Open theism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Open theism, also known as free will theism, is a philosophical view about the nature of a theistic God's knowledge, according to which God is incapable, to some extent, of knowing the future actions of a human being with free will.

Open theism is a theological movement that has developed within Evangelical and post-evangelical Protestant Christianity as a response to certain ideas regarded by some as a synthesis of Greek philosophy and Christian theology. Several ideas within Classical theism (a designation which is not to be taken as inclusive of all of orthodox theism) state that God is immutable, impassible, and timeless. Classical Theists also believed that God fully determines the future; thus, humanity does not have libertarian free will, or, if free, that its freedom must necessarily be compatible with God's determining actions.

Contrary to what Calvinist polemicists often claim, open theism is not about reconciling free will and the sovereignty of God. Open theism is fundamentally about the character and attributes of God and how the Bible describes Him. Open theism aims to separate any humanist influences in defining God:

Openness is based on God as the Living God. The five most fundamental attributes of God are that He is Living, Personal, Relational, Good, and Loving. These faithfully represent God the way that Scripture presents Him, and starkly contrast with the Greek and Roman philosophical construction of God. [1]

Practically, open theism makes the case for a personal God who is able to be influenced through prayer, decisions, and actions of people. Although unknowing of the future, God has predictive (anticipatory) foreknowledge of the future through his intimate knowledge of each individual. As such, he is able to anticipate the future, yet remains fluid to respond and react to prayer and decisions made either contrary or advantageous to His plan or presuppositions.

Contents

[edit] Historical development

The first post-Pauline concept similar to open theism with regard to the issue of foreknowledge is found in the writings of Calcidius , a 5th-century interpreter of Plato. In the 19th century several theologians wrote in defense of this idea, including Gustav Fechner, Otto Pfeiderer, Jules Lequier, Adam Clarke, Billy Hibbard, Joel Hayes, T.W. Brents, and Lorenzo D. McCabe. Contributions to this defense increased as the century drew to a close. The term "open theism" was introduced in 1980 with Seventh-day Adventist theologian Richard Rice's book The Openness of God: The Relationship of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Free Will. The broader articulation of open theism was given in 1994, when five essays were published by Evangelical scholars (including Rice) under the title The Openness of God.

Theologians of note currently espousing this view include: Gordon Olson, Winkie Pratney, Richard Rice, Gregory Boyd, Thomas Jay Oord, Clark Pinnock, John E. Sanders, C. Peter Wagner, William Hasker, David Basinger, and Bob Enyart.

[edit] Philosophical Arguments

Open theists maintain that some of the classical attributes of God are contradictory and unintelligible. The five main classical attributes are as follows:

  • Immutability – God cannot change in any way. Augustine argued that because God is immutable he cannot even speak in time, using created beings to utter eternal words. [2] Immutability did not allow God to be altered in any way by time or by his own creatures.
  • Impassibility – God is without emotion.
  • Omnipotence – God has all power, which includes complete sovereignty over all things.
  • Omniscience – God has all knowledge, including all past, present, and future.
  • Omnipresence – God is everywhere, or alternatively God is above the concept of space.

Contradictions in the traditional attributes are pointed out by open theists and atheists alike. Atheist George H. Smith writes in his book “Atheism: the Case Against God” that if God is omniscient, meaning he knows the future, he cannot be omnipotent, meaning he can do anything, because: “If God knew the future with infallible certainty, he cannot change it – in which case he cannot be omnipotent. If God can change the future, however, he cannot have infallible knowledge of it.”[3]. Likewise, if God is omnipresent, he cannot be omnipotent because he could not limit his own location. Open theists would again use the same argument here that changing his location would conflict with his immutability.

Open theism also answers the question of how God can be blameless and omnipotent even though evil exists in the world. H. Roy Elseth gives an example of a parent that knows with certainty that his child would go out and murder someone if he was given a gun. Elseth argues that if the parent did give the gun to the child then the parent would be responsible for that crime.[4] However, if God was unsure about the outcome then he would not be culpable for that act; only the one who committed the act would be guilty.

