wombatty goodness and other weirdness

[2eclipse]

ganked from planetjake because i thought ya'll should see this.
http://www.globalcommunity.org/flash/wombat.shtml

also vale797 please help.
i can't remember what openness theology is. getting back into reading theology is a bitch.
i read this really scary article in "christianity today" yesterday that was this woman talking about how she went off the pill because she decided it could cause her to murder her unborn children .01% of the time instead of preventing ovulation like a good little contraceptive.
AHHHHH scary christians!!!!!
wait? did someone say look in the mirror?
AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Comments

[xerotic.livejournal.com]

"The animals, the water, the sky, the ground, the fish, the tacos..."

I am now dying of laughter on the inside. Outside, I started laughing, and people looked at me funny.

Oh, and I'm going to call you as soon as I get a chance. Schedule has been way screwed up lately. Blame work.
Love!

teehee

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

always glad to amuse.
and thanks for the info on the crazy work schedule. i was starting to think you were mad at me or something.
cool that you are running for nos coord, btw.

Re: teehee

[xerotic.livejournal.com]

All good - I have an over-arching post to be made that might fill you in a bit more. I promise, it isn't directed at you so much as others!

Hopefully we'll chat soon :)

a short sumery

[vale797.livejournal.com]

Take note: I do not like openess theology cause i am a bit too orthodox for my own good... so This may be a bit biased but here is my best shot:

Summary of Open Theism
According to openness theology, the triune God of love has, in almighty power, created all that is and is sovereign over all. In freedom God decided to create beings capable of experiencing his love. God loves us and desires for us to enter into reciprocal relations of love with God as well as our fellow creatures. In creating us the divine intention was that we would come to experience the triune love and respond to it with love of our own and freely come to collaborate with God towards the achievement of his goals. We believe love is the primary characteristic of God because the triune Godhead has eternally loved without any creation. Divine holiness and justice are aspects of the divine love towards creatures, expressions of God’s loving concern for us. Love takes many forms—it can even be experienced as wrath when the lover sees the beloved destroying herself and others.

Second, God has, in sovereign freedom, decided to make some of his actions contingent upon our requests and actions. God elicits our free collaboration in his plans. Hence, God can be influenced by what we do and God truly responds to what we do. God genuinely interacts and enters into dynamic give-and-take relationships with us.

Third, the only wise God has chosen to exercise general rather than meticulous providence, allowing space for us to operate and for God to be creative and resourceful in working with us. It was solely God’s decision not to control every detail that happens in our lives. Moreover, God has flexible strategies. Though the divine nature does not change, God reacts to contingencies, even adjusting his plans, if necessary, to take into account the decisions of his free creatures. God is endlessly resourceful and wise in working towards the fulfillment of his ultimate goals. Sometimes God alone decides how to accomplish these goals. Usually, however, God elicits human cooperation such that it is both God and humanity who decide what the future shall be. God’s plan is not a detailed script or blueprint, but a broad intention that allows for a variety of options regarding precisely how his goals may be reached. What God and people do in history matters. If the Hebrew midwives had feared Pharaoh rather than God and killed the baby boys, then God would have responded accordingly and a different story would have emerged. Moses’ refusal to return to Egypt prompted God to resort to plan B, allowing Aaron to do the public speaking instead of Moses. What people do and whether they come to trust God makes a difference concerning what God does--God does not fake the story of human history. An implication of this is that God experiences temporal succession. That is, God is everlasting through time rather than timelessly eternal.

Fourth, God has granted us the type of freedom (libertarian) necessary for a truly personal relationship of love to develop. Again, this was God’s decision, not ours. Despite the fact that we have abused our freedom by turning away from the divine love, God remains faithful to his intentions for creation.

continued

[vale797.livejournal.com]

Finally, the omniscient God knows all that can be known or all that he wants to know. The debate over divine omniscience in the Christian tradition, between Thomism and Molinism for example, has always been about the content of precisely what can be known. In the openness debate the focus is on the nature of the future: is it fully knowable, fully unknowable or partially knowable and partially unknowable? Even if the future is fully knowable does God choose not to know it? According to open theism God knows the past and present with exhaustive definite knowledge and knows the future as partly definite (closed) and partly indefinite (open). God’s knowledge of the future contains knowledge of what God has decided to bring about unilaterally (that which is definite or settled), knowledge of possibilities (that which is indefinite) and those events that are determined to occur (e. g. an asteroid hitting a planet). Hence, the future is partly open or indefinite and partly closed or definite. It is not the case that just anything may happen, for God has acted in history to bring about events in order to achieve his unchanging purpose. Graciously, however, God invites us to collaborate with him to bring the open part of the future into being.

To continue again

[vale797.livejournal.com]

FYI There is a debate as to if openess theolgoy is part of process theology or not. I, being a firm beliver in the Eschaton and Immutability of Go, would argue "Yes openness theology is part of the process theology school of though"

A Process theologian would argue however that it isn't pure Process theology because it , in some way, hints at the possibility of an eschaton. Tit for tat i guess, and not really what you were asking but I thought I would throw that in the soup bowl with you.

Why are you wondering ?

I say, stick to Augustine, Aquinas and even some John Wesley (gasp) hell I'll even take Multman above openess theology's attempt to limit God in order to indulge our bloated egos of self worth and power. But you knew i would say something like that anyways... didn't you?

Re: To continue again

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

Good GOD i remember this...we had to read some for my providence, evil and suffering class last spring. i found it REALLY interesting and disturbing. i also am too orthodox for this stuff. i acknowledge the appeal of having to love back voluntarily, but that doesn't make it true. or necessary if you really give it thought.
you can choose to do something and obey at the same time. openness theology doesn't deal adequately with human brokenness, but it DOES raise questions that i think are important for its opponants to consider. for example,isn't there an argument associated with openness theology that predestination binds God as much as it binds us?
i read an article yesterday that referred to openness theology and i freaked because i KNEW i'd studied it, and couldn't for the life of me remember what it was or what i'd studied.
process theology i've never studied....probably because kendall doesn't like it.
in anycase i'm pretty much in the middle. i believe in divine sovereignty AND free will. neither one explains the whole picture well enough to satisfy me and scripture uses BOTH to talk about God's relationship to his children. Therefore, i sit on my rage that life doesn't make sense and tell myself there are things more important than wrapping my brain around life. it hurts, but i do it.

Re: To continue again

[vale797.livejournal.com]

i personally think process theology is the suck... Chett loves process theology. Margret sue Hokey (sp?) is the big process theologian these days check her out

Re: To continue again

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

well....i love chett, but i don't always agree with him.

i miss talking shop with you. *wheedles* if you ever get the time to come up here, i will make sure to introduce you to all the cute boys at the guthrie....

Re: To continue again

[2eclipse.livejournal.com]

oh....did i mention THANK YOU?!
you obviously put some serious thought and time into typing all this out. it is very clear and in depth. i appreciate it. you not only told me what it is, but reminded me of the reasons i disagree with it.