May

Out Of The Closet

Posted by: Sonny in Belief, Kingdom, Sovereignty

I am a gay (defined as: showing or characterized by cheerfulness and lighthearted excitement; merry.) open theist.

eye_of_god There, I have said it. I have been writing from this frame of mind ever since I started this blog but have been hesitant to label myself. The open theist label, that is. The reason for this is mainly that I hate labels. They never really justify anyone’s beliefs totally. I constantly hear people refer to themselves as three point Calvinists or four point Calvinists. What does this really mean? If you are a Calvinist, then you are, right? And most Arminians really do not even know who they are or what it means.

Open theism is the same way. There are many proponents of this view and none of them agree on all the intricacies of this theological worldview. That is one of the reasons I hate labels; they are never really accurate in describing anyone’s total belief system. Another, and even more valid reason is, that once you label yourself, most dismiss your views, thoughts, discussions and relevance out of hand. I have seen many people ostracized and labeled as heretical from the start once they say they are an open theist. And many times by people that do not even know what it means.

I believe this viewpoint is biblically sound, addresses almost all the problems I ever had as an atheist, and actually reflects the way we all live as Christians already. We just can’t seem to let go of some of the eisegesis of scripture that has come before us. We ask questions like: who are we to question the early church fathers, those greats of traditional scriptural thought. Well, have you ever thought about the fact that not all of those agreed with each other. If they had I would be one of the first to give what they have said credence. My own denomination has had loads of changes over the last one hundred years of doctrine but some are still so dogmatic about their own current beliefs to the point that they argue that they cannot be wrong and any who oppose them are therefore, heretical.

Open theism really boils down to an argument about God’s omniscience. Does God live outside and above time? Does God know every free will choice we will ever make in the future? Is the future something that exists already to even be known or is it just something that unfolds as choices are made and therefore becomes the present?

I simply do not see how free will exists if God already knows all the choice in front of me as facts. I am okay and actually believe He does know all of my future choices as possibilities. A great book to introduce you to this whole concept is “God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God” by Greg Boyd. But the discussion has to go deeper than just do I or anyone else have free will, even in this viewpoint. I keep being bombarded with the question about Peter’s free will and whether God allowed, foresaw or actually made Peter deny Christ. I believe I have answered this but I do realize that just maybe it was too spread out among the posts and comments to ascertain.

So here is part of what I believe about our free will and I believe it answers any question about Peter’s free will.

For God to truly have loving relationships with His creation He had to make us with free will. Our choices are our own. Peter’s choices were His own. But a major choice he made was to follow Jesus. I believe part of the whole concept of servant hood to God is that we come to a place where we turn our free will over to Him and allow His will to take over. Peter was on that path. He stood and declared that he would never fall in following our Lord but our Lord knew him better than he knew himself. He knew that there was still a pride issue Peter had to overcome to be the man that God wanted him to be.

So the simple answer is that yes, I believe God possibly, and take note I said possibly, caused Peter to deny Jesus. This is not a big problem to me because it is actually where we all are supposed to be. We are supposed to make a free will choice to follow God and part of this, a major part, is giving Him our free will. Is this not what we are doing when we ask Him to direct and lead us as we live for Him? Peter had already come to this place and God used this opportunity for his growth.

The argument against my belief of this issue is pointed toward making me out to say that I do not even believe in free will. That is not the case. But the last thing about this is that no matter what, God is God and can and has suspended our free will on many occasions. Look at Pharaoh, look at Jonah, look at Job, look at all the people destroyed in the Old Testament, look at your own life where God got you to do something you really did not want to do. All of these examples do not in any way mean that free will does not exist.

If this does not answer the endless questions about my belief concerning Peter and his denial, then I am incapable of answering what I believe. If that is the case, I am sorry.

I pray we all use our free will choice to turn our free will over to Jesus.

