The Twist that Reframes the Whole Story

1,496 Views | 18 Replies | Last: 7 yr ago by JJMt
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Twist that Reframes the Whole Story

This looks to be a series Greg Boyd is doing. I'll post part 2 below.

Quote:


The Bible could be compared to the movie The Sixth Sense, starring Bruce Willis. In it, the last few minutes reveals an unexpected twist that requires you to rethink every single thing that took place previously. The whole Old Testament leads up to, and is fulfilled in, Jesus the Messiah. But the particular way Jesus fulfills it reframes everything. Hardly anyone saw this coming! In fact, Jesus completes the story of God's dealings with Israel in a way that was so unexpected, most who were looking for the Messiah couldn't accept him once he came.

For example, most Jews were looking for a Messiah who would reinforce Israel's status as God's favored nation by leading a revolt against its oppressors (the Romans) and reinstating it as a sovereign nation. Jesus instead turned Jewish religious nationalism on its head. His message inaugurated a kingdom that included "outsiders" (gentiles) and his way was one of loving enemies instead of revolting against them.

Quote:

In fact, not only does Jesus not lead people in a military conquest over their enemies, he allows himself to be executed on a cross to reveal God's profound love for enemies. And in this scandalous and unexpected action, his followers discerned the ultimate revelation of God's true nature. With his life, ministry, teaching, and especially his sacrificial death, Jesus provided a picture of God and his kingdom that forces us to reframe everything that led up to him.

This means that we should read the Old Testament through the lens of the revelation of God in Christ, and especially through the lens of the cross, which sums up everything Jesus was about. This is how Jesus himself suggested we should read the Scripture when he taught that all Scripture is about him (Luke 24:25-27; John 5:39-47). It is also implied by Paul's teaching that the Spirit has removed the "veil" over our "hearts" and "minds" (2 Cor 3:14-16) so that we can now see the "glory of God shining in the face of Jesus Christ" as we read Scripture. And it's reflected in the way various authors of the New Testament read the Old Testament. In sharp contrast to the common teaching of modern evangelicals that Bible interpreters should always stick to the "original intended meaning" of a passage, the way New Testament authors use the Old Testament reflects little concern with this. Their primary concern was rather to see how it points to Jesus.




PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Part Two: Jesus is the Center of the Story

Drum5343
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This is interesting to me. Never heard of Greg Boyd before today.

I like what he said in your quote. Most Christians today, especially protestants, read the Bible in a way that doesn't fit with the way Christians historically read it.

Do you subscribe to open theism? And what the heck is it?
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Do you subscribe to open theism? And what the heck is it?
Yes I do. IMO, it's the only perspective I've heard that logically allows for free will, while embracing fundamental doctrines re: God's omnipotence and omniscience. I'm about to leave the office for the day, but here are some good sources for information. I'm reading his book God at War, which is about spiritual warfare, but you can definitely see how open theism plays into it.

Open Theism: A Basic Introduction

How People Misunderstand Open Theism

Greg Boyd - Q & A - What is Open Theism?

These are all Greg Boyd links. There are other open theists out there, but I feel like he does the best job of explaining it.
Drum5343
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's interesting. I've thought before "what if God sees the future as sort of like an enormous decision tree, where he can see each decision and the consequences it would lead branching out." I guess I didn't know there was a whole theology that other people had thought about.

It's interesting. But why should I believe it over other theories out there. Does it have any basis in revelation or Tradition?
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

It's interesting. But why should I believe it over other theories out there. Does it have any basis in revelation or Tradition?
Well, there are many different scriptures that open theists often point to. As for why should you believe it over other theories...IMO, it's the only perspective that truly allows for free will and doesn't ascribe the presence of evil as being part of God's will. But, I will also add that I think these are just man's ways of trying to gain a greater understanding of the nature of God, and all these theories will inevitably fall short in one way or another. We are trying to draw from ancient texts in order to understand something as vast and complex as foreknowledge and God. Open theism makes most sense to me, especially as someone that believes strongly in free will. Am I 100% certain it's "correct"? No, and I think that's safe to say about any person's perspective on this issue.
Rusty Aha
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Drum5343 said:

This is interesting to me. Never heard of Greg Boyd before today.

