Neopatriarch

Okay guys, don't get distracted from all the killing that's going on in Gaza and in Iran and all the pedophilia that's being ignored. There are no aliens from outer space. If that had been the case we would have met them today. Sorry to let you down.

2026-01-20 21:17:45 UTC

When you're disappointed in your elected representative, remember three forces may shape their decisions:
Previous moral compromise.
Threats against their family.
Or greed — wealth one could never have earned honestly.
Even the Magna Carta was signed under threat. This is just bare-knuckle politics. Power has always worked this way.

2026-01-20 07:40:22 UTC

- reply

When I was a kid, you could buy most of these types of components at a store called Radio Shack. It was a walking distance from my house.

2026-01-18 01:49:35 UTC

- reply

Make sure you're not being screwed by someone that doesn't even have insurance or the means to actually pay you. If you can, let your insurance work it out.

2026-01-16 11:48:04 UTC

I'm already against the next bombing.

2026-01-16 02:07:29 UTC

- reply

Amen. Rights proceed government and persists despite it.

2026-01-15 15:21:15 UTC

Free peoples must cooperate to defend their rights, or they will lose them.
Citizens must use whatever liberties remain to reclaim their rights and recover their freedom.

2026-01-13 09:37:37 UTC

There is nothing more dangerous than a scared cop. Nothing frightens an officer more than people who refuse to respect their authority. The killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis is a grim reminder of what happens when fear meets a badge.

2026-01-12 07:13:14 UTC

You're not paying; the government is paying, out of funds they confiscated from you. You don't get any more say in how it's spent than you did to "pay" it. #taxationIsTheft

2026-01-10 08:18:49 UTC

Muh roads?
News flash: politicians don’t build roads. Normal people do.
#NewsFlash #RealityCheck #Freedom #MythOfAuthority #UnpopularOpinion

2026-01-10 01:54:53 UTC

If you say “we” when referring to government actions, then you’re taking responsibility for them.
That includes the nuclear bombing of civilian populations, the Wounded Knee Massacre, the internment of innocent families, covert coups, mass surveillance, and detention by armed agents of the state.
It’s easy to claim the good and ignore the bad. But responsibility doesn’t work that way.
If you didn’t do it, didn’t choose it, and don’t have the power to stop it, then don’t claim “we.”

2026-01-08 14:07:31 UTC

Corrupt government isn't news. Finding a good one—that would be news.

2026-01-07 19:24:16 UTC

What’s more likely?
That poor Somali immigrants suddenly outsmarted the U.S. government?
Or that they were walked through a system built to move money fast — and blamed when it blew up?
We owe them that question.

2026-01-05 15:24:25 UTC

A moral question,for believers and non-believers alike: If taking someone’s property without consent is wrong in principle, does the moral rule change based on who does the taking?
Scripture grounds justice in consent and honest weights. Philosophy grounds justice in the same place.
So the real question isn’t about good intentions, it’s whether moral standards apply equally.

2026-01-05 10:26:27 UTC

- reply

Governments only ever work out for the ruling class.

2026-01-05 01:31:52 UTC

- reply

I think Nostr needs a landing page. It's decentralized so there's could be lots of landing pages. Relays and Clients could have public facing threads on a landing page. When people want to join the conversation... Make it easy.

2026-01-03 09:06:07 UTC

Thought for 15s and immediately did three hours work. I hate AI.

2026-01-03 03:12:05 UTC

- reply

Probably because those links land you right to a legible page.

2026-01-03 03:10:06 UTC

The reason the value of money is eroded is because the people that you depend on to protect you are infact robbing you.?

2026-01-01 16:36:57 UTC

Maximus 2, the Brotherhood of Steel 0.
#Fallout

2026-01-01 16:15:49 UTC

You don't need to resort to assassinating corrupt rulers; instead, just stop obeying them.

2026-01-01 01:40:01 UTC

Somalians did not steal from you, your elected officials did. Remember, you voted for the lesser evil. Well, here it is.

2026-01-01 01:19:06 UTC

So I created my very first phone app. Right now it just rejects you signing in... But it's a start.
It was fun seeing my creation take shape.

2025-12-31 15:44:20 UTC

Is it possible possible that I have two apps running on the same NPUB, with completely different sets of relays? I guess I need to check and see, which if any they share.

2025-12-31 11:53:03 UTC

- reply

I agree with you, and I think it actually goes even deeper than Jesus quoting the OT. When Jesus speaks, He is not appealing to an external authority. He is speaking as the same Lord who gave it in the first place.
That is why He can say, “You have heard it said… but I say to you.” He is not revising Moses. He is the one who spoke to Moses.
Titus 1:2–3 makes this explicit. God, who cannot lie, promised before the ages began, and at the proper time manifested His word through preaching. That promise before time is not abstract. It is Christ Himself. Paul is saying the same Lord who gave the Law later revealed Himself in the flesh.
So when Jesus interprets Torah, He is not re-reading it. He is revealing its original voice. That is why He can say, “Moses wrote about Me.” The Torah was not merely pointing forward. It was already Christ speaking.
That’s why your use of the word vantage stood out to me. I read it as Christ being the standpoint from which all Scripture is rightly understood. But I’m curious what you had in mind by it. Were you thinking of perspective, fulfillment, or something else?
That’s what I meant by Christ being the vantage point. He is not just the lens through which we read Scripture. He is the author who steps onto the page and explains His own words.