Love you all

And in case you are wondering, the opening statement was not only to get your attention and to generate Google hits, I am cheerful, excited and merry (gay) because open theism truly does answer more of the unanswerable questions that skeptics have. The mission field is wide open. Let’s go.

Tags: atheist, Belief, blog, Calvin, Creation, Discussion, eisegesis, Free will, God, Greg Boyd, open theism, relationship, Servant, Servant Hood, Theological

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 27th, 2009 at 12:01 am and is filed under Belief, Kingdom, Sovereignty. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

23 comments so far

Justin A

You said you answered over and over and yet to clear it all up you say you don’t know. Please just stop saying you answered.

May 27th, 2009 at 6:11 am

Chris

Justin A: You said you answered over and over and yet to clear it all up you say you don’t know.Please just stop saying you answered.

You are either blind, or you are just out for some agenda that is not of God. He answered more clearly than any answer you have ever given. He also has answered many questions you have not asked.

You seem to be closed minded, and if that gets you to Heaven then I have no problem with it, but please remember that everyone is different and everyone one has their own relationship with God. If that doesn’t mesh with you then too bad.

I hope you find your answers, but as far as Sonny and Peter goes that has been answered, and is very clear.

If you can’t see that, then you do not understand common, English.

I enjoyed the post, and will respond with more later on, when I have time.

Chris

May 27th, 2009 at 7:21 am

Sonny

Justin A: You said you answered over and over and yet to clear it all up you say you don’t know.Please just stop saying you answered.

Please, now it is definitely time for you to stop asking. You evidently want an answer only God knows so ask Him.

I have bent over backward and twisted every which way trying to answer and, like I said, if you don’t get it, I am sorry but I am done.

I don’t want and will not shut anyone down here for asking, discussing, disagreeing, or even judging me, but, I may delete anymore of your comments about Peter’s free will directed to me. I don’t know what you want or what you are trying to achieve with this but I am not helping anymore on this subject.

Love you all

May 27th, 2009 at 8:39 am

Chris

Sonny: but I am not helping anymore on this subject.

AMEN!!!

I used my free will to support your decision. See how that works.

May 27th, 2009 at 9:36 am

Heath

Sonny,

I am not sure I agree to much with your assessment of Peter’s decision to deny Christ being forced by God. I know you are in process on this one, as evidenced by your answer to Justin (which, BTW, was a very well thought out answer.) But let me place this alternative up there for you to consider:

Perhaps God understood Peter’s possible future choices and was hoping to disade him from the action. In the midst of Peter’s declaration that he would die for Jesus, Jesus gave him a shot of cold water by warning him of what was going to happen if Peter acted like Peter had always acted. Jesus knew that given’s Peter’s personality he would shrink away when the danger came. But by giving him advance warning, Peter should have been empowered to stand up and declare his faith in Christ when the time came.

It is a shame that Peter did deny Jesus. If he had not, I am sure the story would have been written much diffrently and Christian history would reflect how the first martyr for the faith was Peter instead of Stephen. But Peter failed the test.

It reminds me of God’s words to Cain when he was about to kill his brother: “Sin is crouching at your door and desires to have you. But you must master it.” God knew what was in Cain’s heart just as He knew Peter’s heart. But that did not mean that it was inevitable that Cain would kill his brother, nor does it mean that Peter could not have affirmed his relationship with Jesus and hung with him on a cross.

Just because Jesus declared one possible outcome does not mean it was the only possible outcome. Prophesy is not foretelling the future but rather a declaration of God’s intentions. As such, they are subject to change when our actions align themselves with God’s will.

May 27th, 2009 at 7:47 pm

Sonny

Heath,

I do and have thought about the whole question of not only Peters free will but all of ours. I solidly hold the notion that we all have it and I do think that Jesus words appear prophetic and that is why I even attempt an answer. I have come to the conclusion that if I give my all supposedly to Christ and God does see a possible action or reaction that needs an attitude adjustment, He just might, and I emphasize might, force some things on me.