I like what he said in your quote. Most Christians today, especially protestants, read the Bible in a way that doesn't fit with the way Christians historically read it.

Do you subscribe to open theism? And what the heck is it?
Ignore the heretical theology of Greg Boyd (who endorses the likes of Rob Bell, a dangerous wolf in sheep's clothing) and the unscriptural doctrine of open-theism. Isaiah 46:10 makes it clear that God declared the end from the beginning. Stick to reading the Bible and don't fall for this new age crap that's being peddled in order to tickle men's ears.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There it is. "Heretic" and "Rob Bell" mentioned in your first post. You seem to be getting more efficient.

BTW, the Rob Bell "endorsement" has been addressed multiple times. This doesn't seem to matter to you, as it continually is brought up any time Greg Boyd's name is mentioned. Discussion cannot be had when one party simply ignores the other. Have a great day, brother.
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

There it is. "Heretic" and "Rob Bell" mentioned in your first post. You seem to be getting more efficient.

BTW, the Rob Bell "endorsement" has been addressed multiple times. This doesn't seem to matter to you, as it continually is brought up any time Greg Boyd's name is mentioned. Discussion cannot be had when one party simply ignores the other. Have a great day, brother.


I see a lot about universalism in that article but not open theism. It kind of defends universalism too.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The article about Rob Bell? It's not about open theism. And it's not a defense of universalism. Boyd doesn't even believe Rob Bell would consider himself a universalist, and Boyd certainly is not.

This thread isn't about Greg Boyd or Rob Bell though. It's a thread about something Boyd wrote, but it is not about these men. Tampa tosses out the standard "Greg Boyd is a heretic and endorsed Rob Bell" line any time something is posted from Boyd. It's just an attempt to derail, so I'd like to keep it on topic.
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

The article about Rob Bell? It's not about open theism. And it's not a defense of universalism. Boyd doesn't even believe Rob Bell would consider himself a universalist, and Boyd certainly is not.

This thread isn't about Greg Boyd or Rob Bell though. It's a thread about something Boyd wrote, but it is not about these men. Tampa tosses out the standard "Greg Boyd is a heretic and endorsed Rob Bell" line any time something is posted from Boyd. It's just an attempt to derail, so I'd like to keep it on topic.


Tampa specifically mentioned open theism, not universalism.
opk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From the linked article: "Jesus instead turned Jewish religious nationalism on its head."

No wonder I've been having headaches.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Tampa specifically mentioned open theism, not universalism.
He specifically mentioned Rob Bell, and every time he does this, it's because of his belief that Rob Bell is a universalist and that Greg Boyd, in Tampa's view, "endorsed" that universalism. I don't recall a single time Rob Bell has been mentioned in connection w/ open theism. Yes, he also mentioned his objection to open theism, but he also mentioned a completely unrelated issue w/ Rob Bell. He's trying to immediately discredit Boyd by linking him to Bell on an issue that has nothing to do w/ the thread.

This isn't his first time to pull this attempt to derail a topic by tossing out Rob Bell's name. Just keep the discussion on the topics raised in the OP.
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

Quote:

Tampa specifically mentioned open theism, not universalism.
He specifically mentioned Rob Bell, and every time he does this, it's because of his belief that Rob Bell is a universalist and that Greg Boyd, in Tampa's view, "endorsed" that universalism. I don't recall a single time Rob Bell has been mentioned in connection w/ open theism. Yes, he also mentioned his objection to open theism, but he also mentioned a completely unrelated issue w/ Rob Bell. He's trying to immediately discredit Boyd by linking him to Bell on an issue that has nothing to do w/ the thread.

This isn't his first time to pull this attempt to derail a topic by tossing out Rob Bell's name. Just keep the discussion on the topics raised in the OP.


