Open Panel Discussion - Open Theism

[praise_yeshua]

A good thing to examine with science, the scripture speaks of two types of seed, and both are derived from scripture.

The character of the interpretation is the seed idea, the application becomes the plant that eventually bears fruit.

In the same way people could ask, why does my soul hunger? why does my soul thirst? why am I depressed, neurotic, bloodthirsty, or starved to annihilate everything? The answer is all in the seed, and the soil it is planted in.

So many people in the church fall prey to these hungers and thirsts that are sinful, death bound, and demonic. However, this should not be so.

Thus according to science, what is the genetics of a good seed that feeds everyone to satisfaction? What are it's characteristics? If we had such a seed, perhaps a parable could be more commonly known for emotional and spiritual hungers alike.

All of theses desired and search is to fill a void that can only be filled by God. This is true irrespective of the seed.

 

[Frank Russell]

All of theses desired and search is to fill a void that can only be filled by God. This is true irrespective of the seed.

The seed really matters though. I live in this question because it's related to an issue I'm trying to solve in the long term.

Because desires are tricky and not all controlled consciously. People asking God to fill a void in them consciously may also subconsciously or emotionally deny God's existence in that part of them.

So in terms of "the engrafted word that is able to save our souls" I'm looking for an application of that manner.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I share your belief but the main plank I'd say of Open Theism is that God does not know all things but he knows only that which is knowable. Or to put it another way It wouldn't be an indication of God not being Almighty for not being in a place that does not exist that being the future.(and that doesn't go to say that he doesn't know some of it that he decided will take place....eg....a divine decree that Israel would go into captivity into Babylon)

That being a judgment God does know that for he already said he's going to do it. So.....outside of some particular decrees according to open theists God only knows that which is knowable. If I'm wrong in that assertion of what they believe I I welcome one's to correct me. So how do you feel about that?

I believe that is a good working definition of what God knows.

I also have issues with an Open Theist view that all things are possibilities. There are many things that are not possible relative to circumstances. Not everyone has equal opportunity nor equal ability.

 

[synergy]

I'm glad you've joined the conversation brother!

I agree with much of what you've said above. I'll give you my penny on Jeremiah. There isn't any "getting around" the fact that what God purposes, is where God, Himself, takes action within His own Character and Divine power to accomplish His will. Which both works against resistance of contrary will and establishes providence. Most Calvinist overstate God's providence. God's providence within humanity is CENTERED completely/entirely around Jesus Christ. However, there are others that share in this purpose wherein they "BRING US" in the timeline to Christ. This is where the remnant prevents humanity being like "Sodom and Gomorrah".

Unless God has left a "seed".... (LXX) Jeremiah was SEED...... Isa 1:9

Rom 9:29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

Notice the word choice again. Seed. Not predetermination of election (that stands only in Jesus Christ alone) but seed.

Jeremiah was seed. God purposed Jeremiah to "intervene" in humanity for the good of God's purpose. Here, you have an irrevocable instance wherein God overpowers all resistance to accomplish His purpose. Which happens periodically throughout the timeline. Which is what God does throughout the "timeline". He intervenes at specific moments in specific ways to keep all of existence "on course".

However, this does not establish that God has purposed evil nor that God has chosen anyone contrary to their own choices.

Some are blessed with being "planted" at specific times to accomplish specific goals. Man working with humanity.

Luk 10:24 For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

This doesn't predetermine a lack of resistance nor a lack of even failure. God killed disobedient prophet "Iddo" in 1 Kings 13.

Those you refer to as seed are those I refer to as elect. For example, many Hellenized Jews were elected by God to be already spread out throughout the Roman Empire so that, upon their conversion, they would immediately serve as frontline Christian workers for the initial ignition and spread of the Gospel. I also agree that God's elect do keep our society from deteriorating down to the level of Sodom and Gomorrah.

 

[synergy]

I share your belief but the main plank I'd say of Open Theism is that God does not know all things but he knows only that which is knowable. Or to put it another way It wouldn't be an indication of God not being Almighty for not being in a place that does not exist that being the future.(and that doesn't go to say that he doesn't know some of it that he decided will take place....eg....a divine decree that Israel would go into captivity into Babylon)

That being a judgment God does know that for he already said he's going to do it. So.....outside of some particular decrees according to open theists God only knows that which is knowable. If I'm wrong in that assertion of what they believe I I welcome one's to correct me. So how do you feel about that?