You said, “Prophesy is not foretelling the future but rather a declaration of God’s intentions.”

That is precisely why I believe my scenario has at least some merit. Thanks for your contributions though. I really appreciate them.

Love you all

May 27th, 2009 at 10:01 pm

Heath

Let me put it another way…

Does God ever cause anyone to sin?

May 27th, 2009 at 10:04 pm

Sonny

That is a good question. And I see how it appears to connect in reference to my conclusion. And it did occur to me but one of my own question’s would be does God ever cause anyone to sin?

I know it is the same question and I do not believe it so but I have to ask, what about Pharaoh? Isn’t hardening the heart, even though He knew that heart, at least a similar situation? Thankfully the results were not the same, Pharaoh died and Peter became stronger. But I am not quite sure and I know this question of yours is the hardest to reconcile with what I wrote about this.

Now you’ve gone and made me have to think some more about this question I was trying to forget.

Love you all

May 27th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

Chris

What if God can do what ever he wants, and in some situations he does one thing and in another he does something else.

Why can’t God have influenced Peter’s decision and yet still allowed him to make the final choice. In order to fulfill many of the prophesies God had to step in and make things happen.

If Peter had not done it then the outcome would have been different, and then would we think the same way. Probably not, but it did happen that way, and there has to be a reason for it.

I don’t know all the answers, but can’t God have it both ways? I mean he is God. All things are possible through him, etc.

Just a thought.

May 27th, 2009 at 11:05 pm

Heath

Sonny: I know it is the same question and I do not believe it so but I have to ask, what about Pharaoh? Isn’t hardening the heart, even though He knew that heart, at least a similar situation?

I would challenge you to reread the account of Pharaoh. God told Moses that He would harden Pharaoh’s heart (Ex 4:21). But scripture actually records that Pharaoh hardened his own heart twice (Ex. 8:15, 8:32) before recording that God hardened his heart (9:12).

Also, the sequence of Exodus 9:13-34 tells us much about what it means to have one’s heart “hardened.” It is a very cryptic idea, theologically speaking. But here, we see Pharaoh repent in the midst of punishment and then reject God’s will once the plague is lifted. It is clear that Pharaoh is the one taking the actions that lead to the hardening of his own heart, and equally clear that God stands ready to relent and forgive.

I have heard the argument of Pharaoh used many times as an example of God compromising free will. But I find it unconvincing given the clear indications from the story that Pharaoh himself took the initiative in the hardening of his own heart.

I see it more an example of God’s intimate knowledge of Pharaoh’s stubbornness than God’s declaration of His intention to remove Pharaoh’s ability to repent. God knew that Pharaoh would not react well to his authority being challenged, yet still gave him multiple opportunities to accept God’s will in the face increasingly disastrous punishments. In the face of each of these plagues, Pharaoh resists God of his own free will. And it is this resistance to God’s actions that are the “hardening” that you are referring to. God is not “harding” Pharaoh by removing free will but by punishing Pharaoh for his sin.

Thus, the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and Peter’s denial are indeed similar situations… just not in the way you propose. Both are examples, not of a person’s free will being compromised, but of people being warned by God of their personal flaws and the subsequent refusal of those individuals to yield to God’s warnings.

The Bible is also full of examples of people who did yield… Pharaoh could have been God’s champion and Peter God’s martyr. But tragically, our desire to exercise our authority often takes the story of creation in a much different path than God would wish.