Another claim made by open theists is that the traditional definition of omniscience is incompatible with a real love relationship with God. It is claimed that for someone to have a real love relationship, it must be give and take. Each member opens themselves up and becomes vulnerable. They point out that God, throughout the Bible, is shown as grieving over Israel’s rebellion. They claim that if the future was known with absolute certainty, then Israel could not have freely chosen to rebel and God could not be genuinely grieving, knowing that this was the only possibility. Israel’s actions would have been set in stone a millennia before they were ever born. They would have been compelled by fate or providence to take those actions. This would be the same as a relationship between a programmer and computer. Open theists, such as John Sanders, claim that the only way a relationship can be real is if there is freedom to choose.

[edit] Biblical Arguments

Open theists advocate that the Bible be read literally while understanding figures of speech such as metaphors, hyperboles, and synecdoches. Bob Enyart, in a moderated debate with Knox Theological Seminary Associate Professor of New Testament, Samuel Lamerson, lays out a systematic method for interpreting scripture. He proposes two hermeneutics: NOAH and JONAH:

The New Openness-Attributes Hermeneutic resolves conflicting explanations by selecting interpretations that give precedent to the biblical attributes of God as being living, personal, relational, good, and loving, and by rejecting explanations derived from commitment to the philosophical attributes of God such as omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, impassible, and immutable. [5]

The hermeneutic to prove Openness is JONAH!
Jehovah’s Obvious Nativity Attributes Hermeneutic
Holding her cooing newborn, any mom can tell you her baby’s attributes, of being living, personal, relational, and loving. But the sin inherited by the baby through the father will eventually express itself, and lead to death. And Mary would recognize an additional attribute in her Baby, because she did not conceive by a sinful man but of God as a virgin, therefore she could add to those four attributes: absolute goodness! [6]

In order to defend open theism, open theists also tend to focus on verses that tell of failed or subverted prophecies and instances where God changes his mind through interaction with man. The following is a quick overview of where the Bible expounds ideas that seem to contradict the classical attributes of God:

