OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 22, 2014, 11:53:56 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Open Theism??  (Read 1597 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #45 on: May 05, 2012, 05:12:39 AM »

By the way, there is a convert Orthodox person in the U.K. who is an open theist. However, I will not say who it is. I think it's best to keep it to myself.
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #46 on: May 05, 2012, 07:09:22 AM »

Those were really big letters, but would you respond to my post by its context? I don't really care bout your skills, I was trying to present a real problem as I have seen it. The issue is not of causation and knowing. If it's not clear, I can try and rewrite it.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #47 on: May 09, 2012, 09:48:32 PM »

Those were really big letters, but would you respond to my post by its context? I don't really care bout your skills, I was trying to present a real problem as I have seen it. The issue is not of causation and knowing. If it's not clear, I can try and rewrite it.

The issue is not """only""" about causation and knowing, but that's one of the key issues that separate East from West when looking at this issue. If you dig into the Eastern Christian Tradition then you will find the answers you are looking for. As well as much much more! Read this blog article from my friends blog for starters!

http://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/could-a-maverick-go-east/ (Could a Maverick Go East?)
Quote
quote"
"Personal activities could be true of God without implying a defect or a loss of freedom in creatures whose acts God foreknows. (This has parallels to issues in Agent Causation.)"

To read the whole thing please go to the link!
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #48 on: May 09, 2012, 09:58:54 PM »

Aindriú,

Is there a Library near you? If so then ask for this book through inter-Library Loan:

http://www.amazon.com/Free-Choice-Saint-Maximus-Confessor/dp/1878997025 (Free Choice in Saint Maximus the Confessor)

A section of this book looks at the issue of free will and predestination by way of Christology. And so it doesn't answer your questions directly, but it does answer a number of your questions indirectly for the same tools that it has to answer other problems can be used to answer yours.

This is what the blog post I wanted you to read was getting at.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2012, 09:59:39 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #49 on: May 09, 2012, 11:27:11 PM »

I'm not concerned about personal freedom. I'm concerned about the participation of God. If God knows 100% what you're choices are going to be, why would he act? This includes simple events in life, to ultimate salvation.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2012, 05:41:57 AM »

I'm not concerned about personal freedom. I'm concerned about the participation of God. If God knows 100% what you're choices are going to be, why would he act? This includes simple events in life, to ultimate salvation.

Do you believe in the Essence vs Energies distinction and what that would imply in regards to this issue? Especially in regards to what you think God can and can not know?

Also, what are your beliefs about huperousia?

Don't forget what my friend wrote in his blog post:
quote:
Quote
"The way is not down, but up and so far “up” that we get off the spectrum entirely. If we combine the e/e distinction with the doctrine of huperousia there is another way out of the problem, or at least a plausible line of philosophical development for one.  Part of the problem is change and error. Roughly, if God’s knowledge were to change, then it seems God in fact didn’t know and was in error.  Given Divine perfection, this isn’t possible and not welcome either. But what if the kind of  ”change” that entails substantial alteration via motion/activity is limited to things that “be?”  If God is huperousia, or as Plato remarked concerning the Good, “on the other side of being” then the kind of problematic change envisioned is in principle precluded and cannot be attributed to God. Personal activities could be true of God without implying a defect or a loss of freedom in creatures whose acts God foreknows. (This has parallels to issues in Agent Causation.)

Second, the actualization of different truths across logically possible worlds would not entail accidental change in God either, since accidents inhere in substances that be.  Whatever the thing it is, it isn’t substantial and it isn’t an accident, but something else, a specific kind of potency akin to the possessing of a power that is brought to act by the agent whose power it is."



You said:
Quote
If God knows 100% what you're choices are going to be, why would he act?

Why should this be a problem if God also 100%ly knows His reaction/interaction to our future actions?


When God was talking to Abram / Abraham about the city of Lot, didn't He know how many righteous people the city really had? Didn't He already know that the city was going to be destroyed anyway?

Yet, He took the time to dialog with Abram / Abraham anyway.



The Book will give you extra tools when thinking about this issue, for right now you seem to think that there is only one Classical Christian view. You want to think that most western scholars are looking at both East and West when talking about this issue when really they're not. They are mostly only talking about the west.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2012, 05:53:29 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.045 seconds with 32 queries.