May 28th, 2009 at 12:24 am

Anthony

Heath:
I would challenge you to reread the account of Pharaoh. God told Moses that He would harden Pharaoh’s heart (Ex 4:21). But scripture actually records that Pharaoh hardened his own heart twice (Ex. 8:15, 8:32) before recording that God hardened his heart (9:12).
Also, the sequence of Exodus 9:13-34 tells us much about what it means to have one’s heart “hardened.” It is a very cryptic idea, theologically speaking. But here, we see Pharaoh repent in the midst of punishment and then reject God’s will once the plague is lifted. It is clear that Pharaoh is the one taking the actions that lead to the hardening of his own heart, and equally clear that God stands ready to relent and forgive.I have heard the argument of Pharaoh used many times as an example of God compromising free will. But I find it unconvincing given the clear indications from the story that Pharaoh himself took the initiative in the hardening of his own heart.I see it more an example of God’s intimate knowledge of Pharaoh’s stubbornness than God’s declaration of His intention to remove Pharaoh’s ability to repent. God knew that Pharaoh would not react well to his authority being challenged, yet still gave him multiple opportunities to accept God’s will in the face increasingly disastrous punishments. In the face of each of these plagues, Pharaoh resists God of his own free will. And it is this resistance to God’s actions that are the “hardening” that you are referring to. God is not “harding” Pharaoh by removing free will but by punishing Pharaoh for his sin.
Thus, the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and Peter’s denial are indeed similar situations… just not in the way you propose. Both are examples, not of a person’s free will being compromised, but of people being warned by God of their personal flaws and the subsequent refusal of those individuals to yield to God’s warnings.The Bible is also full of examples of people who did yield… Pharaoh could have been God’s champion and Peter God’s martyr. But tragically, our desire to exercise our authority often takes the story of creation in a much different path than God would wish.

Here’s the problem with all of our views. There are way too many “I’s”. I think this, I believe this, I want this to be this way, I, I, I… There’s no way around it; we don’t have all the answers, and can’t. Pharaoh hardening his own heart, God allowing the option for Pharaoh to harden his own heart, and God hardening Pharaoh’s heart are all about the same, don’t you think? Why not believe that God is much more than we are. Limiting him to what we know puts him no the same level as us. I serve a God that is much more than just a physical representation of what we should be. I serve a God that created all things and gave us the possibilities we have. With all those possibilities comes the thought process. Why don’t we realize that God is much more than we are. Regardless of whether he controls time or not, controls the orbit of this earth so we can live or even not. At what point are we going to realize that God is much more than what we make him out to be. Relational he is, but he is more than relational. He has the power to let you absence yourself from him. Hence the key element of evil….the absence of God. A God that can hold the constellations in the palm of his hand can let you decide not to have him in you. That’s a big thing to me. God can be all around us, but not in us. That’s a major decision to allow. Let’s realize that all we try to conceive as fact, most times, just becomes another possibility. My God is a God of those possibilities.

To answer your question Heath. Is it wrong for God to kill the people of a city because of their continually disregard of God? I’m pretty sure there is an example. For God to harden the heart of the Pharaoh, or even allow the Pharaoh to harden his own heart, is the relevance that God is still master of all.

May 29th, 2009 at 10:13 am

Sonny

Anthony,

Who is saying God is so little in your mind?

Sometimes you sound like these things are not worth discussing because who are we to question or even try to see who God is. I don’t think you mean it that way but it reads that way sometime.

God is God but if we can’t discern anything about him at all then He is not relational.

Love you all

May 29th, 2009 at 10:31 am

Heath

Anthony: Pharaoh hardening his own heart, God allowing the option for Pharaoh to harden his own heart, and God hardening Pharaoh’s heart are all about the same, don’t you think?

No, I don’t. I think they are completely different things with vastly different influences on answering the question of who God is.

May 29th, 2009 at 8:36 pm

Anthony

Sonny: Anthony,Who is saying God is so little in your mind?Sometimes you sound like these things are not worth discussing because who are we to question or even try to see who God is.I don’t think you mean it that way but it reads that way sometime.God is God but if we can’t discern anything about him at all then He is not relational.Love you all

I don’t mean it that way. What I’m saying is there are parts of God we will not understand until eternity. Even then, they may not be important, we will just know or maybe we won’t. I don’t know how it all works. All I can do is trust in the God that does. Having a relationship with God does not require us to know everything he is, just to continually getting closer to him even if we can’t understand all of him.