I tend to agree. I don't think it makes any difference to one's salvation. Also, God knowing all combination and permutations of all possibilities throughout all eternity is something no human can make a call on. Nevertheless, it's interesting to speculate...

 

[praise_yeshua]

Those you refer to as seed are those I refer to as elect. For example, many Hellenized Jews were elected by God to be already spread out throughout the Roman Empire so that, upon their conversion, they would immediately serve as frontline Christian workers for the initial ignition and spread of the Gospel. I also agree that God's elect do keep our society from deteriorating down to the level of Sodom and Gomorrah.

We are close on this. I wouldn't call them elect so as to avoid any sense of comparison of those within God Choice, Jesus Christ but that is only my attempt.....

I'm going to ramble for a few minutes in my thoughts. Please bear with me....

While I believe there are more seeds than those directly referenced in Scripture, I wouldn't try to draw a distinct for anyone else. It is my position that we are our brother's keeper. Thusly, it is not God's requirement to continually overcome our (human race) failures. Our choices impact generations to come.

I believe that apostasy has been at work from the time of the apostles. That Christianity has suffered much more than most anyone is willing to admit because of this. Every generation seems to want to believe they are exempt from the choices of previous generations. I don't see anything in the Scriptures that teach such and I'm not personally trying to be an "exemption" myself. I am filled with regrets because of personal bad choices. Choices I believe have affected others. Though they be small, it is the "small foxes" that spoil the grapes. I believe God is merciful and forgiving but forgiveness doesn't prevent natural consequences. Take for example, David and Absalom. One of the sadist stories in the Bible. The love of a Father trying to overcome the impact of his own mistakes/sin.

I read Acts 17 many years ago and believe it teaches us what God personally has done for mankind.

Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

There is a natural order that built into this life that was established in creation. Many want to see themselves exempt to this order. They are not. We all get caught up in circumstances and natural order. For example, what we call gravity.... is a killer....

God has set limits and defined boundaries. We operate within those boundaries. Such is why evil befalls the righteous.

We things are our "disposal" that will help "change" things. For example prayer. Prayer changes things. The simple act of trust in God to do what we can not do for ourselves. Not only relative to Eternal things but to temporal things. Like protect and bless those we are responsible for. To protect and keep us from evil desires of me.

However, even when prayer is offered, it doesn't always redefine the laws of gravity. I'm not saying it can't. I'm saying that I know the natural law of gravity doesn't always cease to operate.

Not saying this is contrary to anything you've said. Just "talking"...

 

[praise_yeshua]

The seed really matters though. I live in this question because it's related to an issue I'm trying to solve in the long term.

Because desires are tricky and not all controlled consciously. People asking God to fill a void in them consciously may also subconsciously or emotionally deny God's existence in that part of them.

So in terms of "the engrafted word that is able to save our souls" I'm looking for an application of that manner.

Brother, even when we lose everything, it leaves us with what we can not lose or another can not take from us. We still have the commitment and loving kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ. The anchor is Christ. That anchor holds....

 

[Frank Russell]

Brother, even when we lose everything, it leaves us with what we can not lose or another can not take from us. We still have the commitment and loving kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ. The anchor is Christ. That anchor holds....

Different callings have different priorities I guess. Thanks for the 101.

 

[Frank Russell]

Hellenized

Means they liked to eat Mayo.

 

[synergy]

Means they liked to eat Mayo.

View attachment 450

God brings out the best in all of us.

Maybe they liked Greek (Hellenized) Yogurt also?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Means they liked to eat Mayo.

View attachment 450

Heinz is best but I fall back to Hellmans.

 

[Rockson]

I'll be clear where I stand. I have a predictability model myself. I believe time is sequential and God is certainly intelligent enough to be able to predict the future flawlessly given general circumstances.

So correct me if I'm wrong. Would general circumstances be something like this? God looks at a baseball team. Knowing their stats he could make a general prediction . Team A is going to beat team B. That would be a prediction right? And we can agree all people do that. However we at times can make mistakes. We can say a very bad team IS going to lose to a very good team and such still would have been a very reasonable prediction.
We could however be wrong. The unexpected....can happen.

So now let's switch to God. God could make very good predictions based on knowing the players. Would this be what you call general circumstances? Could he however know what the actual score will end up ? ) (9--3?) Could he also tell us beforehand how many foul balls will be hit (25?) and how many home runs? (4?)

