21 күн бұрын
10 ай бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
7 жыл бұрын
7 жыл бұрын
7 жыл бұрын
7 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
8 жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@hondotheology 5 күн бұрын
be happy you aren't in heaven with Christ! be happy you're not dead! what a stupid thing to say. does he believe death is the end and that when we're "six feet under," that's it? this man is not a theologian. he isn't even a believer. he's a pagan deist
@1funnfunky 20 күн бұрын
Check out Roger Forster's 'God's Strategy in Human History', a quite brilliant defence of free will and probably the best Christian book I've ever read.
@davidswiger3324 Ай бұрын
I believe in the open view. This video was extremely helpful. Thank you. God bless you and yours. :)
@vernonpurdy8607 Ай бұрын
First time I’ve heard this scripture interpreted like this. It seams absolutely correct in comparison to Jesus.
@Richard_Rz 3 ай бұрын
Excellent tteaching! I'm heartened to see Calvinism exposed for its evil ways. It is incredibly dangerous abd appeals to narcissists, they LOVE it.
@hondotheology 3 ай бұрын
God is not a man, you clown. he doesn't "think ahead" like some super super super smart man
@Obrandoporlaverdad 3 ай бұрын
It's disturbing to me how people (like this man) can introduce new doctrines, and do it with such ease and even jokingly not being bothered at the thought of the negative effect it would cause to the church, as if we were planning a new business strategy for a secular company.
@tomtemple69 4 ай бұрын
this is a joke
@jrmitchell12 4 ай бұрын
Here are a few flaws that I see in this video. 1. At the beginning of Romans 9, Paul is grieved that he is saved and other Jews are not "I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit- I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people". He then tries to reconcile how is it possible that he is saved when the Jews were the ones that were supposed to receive the promise. That is the flow of the argument. That is the reason it is about salvation, because that is specifically what Paul is wrestling with at the beginning of the chapter. 2. Verse 30 is not a "summary of the chapter", it is just another objection that one might have to his argument. He even makes the same "What then shall we say?" in verse 14. If I took your view of this, I could just say that THAT with its answer should have been the end of the chapter. 3. What does it mean to be "true Israel" if not saved? Sure, he is saying it doesn't have to do with ethnic physical blood background, but what else other than being in Christ and saved would it mean to be part of a "true Israel"? 4. "He doesn't appeal to what God arbitrarily does". Who on the positive side of the deterministic debate is arguing that God arbitrarily does this? No one. 5. "Any interpretation on Romans 9 that undermines free will has got to be wrong, because Paul's own summary of his argument emphasizes free will". This might have been a good point if you only read to 30-32, but what about verse 33, the very next verse? 'As it is written: "See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame."' Who laid the rock? Who is causing people to stumble? Just because they choose in their own will to choose something doesn't mean that they have complete free will in the sense that it is outside of his divine will. 6. "Here obviously Paul doesn't see hardening as a permanent thing... it's done out of love for the purposes of redemption" Where in the world are you getting this from Romans 9? "Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden." So he is contrasting people he is mercying with people he is hardening. That seem to imply that people He is hardening are not being given mercy. If this were truly about hardening for the purposes of redemption then why in the world would he even go through the entire objection and answer in 19-21? If it was obviously about redemption and not giving mercy then why even say "One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”" This question doesn't even make sense to ask if it is about redeeming people! 7. Regarding Jeremiah 18, can someone make a point using a similar example but be making a different point? Read 20-24 a few times in a row. Does that sound to you like he has a spoiled clay and is making the best use with what he has? "make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use" He is literally making it out of the same lump, there is no difference in the lump, it has to do with what he wills that part of the lump to be. Also, if it were about God being flexible and working with what he has, how in the world is that an answer to the rhetorical question he is asking in the first place. This is supposed to be in answer to the question "Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?" Who can resist his will? Why does he blame us? Was the answer "well you had the free will and you chose what you were going to do, so I just did the best with what I had". Emphatically NO! 8. "God is saying he has mercy on whomever he wants and hardens whomever he wants...what he is saying is God will have mercy on whomever he wants and the ones he wants to have mercy on are those who will simply have faith... and the ones that god will harden are the ones that won't have faith." How does this make any sense at all given what it actually says. It says God will mercy and God will harden. God is doing SOMETHING right? Otherwise, it wouldn't use those words. It seems that you are just taking your understanding of what you believe and shoving it into the text when it seems to just say plain language on what it means.