2025-12-30 18:35:46 UTC

🗓️ EVENT: New Years Day
📍 WHERE: USA
🕖 WHEN: January 1, 2026 at 12:01 AM EST
📝 DETAILS: Welcome to a brand new year everybody.
https://i.imgur.com/8ELGgoz.jpeg
---
Posted with the Agora Marketplace App. A decentralized platform for local events.
Learn more and contribute on GitHub: https://github.com/Neopatriarch/AgoraMarketplace

2025-12-30 18:23:46 UTC

2025-12-30 17:59:24 UTC

{"name":"Another New Years Event","location":"South Carolina","startTime":"2026-01-01T12:57","description":"ANother test event that could have been a party."}

2025-12-30 17:30:35 UTC

🗓️ EVENT: Watch the Ball Drop
📍 WHERE: Dallas Texas
🕖 WHEN: December 31, 2025 at 11:59 PM EST
📝 DETAILS: I will be sleeping
---
Posted with the Agora Marketplace App. The decentralized home for local events. The Agora Marketplace App is coming soon. Learn more at [Agora Marketplace Placeholder].

2025-12-30 17:26:09 UTC

Somebody has to change the world and it might as well be me.

2025-12-30 17:14:58 UTC

🗓️ EVENT: New Years Day
📍 WHERE: USA
🕖 WHEN: January 1, 2026 at 12:01 AM EST
📝 DETAILS: Welcome to a brand new year everybody.
---
Posted with the Agora Marketplace App. The decentralized home for local events. The Agora Marketplace App is coming soon. Learn more at nostr.agora (placeholder).

2025-12-30 17:10:48 UTC

- reply

My Birthday is real but the link is not. But it will be soon.

2025-12-30 17:09:15 UTC

- reply

Thanks for trying. I was able to zap you. So that's good.

2025-12-30 17:05:33 UTC

🗓️ EVENT: My Birthday
📍 WHERE: South Carolina
🕖 WHEN: January 19, 2026 at 12:00 PM EST
📝 DETAILS: I will be 60, and as my present you could use my new app.
---
Posted with the Agora Marketplace App. The decentralized home for local events. The Agora Marketplace App is coming soon. Learn more at nostr.agora (placeholder).

2025-12-30 16:23:04 UTC

{"name":"Watch the Ball Drop","location":"Dallas Texas","startTime":"2025-12-31T23:59","description":"I will be sleeping","image_url":""}

2025-12-30 12:15:16 UTC

I have started making ghee. I use it for popcorn. It is amazing.

2025-12-30 12:08:25 UTC

- reply

I would say simply that Romans doesn't exist in a vacuum. So when Paul wrote Romans 13, was there an example he was referencing? Was Rome a terror to Christians or a blessing? Jesus did what was good, so did He receive the approval of the state? I believe that Jesus has all authority in heaven and on earth. I think Paul believed that as well; he was familiar with the Old Testament and what had happened to Samuel—how Israel had rejected God as their ruler. Isn't that exactly what Christians do when they follow the godless and throw in their lot with sinners?

2025-12-30 08:42:29 UTC

- reply

Here is an image.
https://i.imgur.com/VcRSZ1I.jpeg

2025-12-30 08:26:33 UTC

- reply

It is wrong for humans to rule over other humans. When the Israelites demanded a human king, God warned them that this would lead to their abuse. Human government always leads to such abuse, for it is a rejection of God's authority. That is what God is telling us, and Christians find themselves in that same position today. Yet most Christians do not take this stand—and they should. It does not matter whether the ruler is a king or whether the public is held up as sovereign—all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Jesus. That should be the Christian position.

2025-12-30 08:11:50 UTC

- reply

Jesus isn't making that stuff up on the fly. He isn't quoting the OT. He is repeating himself.

2025-12-30 08:06:37 UTC

Of course, there is rampant fraud. It's the government. Now you're just frauding yourself.

2025-12-30 07:51:09 UTC

- reply

Which would be weird if you were in New Jersey. I doubt that though. I wish I could see one of those outside my window. I'm not in New Jersey either...

2025-12-30 07:50:33 UTC

- reply

Help me test my zap by zapping me even if it's just one Satoshi so I can see it's working and I can move on to other things. Thanks

2025-12-30 07:49:37 UTC

I don't know what's going on over at getalby but it's like pulling teeth. They wanted me to pay for services which I was willing to do but for some reason they wouldn't take Bitcoin. I couldn't even send them more than zero satoshis.
I'd like to thank Rizful.com for making it easy. It didn't take me more than a couple of minutes to get my zapper set up. Thanks again

2025-12-30 07:47:22 UTC

- reply

You rock! Thanks for replying.