This seems be God's way not merely predictions but something greater. A revelation or a revealing something different then prediction. It can only be (at least I'd say) that he saw it all happen watched it, that is .....before it happened. Not by seeing it all happen because of his wisdom in a figurative sense....but no he saw it all happen .......in a real sense.

I consider it this way when we look at a number of things. Peter's denial of the Lord three times. Not 1 times that a prediction might be by looking at the strength and weakness of individual. 3 times goes beyond a prediction. I believe there are other examples as well.

The next question must be asked, Has God ever been surprised? I have to say clearly, that I believe He has.

I believe you're talking about beside the time of Jesus incarnation correct? Assuming that's correct then you would say God's capacity to predict everything perfectly would have it's limits as there would be no surprises of anything.

I'll let that "sink in" with some of you for a little while to think about.

And you would agree with some that might take more than a little time? Maybe a great deal of time? And perhaps the perimeters of what some people's minds allow won't do that or can't do that or however else one might want to say that.

Jesus said once there were some things he could tell them but they couldn't bear it. Some people may not be able to bear somethings. Of course that can be true and should be true....with somethings for all of us....the question is....what things? And what things can one show some flexibility about? We're all on life's journey seeking to navigate ourselves through that.

To change a paradigm of a long cherished view is not always easy . That's why if we do like talking on message boards not to be too frustrated if ones don't appear to be convinced of whatever. Everything one says can be considered to be planted in their hearts....and even years later they start to consider it. These things can a take.......TIME.

 

[praise_yeshua]

So correct me if I'm wrong. Would general circumstances be something like this? God looks at a baseball team. Knowing their stats he could make a general prediction . Team A is going to beat team B. That would be a prediction right? And we can agree all people do that. However we at times can make mistakes. We can say a very bad team IS going to lose to a very good team and such still would have been a very reasonable prediction.
We could however be wrong. The unexpected....can happen.

So now let's switch to God. God could make very good predictions based on knowing the players. Would this be what you call general circumstances? Could he however know what the actual score will end up ? ) (9--3?) Could he also tell us beforehand how many foul balls will be hit (25?) and how many home runs? (4?)

Those are good questions and deserve an answer. I can't tell you that I'm smart (God level knowledge) enough to provide extreme details of what might happen in the future. I don't know all there is to know about God's existence nor His creation.

Ultimately, my appeal to predictability is relative to the unpredictability of anything that has a self will. For the moment, lets limit circumstances to natural order. Gravity, Heat, Cold and etc.... God has designed natural order to consistently produce the same results. (though we certain don't know all of the boundaries and results). There is a consistency to Divine creative order within our natural world. When it comes to something like an earthquake relative to tectonics plate movements, God can certain predict when all the natural circumstances will take place to produce an earthquake. Expand that to an unfathomable scope of the entirely of our Universe. God would know the natural circumstances throughout all things relative to boundaries and circumstances relative to a consistent result.

Baseball games are a different thing. Why? Because results are not entirely relative to natural physical circumstances. I'm a Pete Rose fan. I loved baseball when I was young. One of my favorite things. Pete Rose is the single greatest hitter of all time. To me, no one is better. In fact, no one else is even close. However, he cheated. He admitted that he cheated. (I think he should be forgiven and be part of the "hall of fame".) His actions caused an unnatural and evil outcome. God knows that Pete Rose is capable of doing such a thing. In fact, God knows Pete Rose better than Pete Rose knows Pete Rose. However, there are battle of wills involved. A battle that does not happen consistently. Given circumstances, one person will choose different than another. Even among those that appear in identical circumstances. This is where the "will of man" is innately different than a "machine". In fact, I believe this by God's design. Not predeterminism but "constructionism". God allows man to build as he pleases in this life. In fact, death can be accelerated due to the choice of men.

This seems be God's way not merely predictions but something greater. A revelation or a revealing something different then prediction. It can only be (at least I'd say) that he saw it all happen watched it, that is .....before it happened. Not by seeing it all happen because of his wisdom in a figurative sense....but no he saw it all happen .......in a real sense.

I'm going to seperate your statement here from your evidence so I can deal with the philosophical aspect of this approach.