@orangeswell1469 5 ай бұрын
Brilliant 👍
@bstein9500 5 ай бұрын
Jeremiah 32:35 (KJV) And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
@dubbelkastrull 5 ай бұрын
21:33 bookmark Youre no longer an open theist if you say all of future is certain for God.
@paulthomson8798 6 ай бұрын
If God knew all possibilities as if they were certainties, why would he regret the human race becoming almost wholly evil. Did he not anticipate and have a plan to advance from there? I guess he could regret that they made choices that mandated the flood to fix things. But why would He regret His own past actions?
@mantijutsu 6 ай бұрын
Gracias por tu trabajo y explicación
@Over-for-now 9 ай бұрын
Thank God He chose me even as a small child. As a dead person l would end in hell because our free choice takes us to a cult and satanic deception
@inTruthbyGrace 7 ай бұрын
wow you *_are_* so special!!! How wonderful that God loves Jacob and *_YOU_* and hated Esau and everyone else.... I personally am glad that I am chosen *_in CHRIST_* bc Jesus came to save *_sinners_* and I know for sure that I am one of those... but congratulations on discovering how super-duper special you are!
@Over-for-now 7 ай бұрын
@@inTruthbyGrace thanks so much --- you actually agree with the Saviour about my position in HIM. I believe what HE says about me as the TRAVAIL of HIS soul. HE suffered greatly for my sins upon HIMSELF
@inTruthbyGrace 7 ай бұрын
@@Over-for-now no, you clearly do not... your comment point blank says God choose *_YOU_* .... you mentioned nothing, absolutely *_NOTHING_* about Jesus at all nor about God's having chosen you in Jesus... that is the problem with Calvinism... Jesus is an after thought bc you imagine and you speak that God chose you ....it is all about YOU! "a good man out of the good treasure of the heart brings forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
@Over-for-now 7 ай бұрын
@@inTruthbyGrace ---You haven't read where Jesus says He will not lose any THAT the FATHER GAVE HIM?? I'm a gift from the Father to the Lord Jesus Christ
@Over-for-now 7 ай бұрын
@@inTruthbyGrace I know it offends you deeply THAT lam simply trusting in the FINISHED work the Lord Jesus Christ accomplished for me. Iam not a calvinist and don't care about what man says. GOD receives ALL the GLORY and HE WILL NOT share HIS GLORY with another You CAN have THAT assurance also
@danielsereader4710 10 ай бұрын
After listening to this lecture about five times, I believe I've found a chink in the armor. It has to do with the chess player analogy and how God thinks and acts. In analyzing it (the chess player analogy), I think it falls short because it presents God in too much of a machine-like fashion where-in his actions become that of an assembly-line, which is like Calvinism and is what Boyd is trying to avoid. This analogy does not take into account the 'human' factor. To go a little random, this point is well illustrated in the movie 'Sully.' In the movie, Sully is faulted for not having the 'immediate' correct reaction in the dual-engine loss situation. Because he had to consider for 30 seconds or more what he needed to do, this resulted in the airplane landing in the water versus landing back on the runway. And since the Scripture tells us God too has 'reactions' and things happen that he wasn't expecting, we would have to say the same would be true for God as was for Sully. That 'reaction' time means the outcome may turn out differently than it could have. Real-life is not like a chess game, in that in a chess game there can be a lack of emotion. In real-life, there are real reactions by both people and God. So, taking this into account, I think the chess player analogy falls short. For God to always be anticipating the alternatives would mean he couldn't leave time for emotional 'reactions' because the very reaction can change the outcome. To ease people's minds, I will say I do find the overall argument of Open Theism as very strong and hold it as my personal position, but I think the chess thing needs addressed. I would love to hear Boyd respond to this.
@simplegarak 10 ай бұрын
Hm. This is interesting to me as a computer programmer and to think about how God is the creator of cause and effect Himself. Much to think on. Appreciated.
@falconguy4768 10 ай бұрын
Wow now you brought home the point so well thank you Pastor
@Genna01 Жыл бұрын
Where’s Ava grace.?…..
@nanyanguo1 Жыл бұрын
she can follow the scri;pt.
@mangthangkhal8349 Жыл бұрын
Trash after trash🥴
@duhawmasailo2019 Жыл бұрын
She so cute ❤️❤️❤️💋💋
@marcmoreau9411 Жыл бұрын
Magnifique mini girl !!!!
