of time in a similar way. What you fail to realize, however, is that when speaking of God we are not infinitely dividing a finite thing (time, distance, etc) but rather are speaking of the truely infinite. In true infinity no such thing as present, past, or future exist as seperate realities as it is ludicrous to suggest that infinity can be spanned. 2. Prophecy is not a problem. The closed view makes God a liar when He says He will do something and then does not do it, or says He will not do something and then does it. A deeper look at your examples will consistently show that God's character was always such that mercy and salvation, or judgement and destruction, were present prior to such statements. Much of prophecy is broad, sweeping themes that could be fulfilled in various ways (hence the myriad of interpretations of Revelation). Man's failure to interpret God's prophecy correctly is the weakest argument you have yet proposed for OVT. Exact dates, names of individuals, countries involved, etc. are not revealed since there is an openness to the future. This statement, too, fails to persuade of anything as well since it is based entirely on you thinking the future is open. The fact remains that so much of prophecy regards the future actions of "free" beings. It is ludicrous to suggest that without prior knowledge of such events/actions those things can be rightly guessed. That specific names, dates and countries are not blatantly stated no more proves that God did not know them than it proves that God is not responsible to tell us them. Rather, we are given the circumstances and characters by which we will know what time it is. God can providentially guide history to His desired fulfillment without controlling or knowing every irrelevant detail along the way. ...like, say, the very thoughts and imaginations of your heart? 3. God does not make 'mistakes', but knows reality as it is. Not according to your beloved John Sanders. "...Nonetheless, this does leave open the possibility that God might be "mistaken" about some points, as the Biblical record acknowledges. ...even if we affirm that God is sometimes "mistaken" in the sense that God believes that something would happen when, in fact, it does not come about, there is a question as to how often this happens. The Biblical record gives a few occasions, but we are in no position to judge just how many times this occurs with God." Your God is a very good guesser, but even He can be wrong...can make a mistake. 4. ...God can and does change His mind...He can regret making Saul King...he was grieved, disappointed... Being grieved by the way something turns out in no way proves lack of prior knowledge. It is more rightly proof that God will do what is right by His plan, even when it is painful. You and I can just as easily be grieved by actions we have taken, though we knew full well that they would be painful or difficult when we began them. Is your God not capable of this? God is never surprised at the way things turn out. In Christ, Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted November 12, 2005 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,043 Content Per Day: 0.52 Reputation: 426 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted November 12, 2005 No sir. Read the second verse again. It plainly states that the earth was in darkness. The light was created in response to "let there be" in the following verse. Light was spoken into existence. Also, by your false reasoning, God didn't make the plants or dry land either, because "make" doesn't directly appear in connection to the plants or the dry land, only "let there be". See? you have just distorted scripture YET AGAIN, to support one of your strange doctrines. "Let there be" is a creative statement. God spoke, and light was created out of nothing. Agreed. Seems clear enough. Ge 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Ge 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted November 12, 2005 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,043 Content Per Day: 0.52 Reputation: 426 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted November 12, 2005 Below is a cut and paste from Adam Clarkes Commentary I submit for all interested parties consideration. Many have asked, "How could light be produced on the first day, and the sun, the fountain of it, not created till the fourth day?" With the various and often unphilosophical answers which have been given to this question I will not meddle, but shall observe that the original word rwa signifies not only light but fire, see Isa 31:9; Eze 5:2. It is used for the SUN, Job 31:26. And for the electric fluid or LIGHTNING, Job 37:3. And it is worthy of remark that It is used in Isa 44:16, for the heat, derived from (va esh, the fire. He burneth part thereof in the fire (va wmb bemo esh:) yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, Aha! I have seen the fire, rwa ytyar raithi ur, which a modern philosopher who understood the language would not scruple to translate, I have received caloric, or an additional portion of the matter of heat. I therefore conclude, that as God has diffused the matter of caloric or latent heat through every part of nature, without which there could be neither vegetation nor animal life, that it is caloric or latent heat which is principally intended by the original word. That there is latent light, which is probably the same with latent heat, may be easily demonstrated: take two pieces of smooth rock crystal, agate, cornelian or flint, and rub them together briskly in the dark, and the latent light or matter of caloric will be immediately produced and become visible. The light or caloric thus disengaged does not operate in the same powerful manner as the heat or fire which is produced by striking with flint and steel, or that produced by electric friction. The existence of this caloric-latent or primitive light, may be ascertained in various other bodies; it can be produced by the flint and steel, by rubbing two hard sticks together, by hammering cold iron, which in a short time becomes red hot, and by the strong and sudden compression of atmospheric air in a tube. Friction in general produces both fire and light. God therefore created this universal agent on the first day, because without It no operation of nature could be carried on or perfected. Light is one of the most astonishing productions of the creative skill and power of God. It is the grand medium by which all his other works are discovered, examined, and understood, so far as they can be known. Its immense diffusion and extreme velocity are alone sufficient to demonstrate the being and wisdom of God. Light has been proved by many experiments to travel at the astonishing rate of 194,188 miles in one second of time! and comes from the sun to the earth in eight minutes 11 43/50 seconds, a distance of 95,513,794 English miles. The fact that Jesus is the Light of the World deals with the spiritual enlightenment all man kind needs to be saved . . . it is different from the physical realm. Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caldog Posted November 12, 2005 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 21 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/02/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted November 12, 2005 (edited) I've gotta go with God created time for the bennefit of His creatures. God dwells in eternity. We will someday dwell there with Him, but He has eternally existed. He began His creation in the beginning. He speaks to us on a level we can understand. The Son was with the Father from the beginning. We infer that this does'nt mean since the beginning of time, rather from time everlasting. I would venture that time began when God created the heavens and the earth. Edited November 12, 2005 by caldog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caldog Posted November 12, 2005 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 21 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/02/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted November 12, 2005 Other passages show that God changes His mind. What greater danger could there be than a God that "changes" His mind. It questions the perfection of God's knowledge and wisdom, His sovereignty, and the very word which is the basis of our faith. I understand that a few verses speak of God "repenting" of what he was going to do...or that he spared some He had promised to destroy... etc, etc. Better to understand these things as the best way man can understand God rather than understand God to change. The mass of scripture speaks or alludes to a God who changes in no way, ever. In Christ, Eric right, I'm guessing His "repenting" is describing His emotion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts