[CCWoody]

*** the fatal flaws in the arguments *** ~ my actual words

***If you are going to resort to calling every idea that does not comport with CCWoodyism a fatal sin,...***

Are you intentionally misrepresenting me or trying to lay out some flame bait?

***Our salvation is not dependent upon our understanding of God in the realms of space/time/relativity, but only on our recognition of the sacrifice that Jesus made on the cross.***

xzins, see what I mean about appeals to intelligence and scientific reasoning. The Omniscience of God really can be discussed Biblically.

***Everybody knows that you think that you are the most orthodox person on the planet.***

Is this personal flame called for?

Woody.

[xzins]

Actually, I think the omniscience of God being discussed biblically was Boyd's reason for going this route that is called open theology.

They wished to remain true to a high view of scripture and inspiration, and maintain a "literal" hermeneutic while taking the problem passages of God at face value.

If God said he repented of something, then they wanted to be literal about it. If God said, he changed his mind, then they wanted to be literal about it. If God said something never entered His mind, then they wanted to be literal about it.

But to do so required them to look for new ways to be literal about other portions of scripture.

I think it's fairly clear to me that they were being honest because I'd had the same concerns about some passages of scripture long before I ever heard of open theology.