Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Let's open with a word of prayer our Heavenly Father.
We thank you for the opportunity to come together to worship this morning.
We ask that the Holy Spirit Minister to us this morning and prepare our hearts to receive the
word and we ask this in Jesus name.
Amen.
We're going to start this morning on a three -week tour a three -week look
at a major heresy that is Threatening the evangelical church
by that I mean open theism.
Some of you may or may not have heard of that.
What is open theism?
Why why is it a threat and What can we do about it?
And this morning is going to be primarily Introduction.
We're not going to get into a lot of scripture this morning.
We're going to sort of lay the groundwork on what we're going to do for the next two weeks on this topic
and so We'll start off.
John Stott listed Characteristics of evangelicalism.
What what is we call ourselves evangelicals?
What does that mean?
What does it mean to be an evangelical and Start to find the three defining
characteristics of evangelicalism is this first of all there is the revealing work of the Father.
Christianity is a revealed religion.
Not that men thought it up.
The second thing is the redeeming work of the Son and the third aspect is the regenerating work of the Holy
Spirit.
These three things are what define what we call evangelicalism now that name has been
co -opted by all sorts of people.
Literally a huge percentage of the population would define themselves as evangelical.
We would not necessarily agree with that definition but
this this is the core thing and Up until the 1960s
the primary challenge to Evangelical thought
to the evangelical approach to life if you will the primary challenge of that came
from what we would call the Enlightenment or rationalism the
idea that human reason could define how we needed to
approach life that men by exercise of their minds and Looking around
them and studying nature and what -have -you could come to Answers
To the great questions of life.
Who am I?
Why am I here?
Where am I going?
What is the purpose for my life?
And so?
This started back even before say the French Revolution and Became the defining
characteristic of the time.
And it enabled certain things.
First of all, it enabled men to live as if God did not exist.
And this was kind of curious because one of the characteristics of modernism is that they they all Pretty much
agreed that God existed that there was a God.
But he was not the God that interfered in human life.
That directed anything.
He was sort of the he was he was what has been termed sometimes the watchmaker God.
You know There was a creator God who had made the watch and had wound it up and then just set it on the shelf and was watching It to see
what would happen.
But this is the God of the deist is not the God that directs your life that interacts with your
life.
It's a God that's totally transcendent and is not imminent in any way.
And so you can live as if God did not exist.
Throughout history there have not been too many actual overt
atheists.
But the world is full of practical atheists.
Churches are full of practical atheists if you will people who live as if God is not there
regardless of what they say and.
So the other another characteristic was the human being was the source of all morality and meaning.
Somehow we could reach down grab a hold of our own bootstraps and pull ourselves up and
We could by exercise of our rational thought become moral beings
and.
This this whole idea this modernistic idea repudiated all external authorities
particularly external religious authorities.
Instead of the church.
Being the authority in your life now you are going to be your own authority.
Well that continued up until the early 1960s.
But starting in the 1960s We began to swing away from that
and swing into what is what's become known as post -modernism and.
The Defining characteristic of post -modernism if you will is the rejection of
truth per se.
The modernist would agree with you that truth existed.
He may not agree that we knew what it was.
But they would at least agree that yes out there somewhere is Truth
and if we ever do discover what it is, it will apply to everyone.
Because that's the characteristic of an absolute truth.
It applies to everybody and so.
But then you start to get into the 1960s and into the post -modernist era and they reject that idea.
They reject the basic idea that there is absolute truth and.
Which once you do that?
Morality is no longer self -evident.
How we are to act with one another.
No longer becomes self -evident.
The very idea of knowledge itself is seen as being biased.
The very fact that we claim that we know something.
Well, who are you to claim that you know anything, you know, how do you know that that that type of attitude?
Comes out of this and finally you come to the point where everybody and everything is seen as being
false.
Everybody and everything is seen as being fake and so there is no longer any truth.
With a capital T there are only truths.
Which are things that are true for you, but they're not necessarily true for me.
And if that's your truth, well, that's fine.
I'm glad you found your truth, but that doesn't apply to me.
That sort of attitude.
We no longer have any principles.
We have only preferences.
What I would prefer to do.
It's interesting a principle was once defined by the court as what you're willing to die for and
We no longer have things like that that we're willing to die for what would you go to the wall for?