1. God worked in six day-divided time spans, but rested on the seventh day (Gen 2:1-2)
2. God brought the animals before Adam to see what he would call them. (Gen 2:19)
3. God is uncertain whether they will eat of the Tree of Life after the fall. (Gen 3:22)
4. God repents that he made man. (Gen 6:6)
5. God must patiently wait while the ark is being built (1 Pet 3:20)
6. Satan is willing to wager with God over how the future will turn out. (Job 1:11-12)
7. Abraham challenges God over his promise, and lives! (Gen 15:2-3, 6)
8. God is prevailed upon by Abraham over whether to spare Sodom. (Gen 18:23-33)
9. The angels of God argue with Lot about sleeping in the square (Gen 19:2-4)
10. God learns that Abraham would go to not withhold even his son (Gen 22:12)
11. God is moved by the cries of injustice (Ex. 2:23-25)
12. God agrees with Moses that a backup plan should be prepared. (Ex. 4:1-9)
13. God promised those in the Exodus would reach the promise land, but they don’t. (Deut. 1:8; 1:34)
14. God is uncertain how Israel will react when they see war. (Ex 13:17)
15. God tells Moses He will destroy Israel, but does not. (Ex 32:7-10; Deut 10:10)
16. God tells Moses He will not lead them, but He does (Ex. 33:3-19)
17. God wants to destroy Israel again, but is talked out of it (Num 14:11-12)
18. God sets both a curse and a blessing for Israel to choose. (Deut. 11:26-28)
19. God has faith in the people, that they can do it. (Deut 30:11)
20. God gives the choice of life and death. (Deut. 30:19)
21. God repents when his sets up people that lead others astray. (Deut. 32:36)
22. God promises to drive out the Canaanites, but doesn’t (Josh 3:10; Judg 2:1-3; 3:1-7)
23. Joshua charges that we can choose between good and evil. (Joshua 24:15)
24. God changes His mind about establishing Eli and his sons forever. (1 Sam 2:30)
25. God gives Israel a king before He had planned to. (1 Sam 7:7-8)
26. God had planned to establish Saul forever, but will not. (1 Sam 13:13-14)
27. God repents over making Saul king. (1 Sam 15:10)
28. David believes God can change His mind. (2 Sam 12:21-23)
29. God’s mercy stopped the punishment from completing what He said. (2 Sam 24:16; 2 Chr 21:15)
30. Elijah claims they had two options to choose from. (1 Kings 18:21)
31. God is not always in the wind, fire, and earthquakes. (1 Kings 19:12)
32. God is full of compassion. (Ps 78:38-40)
33. God is limited by man’s decisions (Ps 78:41)
34. God desires new songs (Ps 33:3; 96:1; 98:1; 144:9; 149:1).
35. Heed my rebuke demands God, or else (Prov 1:22-27).
36. The span of your life is alterable (Prov. 9:11)
37. Solomon lists chance as a factor in life. (Ecc 9:11)
38. God tells Hezekiah that he will die, then adds years to his life. (2 Kings 20:1-6)
39. God expected His work towards Israel would not be in vain. (Isa 5:1-5)
40. God’s desire is to be allowed to forget our sins. (Isa 43:25).
41. God declares the future, rather than knowing it. (Isa 46:9-11)
42. It is not God that keeps men from being saved. (Isa 59:1)
43. The people were able to grieve the Holy Spirit. (Isa. 63:10)
44. God predicted Israel would repent, but admits He was wrong. (Jer 3:7-10)
45. Ordaining the sacrificing of children never entered God’s mind (Jer 7:31; 19:5; 32:35)
46. God gets tired of repenting. (Jer 15:6)
47. God promises to repent of what He thought to destroy a repenting people. (Jer 18:7-8)
48. God promises to repent of what He says to promote a backslidden people. (Jer 18:9-10)
49. God is uncertain if the people will repent if they hear his message. (Jer 26:2-3)
50. God is uncertain if the people will repent from a written message. (Jer 36:2-3)
51. God does not willingly bring grief on men. (Lam 3:33)
52. God despises the fatalistic viewpoint. (Eze 18:2)
53. God predicts Babylon will take Tyre, but they do not. (Eze 26:7; 29:18)
54. God predicts Babylon will destroy Egypt, but they do not (Eze 30:10)
55. What God wants, is for the wicked to turn from their ways. (Eze 33:11)
56. God becomes heartbroken. (Hosea 11:8-9)
57. God sends a drought to influence his people without success (Amos 4:6-11)
58. Nineveh repents and God refuses to fulfill His prophecy. (Jonah 3:10)
59. Jesus became flesh, who had never been so previously. (John 1:14)
60. The will of men and the will of God need to coincide. (John 7:17)
61. Some people are just born blind. (John 9:1-4)
62. Man has a choice, and God wants him to choose to abide in Him. (John 15:6-7)
63. Jesus is amazed at the unbelief of Israel. (Mark 6:6)
64. Jesus is marveled at the belief of Gentiles (Luke 7:9)
65. The Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God. (Luke 7:30)
66. They could have believed if Satan hadn’t interfered. (Luke 8:12)
67. Jesus teaches about chance meetings. (Luke 10:31)
68. Bad things happen without a reason. (Luke 13:2-5)
69. God wants to destroy Israel, but Jesus convinces God to wait-and-see. (Luke 13:6-9)
70. Woe! Men are responsible for their own actions. (Luke 17:1)
71. Perhaps they will respect the master’s son, says the master. (Luke 20:13)
72. Jesus asks people to come to him. (Matt 11:28).
73. Jesus predicts the last days will not last as long as prophesied. (Matt 24:22)
74. Jesus predicts he will return in His follower’s lifetime. (Mat 24:33-34; 16:28; 10:23; 23:31-36)
75. Jesus says he wanted Israel to rally to him, but they weren’t willing. (Mat 23:37)
76. Jesus left Godliness to become sin and to experience death, for us. (Phil 2:8; Heb 12:12-20)
77. The Father, for the first time, forsakes the Son. (Mat 27:46)
78. The Holy Spirit announces the start of the Last Days that never come. (Acts 2:14-20)
79. People can resist the Holy Spirit in their lives (Acts 7:51)
80. Paul advises to prevent prophecy from happening. (Acts 13:40-41; Hab 1:5)
81. Faith comes from things that men do – namely hearing and reading. (Rom 10:17)
82. God may return to Israel if the Gentiles abuse their position. (Rom 11:20-24)
83. Love is more important to God than a prophecy. (1 Cor 13:1-13)
84. Your prize is not decreed, but is based on how you run. (1 Cor . 9:24)
85. God changes His mind about keeping the Sabbaths. (Col 2:16)
86. God wants all to be saved. (1 Tim. 2:3)
87. God’s will is that men abstain from sexual immorality. (1 Thess 4:3)
88. Jesus must wait for his enemies to become His footstool. (Heb 10:12-13)
89. God does not pick one person over another (Gal 2:6)
90. If you do these things, your election will be made sure. (2 Peter 1:10)
91. The Holy Spirit counsels everyone to decide to come to Christ. (2 Peter 3:9)
92. Temptation originates apart from God’s decree but from our own will. (James 1:13-15)
93. God very strongly desires that we follow Him and not the world. (James4:5)
94. There is time in heaven. (Rev. 8:1; 6:10; 22:2)
95. The water of life is offered to whoever wills. (Rev 22:17)