2025-12-30 07:28:05 UTC

- reply

I understand, I cannot find what I need on getAlby to do that...but I have a message out to them. Thanks for trying.

2025-12-30 07:28:02 UTC

- reply

I understand, I cannot find what I need on getAlby to do that...but I have a message out to them. Thanks for trying.

2025-12-30 07:00:34 UTC

- reply

This is a test comment.

2025-12-30 06:07:15 UTC

- reply

I cannot wait till this app works

2025-12-30 06:00:27 UTC

- reply

I look forward to next year.

2025-12-29 20:15:37 UTC

{"name":"New Years Day","location":"USA","startTime":"2026-01-01T00:01","description":"Welcome to a brand new year everybody.","image_url":"https://i.imgur.com/8ELGgoz.jpeg"}

2025-12-29 00:20:00 UTC

{"name":"My Birthday","location":"South Carolina","startTime":"2026-01-19T12:00","description":"I will be 60, and as my present you could use my new app.","image_url":""}

2025-12-28 15:05:35 UTC

- reply

🎉 SPONTANEOUS MEETUP! 🎉
Event: Church
Where: At the corner
When: Tomorrow at 8am
Come join us! #meetup #nostr
(This event was created with the Agora Marketplace App)

2025-12-28 14:34:45 UTC

- reply

🎉 SPONTANEOUS MEETUP! 🎉
Event: A test...
Where: Somewhere nearby
When: Noonish on Monday
Come join us! #meetup #nostr
(This event was created with the Agora app)

2025-12-26 00:05:55 UTC

I hope you all had a Merry Christmas.

2025-12-25 09:52:14 UTC

We all know how predators work:
Pedophiles seek jobs with access to kids.
Rapists target the vulnerable.
Thieves go where the money is.
Authoritarians don’t “end up” in power by accident—they crave positions of authority for the same reason: it gives them captive prey, legitimized control, and impunity.
Power attracts those who want to dominate. Always has, always will.
No checks, no reforms, no “good ones” change the pattern. The role itself is the lure.
Predators seek prey. Stop pretending authority is the exception.

2025-12-24 14:29:33 UTC

My vibe code experience has not been as smooth as those dudes on YT. The AI has put me to work. Aren't they supposed to write all the stuff.

2025-12-23 09:45:46 UTC

GM Nostr
Merry Christmas!
From South Carolina, USA
Where are you and what are you doing today?
I'll be working for the man.
After today I'm off till the new year.
I'm playing with vibe coding in my free time.

2025-12-23 02:17:59 UTC

- reply

I should have read more carefully. https://image.nostr.build/b812a6e37d891512ceed1fa16c056219bbc979fef4a98163c969f5cd6edd5fda.jpg

2025-12-22 01:07:46 UTC

- reply

Sure. Zaps are a little more direct. I couldn't send you any SATs. If you set that up people can actively reward you for your content.
Are you a publisher?

2025-12-21 21:08:18 UTC

- reply

Agreed. This thread was about likes versus zaps. I think they made a terrible mistake when they kept these actions separated. People love zaps—even trolls love them. Trolls will troll less if there are better incentives for doing good.

2025-12-21 18:01:07 UTC

- reply

I pay for a lot of things I don't love. I pay my electric bill, and I don't love them. In fact, they don't entertain me at all. I pay my car payment, and I don't love Chevy; I like my car, so maybe that counts as love.
Of course, the difference is that not only do I not love them, I have to pay them a lot more than tiny fractions of a penny. But the stuff I do love? I love it a whole lot more. If I only had to pay those companies less than a penny… Maybe I could negotiate them down to satoshis. What do you think? I might love them more.

2025-12-21 10:19:04 UTC

- reply

Violence often leads to more violence, so what's the goal here?

2025-12-21 10:02:37 UTC

Are you doing no dig gardening?
Do you watch Charles Dowding?

2025-12-21 09:54:40 UTC

Love ❤️ is free, but it don't pay them bills. ⚡

2025-12-21 09:52:56 UTC

"Someone tried to send you SATs as a reward but you weren't set up to receive them. "
-an auto message that should be sent when that happens.