@joaquin6957 Жыл бұрын
pքɾօʍօʂʍ
@gab31282 Жыл бұрын
It's the reason I don't believe in a God who sends people to eternal suffer in hell.
@paulmussell7943 Жыл бұрын
You should check out my other channel here kzfaq.info/sun/PL3c6ubh1HrRgFu0_zyObJ1XkZ-Cxz39RC or my website at UnderstandingPerspectives.com where I analyze views of hell and explain some of the reasons why people in different groups think like they do about hell and other issues such as foreknowledge and the identity of Jesus.
@nickgoogle4525 Жыл бұрын
You can configure to your liking. For example if you would like to reorder clips after pasting that is an option as well (which I do not use / like). Nice features are to mark favourite clips and rename clips if you like. This way -- together with the "search as you type" function one can easily also store often used phrases, login info or whatever you need to regularly access. Also showing only the type of clips you are interested in (text, bitmaps ...) is a nice feature. Sometimes I want to edit something which is in the clipboard. This is an option as well. Best clipboard manager I have found after trying _many_ :-)
@paulmussell7943 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the comment. I'll check those features out. I didn't realize it did all that.
@sheilasmith7779 2 жыл бұрын
This is so good. A far more grand view than the limited view of God of Calvinists.
@kevinsBiblicaldiscussions 2 жыл бұрын
Please repent of open theism.. it's heresy
@blusheep2 Жыл бұрын
I'm very cautious to call something "heresy" because who am I and under what authority am I able to make those claims, but in this case I am as close as it comes to calling it heresy as I can be. Open theism cherry picks verses. It doesn't attempt to understand the passage in any deep and meaningful way, especially in context to the other verses, it makes the promises of God hopes and dreams and limits God to a superior power. Instead of all things being held together by the power of his word, God must "take risks" and wait to see the outcome of even His own decisions.
@dimitartodorov4826 Жыл бұрын
@@blusheep2 The promises of God aren't hopes and dreams when God is briliant and wise, He is so wise that He actually can achieve what He wants in a world with creatures with libertarian free will and future being partly open. I think God in partly open future is way more powerful and smart than God in future settled from eternitiy.
@blusheep2 Жыл бұрын
@@dimitartodorov4826 To each his own but it makes God out to be guessing. IF by saying that he is so wise that he can predict everything that can ever happen accurately and therefore he can inject himself into history when he needs to prod it in one direction or another then you are really only saying that God is actually omniscient and God doesn't take any risks. That isn't what open theism teaches. Open theism teaches that he doesn't know what we are going to do. He only thinks he knows and therefore "risk." And if He takes a risk with me, on my level, and all of history is one risk after the other then God can't predict anything or if He can then his predictions are just that... predictions. Like an investor predicts the outcome of a companies stocks. Most of the time he will be right but sometimes he gets it wrong. That is limiting God or making him more powerful and smarter. My biggest problem with Open theism is that they all sound like atheists. I've been talking with atheists for about 5 years now and open theists and atheists use the same reasoning and arguments. Open theists sound like people that are on the edge of giving up their faith but have found a way to rationalize all the difficult pieces in the Bible like hell, penal substitution, genocide in the OT, etc. For the open theist, hell doesn't exist, everyone goes to heaven with various rewards, penal substitution is not a thing, and the conquering of Canaan wasn't commanded by God but only perceived by the Hebrews to have been commanded so.
@dimitartodorov4826 Жыл бұрын
@@blusheep2 Its not limiting God since He had a plan what to do as every possiblity was certain. Like how the chess master is limited if He is ready for every possible move you can make. Not knowing with certainty which move are you gonna chose doesnt change a thing since He is prepared for whatever you play. I dont know if "they sound like an atheists" its a sound argument. Open theists have different views on hell, I mean there many non-open theists with different view on hell. Christ Date for example is a famous calvinist who support annihilationism aka conditional immorality. I no, for the open theist everyone doesnt go to heaven. What are you describing is universalism and very few people hold this position today, in fact I dont know even one Open Theist holding universalism. Different people have different views of OT genocides. Greg Boyd is the only open theist I know saying that the genocides are not commands from God.
