Open Theism Discussion Board

No challenge or disrespect intended at all, rsirkel. I was actually very excited to see someone referencing this circle of scholars. I have found them extremely fascinating, and I can't tell you how glad I am to have come across them. I've learned a lot by working with some of their ideas.

By "dogmatic," I was basically referring to an "it is absolutely impossible that I could be wrong" vibe or, at the very least, triumphalistic tone. I say this particularly of their understanding of the faith/reason relationship, but I think I could say it of some of their theological positions as well. Again, I haven't read Hays or Martyn, so I certainly won't tread those waters. But some (I should have qualified earlier) of the authors I referenced are so staunchly against the possibility of there being any validity to "natural reason" (therefore "presuppositionalist" in my usage), that they're even willing to call first principles of logic cognitive constructions of the West. I may be misunderstanding them, but this is what I've gathered. It's admittedly postmodern, and the implementation of postmodern "logic," semantics, and cognitive constructivism seems to me to guarantee outright that no one can threaten one's position with argumentation. But I could be off base here. I'm no scholar.

I'm in a weekly discussion group with about 10 guys, two of whom (directing our study) are thorougly read, devoted followers of these postliberals I've mentioned. We've been discussing them. The pastor leading our study even talks with some of them once in awhile. Despite my mad respect for the tremendous intelligence of the hardline postliberals in my discussion group, in my experience the degree of their presuppositionalism commits them to a completely unfalsifiable position. I can't even ask a critical question of this theological camp without being written off a priori as some sort of product of "modernity." I really like their ecclesiology, so we have enough in common to enjoy our dialogue very much. But I don't even bother challenging them in any way that could be considered "philosophical." They've set up their position to be completely unassailable. But maybe Hays and Martyn are different. I don't know, to be quite honest. I just know that the authors we discuss cite the two of them frequently.

Side note: I was at Woodland Hills this weekend and heard Greg's Sunday morning sermon "Why Did Jesus Have to Die." Just about brought me to freakin' tears. Thank God for this brother's ability to remind us of the love of our triune God. This was the first time I've ever heard him speak. *I could have passed on the worship though. A bit distracting (and this is even coming from the former guitar player of the now defunct Christian rock band 38th Parallel).

Respectfully,

Shane