What principles are there in your life.
That you would that you would go to the to the wall for.
To go back to the age of martyrs.
What what is there in your life that you would go to the stake for
that you would not recant.
Okay but Carl.
You're in the minority.
I would say everyone else here would probably go to the stake for that, but we are in the minority in
The world in general the world around us.
There are very few things in this country in particular that people would go to the wall for.
Now and this is one of the things to diverting slightly this is one of the concepts that we why we have trouble.
Understanding our adversaries in the world and the war on terrorism.
There are people out there who believe in something and they will go to the wall for it.
These are the kind of guys that drive the car loaded with explosives up beside something and blow it up.
We have a great Deal of trouble in this war in in this country.
Understanding the mental processes of people that would do that because we have long since abandoned
that type of commitment.
Okay, no principles only preferences.
There is no meaning outside ourselves.
There is no Fixed greater meaning than ourselves.
There is only what we define within ourselves.
Again this idea it goes back the idea that there's no absolute truth and so
words.
We no longer use words.
We no longer use language to describe a Meaning
that is outside of ourselves or a reality that is outside of ourselves they are
used only to create a reality within ourselves and.
So again another way of putting that is words no longer have fixed meanings.
It's kind of like Alice in Wonderland, what does it mean?
It means whatever I want it to mean and It might not mean that tomorrow.
It only means that today or right now Truth has become a
construct.
Truth is not an absolute anymore in the post -modernist world.
It's construct.
All of this does have a point by the way.
We will get there God willing sooner or later.
And so the moral universe.
Because of all of these previous things we've just talked about the moral universe.
That is a universe in which your actions have consequences.
No longer exists.
The idea of a moral universe no longer exists in the post -modernist mind and
This affects to a great extent we go out and try to evangelize a
great deal of the time we go out and we we use phrases and words and
methods.
That are no longer appropriate.
Because they don't mean anything to the people we're talking to
we have also substituted values for virtues.
Now we talk about family values and that's a good thing, but what we really mean is family virtues.
Now, what's the difference?
Virtues are aspects of good which are supposed to be normative for all
and When you even as late as the 1950s
most of society Functioned from what we would call a Christian worldview.
They were not Christians.
But they functioned from a Christian worldview.
There were certain virtues that everyone accepted as good even without proof.
They sort of defined the way that we interacted with each other and what -have -you.
Now we've substituted values and that's just a personal preference.
That's just a personal preference and what is a value for me may not be a value for you and what you value I might not
value is the way it goes.
We have also substituted self.
Which self are the unique characteristics of each individual.
We've substituted that for human nature and.
Human nature is that which makes man man?
We are created in the image of God.
He gave us a nature and even though that nature is fallen.
There is still an echo of that in human beings.
Why are we different from animals?
Why is why are the people of Pita?
Fundamentally wrong.
Because you know their idea is is that animals have all the same rights and privileges that human beings have.
What makes human beings different.
Why are we special.
Is it just that we have clawed our way to the top of the food chain?
No, it is that we are created.
Differently we are fundamentally different from the rest of the animal kingdom because we are created in the
image of God.
Notice I said created in the image of God.
We did not evolve in the image of God.
We were created that way and so that is what makes that that's
human nature, but we have substituted self for that.
We have also substituted personality for character.
You see this around you all the time.
What is character.
Character is what made the practice of the virtues habitual and unconscious
personality is Just the the characteristics of an individual.
Oh, he has such a nice personality.
You know and personality is what matters you know, we've heard we've heard this so often and
we it's we have come into a world in which Character no longer matters for anything
and so much of the area of life, you know, particularly in the area of politics.
You know, the old joke is you know, the trouble with political jokes is too many of them get elected and.
That's more true now than it's ever been.
You know, it's the guy with the glib answer the guy that can get the good spin.
But character it's all about character.
A Couple of elections ago, you know, we heard a great deal of the fact that it did well character doesn't matter.
It's you know, how well does he do the job and At the same time Norman
Schwarzkopf general Norman Schwarzkopf developed or delivered a speech in which he made the point.
It's all about character.
They still teach that in our military academies fortunately is that leadership is
all about character.
We've basically abandoned that idea.
