Open Theism: What is it and can we even talk about it here?

BenAdam · Jan 13, 2006

Well let's talk!!

Not a place to dispute it, but ask real questions about it.

BenAdam · Jan 13, 2006

Ok to start, quote from another thread...

The belief that the future does not yet exist. If it does not exist then it cannot be seen. It rejects that God is residing in some "eternal now" viewing the past, present, and future in one simultaneous act and believe that God is ever experiencing history with us. As far as God's knowledge and immutability is concerned, here is a previous post on this subject showing my beliefs:

Here is a definition of OMNISCIENCE from the Full Life Study Bible which is a Charismatic/Pentecostal study Bible. The notes were written by the late Pentecostal scholar, Donald C. Stamps:

God is omniscient - i.e., he knows verything (Ps 139:1-6; 147:5). He knows not only our actions but also our very thoughts (1Sa 16:7; 1Ki 8:39; Ps 44:21; Jer 17:9-10). When the Bible speaks of God's foreknowledge (Isa. 42:9; Ac 2:33; 1Pe 1:2), it means that he knows all things possible as possible, all things certain as certain, all things contingent as contingent, all things future as future, all things past as past, all things foreordained as predestined certainties (cf 1Sa 23:10-13; Jer 38:17-20). Biblical foreknowledge does not entail philosophical determinism. God remains free to make decisions and alter purposes in time and history, according to his own will and wisdom. In other words, God is not a prisoner of his own foreknowledge (see Nu 14:11-20; 2Ki 20:1-7 ....) - From page 882

I like this definition (which I think is very close to Dake's as well) because it doesn't put God in a box and it does not close the future to some unchangeable blueprint, except where God has stated certain things must occur. However, my future is open to possibilities. HALLELUJAH!!!!

However, this would not be complete without Stamps definition of God's immutability,

God is unchangeable - i.e., there is no change in God's attributes, in his perfections or in his purpose for humankind (Nu 23:19; Ps 102:26-28; Isa 41:4; Mal 3:6; Heb 1:11-12; Jas 1:17); this doesn't mean, however, that God never alters his temporary purposes in response to the actions of humans. He may, for example, alter his intentions of judgment because of the sincere repentence of sinners (cf. Jnh 3:6-10). Furthermore, he remains free to respond to the needs of human beings and to the prayers of his people. The Bible often speaks of God changing his mind as a result of the diligent prayers of the righteous (e. g., Nu 14:1-20; 2Ki 20:2-6; Isa 38:2-6; Lk

Ok this sounds to me like this... God told Jonah He was going to destroy Ninevah. To cut to the chase, Jonah told Ninevah this and they repented allowing God to not destroy them. Therefore the future was not set... is that right?

JimB · Jan 13, 2006

Okay. To define the field I am offering this objective (I hope) definition of Open Theism from carm.org..

What is Open Theism?

Open theism, also called openness and the open view, is a theological position dealing with human free will and its relationship to God and the nature of the future. It is the teaching that God has granted to humanity free will and that in order for the free will to be truly free, the future free will choices of individuals cannot be known ahead of time by God. They hold that if God knows what we are going to choose, then how can we be truly free when it is time to make those choices since a counter choice cannot then be made by us because it is already "known" what we are going to do.1 In other words, we would not actually be able to make a contrary choice to what God "knows" we will choose thus implying that we would not then be free.
In open theism, the future is either knowable or not knowable. For the open theists who hold that the future is knowable by God, they maintain that God voluntarily limits His knowledge of free will choices so that they can remain truly free.2 Other open theists maintain that the future, being non existent, is not knowable, even by God.3 Gregory Boyd, a well know advocate of Open Theism says,

"Much of it [the future], open theists will concede, is settled ahead of time, either by God's predestining will or by existing earthly causes, but it is not exhaustively settled ahead of time. To whatever degree the future is yet open to be decided by free agents, it is unsettled."4

But open theists would not say that God is weak or powerless. They say that God is capable of predicting and ordaining certain future events because He is capable of working in the world and bringing certain events to pass when the time is needed. Therefore, God could inspire the Old Testament writers to prophecy certain events and then He could simply ensure that those events occur at the right time.
Furthermore, open theists claim that they do not deny the omniscience of God. They, like classical theologians, state that God is indeed all knowing. But the differ in that the God can only know that which is knowable and since the future has not yet happened, it can not be exhaustively known by God. Instead, God only knows the present exhaustively, including the inclinations, desires, thoughts, and hopes of all people.
In open theism God can make mistakes because He does not know all things that will occur in the future. According to them God also takes risks and adapts to the free will choices of people. They claim biblical support for their position by citing scripture where God changes His mind (Exodus 32:14), is surprised (Isaiah 5:37), and tests people to see what they will do (Genesis 22:12).
Finally, open theism tends to portray the God of orthodoxy as distant, controlling, and unyielding while promoting the God of openness as involved, adapting, loving, interacting, and caring for humanity.