2025-12-20 18:18:58 UTC

- reply

Just after I posted that, I started thinking about it more and decided I wanted to go ahead with it—still a little differently, though. So now I've rearranged the boxes and buried them in the wood chips. The wood chips are now separated from the compost by the boxes, but the boxes aren't as prominent. This way, I can build my garden gradually in small sections and leave plenty of room between my micro-beds (or mini-beds.whichever term sounds better). https://image.nostr.build/c5bf3570f3411af9cd8a4de8ab6afbb73f99cf1da74d3547ff807e248c745060.jpg

2025-12-20 15:24:27 UTC

Fallout
I think The Ghoul has the Bloody Mess perk.
#FalloutSeason2

2025-12-20 11:51:06 UTC

Hey GARDENERS! 🪴
Are you starting your beds yet?
I just saw a video by James Prigioni where he grew a garden right in a commercial soil bag. It was inspiring!
I’m working on a twist on that idea by making small garden beds to keep things as a simple weekend project. Here (see picture) was my first pass, but I think I’m going to go even simpler: block the weeds with cardboard, lay in the small beds, and then surround everything with wood chips to cover the rest of the cardboard and make it look a little less 'redneck.'
If I do one or two of these a weekend, I should be ready to start planting as soon as the frost is gone.
So, gardeners, what are you doing right now to get ready for the coming season?
https://image.nostr.build/3bf5a1923306ec25437535d270ac9679e7a9cac790316dedce2107000781ac89.jpg

2025-06-06 14:35:28 UTC

Just so you know, “seize” is just a fancy word for “steal”—especially when the government says it.
#TaxationIsTheft #AssetForfeiture #Voluntaryism #ThinkForYourself

2025-05-28 10:52:41 UTC

"Public servant" is, at best, a misnomer.
They don’t wash feet—they write laws, issue fines, and wield force.
They don’t serve you—they serve the system, the state, and their own careers.
The phrase is meant to soften power, to make control sound kind.
But true servants don’t need badges, titles, or immunity.
#Power #PublicServant #Voluntaryist #Accountability #WakeUp

2025-05-28 10:43:45 UTC

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." People keep thinking this election, this investigation, this law will finally bring accountability. But if the system protects power over justice, nothing changes. The Rule of Law seems like a good idea—just rarely a true one. Maybe the problem isn’t who’s in charge. Maybe it’s the game itself.
#RuleOfLaw #Power #HistoryRepeats #Accountability #WakeUp

2025-05-27 10:50:25 UTC

Every time a politician lies, people act shocked—or defend their favorite like they’re above it. Be honest: politicians lie. And if someone truly honest ran, most wouldn’t vote for them. Truth makes us uncomfortable. That’s the real problem. #politics #truth

2025-04-03 08:11:48 UTC

It's interesting to me how people in the Bible negotiate with God in their prayers. Here, Hannah expresses her belief that God will listen, that He can be moved to act, and that the future is not predetermined.
Do you pray like Hannah?
1 Samuel 1:11 And she vowed a vow, and said, O LORD of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but wilt give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the LORD all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.

2025-03-12 14:12:02 UTC

- reply

Maybe I should have been even more concise. Did all of the ruling class retire? Or did they seize new positions of power immediately in the new structure?

2025-03-12 10:59:24 UTC

I'm so disappointed the government won't be shut down. Of course, even that was a lie. Rulers never surrender power voluntarily. #Government #Politics #Power

2025-02-24 11:34:16 UTC

Avoiding Vain Philosophies: The Danger of Speculating About Time
Introduction: When Theology Becomes Science Fiction
Some words sound theological, but they are not biblical. Concepts like "before time," "outside of time," and "timelessness" are often used in theological discussions, yet they have no scriptural basis. Instead of leading us into truth, they tend to drift into the realm of science fiction. These terms would feel more at home in Back to the Future or Star Trek than in serious Bible study.
Yet, many Christians repeat them without question. But is this how God reveals Himself? Or are we allowing human philosophy to redefine the God of Scripture?
Where Do These Ideas Come From?
When people talk about God being "outside of time," they are not drawing from the Bible but from Greek philosophy, particularly Platonism and Aristotelian metaphysics. Plato taught that the material world is an inferior copy of an eternal, unchanging realm of perfect forms. Aristotle developed the idea of a "Prime Mover"—a being that causes motion but does not move or change itself.
Early Christian theologians, influenced by Greek thought, attempted to merge these ideas with the Bible. The result? A concept of God that is static, impersonal, and detached from time and human history. But is this how God presents Himself in Scripture?
The Biblical God: A God Who Acts in History
From Genesis to Revelation, God is revealed as a living, dynamic, and relational Being who interacts with His creation in real time:
God speaks and creates – "And God said, Let there be light" (Genesis 1:3).
God walks with man – "And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden" (Genesis 3:8).
God responds to prayer – "And God repented of the evil that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not" (Jonah 3:10).
God enters history as Jesus Christ – "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1:14).
God has a future plan – "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father" (1 Corinthians 15:24).
These passages do not describe a "timeless" deity but a God who engages with His creation in real, unfolding history.
Paul’s Warning: Beware of Vain Philosophies
Colossians 2:8 warns us:
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."
Many theological ideas that pass as "deep truths" are actually vain philosophies that lead believers away from Christ. Instead of focusing on how God actually reveals Himself, people become obsessed with abstract ideas that sound profound but have no scriptural foundation.
Paul tells us to guard our minds against these influences. Our theology must be rooted in Scripture, not speculation.
Conclusion: Keep Theology Biblical, Not Speculative
The Bible never speaks of a "timeless" or "outside of time" God. These ideas do not come from Scripture but from human philosophy and speculation.
God acts in real time.
God engages in history.
God reveals Himself through events, covenants, and relationships.
Instead of drifting into abstract, extra-biblical ideas, let’s stick to how God actually presents Himself in Scripture. The moment we go beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4:6), we risk exchanging biblical truth for philosophical speculation.
As Paul warns, let’s not be "spoiled" by vain philosophy. Let’s keep our theology rooted in Scripture, not speculation.

