Almost doesn't count. But many atheist/nonbeleivers use the Settled view theology to stay away from God. Why follow a God that would predetermine sin and love him? How is that loving? He must not be loving, that is the conclusion they came to and I almost came to.
Faith pulled me through until I found the answer, and that is the Open View. I must say faith sustained me for a long time before I came to the answer. But please, do not let the issue of faith blind you from the problem of the S.V., that is it pins all sin on God. Do you not have an issue with this?
I'm not truly Calvinist so my theological stance isn't bothered by this no. I don't believe that we can blame God for this. I try to see God as doing things that fit Calvinism at times and OV at other times. If you tried to examine my life and create a humanology system to understand me, you'd be about half right and other times you'd be half wrong.
I believe Theology proper is important and I study all the time but I don't buy into any particular train of thought. Honestly, they all have some kewl things to point out about God and they all have their weaknesses. Just as I'd find it very difficult to be hyperCalvinistic, I don't believe OV fits with what I know from reading scripture. Some parts do, but there are so many basic tenets that I couldn't accept that would prevent me from moving to an OV position. I'd probably most closely relate to a Presbyterian and somewhat Lutheran viewpoint.
I'm not truly Calvinist so my theological stance isn't bothered by this no. I don't believe that we can blame God for this. I try to see God as doing things that fit Calvinism at times and OV at other times. If you tried to examine my life and create a humanology system to understand me, you'd be about half right and other times you'd be half wrong.
I believe Theology proper is important and I study all the time but I don't buy into any particular train of thought. Honestly, they all have some kewl things to point out about God and they all have their weaknesses. Just as I'd find it very difficult to be hyperCalvinistic, I don't believe OV fits with what I know from reading scripture. Some parts do, but there are so many basic tenets that I couldn't accept that would prevent me from moving to an OV position. I'd probably most closely relate to a Presbyterian and somewhat Lutheran viewpoint.
Some of this has a ring of truth to it.
There ARE some future events that are set. But not all of them. Exhaustive foreknowledge is what the OV is against... that doesn't mean God has no foreknowledge, it means he doesn't have all foreknowledge.
Jonah is a good example of OV at work. God changed his mind about a future event because the people repented. But in the future the kingdom of Heaven WILL happen, no matter what man does.
It is just impossible to make the future totally open and totally settled and the theology still fit with scripture. With this one can have confidence in a "happy ending" yet have no reason to blame God for creating things to be evil.
There ARE some future events that are set. But not all of them. Exhaustive foreknowledge is what the OV is against... that doesn't mean God has no foreknowledge, it means he doesn't have all foreknowledge.
Jonah is a good example of OV at work. God changed his mind about a future event because the people repented. But in the future the kingdom of Heaven WILL happen, no matter what man does.
It is just impossible to make the future totally open and totally settled and the theology still fit with scripture. With this one can have confidence in a "happy ending" yet have no reason to blame God for creating things to be evil.
I'm not hung up on the OV position so much. Knight told me I was an OV theoogian because of some of my beliefs. I still think God has an extensive foreknowledge. It is really hard for me to read the gospels any other way. Jesus said some things only the Father knew but other times He was incredibly accurate. The best sense from the text to me is that He saw it like it already happened. I know OV has a bit of a problem with God being able to transcend time like this, but I'd never be able to understand this kind of limitation. It doesn't make scripture contextual sense to me.
I'm not hung up on the OV position so much. Knight told me I was an OV theoogian because of some of my beliefs. I still think God has an extensive foreknowledge. It is really hard for me to read the gospels any other way. Jesus said some things only the Father knew but other times He was incredibly accurate. The best sense from the text to me is that He saw it like it already happened. I know OV has a bit of a problem with God being able to transcend time like this, but I'd never be able to understand this kind of limitation. It doesn't make scripture contextual sense to me.
I think of it as simple as this: God knows all things, but the future is not a thing to be known. God is smart enough and powerful enough to foresee and accomplish some future events.
Slogan/motto:
THE CHAMPION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND DEFENDER OF LIBERTY
Reputation:
February 23rd, 2007, 08:39 AM
If you are talking about the human race born of Adam you would do will to read Cleat's post. They are right on.