– [7]

[edit] Divisions in Open Theism

The open theist movement is primarily split by how many of the traditional Greek attributes one discards. Some open theists, such as Sanders, maintain that God is omniscient to the extent he knows all things, past, present, and all possible futures. Others, such as Bob Enyart advocate that God only knows what he wishes to know, and that God can choose to forget sin as he claimed in the Bible (Isa 43:25). Some advocate that God is everywhere present while others claim God chooses where he wants to be and is not currently in hell.

All open theists, however, discard the attributes of impassibility, immutability, and timelessness. They claim those are the attributes that limit God and his relation to mankind. It is these attributes that are claimed to make God responsible for the problem of evil and eliminate the ability to freely love God.

While some might think dispensationalism is an open theist tenant, there are some covenant theologists (see Covenant theology) who are open theists.

[edit] Critics of Open Theism

Open theism has experienced a strong backlash from the traditional Christian churches. Opponents of open theism include Dr. Norman Geisler, Bruce A. Ware, Thomas R. Schreiner, John M. Frame, and most[citation needed] other contemporary Christian theology authors. Dr. Norman Geisler attempts, in his book ‘’Creating God in the Image of Man?’’ to show that open theism is a heresy and that the traditional attributes of God are true. He quotes Exodus 3:14 (“I am who I am”) and claims that it establishes God’s aseity. From there, Geisler deduces Simplicity, Necessity, Immutability, Impassability, Eternity, and Unity. He also addresses the claims that the Classical attributes were derived from the Greeks with three observations:

  1. He claims the quest for something unchanging is not bad
  2. He claims the Greeks did not have the same concept of God
  3. He claims philosophical influences are not wrong in themselves [8]

Other opponents of open theism claim that the verses commonly used are anthropopathisms (see Anthropopathy). They also point to verses that suggest God is immutable, such as:

  • Mal 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
  • Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
  • 1Sa 15:29 And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.

Those advocating the traditional view see these as the verses that form God’s character, and they interpret other verses that say God repents as anthropopathisms. Authors who claim this can be traced back through Calvin, Ambrose, and Augustine.