2025-02-24 07:56:36 UTC

jht7uqHXEiAezF5D3o05IbSHzQ76lhFpv-3CE2vMnG8

2025-02-22 13:28:36 UTC

Privatize ALL gov’t services—education, healthcare, roads, cops, defense. Free market delivers better than force & bureaucracy. End gov’t monopolies, empower choice. Agree? #PrivatizeEverything #FreeMarket #NoGovMonopoly #MaximizeFreedom #EndForce

2025-02-21 13:44:23 UTC

God is omnicompetent (Isaiah 46:10). He is able to accomplish His purposes, That doesn’t require exhaustive foreknowledge or determinism. Like a master chess player, He doesn’t dictate every move—He guides, responds, and ensures victory within an open future. #OpenTheism #GodIsFree

2025-02-20 06:33:51 UTC

- reply

That's an interesting question, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss Open Theism! Let’s dive into the key points you raised.
Future Contingent Propositions & Open Theism
Dr. Craig argues that there are true future contingent propositions—statements about the future that are already true or false, even before the events happen. Open Theists reject this because it assumes a settled future rather than an open one, which would trap God in fate. However, Molinism provides God with more freedom than simple foreknowledge because there was a point when God chose to create.
The key issue is whether truth exists for things that haven’t happened yet. If future contingent propositions (like “Person X will choose Christ”) are already true or false, then the future is determined in some way—either by necessity (Calvinism), middle knowledge (Molinism), or simple foreknowledge (Classical Arminianism). But if the future is truly open, then such propositions do not yet have a truth value. Instead of saying, “God knows X will happen,” Open Theism says, “God knows X might happen, and He knows all possible futures.”
This view is fully consistent with God’s omniscience—He knows all that can be known. But if the future is not fully determined, then it cannot be “known” in the way Craig suggests because there is nothing definite yet to know.
Isaiah 46:10 & "God Knows the End from the Beginning"
You mentioned the biblical phrase, “God knows the end from the beginning.” This comes from Isaiah 46:10, where God says:
"Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose.’”
This is often used to argue that God foreknows all future events as settled. However, if you read the context, God is contrasting Himself with idols, showing His sovereignty and power to bring about His plans (not necessarily foreknowing every detail of the future). In Isaiah, God is appealing to His people, who have a history with Him. They know that He would declare a thing and was faithful to do that thing. The phrase doesn’t mean every event is already fixed; rather, it highlights God’s ability to accomplish what He has decreed. Open Theists fully affirm this! God does declare some things and ensures they happen (e.g., Christ’s return), but that doesn’t mean every choice is already settled.
Molinism vs. Open Theism
Molinism, as you mentioned, seeks to solve problems with Calvinism by introducing middle knowledge—the idea that God knows not only what will happen but also what would happen under different circumstances. The challenge is that Molinism still assumes a settled future in God’s actualized world. Open Theism, by contrast, argues that the future is partly determined and partly open. God knows all possibilities, but He has left room for genuine freedom.
One of the main issues Open Theists raise with Molinism is that middle knowledge still results in determinism by selection. If God knows what every free creature would do in every situation and then actualizes the one where things play out the way He wants, how is that real freedom? Open Theists argue that if humans are truly free, then some aspects of the future cannot be definitively known because they haven’t been determined yet.
Is This an Essential Doctrine?
I really respect your attitude here. You’re right—this isn’t an issue of who we worship. We both affirm that God is the sovereign Creator, Jesus is Lord, and salvation is by grace through faith. Open Theists and Classical Theists agree on these fundamentals but differ on how God relates to time and the future.
In my view, Open Theism actually makes God more free, rather than less. If God has total freedom to act in the present, rather than simply executing a pre-known script, then He is even more dynamic and relational than traditionally understood. But I completely agree that this is an area where believers can disagree while still being brothers and sisters in Christ.
Thanks for engaging in the discussion thoughtfully! Let me know if you’d like more resources on the history of Open Theism or its biblical basis.