When it comes to being saved or born again then the old has passed away and we are no longer the person born of Adam. The rules of open view no longer apply. Our identity changes from that of Adam (flesh) to that of God (Closed)
Jesus is the only person born with a body that was closed view. Jesus is the only begotten Son of God born of a woman and of the seed of God and not born of the seed of Adam.
The confusion comes into play when we continue to think of ourselves in terms of the flesh born of Adam. We have passed from death (Adam) to life (Jesus). This is understandable sense we still have the body of death after we enter into life. We the living relate to the world and those around us through the body of death that is passing away and still make decisions basted on the old free will of the flesh. It is impossible for us to do otherwise and that is why we are so easily confused as to our identity. It is not an easy thing to understand.
"The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders
Slogan/motto:
THE CHAMPION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND DEFENDER OF LIBERTY
Reputation:
February 23rd, 2007, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
e4e,
Your position on this just doesn't make any sense.
Are you suggesting that I, as a saved believer in Christ, wouldn't be able to freely choose between two equally righteous actions?
Resting in Him,
Clete
As a man, a son of Adam, which we all are in the flesh, we still have the choice of choosing the good and the evil in relationship to the world around us. Your prety solid on that point.
As a righteous person born of God spiritually you are righteous even as God is righteous and evil is not a choice that you can make. It is beyond the capability of who you are in the spirit.. The problem is that our mind is still born of the flesh and it must be renewed by the spirit and it retains the ability to choose because that is who we are as relating to the physical world around us. Though the mind retains the ability to choose it does not change in any respect who we are in Christ. We do not sin ever, because we have been made the righteousness of Christ. It does not matter what choices our flesh makes to carry out a choice made because it remains dead. It is the spirit that quickens the mind to choose the right but that right choice must still be carried out in the flesh because that is the medium that we have to relate to the world. We are in the world and not of it.
God did not leave us to our own devices after we came to Him. He gave us his word to instruct us and took upon Himself the security of our salvation. The choices retained by the dead flesh are not something by which our salvation and our relationship to Christ is to be left too. They are for to whimsical to leave our destiny too. We are forever learning but never learning to be saved but in the fleshing out of the salvation that we possess. The more we learn the better job we do.
First and foremost we must know who we are in Christ if we are to have confidence to make choice without fear of failure. If we are not confident in god and as to our status in Him then all manner of doubt creeps in and our effectiveness as the living among the dead is nullified. There is a reason for the helmet of salvation. It protects our thinking because we do what we think about. Whether of the spirit or of the flesh. We think about it we usually wind up doing it.
Location: Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
Rep Power: 96294
Christian
Right Wing Zealot
Slogan/motto:
Do right and risk the consequences!
Reputation:
February 23rd, 2007, 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by elected4ever
As a man, a son of Adam, which we all are in the flesh, we still have the choice of choosing the good and the evil in relationship to the world around us. Your prety solid on that point.
As a righteous person born of God spiritually you are righteous even as God is righteous and evil is not a choice that you can make. It is beyond the capability of who you are in the spirit.. The problem is that our mind is still born of the flesh and it must be renewed by the spirit and it retains the ability to choose because that is who we are as relating to the physical world around us. Though the mind retains the ability to choose it does not change in any respect who we are in Christ. We do not sin ever, because we have been made the righteousness of Christ. It does not matter what choices our flesh makes to carry out a choice made because it remains dead. It is the spirit that quickens the mind to choose the right but that right choice must still be carried out in the flesh because that is the medium that we have to relate to the world. We are in the world and not of it.
God did not leave us to our own devices after we came to Him. He gave us his word to instruct us and took upon Himself the security of our salvation. The choices retained by the dead flesh are not something by which our salvation and our relationship to Christ is to be left too. They are for to whimsical to leave our destiny too. We are forever learning but never learning to be saved but in the fleshing out of the salvation that we possess. The more we learn the better job we do.
First and foremost we must know who we are in Christ if we are to have confidence to make choice without fear of failure. If we are not confident in god and as to our status in Him then all manner of doubt creeps in and our effectiveness as the living among the dead is nullified. There is a reason for the helmet of salvation. It protects our thinking because we do what we think about. Whether of the spirit or of the flesh. We think about it we usually wind up doing it.
I don't think you understood the point of my question.