I've had issues with this approach from a very early stage of my Christian experience. This requires that God only be an observer. I don't find knowledge nor wisdom in just "observing" the choices of another to determine an outcome. This is complicated and I'm not complaining. Just giving you my thoughts. Have you ever watched the J.J. Abrams drama "Fringe". I'm not using Fringe as evidence here. Just appealing to the philosophical idea of observation relative to outcomes.

Also, I don't understand the paradoxical interaction between what God's purposes and observes. This "construct" doesn't seem viable to me.

I consider it this way when we look at a number of things. Peter's denial of the Lord three times. Not 1 times that a prediction might be by looking at the strength and weakness of individual. 3 times goes beyond a prediction. I believe there are other examples as well.

To be clear about my view, God exhaustively knows everything in the present and potentially some sense what happens in the future. Unlike Open Theism. I would call it "The now". "Now" might be slightly different and relative to variants that we do not understand.

Relative to what we all know from the narrative and natural order.

1. Chickens crow. They are very reliable and predictable. Timing is usually "right on".
2. Peter claimed that he would NOT deny Jesus. It is not like Jesus told Peter years earlier that Peter would deny him.
3. In fact, you have Jesus probably limiting what Peter knew for a reason.
4. Jesus knew all the circumstances surrounding Him.
5. Jesus could control His own actions and even the actions of those who listened to Him.

This is where we get into paradoxical circumstances.

1. Did Jesus bring about Peter's denial
2. Did Jesus simply operate in a way that lead to Peter's denial
3. Did Jesus observe Peter's denial "being outside time"?

I don't accept any of these scenarios as being valid nor possible relative to my understanding. I believe that Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him as a way to let Peter know that Jesus REALLY KNEW Peter. Also, the fact that Peter denied Christ actually keep Peter from being punished himself.

In this, you have the innate knowing of Christ knowing the circumstances, knowing Peter, and knowing everyone else and how they would react because He knew all those involved within the crucifixion.

In fact, I'll go a step further. Jesus was also "hiding" His actions/intent from evil "rulers"....

1Co 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Which shows that knowledge is power. Even causation. Men would have acted different if they had known. Not that they weren't told, they simply didn't believe it.

I believe you're talking about beside the time of Jesus incarnation correct? Assuming that's correct then you would say God's capacity to predict everything perfectly would have it's limits as there would be no surprises of anything.

There were meaningful things that happened, less meaningful things and things that didn't matter at all. A storm off the coast of California wouldn't mean a thing in the Crucifixion. Not trying to be crude but a "ant" dying in the blood of Jesus Christ wouldn't be meaningful to the event. (though I'm certain that will offend many people). I'm saying the blood of Jesus Christ that was shed could have killed a bug on the ground by trapping it so it couldn't breath and it wouldn't matter.

And you would agree with some that might take more than a little time? Maybe a great deal of time? And perhaps the perimeters of what some people's minds allow won't do that or can't do that or however else one might want to say that.

Jesus said once there were some things he could tell them but they couldn't bear it. Some people may not be able to bear somethings. Of course that can be true and should be true....with somethings for all of us....the question is....what things? And what things can one show some flexibility about? We're all on life's journey seeking to navigate ourselves through that.

To change a paradigm of a long cherished view is not always easy . That's why if we do like talking on message boards not to be too frustrated if ones don't appear to be convinced of whatever. Everything one says can be considered to be planted in their hearts....and even years later they start to consider it. These things can a take.......TIME.

I generally do not get into these types of discussions unless others will take the "journey" with me. I don't share everything I believe or know at any given time. Though I do tend to talk too much at times. I'm trying to break myself of doing that. I know I bother some people and they tend to think I'm a "know it all". I don't want to come across as being that. You're definitely right here. Jesus was great about saying the right things are the right time. Much more so than anyone.

Yes. There are things it has taken me years to connect. I've told others in the past that I've resisted writing (other than dynamic interactions with others in forums) because I don't feel like I've gotten to point where I will not change in the future. I don't want to get the details wrong. Though I've been rather stable for many years now. Details come into "better focus" as we keep growing. I don't want to get any detail wrong. I should probably give up on that part....

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me and I hope I've be clear and helpful. Blessings...

 

[Rockson]

Those are good questions and deserve an answer. I can't tell you that I'm smart (God level knowledge) enough to provide extreme details of what might happen in the future. I don't know all there is to know about God's existence nor His creation.

Yeah nor do I.

I've had issues with this approach from a very early stage of my Christian experience. This requires that God only be an observer. I don't find knowledge nor wisdom in just "observing" the choices of another to determine an outcome.