And finally we have substituted shame for guilt.
So what's the difference there?
Shame is embarrassment at something that we would prefer to have hidden becoming public.
There are things about each one of us that we would prefer that other people do not know about and
When that does become known for whatever reason we we are embarrassed at that and that
shame and of course Modern psychology has put in a great deal of
effort in just doing away with shame.
Guilt.
By contrast is our state before a thrice.
Holy God.
Guilt is our state before a thrice.
We have violated his laws.
And this is a concept that modern society absolutely detests that there is a holy God
we are accountable to him because he made us and we have offended him
mightily and The problem that we face is how can we fit ourselves to
stand in his presence?
Modern society does not want to deal with that issue and It's
not only Postmodern society this whole attitude is starting to
come its way into evangelical society as well where we are trying to
Reinvent God in our own image.
We are trying to we don't like the God that is revealed in the pages of Scripture.
So we're going to reinvent God.
Into something that's more palatable we would like a God that's sort of like
a a cosmic grandpa.
Who is you know is going to be indulgent and is this going to sort of wink at our
sins?
We don't like the idea of a God that demands He's a righteous God.
He's a holy God and he demands that sins penalty be paid.
We don't care for that.
And so in society in general we have the church the body of Christ
and What is the role of the church.
In modern society or in ancient society for that matter, well, first of all, the church is
supposed to be different.
We are not supposed to be like the world.
We are supposed to be in the world, but not of the world.
We function inside the world inside the cosmos.
You know, that's where we function but we are not of that we
are different.
Unfortunately, what is happening so much today?
Is that the idea comes that well what we should do is we should be really?
Like the world and we will attract them.
You know, we'll be such nice guys that they'll want to be around us.
And so they're gonna be comfortable.
They got to be comfortable in our meetings, you know, so let's don't talk about sin and let's don't talk
about guilt and Heaven forbid we should not talk about Substitutionary atonement.
First of all, those are big words.
I mean nobody knows what those words mean and Secondly, we don't like the idea that there is something that needs
to be atoned for and that we need a substitute.
Because we are not capable of Paying the price ourselves.
We don't like any of that.
So we've started to become like the world.
You know and use the world's methods.
To attract, you know, we have we have defined.
Success in the church is bodies in the pew and bodies in the pews.
If you have all the bodies you got the pews filled you're succeeding.
Not necessarily and so we are what are we supposed to be doing?
We are supposed to be proclaiming the truth of God.
God has revealed his truth to us in his Word.
2nd Timothy 3 15 to 16 that from a child you have known the holy scriptures.
Which are able to make you what?
Wise.
Under salvation and We're supposed to be proclaiming the truth of God
instead we have substituted psychobabble.
For God's revealed truth.
We are supposed to be using God's revealed truth for regeneration and
sanctification.
They're able to make you wise unto salvation.
You want to be wise study the Bible.
What God wants you to know he has revealed in the pages of his Word.
And it's not some obscure thing either.
It's plainly revealed.
But we have substituted 12 -step plans or self -esteem workshops or
whatever.
For simply proclaiming the Word of God.
I carry around a Cartoon in my Bible.
I've had it for years.
Some of the characters out of Doonesbury and You know, there's a there's a minister one of the
characters and and he's going through the whole list of what's going on at the church of Walden and
he finally gets to the end and he says are there any questions and.
Some a voice from out of the frame says yes.
Is there a church service and he says no, I'm sorry.
It conflicted with the self -esteem workshop.
But you know, we'd laugh at that except that is largely what so much
of modern church life has become and.
So the it and we argue about things that used to be self self -evident.
We argue about inspiration and today even in evangelical churches.
Unfortunately, the issue is not so much inspiration but sufficiency.
You know most people in an evangelical church will agree that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.
But is that sufficient to handle whatever it is that we're facing?
Is that sufficient to handle our problems?
Is that truly what we need to know for for life and godliness?
Or do we need other things?
Do we need the cycle babble?
Do we need the 12 -step plan?
Do we need whatever it is thrown in?
And we try to redefine this idea that you know that old -time religion.
It was good enough for our mother, but it's not good enough for us.
Because it can't handle the modern world, you know.
Or as somebody else put it now that we have modern communication.