2025-02-19 21:24:35 UTC

- reply

I'm glad to see you're taking the time to explore Open Theism more thoroughly! Dr. Craig is certainly a brilliant thinker, and I respect his scholarship as well. His critiques of Open Theism tend to stem from his commitment to classical foreknowledge models and his philosophical views on God's relationship to time. While he presents his case well, I believe Open Theism provides a more coherent understanding of God's freedom and the dynamic nature of creation.
One of the key issues I see in Craig’s perspective is that his middle knowledge view, or Molinism, still locks in all possible futures before God even acts. This essentially means that while God chooses among various possible worlds, He is still bound to a framework in which every outcome is predetermined in some sense. In contrast, Open Theism maintains that the future is truly open, allowing for real relational engagement between God and humanity, as well as genuine human freedom.
Another point worth considering is that Open Theism aligns more naturally with the biblical witness of God's interactions with people. The numerous passages where God expresses regret, changes His mind, or responds dynamically to human choices make more sense within an open view of the future. If the future were exhaustively settled, these interactions would appear either disingenuous or merely anthropomorphic, raising theological concerns about the sincerity of God's engagement with creation.
Moreover, Perfect Being theology, which underlies much of classical theism, has its roots in pagan philosophy. Concepts such as immutability, impassibility, and timelessness were heavily influenced by Greek metaphysical ideas, particularly from Plato and Aristotle. While these ideas were later incorporated into Christian theology by thinkers like Augustine and Aquinas, they often present a more static and abstract view of God—one that seems distant from the living, relational God revealed in Scripture. Open Theism challenges this framework, seeking to restore a biblical understanding of a God who genuinely interacts with creation in real time.
I've watched this video before. I’d be curious—do any of Craig’s arguments against Open Theism stand out to you so far?
P.S. There’s a great Unbelievable? episode where he and Dr. James White discuss related topics. It's a fascinating conversation.

2025-02-19 08:41:54 UTC

- reply

I appreciate your willingness to explore this, brother! Just to start, it's important to know that Open Theism isn't monolithic—there's a range of views within it. But at its core, Open Theism is about the freedom of God. If God is/was ever free to choose, then the future couldn't be entirely settled because He would have had the ability to do otherwise.
As Psalm 115:3 says, "Our God is in the heavens; He does all that He pleases." This illustrates God's freedom and sovereignty, highlighting that His actions are not predetermined but are chosen according to His will.
Regarding prophecy, Open Theism doesn't require God to see a fixed future. Instead, God knows every possible outcome and is powerful enough to bring about what He promises. Think of it like a master chess player who doesn't need to see the future to guarantee victory. He knows every possible move his opponent could make and has a strategy for each one. Similarly, God knows every possibility and works through the free actions of people to accomplish His purposes.
One of the most interesting aspects of Open Theism is how it explains what some might see as ‘failed prophecy.’ In this view, prophecy isn't about God seeing a fixed future but about Him declaring intentions that are conditional on human response. This is seen in places like Jonah and Nineveh: God declared that Nineveh would be destroyed, but when they repented, God relented. The prophecy wasn’t false; it was conditional.
Open Theism acknowledges that because God honors human freedom, some prophecies are warnings or invitations to change course. This highlights God's relational nature and His willingness to adapt His plans in response to human choices—without compromising His ultimate purposes.
This perspective actually emphasizes God's sovereignty and creativity even more! I'm happy to chat more about this when you have time. Blessings to you as well!

2025-02-18 19:41:18 UTC

- reply

I really appreciate your thoughtful response and your deep love for God—it’s clear that you take these theological discussions seriously, and I respect that a lot! I can tell that you’re genuinely seeking to understand how God's sovereignty and human freedom fit together, which is something I wrestle with too.
You made a great point about how God knowing the future doesn’t necessarily mean He determines it. But that raises an interesting question: If God infallibly knows what will happen, and humans cannot do otherwise, who or what determined that God would be helpless to watch events unfold?
If we break it down, there are really only a few possibilities:
1. God Himself determined it—but that would mean He actually did predestine all things, which would lead back to a deterministic view, contradicting free will.
2. The future exists as a fixed reality apart from God—but that would mean God is subject to fate rather than truly sovereign.
3. God knows all possibilities but not a fixed, settled future—this would allow Him to remain sovereign and engaged while still granting us true freedom.
Open Theism takes this third approach, not as a way of limiting God, but as a way of elevating His sovereignty—not as a passive observer of history, but as an active participant, dynamically engaging with His creation in real time. It’s not that God can’t know the future, but rather that the future isn’t a thing yet—it hasn’t happened. God knows everything that can be known, but He is not bound by a future that doesn’t yet exist.
I love that you're open to discussing this, and I truly appreciate your willingness to explore different views. At the end of the day, we both agree on the most important thing: God is good, wise, and worthy of all our love and trust.
Blessings, brother!

2025-02-18 11:39:11 UTC

- reply

You're right that Calvinism does assert those things, but they are not found in this 1 Samuel text. In fact, this passage presents a scenario where God declares what would happen if Saul remained, yet Saul does not remain, meaning the future was not exhaustively settled. This directly challenges the idea of exhaustive, definite foreknowledge as understood in Calvinism. If God's knowledge of the future were entirely fixed, He would not state a conditional outcome that never comes to pass. Instead, this passage fits naturally within an Open Theist framework, where God knows all possibilities and responds dynamically.
---
Would you like to add anything else to emphasize your point?