Or perhaps God observing isn't to determine an outcome that men determine their outcome?

Have you ever watched the J.J. Abrams drama "Fringe". I'm not using Fringe as evidence here. Just appealing to the philosophical idea of observation relative to outcomes.

No I've never seen that series. Can you explain observation relative t outcomes?

1. Chickens crow. They are very reliable and predictable. Timing is usually "right on".

Yeah they are. But to me for Jesus to get the actual time sequence of events, the three times denial....not once as one might do by a prediction....and the rooster crowing seconds after the third denial....seems like one watching it actually be played out.

2. Peter claimed that he would NOT deny Jesus. It is not like Jesus told Peter years earlier that Peter would deny him.

True...but again....three times in one night.

This is where we get into paradoxical circumstances.

1. Did Jesus bring about Peter's denial

I wouldn't think so myself. That would go to say that Jesus wanted Peter to do this so why discourage him so heavily? I would say it was bad enough how discouraged they all were.

2. Did Jesus simply operate in a way that lead to Peter's denial

Seem to me the Lord was operating in such a way to do the opposite. He told them they needed to pray lest they enter into temptation. We know they didn't not really they chose to sleep. Thus the words of Jesus can you not watch with me one hour?

3. Did Jesus observe Peter's denial "being outside time"?

I'd think the term outside time has been asserted by many. It's not explained what outside time means though it may mean somewhat different then how they visualize it. You and I both I think agree that there is sequencing with God whether in heaven or earth. Time or what we think of the speed of sequencing
may be a different things from place to place. Even with the

physicals universe men of science know this to be true. (time dilation, relativity) the vantage point of the observer would claim their vantage point is KING. One in a ship going to near the speed of light would tell you they moved their hand and it only took one second. An observer watching their live broadcast from earth would tell them something totally an absolutely different.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me and I hope I've be clear and helpful. Blessings...

You're welcome and you too. I think I'll do one more post on this.

 

[Rockson]

I honestly do not believe that measuring time based upon atomic osculation and relative frequency gets us anywhere. I maybe wrong but I didn't see the overall arching need. I believe it might introduce downstream variation that is nothing more than a distraction.

And I believe you're right. Even if it is true the complexity to seek to get it across can still be counterproductive. He could tell somebody something or reveal whatever but yes also add it's unspeakable and not to share it. We see this happened to Paul with some things he saw in heaven. It's not that they would be bad....it's just, it's just as you say can serve to be a possible distraction. Some can get all their focus on this....and not things of real great importance.

Have you ever seen the Keanu Reeves "The day the earth stood still" version of the movie. I really liked the part where Reeves walks up to the chalk board where Barnhardt is working on the three-body problem and with a couple of chalk marks "blows his mind".

Yeah I saw that film. Like the original one better though

Don't know why just the charm of a 50's movie about a flying saucer became iconic, . Kind of a classic.

Back to the issue. Many years ago I really would pray to God about this.....about the predestination or foreknowledge aspects of scripture or the things that Jesus knew things as if he had seen it played out. How is it God that you do KNOW the future?

I believe he showed me and what he did show me has given me peace. (at least to my satisfaction) i'll just conclude by saying Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega and the Beginning and the End and just trust him that he knows the future in whatever way he does.... PEACE. It's been a good conversation!

 

[praise_yeshua]

Or perhaps God observing isn't to determine an outcome that men determine their outcome?

If so, then I don't understand the need for observation at all. It is the desire to present God as knowing all things that causes issue like this.

No I've never seen that series. Can you explain observation relative t outcomes?

Observation allows for patterning and learning. We are creatures of habit. Not that I believe that God doesn't intimately know us. He does. All human beings. Just making the reference relative to a predictability model.

Yeah they are. But to me for Jesus to get the actual time sequence of events, the three times denial....not once as one might do by a prediction....and the rooster crowing seconds after the third denial....seems like one watching it actually be played out.

True...but again....three times in one night.

There is no context of timing from the Scriptures but it is very plausible/likely that it happened in close proximity. Near dawn. (still night) Roosters crow throughout the morning. We call it the "circadian rhythms" and generally very reliable.

I'm just making the argument. I can't guarantee it was exclusively predictable. I couldn't do it. God can. Not that He did. Just saying it is a plausible explanation. I believe it is just as plausible as any other choice. Even more so than others.