Give me that prime time religion.
You know, there we go and so
Why is this important?
It's because Christ's accomplishment at the cross presupposes a moral
universe.
It presupposes a moral universe that is created by God and that God runs.
It was not something it the universe is not something that God created and wound up the watch and
he's just watching it happen.
God upholds the universe.
Actively moment by moment the fact that you draw your next breath is
A gift from God.
The fact that you woke up this morning and realized you hadn't set your clocks forward.
That's a gift from God.
All of those things the fact that you're still here is a gift from God.
The universe consists because he holds it together as an active as an
active part of his will and So It's a moral
universe and what Christ Accomplished on the cross presupposes that
that actions have consequences and so if Christ
dies in our place on the cross.
That has real consequences in our lives.
But if you don't have a moral universe the substitutionary death of Christ on the cross
becomes unnecessary and Incomprehensible.
If we don't need a Savior.
Why would he do that?
Why would you go to the cross and die?
Why would you go die in the first place much less of death like that?
You know if there's no if there's if you're not living in a moral universe.
But to go back to what we said earlier, you know in the postmodern mind the moral
universe no longer exists and so when we start
talking about Truth as if it existed.
You know, we're talking like this.
We're going past each other.
We're going completely past each other.
So the doctrine of justification by faith has become redundant.
Why do I need to be justified?
What have I done to be justified for.
And Finally the problem the church is left with nothing to say.
And in so much of the modern Liberal church that has happened.
They have run out of something to say they no longer have a message.
They're out there saying well we should live a good life.
Why why should I live a good life?
Because it makes people like me maybe.
But maybe not and so the
idea of what is an evangelical?
You know, that's that's debated now.
Just like the church is supposed to be different the church is supposed to be different because its members are supposed to be
different.
Kingdom citizens are supposed to be different.
Matthew chapters 5 to 7 what we call the Sermon on the Mount that defines how
Kingdom citizens are supposed to act.
What they're supposed to be like what we call the B attitudes are.
The attitudes that are supposed to Characterize our lives
and we read that and we get very uncomfortable.
Don't we at least I do.
Because I realize I'm not like that.
I'd you know meek.
Who wants to be meek?
You know, I want to stand up for my rights, you know, and don't anybody get in my way and
I'm supposed to put others in front of me and I am supposed to love the
Lord my God with all my heart soul and mind.
Any of you do that this week.
Even for an instant.
See if you if you if you're looking for something to confess when you go to your prayer time, you can always hit that one
Lord, I have not loved you with all my heart soul and mind.
Because we all fall short of that.
But if you survey and they do this if you survey the United States the population of the United
States a huge percentage claims to be Born again
big percentage claims to be born again.
Well, that means that in their life.
There's some moment of significance.
There's some moment of experience that they can point to but.
And while they view this as kind of a turning point.
They're not quite clear on what it was.
They turned from or what it was.
They turned to but they know they turned and.
Does it have a moral significance.
Probably not.
Because those same surveys reveal the fact that the majority of those that claim to be born again
Live lives that are exactly the same as those who do not make that claim.
And so what does it mean?
There don't seem to be any moral considerations to what being born again means in the minds of all
too many people we have separated being born again that phrase
from an understanding of sin and repentance and.
Therefore we have divorced.
Being born again from biblical salvation.
What salvation means in the biblical terms?
And so We are confused over what
evangelicals are.
Who's a Christian?
Is it somebody that says I'm a Christian.
Is it somebody that you know got their head wet when they were an infant.
What is it?
What's a Christian and?
So Our view of God.
Our knowledge of the word our knowledge of Christ our knowledge of the Holy Spirit all of these things work
into.
Can we define who and what is a Christian who and what is an evangelical if we don't have an accurate view of God?
The rest of it all falls apart and.
So the church cannot maintain its moral distance from the world unless it has a
sense of supremacy and.
And Centrality for God.
I told you we would eventually get to the point.
This is all preliminary, okay, I promise.
Here's a quote.
The reality of God's glory is vast boundless Infinite
filled with splendor and wondrous it is God's alone and is absolutely unshaken
and undiminished.
By human efforts to make the infinite finite.
Surround the boundless by boundaries and make human like what is uniquely God's.
