Following my previous post, in which I had discussed Open Theism from a Latter-day Saint perspective; I searched a bit more, and discovered that the most heated debates and disagreements have been taking place between Open Theists and Calvinists. Calvinists have been the most vocal critics of Open Theism; and the most heated exchanges have been taking place between those two. What makes these exchanges particularly interesting is that both Calvinism and Open Theism are false theologies, and it is amusing to watch them tie each other into knots which neither of them are able to escape from.
I also found a site called opentheism.org which lists three debates on YouTube between supporters of Open Theism and its opponents (all of them Calvinists), the first of which can be seen above, and two further ones listed below:
The latter two are long, three hour debates between Will Duffy (site owner) and Matt Slick of carm.org. They are entertaining to watch.
I also found a long list of scriptures, under 33 different categories, published on the site which they reckon supports Open Theism, which can be seen here. Then I found another list of scriptures by John M. Frame on another site which seemed to be doing a good job of refuting them. It can be seen here.
On further searches I discovered that John M. Frame is a well-known Calvinist theologian who has written a book in refutation of Open Theism called No Other God: A Response to Open Theism, which seems to have received good reviews (I haven’t read it). However, being a Calvinist he is going to be a supporter of predestination, and a denier of libertarian freewill (as is evident from some of the reviews of his book on Amazon), which in turn means that his book has been heavily compromised. Having to choose between Calvinism and Open Theism is like having to choose between a rock and a hard place.
In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you don’t have to choose between divine sovereignty and libertarian freewill. It is possible to reconcile the two without compromising either. But if I had to choose between Open Theism and Calvinism, I would consider Open Theism the lesser of the two evils. Believing in a flawed and compromised version of libertarian freewill is a lesser evil than believing in the absolute determinism and predestination of Calvinism. Calvinism turns God into an evil monster barely distinguishable from the devil; while Open Theism strips him of his divine power, and turns him into an absent-minded gentleman with good intentions who is not beyond committing a few minor errors occasionally. If I had to choose between the two, I think would choose the latter option rather than the first.
Calvinists can never property defeat Open Theism because of their belief in predestination. Both Calvinism and Open Theism thrive on predestination—but at opposite ends of the scale. Calvinism thrives on predestination because it is a fundamental tenet of its theology, without which it could not exist. Open Theism thrives on predestination because it’s basic tenet is the negation of predestination in order to maintain human freewill—but goes about it the wrong way. It attempts to negate predestination by equating it with (and hence denying) God’s foreknowledge, which are not the same thing. Both Calvinism and Open Theism are based on the false assumption that foreknowledge necessitates predestination. Calvinism resolves the conflict by opting for predestination and denying freewill. Open Theism resolves the conflict by denying the foreknowledge of God instead. The truth of course is neither. The truth is that foreknowledge does not require or necessitate predestination. God’s foreknowledge does not imply or necessitate that the future should be predetermined or predestined, or that man’s will is not free.
And for the record: The “God of Mormonism,” that both James White and Matt Slick keep referring to in the videos, is not any of the things that they say he is. He is everything that the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and other Latter-day Saint scriptures say that he is. He is all the “omnis” and the “ims”. He is “omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, without beginning of days or end of life” (Lectures on Faith 2:2). He is immutable and unchangeable “from all eternity to all eternity” (Moroni 8:18); and “His purposes fail not, neither are there any who can stay his hand; from eternity to eternity he is the same, and his years never fail” (D&C 76:3-4). He “knoweth all things” (1 Nephi 9:6; 2 Nephi 2:24; 9:20; WoM 1:7; Alma 7:13; Mormon 8:17; D&C 35:19; 38:2; 42:17; 93:28; Moses 6:61); and “all things are present before [his] eyes” (D&C 38:2). He “[knows] the end from the beginning” (Abraham 2:8). He is “from everlasting to everlasting” (Moroni 7:22). He does not “progress,” he does not “change,” and he does not learn anything new. He is 100% sovereign over all of his creation, and at the same time is able to grant freewill and moral agency to all his creatures. He is neither the malevolent monster of Calvinism scheming to damn mankind “for his own glory;” nor is he the kindly gentleman of Open Theism stripped of divine power scratching his head wondering what to do next.
Revised December 25, 2021.
Calvinists can never property defeat Open Theism because of their belief in predestination. Both Calvinism and Open Theism thrive on predestination—but at opposite ends of the scale. Calvinism thrives on predestination because it is a fundamental tenet of its theology, without which it could not exist. Open Theism thrives on predestination because it’s basic tenet is the negation of predestination in order to maintain human freewill—but goes about it the wrong way. It attempts to negate predestination by equating it with (and hence denying) God’s foreknowledge, which are not the same thing. Both Calvinism and Open Theism are based on the false assumption that foreknowledge necessitates predestination. Calvinism resolves the conflict by opting for predestination and denying freewill. Open Theism resolves the conflict by denying the foreknowledge of God instead. The truth of course is neither. The truth is that foreknowledge does not require or necessitate predestination. God’s foreknowledge does not imply or necessitate that the future should be predetermined or predestined, or that man’s will is not free.
And for the record: The “God of Mormonism,” that both James White and Matt Slick keep referring to in the videos, is not any of the things that they say he is. He is everything that the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and other Latter-day Saint scriptures say that he is. He is all the “omnis” and the “ims”. He is “omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, without beginning of days or end of life” (Lectures on Faith 2:2). He is immutable and unchangeable “from all eternity to all eternity” (Moroni 8:18); and “His purposes fail not, neither are there any who can stay his hand; from eternity to eternity he is the same, and his years never fail” (D&C 76:3-4). He “knoweth all things” (1 Nephi 9:6; 2 Nephi 2:24; 9:20; WoM 1:7; Alma 7:13; Mormon 8:17; D&C 35:19; 38:2; 42:17; 93:28; Moses 6:61); and “all things are present before [his] eyes” (D&C 38:2). He “[knows] the end from the beginning” (Abraham 2:8). He is “from everlasting to everlasting” (Moroni 7:22). He does not “progress,” he does not “change,” and he does not learn anything new. He is 100% sovereign over all of his creation, and at the same time is able to grant freewill and moral agency to all his creatures. He is neither the malevolent monster of Calvinism scheming to damn mankind “for his own glory;” nor is he the kindly gentleman of Open Theism stripped of divine power scratching his head wondering what to do next.
Revised December 25, 2021.
No comments:
Post a Comment