Example: My wife and I have been married for a little over 6 years. She’s knows me, and knows aspects of what I do. She does not understand a lot of what I do, but we still have a relationship. She knows I’m a computer whiz, and that I can practically fix anything when it comes to a computer. She knows I can do some carpentry, and she understands it. She knows carpentry some because she grew up helping or watching her dad. She doesn’t understand everything I do, and she surely does not know how I do everything. In spite of this we still have a relationship. This is where my view of God comes from. I can’t fathom everything he does for us or even how he does everything, but I know he’s there and I can still have a relationship with him.

May 30th, 2009 at 11:22 am

Anthony

[b]Anthony:[/b] Pharaoh hardening his own heart, God allowing the option for Pharaoh to harden his own heart, and God hardening Pharaoh’s heart are all about the same, don’t you think?

Heath:
No, I don’t. I think they are completely different things with vastly different influences on answering the question of who God is.

I hate to tell you this, but options one and two are the same thing. Pharaoh can’t harden his own heart unless God allows free will as he has. The context mentioned God saying he was going to harden Pharaoh’s heart, and that Pharaoh hardened his heart twice. It never says that God actually hardened Pharaoh’s heart, does it? With all that being said, what did God do for Moses or what did God just do that hardened Pharaoh’s heart? God said he would harden Pharaoh’s heart before the passover. I’ll have to reread the whole story to see if I’ve missed anything. From what I see right now, God hardened Pharaoh’s heart and then the passover took place. After that the Pharaoh hardened his heart twice, which in turn was allowed by God with free will.

May 30th, 2009 at 11:36 am

Heath

Wow that whole paragraph is hard to understand. What are you actually trying to say? Did God or did He not harden Pharoah’s heart? And why did God harden Pharaoh’s heart?

Anthony: It never says that God actually hardened Pharaoh’s heart, does it?

Yes, actually it does. Reread the story again.

My point is, what does that mean? Sonny suggested in the OP and comment #6 that God hardening Pharoah’s heart and Peter denying Jesus were examples of God using people in ways contrary to the relational aspect of free will, perhaps for some lesson that would be good for Peter or good for Pharoah, (which, incidently sounds suspiciously calvinistic and quite out of place coming from Sonny). I challenged Sonny on that point because I do not believe the bible supports those conclusions. I don’t think Sonny had thought through the issues of Peter and Pharoah, which he then said in comment #8 that he would think about them some more.

You seem to be arguing that God hardening Pharoah’s heart is something we can’t or weren’t meant to understand. If that is the case, then why would God reveal it to us. Why does that even need to be included in the story?

I think we were meant to understand it and I think it is there for a reason. So when I read your responses, I see you suggesting that the mystery is intended and that the mystery is OK. Maybe OK for some, but definetly not for me, at least not on the issue of moral free will.

If I am just some pawn in a game between Satan and God, then I really have better things to do with my Sunday mornings…

May 30th, 2009 at 5:18 pm

Anthony

Heath: Wow that whole paragraph is hard to understand. What are you actually trying to say? Did God or did He not harden Pharoah’s heart? And why did God harden Pharaoh’s heart?
Yes, actually it does. Reread the story again.My point is, what does that mean? Sonny suggested in the OP and comment #6 that God hardening Pharoah’s heart and Peter denying Jesus were examples of God using people in ways contrary to the relational aspect of free will, perhaps for some lesson that would be good for Peter or good for Pharoah, (which, incidently sounds suspiciously calvinistic and quite out of place coming from Sonny). I challenged Sonny on that point because I do not believe the bible supports those conclusions. I don’t think Sonny had thought through the issues of Peter and Pharoah, which he then said in comment #8 that he would think about them some more.You seem to be arguing that God hardening Pharoah’s heart is something we can’t or weren’t meant to understand. If that is the case, then why would God reveal it to us. Why does that even need to be included in the story?
I think we were meant to understand it and I think it is there for a reason. So when I read your responses, I see you suggesting that the mystery is intended and that the mystery is OK. Maybe OK for some, but definetly not for me, at least not on the issue of moral free will.If I am just some pawn in a game between Satan and God, then I really have better things to do with my Sunday mornings…

Heath,
Sorry that was so jumbled. I was asking the question of if it said God hardened Pharaoh’s heart on purpose. The reason I asked is because in your post it seemed you missed that point. The Pharaoh question is really, is there always free will or not. I don’t know that answer.