It comes from Bruce Ware.
He also said this our conception of the glory of God as
opposed to the reality Is shaped by our understanding of his nature his
perfections his sovereignty his knowledge His holiness his goodness and his
providence.
So there's two things at work what God's glory really is the reality of
it and what our conception of it is.
And while the reality of God's glory is completely
unaffected by What we think.
I made that comment one time in a totally different venue.
But I made the comment that God is not impressed with what we think.
There was one lady in the room got very upset about that.
But it's true.
God is not impressed with what we think.
God is only impressed with what he thinks however
our conception of the glory of God is a variable and I
would offer to you that our focus upon our Christian life is
Driven directly by what our conception of God's glory is and our conception of God
is.
Because our view of God and his glory and I'm using the term
God's glory to mean everything that God is and How much
he isn't like us.
What RC Spruill calls the otherness of God.
But that is the bedrock on which all of Christianity rests.
Everything else in our lives flows out of that.
You know, we've got to have this great anchor rock that we tie ourselves
to.
Otherwise we are going to be blown about by every wind of doctrine that comes down the road.
Now, I know every one of you knows people that just as soon as some new doctrine comes down the road some new idea
off they go, you know, they're headed off and Why is that it's because
they have no anchor.
They are not tied to an unmovable foundation.
We've mentioned before, you know, you go to New York City and you look at those great buildings that are there Empire
State Building.
Well underneath the Empire State Building where you can't see it.
There are pilings that go all the way down to bedrock and that's why that building stands is
because it's resting on a firm foundation and If we don't have a firm
foundation under us then indeed we are going to be blown about by every wind of doctrine that comes down
the road and that is Why this open theism thing is so dangerous
the bedrock is under attack.
Serious attempts are being made to alter our fundamental view
of God's glory.
Now what we're going to do from here for the rest of the time we have left to us.
I'm going to do a fast overview of What open theism is all about and the
objections to it?
I want to do that because while we are going to continue with this next Sunday, God
willing we may not have next Sunday and So the Lord may come by then.
So I want you to at least have something to sort of wrap this package up in.
In part of this introduction and then next Sunday, we're going to start studying in detail in some depth.
Passages that address this whole idea.
So what is open theism?
First of all, it's a movement within evangelicalism.
Seeking to alter our view of God.
It is a prominent alternative to classic Arminian ism.
What is Arminian ism?
If you feel that you had any part to play in your salvation any part at all.
Other than to sin if you feel other than that you had any part to play you are Arminian.
If you feel that your salvation is 100 a result of the sovereignty of God you are
Calvinist.
That's the bottom line of the whole argument now we can we can preach for for years on those two things.
But that's the that's the crux of it right there.
But open theism is an alternative To classic Arminian ism.
It is also a major heresy.
That's the only word for it.
It is a major heresy.
The principal proponents today are Clark Pinnock.
Who used to be Calvinist by the way?
Richard Richard Rice John Sanders William Hasker David Basinger and Greg Boyd.
Those are the names that you see attached to this a great deal.
It's also called free will theism.
It's also called the openness of God now.
What are the major theater the major theses of this whole argument?
It's this that God's sovereignty is Limited.
Now they don't really explain how you can have limited sovereignty.
That's sort of a contradiction in terms.
But nonetheless, the idea is that God self limits his sovereignty by the
creation of free agents that is agents you
Who put who possess?
What would be we would call libertarian freedom or Contra -causal freedom if you want a
really $10 word.
That the idea being that you know We make this that we can make
decisions without any outside influence whatsoever nothing influences our
Outside decisions and any decision that we possibly made we could have made the other decision.
Now when you think about this, this is really kind of a ludicrous idea.
Because all of you will admit That even though you are free you are free
moral agents.
Meaning that you can make choices and You bear the consequences of those choices nonetheless
as We as we drove to church this morning.
Even there our decisions were constrained, right?
Because we followed the road didn't we we didn't go driving off across
somebody's front lawn you know and There were places where
I turned and there were places where I did not turn because there's no road there and
There were places where I could have turned left.
But I couldn't have turned right because there's no road on the other side that way.
So I made yes, I was making free decisions in the fact that nobody was coercing me
holding a gun to my head, but on the other hand, I Wasn't completely without
restraint As we drove here.