Whether the future is open or settled has entirely to do with our ability to freely choose. Notice that I did not say that it has to do with our ability to choose between good and evil. That is one choice we make to be sure, but that isn't the point. If I have the ability to choose between ANY TWO OPTIONS, then whether I'm a believer or not is irrelevant. You are making an argument that a saved person can no longer choose evil, which is obviously ridiculous, but be that as it may, even if you were right, one's inability to choose evil doesn't mean that they cannot choose at all. If, for example, there are two people whom I have the ability to help but I can only help one or the other then I can choose one or the other entirely of my own free will. Neither choice is evil but I still chose and could have chosen otherwise. Thus my choice was free, and the future is open, even for me as a believer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lighthouse
He's saying that you can't choose to be unrighteous, or unsaved.
He's saying more than that though, isn't he?
He saying that believers can no longer choose to be unrighteous and that therefore the future is not open for the believer. Even if the premise were true and valid, which it isn't, the logic just doesn't follow. Wouldn't you agree?
"The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders
Slogan/motto:
THE CHAMPION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND DEFENDER OF LIBERTY
Reputation:
February 23rd, 2007, 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
I don't think you understood the point of my question.
Whether the future is open or settled has entirely to do with our ability to freely choose.
I believe we are free to choose between two options. The choice that is made settles your future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
Notice that I did not say that it has to do with our ability to choose between good and evil. That is one choice we make to be sure, but that isn't the point.
On that I can agree
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
If I have the ability to choose between ANY TWO OPTIONS, then whether I'm a believer or not is irrelevant.
No it is not irrelevant. A person can only choose within the context of his existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
You are making an argument that a saved person can no longer choose evil, which is obviously ridiculous,
To you, it probably is ridiculous. Seeing that you equate salvation with the flesh and must live righteously in the flesh.
There is now and never was nor will there ever be a choice for the flesh to be righteous. There is no choice for the flesh to be righteous. Our flesh is dead it shell remain dead and will forever be dead. The flesh cannot choose righteousness. Even when the flesh thinks that it has done righteously it sins against God. If we are of the flesh, we are not of God period. It does not matter what we or all of mankind thinks are our good works. They are evil. So don't expect our supposed good works to get us anywhere but hell.
On the other hand when the Holy Spirit witnesses to our heart and convicts us of sin, of righteousness and of judgment. When the Holy Spirit presents us with Jesus as the remedy for our dilemma then there is opportunity to choose life and only then. No one chooses to be dead. All men are born dead to God. It is only when God presents His life to us do we even become aware of our death. We must then choose life God's way and not our way. We must choose the life that is in Christ or remain dead. God does not accept modifications. It is His way or the low way.
Once having chosen life, then God births within us a live Spirit of His own seed and our life is hide in Him. The new Spirit that God births within us is incapable of choosing sin. That is not a choice that the child of God has. "You are not of the flesh but of the Spirit if so be that the Spirit of God dwells in you", says Paul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
but be that as it may, even if you were right, one's inability to choose evil doesn't mean that cannot choose at all. If, for example, there are two people whom I have the ability to help but I can only help one or the other then I can choose one or the other entirely of my own free will. Neither choice is evil but I still chose and could have chosen otherwise. Thus my choice was free, and the future is open, even for me as a believer.
Off course your choose would be free choice. but only with in the limitations of your existence. An unsaved man can choose only within the limitations of his death and the saved only within the limitations of his life. It seems to me that you fail to take into account these limitation. All ways choose the good that you can do and not what you cannot do. If you are presented with a choice of two things that are good and you only have the means to do one of the two, God always has someone else to take care of the one you could not handle. So always choose to do for one and not to forgo both.
"The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders
Slogan/motto:
THE CHAMPION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND DEFENDER OF LIBERTY
Reputation:
February 23rd, 2007, 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete
e4e,
This thread is about whether or not the future is open, not whether or not Christians can sin. Please take your off topic stupidity to another thread.
It is not open Clete. Your choices determine the outcome. and that is a settled issue. If you cannot understand what I am saying then it is because you do not wont to believe it. You supposed free choice is clouding you mine. I have tried to be civil for a change but you are incapable of hearing. How dare God limit your future. You are your own God.
*** ONE PERSON’S HERETIC IS ANOTHER’S HERO *** 
Linear Mode