@blusheep2 Жыл бұрын
@@dimitartodorov4826 I admit that my exposure to Open Theism is primarily Greg Boyd. I've been to his church by the way, a few years back before I even knew that Open Theism was a thing. My wife had been watching the podcasts of his service for a few months and really wanted to attend. Although his sermon was fine other things about the church raised some red flags. Primarily their tiny library of books for sale. They were books promoting stuff like the Documentary Hypothesis and written by his number 2 pastor, though the name slips my mind. That was a real shock to me. I then have an acquaintance that I see one a year who was heavily influenced by Greg Boyd. That is where I heard the "universalism" side of Open Theism but if that isn't generally accepted nowadays in Open Theist circles then I think that is good. Of course, I'm forced to wonder why it ever was. Her view was, sort of, the opposite of Chris Date. Everyone gets eternal life but only some enter the New Jerusalem. The third exposure to OT was from Pastor Mike Winger who did a teaching on it. He did primarily focus on Greg Boyd. So, maybe this is why I have seen Greg Boyd as the poster child for OpenT. How is an infinite number of plans a plan at all. Isn't that just reaction? When Ezekiel prophesied the rise of Babylon then Persia, then the Greeks, then the Romans and did so with incredible detail, that speaks to a God that knows what will happen. Not a God that guesses what will happen and had a plan for each contingency. Think about it a bit. If God constantly adjusts his plans to fit the unknown choices of humans then how does he predict such detail 100s of years in the future? That would mean that either 1)God is going to inject himself against man's free will constantly, in order to steer the future, which is very Calvanistic, or 2)God can predict the future decisions of humans so perfectly that there is no difference from omniscience. There is no risk. I think the real problem here is that we are trying to describe God's actions on a timeline. God though is timeless. He is eternal. We live on a single dimension of time and it flows for us in only one direction. It might be that God exists in an infinite number of timelines so that on our timeline God takes risks but because he exists on an infinite number of intersecting timelines to our then He also knows the past and the future as if they are all "now." In philosophy there is a discussion about the nature of time. Its often referred to as A theory or B theory of time. I've always been partial to the A theory of time which what we experience. One minute leads to the next and it only flows in one direction. But then I began to read some quanutm mechanics. Specifically the Quantum observer effect and Quantum decoherence. I'm no expert and the topic is relatively new to me but in order to test the quantum observer effect they did an experiment on Quantum decoherence. So, just in case you are unfamiliar... the quantum observer effect essentially says that a particle exists as a wave of possibilities until it is measured by a conscious observer which causes it to collapse into one of its probabilities. The decoherence experiment put this to the test and found it to be true but they found something else that was really interesting. Something they observed late in time had an effect on what the particle did in the past. A present observation effected what the particle did in the past. Very interesting but it sounds a lot more like the B theory of time or what is sometimes called the "block universe." I'm not convinced but this demonstrates how wacky reality really is and trying to fit God into our limited perceptions is probably not going to describe truth. So, when I see God predicting highly detailed future events, I can't conclude that God takes risks. At least not in the sense that we take risks. There has to be much more to it that we just don't see. Maybe there is a way for God to be a risk taker and omniscient at the same time. Who knows but He is omniscient.
@johnkw47 2 жыл бұрын
I see that things genuinely hang on me because the sovereign God uses me as one of His means to get stuff done, stuff which He had preordained to get done.
@johnkw47 2 жыл бұрын
Why is it better that God create with the risk that some would be damned rather than the certainty? Open Theism doesn't get you off the hook. It just makes God look reckless.
@paulmussell7943 2 жыл бұрын
That's a good question. I am persuaded that the scripture teach that the future is partly open. I think this is an important piece of making sense of the problem of hell, evil, and suffering, but it certainly doesn't fully answer the question. I don't know for sure what you mean by damned, but since the most common belief about hell today is that God will torture the wicked forever in fire I would not be surprised if that is what you think about that subject. I would encourage you to consider the possibility that you have inherited a mistaken view of that subject and investigate that issue for yourself. I have another channel with some videos dedicated to the purpose of explaining controversies from various perspectives. I have a series about hell there that you might find interesting. This is a link to that playlist. kzfaq.info/sun/PL3c6ubh1HrRgFu0_zyObJ1XkZ-Cxz39RC The question about suffering and evil is a harder and much broader issue than the question of hell. I have some thoughts about it, but I haven't prepared a presentation of my own on the subject. However, I would highly recommend listening to this series on the subject. It is the best thing I've heard about this by far. restitutio.org/2020/10/22/362-why-god-allows-suffering-1-brandon-duke/ restitutio.org/2020/10/29/363-why-god-allows-suffering-2-brandon-duke/ These two episodes are good too. Another person who disagrees with some of the premises in the first two episodes raises some objections and they have a really good conversation about them. restitutio.org/2020/11/05/364-challenging-soul-making-theodicy-1-brandon-duke-jerry-wierwille/ restitutio.org/2020/11/12/365-challenging-soul-making-theodicy-2-brandon-duke-jerry-wierwille/ Thanks for watching. I hope you find this material to be helpful.