Orthodox Christianity

Historic Orthodox Christianity states that God knows all things, even the entirety of the future, exhaustively. 1 John 3:20 it says, "...for God is greater than our heart, and knows all things." Likewise, Peter said to Jesus in John 21:17, "...You know all things; You know that I love You..." God's sovereignty is clearly taught in scripture and His sovereignty is tied to His omniscience. Orthodox Christianity teaches that God is very loving, very involved, and even condescends to our level and interacts with us in a manner that we can understand. This means that we will see what appears to be instances of God changing His mind, testing, and adapting. But, this is all due to God's working with creatures who have limited vision, short life spans, and are sinners. God must work on our level since we cannot work on His.

God and time

The question about God's knowledge of the future is very important because it deals with the actual definition of God's nature in relation to the nature of the future. Is God all knowing about the future or not? Is God existing in the future or not? Is God limited to the present or not? The answers to these questions reflect the very nature and scope of God's existence. The open theists are pushing a description of God that reduces God from knowing all things, past, present, and future, to not knowing all things in the future. God's omnipresence is also in jeopardy in open theism, since some open theists deny the existence of the future and thereby deny the omnipresence of God in the future.

Conclusion

My opinion is that openness is a dangerous teaching that undermines the sovereignty, majesty, infinitude, knowledge, existence, and glory of God and exalts the nature and condition of man's own free will. Though the open theists will undoubtedly say it does no such thing, it goes without saying that the God of open theism is not as knowledgeable or as ever present as the God of orthodoxy.

Books and Websites Consulted.

For Open Theism
1. Books
  1. Boyd, Gregory A., God of the possible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books), 2001.
  2. Pinnock, Clark, et. al., The Openness of God, (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press), 1994.
  3. Sanders, John, The God who Risks, (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press), 1998.
2. Websites
  1. www.gregboyd.org
Against Open Theism
1. Books

i. Frame, John, No Other God, a response to Open Theism, (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P & R Publishing), 2001.

ii. Ware, Bruce A., God's Lesser Glory: The diminished God of Open Theism, (Crossway Books), 2001

1. Websites

. http://www.antithesis.com/index.html

i. http://www.founders.org/FJ46/article2_fr.html

_____________
1. For more on this, please see If God knows our free will choices, do we still have free will?
2. For more on this, please see God chooses to not know the future free-will choices of human creatures.
3. For an attempt at a logical refutation of this position, please see A logical refutation of open theism
4. Boyd, Gregory A., God of the possible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books), 2001. p. 15
5. ibid., p. 24

LittleRocketBoy · Jan 13, 2006

Someone said OT is an attempt to escape from the absurdity of Calvinism and the uncomfortableness of Arianism by creating a third theological path that includes elements of both and at the same time denies both.
I am not sure that is an escape as much as it is a denial.

I trust VW.. and so will listen with enthusiasm as he makes his points.

psalms 91 · Jan 13, 2006

am awaiting victorywords explanation as am interested in hearing this viewpoint although I will have to be convinced to change my definition as I have a firm belief in it.

Diane_Windsor · Jan 14, 2006

Jim M said:
Okay. To define the field I am offering this objective (I hope) definition of Open Theism from carm.org..

The article from Wikipeida is probably more fair and balanced: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Theism

Plus they list books that are both for and against this idea, and has links to some external websites:

The Open Theism Information Site
God vs. God a February 2000 editorial in Christianity Today.

DIANE

BenAdam · Jan 19, 2006

Diane_Windsor said:
The article from Wikipeida is probably more fair and balanced: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Theism

Plus they list books that are both for and against this idea, and has links to some external websites:

The Open Theism Information Site
God vs. God a February 2000 editorial in Christianity Today.

DIANE

It is a good article.

victoryword · Jan 19, 2006

Didn't even know this thread was here.

BenAdam · Jan 19, 2006

victoryword said:
Didn't even know this thread was here.

Father Rick moved it.

victoryword · Jan 19, 2006

So what are the questions. I really don't want to offer lengthy refuations to lengthy articles that dispute Open Theism. However, I will answer any questions to the best of my ability.

victoryword · Jan 19, 2006

BenAdam said:
Ok to start, quote from another thread...