[edit] References

  1. ^ Openness Theology - Does God Know Your Entire Future?, Bob Enyart v. Samuel Lamerson http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21711
  2. ^ Augustine, Confessions 11.6.8, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110111.htm
  3. ^ Smith, George H. Atheism, the Case Against God, Prometheus Books, NY. p. 74
  4. ^ Elseth, H. Roy, Did God Know? A Study of the Nature of God. Calvary United Church, MN. (1977) p. 23
  5. ^ Enyart, Bob. http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21711
  6. ^ Enyart, Bob. http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21711&page=2
  7. ^ 95 Verses of Open Theism, http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36670
  8. ^ Geisler, Norman. Creating God in the Image of Man. Bethany House Publishers. MN p. 96

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

[edit] Books

[edit] Pro

  • Trinity and Process: Toward a Synthesis, G.Boyd, 1986
  • The Case for Freewill Theism: a Philosophical Assessment, David Basinger, 1996, InterVarsity Press, ISBN 0-8308-1876-6
  • The Openness of God: The Relationship of Divine Foreknowledge and Human Free Will, Richard Rice, 1980, Review and Herald Pub. Association, ISBN 0-8127-0303-0
  • The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God, Clark Pinnock editor, et al, 1994, InterVarsity Press ISBN 0-8308-1852-9, Paternoster Press (UK), ISBN 0-85364-635-X (followup to Rice book includes contribution from him)
  • The God Who Risks: A Theology of Providence, John Sanders, 1998. InterVarsity Press, ISBN 0-8308-1501-5
  • God, Time, and Knowledge, William Hasker, 1998, Cornell University Press, ISBN 0-8014-8545-2
  • God of the Possible, Gregory A. Boyd, 2000 reprint, Baker Books, ISBN 0-8010-6290-X
  • Most Moved Mover: A Theology of God's Openness (The Didsbury Lectures), Clark Pinnock, 2001, Baker Academic, ISBN 0-8010-2290-8
  • Providence, Evil, and the Openness of God, William Hasker, 2004, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-32949-3

[edit] Con

  • God's Lesser Glory, Bruce A. Ware, 2000, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-229-2
  • Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on Election, Foreknowledge, and Grace, Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware (editors), 2000, Baker Academic, ISBN 0-8010-2232-0
  • Bound Only Once: The Failure of Open Theism, Douglas Wilson editor, et. al, 2001, Canon Press, ISBN 1-885767-84-6
  • No Other God: A Response to Open Theism, John M. Frame, P & R Publishing, 2001, ISBN 0-87552-185-1
  • Consuming Glory: A Classical Defense of Divine-Human Relationality Against Open Theism, Gannon Murphy, Wipf & Stock, 2006, ISBN 1-59752-843-9
  • Beyond the Bounds: Open Theism and the Undermining of Biblical Christianity, John Piper et al., 2003, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-462-7
  • What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?: The Current Controversy over Divine Foreknowledge, Millard J. Erickson, Zondervan, 2006, ISBN 0-310-27338-2
  • How Much Does God Foreknow?: A Comprehensive Biblical Study, Steven C. Roy, InterVarsity Press, 2006, ISBN 0830827595
  • The Benefits of Providence: A New Look at Divine Sovereignty, James S. Spiegel, Crossway Books, 2005, ISBN 1-58134-616-6

[edit] Multiple views

  • Divine Foreknowledge: 4 Views, James Beilby and Paul Eddy (editors), et al, 2001, InterVarsity Press, ISBN 0-8308-2652-1
  • God and Time: Essays on the Divine Nature, Gregory E. Ganssle and David M. Woodruff (editors), 2002, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-512965-2
  • God & Time: Four Views, Gregory E. Ganssle (editor), et al, 2001, InterVarsity Press, ISBN 0-8308-1551-1
  • Predestination & Free Will, David and Randall Basinger (editors), et al, 1985, Intervarsity Press, ISBN 0-87784-567-0
  • Searching for an Adequate God, John Cobb and Clark Pinnock (Editors), et al, 2000, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, ISBN 0-8028-4739-0

[edit] Related work

Languages