In fact when we sometimes when we make decisions completely without restraint we call that an accident, right?
Because so anyway Yeah, here we go.
There's really no such thing as as Libertarian freedom that is freedom that is
completely unconstrained by anything and Yet that is what these individuals are trying
to to say that God created.
Yes, ma 'am.
We'll get there.
We'll get there, but that's an excellent question.
That's a very excellent question because they say also that God can
only have comprehensive knowledge of the past and the present but not the future and
As we'll see in a minute they don't really believe that he has comprehensive knowledge the past and the present either.
Then God cannot have comprehensive knowledge of the future they say because future events haven't happened
yet and therefore are not real
and So God's foreknowledge is an impossibility because the future cannot be known.
So God is genuinely baffled by the future now, they will admit that
God is very quick on his feet and he's really good at Making
contingency plans when you guys do something that he was surprised about.
You know and that God has a really really good database and a
really fast search engine.
That lets him come up with things in the past see.
But nonetheless the idea of a sovereign God who has decreed
That certain events will happen is anathema to these people.
God is genuinely baffled by the future.
God's power is limited prophecies, therefore are just an educated guess and
That the supreme attribute of God is his love for us.
You know, he is doing his best to save mankind because he loves us so very much.
But as John MacArthur put it To elevate One of God's
attributes above the others is idolatry and that's what you really
have now.
They they claim a biblical basis for this there are a handful a
relative handful of Places in the scripture where it says God regretted
something God changed his mind about something.
What did God say to Noah?
He says in effect, I'm sorry, I've created man on the earth and they say see there God's changing
his mind or they point to something like where God asked questions
regarding the future or Where God confronts a surprise something that's supposed to have
surprised God or that God gets frustrated.
Or that God tests Individuals to learn their character like Job or like Abraham.
They point to the verse by Genesis 2212.
I think where he says now I know what your character is implying that before
that God did not know Whether or not Abraham would take Isaac up
and sacrifice him.
God speaks of what may or may not happen.
God is seen as being flexible and responding to our choices.
You look in Jeremiah chapter 18.
For that and of course God changes his mind.
That's where you look in Exodus chapter 33.
Where God's talking to Moses, you know and and saying, you know Moses I'm going to
Get rid of all.
I'm going to get rid of all these people and get some new people and I'm gonna you know Get a new chosen people and Moses is pleading
with God.
But in his book on the subject the whole book Clark Pinnock uses exactly
13 references to scripture.
So what what kind of things are they running into.
First of all, they're claiming that.
They claim an inherent incompatibility between first cause and second cause in other words the
idea that You can say that both man and God
caused something to happen.
They reject the idea of second causes.
That we cause things to happen by our actions and we are morally responsible for those choices.
But nonetheless above it all God is the first cause.
They reject that idea.
They also say that you cannot extrapolate a general principle from biblical examples of God's
foreknowledge.
That's the question you were asking.
They they they Admit that they're there.
But they say you can't take a general principle out of all of these examples of God's
foreknowledge and God saying, you know, I have I Have decreed this will happen and it will happen.
On the other hand they say you have to take a general principle
out of the limited set of Examples where it says God changes his
mind.
God regretted something, you know.
You must take you must take your general principle from that not from this vastly larger group of
examples to the contrary.
And then finally they say that more is open than then is settled although the Bible specifically says
Forever.
Oh Lord.
Thy word is what?
Settled in Heaven.
Now, what do they claim for this?
They claim first of all, it makes more intellectual sense.
Although they do not explain what made God what made makes man's comprehension a criterion for anything.
They say it deals better with passages intention whatever that means.
That foreknowledge harms our view of God.
They also say the Calvinistic doctrine of God's providence causes Christians to not pray as they
should.
Because quote it doesn't make any difference.
Unquote.
Now that argument has been around a lot longer than open theism.
If you study anything about this, that's one of the charges that's always leveled against the Calvinist position.
Calvinism stresses Calvinism stresses the sovereignty of God and the providence of God
and they say well, you know, why should I pray?
Overlooking the fact that well, we're commanded to pray is one reason.
And secondly, the Bible does have many examples of where someone prays and
God responds to the prayer of the Saints.