Ok this sounds to me like this... God told Jonah He was going to destroy Ninevah. To cut to the chase, Jonah told Ninevah this and they repented allowing God to not destroy them. Therefore the future was not set... is that right?

You are right there

BenAdam · Jan 19, 2006

victoryword said:
So what are the questions. I really don't want to offer lengthy refuations to lengthy articles that dispute Open Theism. However, I will answer any questions to the best of my ability.

Basically how do you defend it scripturally?

Is is something akin to Schrodinger's cat?

victoryword · Jan 19, 2006

BenAdam said:
Basically how do you defend it scripturally?

There are a few good books on it. Greg Boyd does an okay job in his book, God of the Possible. If you could find a used copy of a book titled Did God Know? by H. Roy Elseth then this is the one I recommend. Unfortunately, it is out of print. I also have a good electronic book by a man named Kent Viklund. If you want it then I will e-mail it to you. Simply send me an e-mail at victoryword@yahoo.com and let me know.

If you want a brief scriptural outline then Boyd has some good ones in the following links:

http://www.opentheism.info/pages/information/boyd/god_future.php

http://www.opentheism.info/pages/information/boyd/open_future.php

BenAdam said:
Is is something akin to Schrodinger's cat?

Not sure what that is. Explain it to me.

Cleany · Jan 20, 2006

wow i dont believe it. i thought it was pretty obvious that the future wasnt "set" and that god can "change his mind" if you will.

i suppose everything needs a name - cool!

"gods plan" woOOooOOoo. people talk about it as if it was a ghost or something mystical and magical. god wants us to be a part of his plan, jesus told us to heal people, not to pray that he will heal people, but he told us to heal. we are a part of whatever god is doing, that is the whole point of christianity.

of course its easier to believe that everything is all laid out. means you can watch the tv in peace.

BenAdam · Jan 20, 2006

victoryword said:
Not sure what that is. Explain it to me.

In brief, in quantum physics, observation changes what is being observed. Until it is observed it is in something of a dual state. You put a cat in a box and give it food that may or may not be poisoned. The cat exists in a dual state until it is observed either alive or dead.

In long, read here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrodinger's_cat

I know we are not talking about observation but the future and I was wondering if this was a good way to think of it.

victoryword · Jan 20, 2006

Cleany said:
wow i dont believe it. i thought it was pretty obvious that the future wasnt "set" and that god can "change his mind" if you will.

i suppose everything needs a name - cool!

"gods plan" woOOooOOoo. people talk about it as if it was a ghost or something mystical and magical. god wants us to be a part of his plan, jesus told us to heal people, not to pray that he will heal people, but he told us to heal. we are a part of whatever god is doing, that is the whole point of christianity.

of course its easier to believe that everything is all laid out. means you can watch the tv in peace.

I like your post and agree with most of it. You and I differ on our understanding of healing, but that's another matter. I believe that we are to pray for the sick (James 5:14-16) as well as exercise authority over sickness, but that it is God, and not us that does the healing (Acts 3). But that is a minor disagreement not worth debating.

When I first got saved I think I was an Open Theist though the term wasn't used back then. When I got around faith people and their teachings on God answering prayer and changing circumstances and wanting an intimate relationship with us, it never occurred to me that the future was settled except as far as God may have PLANNED IT (like the events in Revelation).

Then one day I was listening to a tape by Leon Patillo (he used to be a famous contemporary Christian artist) and he was in concert. Before one of his songs he told the story of how The Father and the Son and The Holy Spirit were walking and having a conversation. The Father says to the other two, "Let's create man." I think he then said that one of the other members of the Trinity, The Holy Spirit replies, "Sure, but you know that they are going to fall and sin against us" and then Jesus replies, "Then I will go down there and die for them."

When I heard the story I thought to myself, "Did God really create man with the knowledge that he would definitely beyond a shadow of a doubt fall into sin? Did He know that by creating man that He would beyond a shadow of a doubt be sending millions of His creation to hell." I accepted this position because I figure Patillo knew more than me. Reading other books (even a number of books by Faith Teachers) settled the belief in me that the future was settled.

But I always had this nagging thing in me that would come up occasionally. For example, after having received prophetic words over me and often God would say "IF you do this THEN I will do this." I would ask myself, why does He always say "if". He knows whether or not I will do it. Furthermore, the Faith Teachers told me that God NEEDS me to pray in order to accomplish things in my life and the life of others. Yet, I figured if God knows the whole future, why does He NEED me to pray. He knows whether or not I am going to do it and He knows how things are going to turn out anyway. Why does He wake me up sometimes at night with this urgency to intercede for someone when He knows already the outcome. I would read through the Bible, especially the Old Testament and wonder why God had all of these emotional reactions to people when He already knew what was going to happen from eternity past. These things nagged me for years. I used to have to force the thoughts out of my mind or come up with logical explanations that satisfied me.