You said a discussion can't be had when one party is ignoring another. I invite you to read again what Tampa actually wrote.

Regarding thread details, what does Evangelical support of Donald Trump have to do with the Wikileaks revelations about Team Hillary and Catholicism?

Drum5343
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TampaBayAg said:

Drum5343 said:

This is interesting to me. Never heard of Greg Boyd before today.

I like what he said in your quote. Most Christians today, especially protestants, read the Bible in a way that doesn't fit with the way Christians historically read it.

Do you subscribe to open theism? And what the heck is it?
Ignore the heretical theology of Greg Boyd (who endorses the likes of Rob Bell, a dangerous wolf in sheep's clothing) and the unscriptural doctrine of open-theism. Isaiah 46:10 makes it clear that God declared the end from the beginning. Stick to reading the Bible and don't fall for this new age crap that's being peddled in order to tickle men's ears.
Yeah, I'm not particularly compelled by anything I read in those links.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

You said a discussion can't be had when one party is ignoring another. I invite you to read again what Tampa actually wrote.
I have.


Quote:

Regarding thread details, what does Evangelical support of Donald Trump have to do with the Wikileaks revelations about Team Hillary and Catholicism?
Same election and dealing with candidate and connections to specific groups within Christianity. Since this isn't the Politics board, I also figured it would be best to confine the politically-tinted posts to one specific thread. My apologies. I can go delete if you would prefer.


PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Drum5343 said:

TampaBayAg said:

Drum5343 said:

This is interesting to me. Never heard of Greg Boyd before today.

I like what he said in your quote. Most Christians today, especially protestants, read the Bible in a way that doesn't fit with the way Christians historically read it.

Do you subscribe to open theism? And what the heck is it?
Ignore the heretical theology of Greg Boyd (who endorses the likes of Rob Bell, a dangerous wolf in sheep's clothing) and the unscriptural doctrine of open-theism. Isaiah 46:10 makes it clear that God declared the end from the beginning. Stick to reading the Bible and don't fall for this new age crap that's being peddled in order to tickle men's ears.
Yeah, I'm not particularly compelled by anything I read in those links.
That's fine. As I said, these are just efforts to develop a greater understanding of God's nature. I'm confident God is up there shaking His head thinking "none of y'all have it exactly right" when it comes to questions like these (and yes, I'm convinced God says "y'all"). The key is to find unity on the essentials of our faith.
Drum5343
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

Drum5343 said:

TampaBayAg said:

Drum5343 said:

This is interesting to me. Never heard of Greg Boyd before today.

I like what he said in your quote. Most Christians today, especially protestants, read the Bible in a way that doesn't fit with the way Christians historically read it.

Do you subscribe to open theism? And what the heck is it?
Ignore the heretical theology of Greg Boyd (who endorses the likes of Rob Bell, a dangerous wolf in sheep's clothing) and the unscriptural doctrine of open-theism. Isaiah 46:10 makes it clear that God declared the end from the beginning. Stick to reading the Bible and don't fall for this new age crap that's being peddled in order to tickle men's ears.
Yeah, I'm not particularly compelled by anything I read in those links.
That's fine. As I said, these are just efforts to develop a greater understanding of God's nature. I'm confident God is up there shaking His head thinking "none of y'all have it exactly right" when it comes to questions like these (and yes, I'm convinced God says "y'all"). The key is to find unity on the essentials of our faith.
My main problem is this: Do we believe God is not subject to time, and thus knows everything that has happened or ever will happen? How do we reconcile that with the idea that God sees multiple actualities in each situation? Do I have this right, or have I totally warped it?

So, according to open theism, does God not know for sure which direction I will choose? Or do all directions I could choose exist at once? Are we talking multiverses here?
BusterAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Must plug Kierkegaard here.

He posits that there is an infinite qualitative distinction between a temporal human and an eternal God, and that distinction is so great that a human cannot fully comprehend God. We just don't have the physical capability to do it.
Post removed:
by user
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.