Another claim for this has made it help us understand the problem of evil and also that it interacts
better with modern science, although they do not explain why that is a criterion either and
You know what set that up?
So by contrast Bb Warfield said this it is immoral
to create what you are unwilling or unable to control.
I'll say it again.
It is immoral to create what you are unwilling or unable to control and So
claims that what you are really claiming here in The open theism position is that God
has created something that is out of his control.
He created it, but he can't control it.
And so what are the problems?
Well, first of all, it reads the Bible atomistically that is each verse is taken in isolation.
Individual atoms, you know type of thing and.
The second thing is is that it's basic hermeneutic which is a quote straightforward reading of the text unquote.
See it says that God says now I know so that miss must mean that before this God
didn't know that right?
Well, you can't consistently apply that and you go all the way back to Genesis chapter 3
verses 9 to 11.
Which is God interacting with Adam and Eve in the garden?
Now, what does God come down and say first thing?
He says, where are you?
So if you're reading this the way the open theists say you are God does not know the present.
He needs information.
He does not know where Adam and Eve are according to this and Then
he says God is spatially limited it's denying the doctrine of omnipresence
because this God is is spoken of as being in one place God came down to the garden and
That must mean that he wasn't in the garden before right and then finally
he's got to ask for information.
What have you eaten?
What have you done?
And These are events that have happened in the past.
So you you're already denying that God even knows what the past is.
Or the present he doesn't know where Adam and Eve are.
He doesn't know what they've done in the past and So you can't apply their hermeneutic breaks
down immediately when you try to explain it.
The we'll go fast here.
It takes Anthropopathisms and anthropomorphisms literally.
Anthropopathisms are applying human emotions to God.
Anthropomorphisms are applying human characteristics to God.
God does not really have hands.
He doesn't have eyes.
He doesn't have ears.
Physically like we do but we talk about the eyes of God the hands of God.
And so it applies this literally and Not as figurative language and not as
language of accommodation as one pastor called it.
It ignores the use of Hebrew idioms.
It assumes that there is an incompatibility with divine sovereignty and human responsibility.
Although there is no basis for assuming that it fails to deal with
what the Bible teaches Throughout its length about divine providence and human freedom
such as in Romans chapter 9.
This is where a knowledge of systematic theology pays off.
Why do you want to study systematic theology?
Why do you want to come to church on Sunday night?
Commercial.
Because you want to know what the Bible says as its entire in its entirety about a subject
That keeps you from picking up one little verse and building a theology on it.
And so the Bible says much more Than the open theists are willing to
allow.
They basically ignore to answer your question.
They don't deny they just ignore the all of those other passages and
Finally they suspect that man is more loving than God and So we're out of time and I
want to leave you though with three references.
To to think about for this coming week the first.
Remember this and stand firm recall it to mind you transgressors.
Remember the former things of old for I am God and there is no other I am God
and there is none like me declaring the end from the beginning.
That's what defines God.
Only God can do that Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things
not yet done.
Saying my Council shall stand and I will accomplish all my purpose
calling a bird of prey from the east the man of my counsel from a far country.
I Have spoken and I will bring it to pass.
I have purposed and I will do it.
Isaiah 46 8 to 11.
The next one is Malachi 3 6 for I the Lord do not change therefore
therefore you Oh children of Jacob are not consumed.
And finally Hebrews chapter 6 verses 17 and 18.
So when God desired to show more convincingly that the heirs of the promise To the heirs of the promise
the unchangeable character of his purpose.
He guaranteed it with an oath.
So that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie.
That's a critical phrase.
We who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set
before us.
Let's pray our Heavenly Father.
We praise you and we thank you that you are an immutable Unchanging God
and That you are a sovereign God and that what you have decreed will indeed happen.
For Lord, we acknowledge that our hope of salvation rests upon that bedrock and If
we don't have that then we are truly without hope and we are truly miserable.
And so father we praise you that you sent your son that you called us to yourself that you have revealed
yourself to us and that you Deal on a regular basis in our
lives that we feel your hand regularly.
We thank you for this we pray for the remainder of the service rest your hand this morning Lord upon pastor Mike as he opens
the word to us and Prepare our hearts to receive your message in Jesus name.
Yeah.