2025-02-18 11:27:57 UTC

- reply

God knew David would be delivered up to Saul. In 1 Samuel 23:10-13, David inquired of the Lord about whether the people of Keilah would hand him over if he stayed, and God said they would. Yet, David left, and the event never happened. This passage shows that God’s knowledge includes not just what will happen but also what could happen based on human choices. Open Theism affirms that God knows all possibilities perfectly, and His wisdom allows Him to respond freely in real-time.
This does not mean God is ignorant of the future but that the future is partly open because free agents make real choices. If the future were exhaustively settled, God's statement about Keilah’s betrayal would be meaningless since it was never actualized. Instead, we see that God’s knowledge includes contingent realities—what would happen given certain conditions—while still allowing for human freedom. This makes God's foreknowledge dynamic, not limited.

2025-02-18 07:56:03 UTC

- reply

Yes, Open Theism holds that God knows all possible outcomes and is perfectly wise in responding to them. However, this doesn't mean God is ignorant of the future—it means the future is not exhaustively settled yet. Instead of seeing the future as a fixed script, Open Theism sees it as partly open, allowing for genuine human freedom and real relational interaction with God.
God’s knowledge is not limited; rather, He knows reality exactly as it is—some aspects are determined by His sovereign will, while others remain contingent on human choices. This allows for true love, dynamic relationships, and meaningful prayer, all while ensuring that God’s ultimate purposes will be fulfilled.
#GodIsWise #RelationalTheology #OpenTheism

2025-02-18 06:40:21 UTC

Open Theism: God sovereignly created a world where the future is partly open. He knows all possibilities, responds in real time, and guides history without determining every choice. The future isn’t fixed—it’s a dynamic story with a relational God. #OpenTheism #GodIsFree

2025-02-18 06:29:16 UTC

- reply

Christian theism is indeed rooted in the truth that God is both transcendent and immanent—sovereign over creation yet intimately involved within it. However, the assumption that Open Theism denies these attributes misrepresents what Open Theists actually affirm.
The God of Scripture is not bound by creation, yet He interacts dynamically with His creatures. His knowledge is perfect—not because it must include a settled, determined future, but because He knows all that can be known and is free to act in response. The idea that He must know the future exhaustively in a fixed, settled way in order to hear and respond to prayers is an assumption, not a biblical necessity.
Furthermore, dismissing biblical descriptions of God’s emotions, responses, and interactions as mere “anthropomorphisms” overlooks the richness of God’s self-revelation. The Bible frequently portrays God as genuinely engaging with His people—grieving, relenting, responding, and making real decisions. These are not merely accommodations to human understanding; they reveal something true about His relational nature.
The false dichotomy of “Christian Theism or Paganism” ignores the fact that Open Theism is rooted in biblical exegesis and a commitment to the living, personal nature of God. If the choice is between a God who is frozen in an eternally settled future or a God who is free and engaged in relationship, the latter is far more in line with the God who walks with His people, listens to their prayers, and responds in love.
#BiblicalTheism #GodIsPersonal #OpenTheism

2025-02-18 06:25:14 UTC

- reply

Dr. White, Isaiah 9:6-7 is a beautiful prophecy of Christ’s coming reign, and I agree that it reveals God's sovereignty and faithfulness to His promises. However, your critique of Open Theism assumes a view of sovereignty that requires meticulous determinism, rather than the dynamic, relational sovereignty that Scripture presents.
Open Theism fully affirms that God accomplishes what He sets out to do—because He is free, wise, and powerful enough to do so, even in a world where humans make real choices. The prophecy in Isaiah doesn’t require exhaustive foreknowledge of every future decision but rather God's ability to bring about His purposes through His wisdom, power, and covenant faithfulness. The text itself emphasizes that God's zeal will accomplish this, not a preordained script of human choices.
God didn’t need to determine every individual decision to bring Christ into the world; He needed only to be faithful to His covenant and powerful enough to direct history toward His intended goal—which He clearly is. Open Theism doesn't deny God's sovereignty but rejects the idea that sovereignty means exhaustive determinism. Instead, it affirms a God who is active, involved, and able to respond in real time to bring about His plans.
So rather than rendering this prophecy unintelligible, Open Theism actually highlights the living, active God who ensures His promises are fulfilled, not because He micromanages history, but because He is the infinitely wise and powerful ruler of all.
#Sovereignty #Faithfulness #ChristReigns