I see there are a few possibilities as far as Peter is concerned. #1 Jesus knew Peter was going to deny him. #2 Because Jesus said Peter was going to deny him, he did. #3 Jesus knew Peter’s character, and from there he knew what Peter would do #4 Jesus really had no clue, it just turned out that way. I would think must of us go with either #1, #2, or #3. All 4 of these can be possibilities.

We can understand most of the key questions on most biblical things. Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. In this case, we know the answers to the first 5 questions (even if estimated). There are aspects of the how I don’t think we (maybe not we, but I) will ever completely understand. I understand the possibilities of creation and how creation could have happened. I understand the aspect of free will. I even understand the reasons for free will, but I still can’t completely comprehend how God would/could want us to have free will. I do understand pieces. I’ve said on many occasions that I know there are many smarter than I. Maybe this falls into me not being able to comprehend.

As far as the pawn between God and Satan… Was Job a pawn? It seems that he was. Can there are many possibilities to many things? Not just the ones we choose to believe. If free will only exist for those that are not true believers of God, I can go with it. If in fact, we lose our free will because we willingly give it back to God, I can see that as a valid argument. Even if God knows all (including the future) and my free will exists even thought he is timeless, I can agree that is a possibility. Even if he can’t, I can view that as a possibility. The second we think we know everything about one aspect of God, he tends to show us we are not quite there. Trying to completely understand most aspects of God (if not all) is just that….trying.

We can base how we view God on many things. This is one reason why there are so many denominations. Regardless of what we believe, one thing will always be true. God is eternally the same.

May 31st, 2009 at 2:29 am

Heath

You left out the option that I think actually happened: Jesus knew Peter would PROBABLY deny him and tried to warn him about it.

May 31st, 2009 at 1:18 pm

Anthony

Jesus knew Peter’s character. I said that.

May 31st, 2009 at 11:45 pm

Anthony

Heath: You left out the option that I think actually happened: Jesus knew Peter would PROBABLY deny him and tried to warn him about it.

Is it possible that your belief could be wrong?

May 31st, 2009 at 11:50 pm

Heath

Yes. But then so could yours. What’s your point?

June 1st, 2009 at 5:53 pm

Heath

Anthony: Jesus knew Peter’s character. I said that.

Actually, you said “Jesus knew Peter’s character, and from there he knew what Peter would do.” I added ‘probably’ into the mix becuase your option suggests that Peter’s destiny was certain, which I do not believe it was.

June 1st, 2009 at 10:38 pm

Anthony

I have not declared a belief about the Pharaoh and Peter. I’ve just stated the obvious.
I was basing the options on what other comments have said. If Jesus knew Peter’s character, that means he has walked with him, and talked with him, and seen him in various situations. I’m pretty sure that was the case here. If you are going to argue that Jesus knew Peter’s character, and that is the only option, you have to argue that by Peter’s character, Jesus knew what he would do in this specific situation. There’s a reason Jesus told Peter this. If he didn’t know for sure, why would he even say it. If Peter didn’t deny Jesus, Jesus would look foolish in this scripture. That would be very unfortunate to the Christian faith. Jesus either knew because God does know all, Jesus knew that Peter would do it based on his character, or Jesus said it and Peter had to do it because it was spoken. Are there any other definite options to this situation? There can’t be doubt there. Jesus didn’t speak with doubt. Why would we show him as having doubt?

June 2nd, 2009 at 10:56 pm