About Four years ago I wrote an article which is now on my webpage about The God Kind of Faith. A friend of mine, Derek Vreeland responded with an article which refuted me based on the concept that God cannot exercise personal faith because He is omniscient, has exhaustive foreknowledge, and lives in the "Eternal Now." I was STUMPED. I prayed and told God that I was willing give up the belief that He had faith if this is false. I am always willing to rid myself of any doctrine that is false. I was willing to remove the article from my web-page. What Derek said made a lot of sense to me.

I was consulting another friend of mine, Joe McIntyre, about this. Joe is the president of Kenyon's Gospel Publishing. Joe told me to look into the Open View. I did but at first I rejected it outright. But then I decided that this was wrong. I needed to keep an open mind. So I started researching it and looking at the Scriptures and the opposition. The OV was looking to be more and more consistent with Scripture. I began to ask God to open my eyes. If this stuff is wrong and if they are misunderstanding your Word then show me. I have prayed similar prayers like this frequently in the beginning. But the more I studied this out, the more it made sense to me - because Scripture just appeared to present the Open View. After about two years of looking into it, I finally made up my mind to embrace it. I think that was back in 2003.

This doesn't mean I agree with everything some of these Open View proponents teach (as I know that they don't agree with me), but this teaching just makes sense in light of both the Bible and as well as a theology of faith.

victoryword · Jan 20, 2006

BenAdam said:
In brief, in quantum physics, observation changes what is being observed. Until it is observed it is in something of a dual state. You put a cat in a box and give it food that may or may not be poisoned. The cat exists in a dual state until it is observed either alive or dead.

In long, read here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrodinger%27s_cat

I know we are not talking about observation but the future and I was wondering if this was a good way to think of it.

I always hated scientific stuff

I'll look into it when I get a chance. You know, Charles Capps had something about Quantum Physics on his web page.

PastorJoey · Jan 20, 2006

BenAdam said:
Ok to start, quote from another thread...

Ok this sounds to me like this... God told Jonah He was going to destroy Ninevah. To cut to the chase, Jonah told Ninevah this and they repented allowing God to not destroy them. Therefore the future was not set... is that right?

No, The future was set. It was Gods plan to lie to Jonah about destroying Ninevah, placing before him temptation to resist going, which was Gods further plan to get him thrown over board and swallowed by a whale just to teach him a spiritual lesson because His ways are not our ways His wonders to perform. After all you never Know what Gods going to do. God just likes mixing things up a bit to make us feel like we are actually being used to make things change so that we dont find out the truth that our lives are senseless. Jonahs repentance was not that of deep sorrow and conviction he was merely doing what had been previously downloaded onto his hardrive before the foundations of the world. So as "preprogrammed" (or predestined)the whale vomited Jonah up on land JonaH preached to Ninevah. Gods ways are definitely not ours.

PJ

BenAdam · Jan 20, 2006

PastorJ said:
No, The future was set. It was Gods plan to lie to Jonah about destroying Ninevah, placing before him temptation to resist going, which was Gods further plan to get him thrown over board and swallowed by a whale just to teach him a spiritual lesson because His ways are not our ways His wonders to perform. After all you never Know what Gods going to do. God just likes mixing things up a bit to make us feel like we are actually being used to make things change so that we dont find out the truth that our lives are senseless. Jonahs repentance was not that of deep sorrow and conviction he was merely doing what had been previously downloaded onto his hardrive before the foundations of the world. So as "preprogrammed" (or predestined)the whale vomited Jonah up on land JonaH preached to Ninevah. Gods ways are definitely not ours.
PJ

Now that my jaw is off the floor, I realize that was tongue in cheek.

PastorJoey · Jan 20, 2006

BenAdam said:
Now that my jaw is off the floor, I realize that was tongue in cheek.

So as not to confuse anyone about my previous post, I was just being fesicious/ fecicious/ fashicous/ ahhh...I was just kiddin'.
PJ

Open Theism: What is it and can we even talk about it here?

Pirate King

Pirate King

Legend

LittleRocketBoy

Guest

Legend

Senior Contributor

Pirate King

Senior Veteran

Pirate King

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Pirate King

Senior Veteran

&amp;amp;quot;I desire mercy, not sacrifice&amp;am

Pirate King

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Veteran

Pirate King

Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency

&quot;I desire mercy, not sacrifice&am