2025-02-17 12:25:04 UTC

Happy Presidents Day!
JK - enjoy your day anyway

2025-02-17 00:04:05 UTC

Exegesis of Isaiah 46: Does It Support Open Theism?
Introduction
Isaiah 46 is often cited as a proof text for divine determinism and exhaustive foreknowledge, particularly by Reformed theologians. However, a careful exegetical examination reveals that this passage does not teach meticulous determinism but rather emphasizes God’s unique ability to accomplish His purposes in contrast to the lifeless idols of Babylon. This study will follow a rigorous exegetical approach—analyzing the historical context, examining the Hebrew text, and addressing theological implications—while demonstrating how Isaiah 46 aligns with Open Theism rather than classical Calvinism.
Historical Context
Isaiah 46 falls within a section of prophecy directed against Babylon. Israel, tempted by the seemingly dominant powers of the day, had fallen into idolatry. The context is one of polemical contrast between Yahweh and the false gods of the nations. The passage begins by describing how Babylon’s idols—Bel and Nebo—are carried as burdens by their worshipers, unable to save themselves or their followers (vv. 1-2). In contrast, Yahweh declares that He carries His people and has the power to bring about His purposes (vv. 3-4). The central point of the chapter is that Yahweh, unlike idols, is active and effective in history.
Exegesis of Isaiah 46:9-10
The key verses often cited by determinists are Isaiah 46:9-10:
"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 and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose.’” (ESV)
#Declaring the End from the Beginning
Some argue that this phrase supports exhaustive divine foreknowledge of all future events. However, a careful examination of the Hebrew verb nagad (נָגַד), translated as "declaring," reveals that it refers to making known or announcing, rather than foreseeing an already settled future. The emphasis here is not on a timeless decree but on God’s active involvement in history. The passage does not say that God foreknows all events in an immutable sense, but that He proclaims what He intends to do and brings it about.
#My Counsel Shall Stand
The phrase "My counsel shall stand" (עֲצָתִי תָּקוּם) is better understood as a declaration of God's ability to accomplish what He purposes, rather than an assertion that all events are predetermined. This interpretation aligns with passages such as Jeremiah 18:7-10, where God explicitly states that He may alter His declared plans based on human response.
God’s declarations in Isaiah 46 must be understood within the broader biblical framework where divine intentions can be conditional. For example, God declares judgment on Nineveh in Jonah 3, but when the people repent, He relents. If Isaiah 46 were teaching exhaustive foreknowledge of a fixed future, this kind of dynamic interaction would be impossible.
The Polemical Purpose of Isaiah 46
A key flaw in deterministic readings of Isaiah 46 is that they ignore the chapter’s rhetorical and polemical function. The contrast is not between an omniscient God who possesses a settled future and an ignorant humanity; rather, the contrast is between Yahweh, who actively shapes history, and idols, which are passive and powerless. The thrust of the argument is that God can accomplish His plans in real time, whereas idols cannot act at all.
Principles of Sound Exegesis in Interpreting Isaiah 46
In analyzing Isaiah 46, a sound exegetical approach includes:
1. Contextual Analysis – Recognizing that the passage addresses Israel’s idolatry and contrasts Yahweh’s sovereignty with the impotence of false gods.
2. Grammatical-Historical Method – Examining the original Hebrew words and their meanings in the historical and literary context.
3. Scripture Interprets Scripture – Understanding Isaiah 46 alongside other passages that show God’s intentions can change based on human response (e.g., Jeremiah 18:7-10, Jonah 3:10).
4. Authorial Intent – Identifying that Isaiah’s goal is to affirm God’s supremacy over idols, not to present a philosophical doctrine of exhaustive foreknowledge.
5. Rejection of Eisegesis – Avoiding reading theological presuppositions (such as determinism) into the text.
Implications for Open Theism
1. God’s Foreknowledge is Dynamic, Not Deterministic – The passage does not teach exhaustive definite foreknowledge but rather God’s sovereign ability to bring about what He has purposed.
2. God Engages in Real-Time Decision-Making – The emphasis is not on a fixed script of history but on God’s ability to fulfill His word within an open and contingent future.
3. God’s Sovereignty is Relational, Not Causal – Open Theism maintains that God’s sovereignty is best understood as His capacity to work within creation dynamically, rather than as a blueprint that eliminates genuine human freedom.
Conclusion
Isaiah 46 does not support exhaustive divine determinism. Rather, it affirms that God is distinct from idols because He acts in history and accomplishes His purposes. A proper exegesis of the passage reveals that God is not merely foreseeing a settled future but is actively working to fulfill His plans in interaction with His people. This reading is fully consistent with Open Theism, which affirms God's sovereignty as relational, purposeful, and dynamically engaged with His creation.
Thus, Isaiah 46, rather than refuting Open Theism, actually supports a view of God that is living, personal, and engaged with His people in real-time decisions.

2025-01-23 01:38:20 UTC

Is anyone else watching this? Season one was awesome, and season two is looking just as good.
https://image.nostr.build/01d49a30de3138f52ca77e5e6e4ab79bfa1311c5fc807c4f3ab2632c3fa946b0.jpg

2025-01-22 06:39:39 UTC

- reply

How do you feel about that now?
#nevent1q…x2ry

2025-01-22 06:38:43 UTC

- reply

He did.
#nevent1q…jgz7

2025-01-20 16:35:00 UTC

Snort isn't notifying me of new messages. I guess I have to keep looking,