@johnkw47 2 жыл бұрын
Believing that some things are available for me to decide does not make me an open theist. You have to ask why people decide what they decide, and the omniscient, omnismart, omnipotent God is ultimately behind those choices.
@johnkw47 2 жыл бұрын
Hmm, Exodus 13:17 says "When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near. For God said, 'Lest the people change their minds when they see war and return to Egypt.' (ESV) You hang a lot on 'lest', as though that's some indicator of probability, about which God isn't certain. I see no uncertainty in this verse.
@johnkw47 2 жыл бұрын
When you talk of Abraham being prevented from sacrificing Issac, you're not doing a close reading of the text. Who said to Abraham, "Now I know that you fear God..."? (Genesis 22:12). If it was God, why didn't he say, "Now I know that you fear Me."?
@blusheep2 Жыл бұрын
Also.... If we are to take the story at face value then what did this test prove or ensure? Abraham could have trusted God in this moment or just done what he did out of fear but tomorrow he rethinks his position and decides to never do that again. If God is unaware of the future then no test ensures anything and becomes meaningless.
@cddpmpls35 2 жыл бұрын
..this man knows nothing of the king..
@livingwaterOC 2 жыл бұрын
Well said my brother! Finally someone who can articulate what is evident to anyone who has rational thought, logic, and true spiritual/Biblical understanding!
@melindalemmon2149 2 жыл бұрын
Sounds more like a defense of determinism than a defense of the open veiw. Jesse Morell and Bob Enyart are far more adept with the doctrine, and their arguments more coherent. Don't cheat yourself by stopping here.
@jesussaves3248 2 жыл бұрын
Annihilationism it is.
@billyr9162 2 жыл бұрын
The devil said the same thing this guy said to Eve. It doesn't really mean what it seems to say. You have to look at it this way or that way and then you'll know what it really means.
@truthseeker5698 3 ай бұрын
What does it say Billy boy? Remember to keep reading through Chapter 11. Sola de Romans 9 is bankrupt bro.
@billyr9162 3 ай бұрын
@truthseeker5698 Now you're saying to me what the devil says mister lie seeker. You say Romans nine doesn't really mean what it says. AND What the devil said to eve was in genesis. MR LIESEEKER
@truthseeker5698 3 ай бұрын
@@billyr9162 You’re deceived Billy Boy. Calvinism reformed theology straight from the satan. Choose better if you’re willing.
@billyr9162 2 жыл бұрын
If God looks like the cross and is all loving then then the verses that say God sends people to hell can't be right. If I have to interpret every verse and light of God looks like the cross then there's no way God sending anyone to hell. All those verses must say something different. The devil must have created hell and it must be the devil sending them there against God's will because God wills that all men be saved.
@shepherd7744 4 ай бұрын
God sends no one to hell, matter of fact the scripture teaches us God had to enlarge it, scripture says it is His desire that ALL come to the knowledge of the truth, YOU send yourself to hell by refusing to submit and put your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Your absolute lack of any understanding of scripture is blatantly obvious to anyone who has even a beginner type of knowledge of scripture. You'd rather spew your rhetoric to make yourself feel justified before a Holy God, when you know in your heart it is YOU rejecting Him, NOT Him rejecting you!! And believe it or not I say these truths with an absolute desire that you receive it and repent of your thoughts and ways, turn to God that you may be saved
@billyr9162 4 ай бұрын
@shepherd7744 God made hell so you could send yourself there. How nice of him.