Patterning and plausibility can make future events seem completely predictable. I've used this "joke" over the years to give an explanation/example.

Joke..... "My wife is a prophetess. She has a 100 percent perfect outcome relative to her predictions. She can tell you right now when I'm going to take out the trash".... I just say "Yes ma'am".

I wouldn't think so myself. That would go to say that Jesus wanted Peter to do this so why discourage him so heavily? I would say it was bad enough how discouraged they all were.

It could have helped Peter because Peter would have possibly been murdered along with Christ.

Seem to me the Lord was operating in such a way to do the opposite. He told them they needed to pray lest they enter into temptation. We know they didn't not really they chose to sleep. Thus the words of Jesus can you not watch with me one hour?

It is definitely a sign of unconcern from them. They didn't see what was happening from Jesus's perspective. They just didn't believe Him.

I'd think the term outside time has been asserted by many. It's not explained what outside time means though it may mean somewhat different then how they visualize it. You and I both I think agree that there is sequencing with God whether in heaven or earth. Time or what we think of the speed of sequencing
may be a different things from place to place. Even with the

physicals universe men of science know this to be true. (time dilation, relativity) the vantage point of the observer would claim their vantage point is KING. One in a ship going to near the speed of light would tell you they moved their hand and it only took one second. An observer watching their live broadcast from earth would tell them something totally an absolutely different.

Absolutely! Order/Sequence does require them to accurate deal with the paradoxical nature of their assertion.

You're welcome and you too. I think I'll do one more post on this.

 

[Rowan]

Dude! I don't even know what you're talking about. Is there a thesis statement in there somewhere?

I watched a SNL skit this weekend where Michael Myers, dressed as a Jewish woman, mentioned a topic and told the audience to discuss among themselves. Are you opposed to the Arminian-Wesleyan camp? Here is an example:

Thesis statement: Salmon is better than tuna because it is not as dry.​

​

Supporting Evidence. Proof people in America agree is salmon outsells tuna.​

People on this forum tend to be highly ant-Calvinist. There are already too many threads bashing such denominations. Are there only 2 options: open theist or Arminian-Wesleyan camp?

Canned tuna or salmon Are not for me. Supporting evidence is I never buy it either one. Here are some great topics for discussion That are not anti-calvinist.

Examples:

• "Dr. Pepper were neither a doctor, nor a pepper. Discuss."
• "The Partridge Family were neither partridges, nor a family. Discuss."
• "Milli Vanilli is neither a Milli or a Vanilli. Discuss."
• "The Romanesque Church design was based on the Roman Basilica. Discuss."
• "Palmolive – it's neither palm, nor olive. Discuss."
• "Grape-Nuts – it contains neither grapes, nor nuts. Discuss."
• "The Civil War was neither civil nor a war. Discuss."
• "The radical reconstruction of the South after the Civil War was neither radical nor a reconstruction. Discuss."
• "The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy nor Roman nor an empire. Discuss." (This quote is based on a famous comment by Voltaire.)
• "Jamaican Joe was neither Jamaican, nor named Joe. Discuss."
• "The peanut is neither a pea nor a nut. Discuss."
• "Ralph Fiennes is spelled neither rafe nor fines. Discuss."
• "Duran Duran is neither a Duran nor a Duran. Discuss."
• "Rhode Island is neither a road nor is it an island. Discuss."
• "The ThighMaster is neither a thigh nor a master. Discuss."
• "The Progressive Era was neither progressive nor an era. Discuss."
• "Did Truman drop the atomic bomb to defeat the Japanese or to scare the Russians? Discuss."
• "The Mormon Tabernacle Choir is neither Mormon nor a tabernacle nor a choir. Discuss."
• "The New Deal was neither new nor was it a deal. Discuss."
• "The chickpea is neither a chick nor a pea. Discuss."
• "Transitional Romanesque architecture was neither transitional nor Romanesque. Discuss."
• "The internal combustion engine was neither internal nor combustion. Discuss."
• "The jelly bean is neither made of jelly nor is it a bean. Discuss."
• "The Italian neo realist movement in film was neither Italian nor neo nor particularly realist. Discuss."
• "The Industrial Revolution was neither Industrial nor a Revolution. Discuss."

 

[Frank Russell]

Canned tuna or salmon Are not for me.

Reminds me of that whole saltuna was really sprat in the Outer Worlds.