@billyr9162 4 ай бұрын
@shepherd7744 how are you gong to let yourself in hell if Jesus has the key? Revelation 1:18 [18]I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
@shepherd7744 4 ай бұрын
@billyr9162 seriously, the fact that He is the creator and holds the keys to the very creation, matter of fact He holds everything together by the word of His power, your going to read that into it, that Christ is just throwing people into hell. I'm amazed at the total lack of understanding, if you end up in hell, it is 100% your on fault, Christ died for ALL, anyone could turn from their wicked ways, and submit to Him, most will not, they would rather choose to obey their own flesh than submit to a Holy Savior
@billyr9162 4 ай бұрын
@shepherd7744 How much do you love yourself? God doesn't love everyone. Malachi 1:3 [3]And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
@billyr9162 2 жыл бұрын
So who is the vessel of wrath *FITTED* for destruction? He started with that verse but never answered it. If God looks like the cross why would anybody be fitted for destruction destruction even if they wanted to and they had free will? If God were truly loving everybody would receive grace whether they wanted it or not. Doesn't every parent save their child even though they disobey?
@TheRomans9Guy 11 ай бұрын
“So who is the vessel of wrath FITTED for destruction?” I can answer that for you. No one. There are no vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. You’re just misreading the author’s intent of that verse. Look at it again, Paul is asking “what if…?” because it’s not a reality. What IF God did this… wouldn’t that be terrible? This is what you Jews believe, God created some vessels for for destruction, and you think it’s the Gentiles, but based on how things are going with you rejecting the Messiah, then wouldn’t you actually be the ones acting like the vessels fitted for destruction? If that were true? Aren’t you glad now that you’re wrong, and God actually loves all people and hasn’t fitted any vessels for destruction? There are no vessels of wrath, good news!
@billyr9162 11 ай бұрын
@@TheRomans9Guy It's called a rhetorical question.
@TheRomans9Guy 11 ай бұрын
@@billyr9162 technically no, it’s a hypothetical question
@billyr9162 11 ай бұрын
@@TheRomans9Guy No it's a rhetorical question
@billyr9162 11 ай бұрын
@The Romans 9 Guy - Bob Leitzel He summarizes it in verse 25 Is quoting Hosea... I will call not my not the people of me, the peopleof me and the ones not having been loved, Having been loved.
@billyr9162 2 жыл бұрын
"God has no choice but to go in that direction" he said. So this guy believes in determinism too. Man is the determiner. God is forced to do what man forces him to do. That makes God a puppet of man. Man has free choice. God doesn't. That was his conclusion. That was his message.
@mjsabie8517 8 ай бұрын
Wow. So you listen to this whole sermon and pull that line out and say it is what the entire point is the sermon was??? You really had to do some mental gymnastics to find something bad to say about the message… well done I guess
@billyr9162 8 ай бұрын
@mjsabie8517 The entire point of every free will worshipper is that man has a free will, and God is subject to what the free will man decides.
@EricSmyth4Christ 2 жыл бұрын
God knows the future infinitely more than he knows it precisely
@anselman3156 2 жыл бұрын
In Gethsemane, the Savior was not asking that it might be possible not to die on the cross, but that it might be possible for Him to be spared some of the sufferings, both before and during the crucifixion. It would have been possible for Him to have been spared some of the tortures, or to have had some of the pain limited or alleviated.
@Hambone3773 3 жыл бұрын
I think you could have made the argument stronger by talking about the idea of justice. Heaven and Hell are consequential. Crime and punishment and reward and privilege are contingent. You sort of included it in your practical consideration in point 5 but you could have dug deeper with justice passages.
@Hambone3773 3 жыл бұрын
I am am open Theist but I hate the "regret" argument. I think "repent" is a better translation for one and for two it describes an acknowledgment to the angels who opposed the creation of mankind as God's image bearing agent that they were correct that free willed man made of dust is unworthy of being God's image bearer. God always knew the fall was an inevitability and planned for it. Just like he knew they would kill his son and planned on using it as the means of atonement. If there is one thing God can count on it is humans sinning.
@Hambone3773 3 жыл бұрын
But the ultimate creation was never perfect angels but redeemed fallen humans in the nation of Isreal and the church made perfect through redemption and that was God's cosmic display of manifold wisdom to the objecting angels.
@scotthix2926 3 жыл бұрын
This is totally contradictory. 1 moment he says God is infinitely wise and knows all possible things. But then he makes God to make bad choices, which denies his character of knowing all things. Or Open theism is trash and God determines all things for his purpose and his glory. So that his wishes are fulfilled and becuase he is he creator we are the creature. Case in point God wanted to find someone to change his mind but could not so he had to wipe out or judge them
@paulmussell7943 3 жыл бұрын
I don't know that I would go so far as Greg goes in saying that God knows all possibilities about the future. I'm not saying He doesn't know all possibilities, but the scriptures don't give us explicit statements either way. There do seem to be hints that real novelty exists even for God. For example there are numerous verses in scripture that talk about people singing new songs to God. If God knows all future possibilities as if they were certainties then there wouldn't really be such a thing as new song because every possible song that could ever be written by anyone would have already existed in God's mind as a possibility. In such a reality it would actually be the case that in a sense God's knowledge wouldn't develop it would just change from a set of possibilities to fewer and fewer future possibilities, more and more certainties, and most of all, lots of things that could have been that weren't. I'm not saying that isn't how it is, but that does seem a little strange to me. I'm inclined to think that God is omnicompetent in that He knows everything as it actually is and is wise enough to deal with whatever happens even if people do things that were unlikely to occur. I don't recall Greg characterizing any of God's prior choices as being bad ones. He does say that God regretted the choices He made, but that is what the scriptures plainly say. That doesn't mean that God made a bad choice. That means that people made bad choices so much so that God regretted giving them the power to go so wrong because of how they misused the authority He gave them. It turned out badly, but that doesn't mean that God's choices were bad for giving people that kind of freedom.
@paulmussell7943 2 жыл бұрын
@@michaelthechristian8286 , I get the feeling that a lot of open theists feel like they need to say that God knows the full extent of all the particular future possibilities because saying otherwise sounds a little bit like saying that there are things that God doesn't know. I get that the argument that God is infinite and you can't fraction up infinity is pretty compelling, and I don't necessarily disagree with it in principle. However, that is going beyond what the scriptures actually say, so I'm reluctant to make statements like that. I suppose it is theoretically possible that God knows everything particular outcome that is possible, but the idea that God must know what all those possibilities are in advance doesn't seem to be logically entailed by the fact that He knows all things. It might be that future possibilities are real but that they don't exist in any real sense other than as a set of potentialities based in the authority God has delegated to others and the scope of the power they may attain rather than a fixed set of knowable possibilities. In that case real novelty could exist for God. We wouldn't have to think that God must have contemplated all the very worst extremes of evil that could potentially exist. And, we would have no reason to make appeals about the scope of God's knowledge that aren't based on scripture. The longer I have been an open theist the less some of the concerns about God's knowledge even seem relevant. God is powerful enough to judge everyone when the time comes. He has delegated much authority to us, but not forever. He call accomplish the purposes He is pleased to accomplish because He is so wise and because of the apparent scope of what He is determined to accomplish. People often think that it is His purpose to determine and control everything on the basis of verses like Isaiah 46:10 and Ephesians 1:13. I can see how easy it is to infer that from the text, but it isn't stated there or anywhere else in scripture that I know of. We have to look elsewhere to see what God's purposes are. It seems to me that His purposes at least insofar as they are revealed to us in scripture are very limited compared to that. He definitely wants us to love Him and each other and He wants to live with us on the new earth, but besides that I'm not sure that we are told many other specifics about the things He is determined to accomplish. If His purposes are limited primarily to those goals then He wouldn't need to know much about the future at all to accomplish what He wants. Since He is wise He will know the best way to deal with each of us, and since He is powerful He won't have any trouble at the judgement.
@TheQweerdeer00 3 жыл бұрын
Is the greg boyd from the church in minnesota. I totally forget the church name but i know its based near st Paul. Answer would be appreciated.
@paulmussell7943 3 жыл бұрын
Yes, he is one of the pastors at Woodland Hills.
@kellywilsonid 3 жыл бұрын
Classic Eberle. He goes on and on with story after story, statement after statement he presents as truth.... and we’re just supposed to take his word for it. He backs nothing up with Scripture. Example: at 12:53 he talks about how the “old religious system needed animals killed all day long to take care of people’s sin”, yet Hebrews 10 tells us the “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin” (v4). God set up the sacrificial system to ultimately point to Jesus atoning for sins of those who would believe - John 3. Eberle is a decent speaker. He can get the crowd riled up, yet only tells partial truths.
@primego3096 3 жыл бұрын
This is so beautiful. God as a father! Thank you pastor harold
@glennmariacher4525 3 жыл бұрын
I wish I could put 2 million likes to this one. This is, hands down, the best explanation for Romans 9 !! This truly is " good news " for any believer and searcher. Glenn