Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Let’s solve the problem of evil > Historicity of Open theism

Forum Quick Jump

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

justinsbts
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 9

Posted 2/8/2002 8:02 AM (GMT -6)

Hi,

I'm new to this board but hope that some positive input can be gained. I have one question to start with:

I'm not a church historian by any means but the Open View of God is, at least from what I've read, been absent for the church's history. If the Open View is viable, what does that make the majority of the church throughout history? Are the church Father's then unknowing apostates, does that mean perhaps Calvin was the heretic? Not to be cheeky, but rather an honest question.

Blessings,
justin

Edited by - justinsbts on 02/08/2002 2:02:30 PM

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 2/8/2002 8:22 AM (GMT -6)

Can't comment now, Justin, but let me welcome you to the family. Jump in. Good question by the way. I know there are several who will help you out.

Tom

pia†desideria
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301

Posted 2/8/2002 8:44 AM (GMT -6)

Hi justin! Open theists think Calvinists are mistaken about the nature of the future. But Open theists don’t condemn past or present Calvinists as heretics or ignorant apostates—we love them as our brothers and sisters in Christ. Your sister, pia

~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
“Peace to the one who wrote and to the one who reads and to those who love the Lord in simplicity of heart.” § Melito of Sardis

Edited by - pia†desideria on 02/08/2002 1:45:58 PM

Modes of Thought
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817

Posted 2/8/2002 8:52 AM (GMT -6)

Yes, welcome.

I think that Sander's has the best response to this. He showed in his plenary address to the ETS last fall that there is no single view of theology that has dominated the Western Church's history. Even if it were, then what of the Eastern? The point is, open theism does not in any way threaten to dislodge the church from its history. The question is whether the categories that "worked" then are still the best categories now. The recognition that langauge is largely metaphorical should help us tremendously. Anyway, what I am trying to say is that "Classical Theism" is not a monolythic coherent system. It only casts a net over many systems that share something in common that "Open Theism" is compelled to call in to quesiton. It is really not different than Galileo asserting the Sun is in the center of the galaxy and eventually the church recognizes this. But what a reaction at first! Or Capernicus and the assertion that the earth is not flat but round, same deal. There are some features of reality that theology needs to come to grips with and Openness is trying to pave the way to recognize that and remain faithful to the Biblical witness.

Tell me how your question is different from someone saying to Galileo, "Hey! You can't say that! Doesn't this call into question the teachings of the Early Church Fathers?" But you see, we still respect the Early Fathers, we just don't lean on their cosmology. Why should we?

"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK

justinsbts
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 9

Posted 2/8/2002 9:02 AM (GMT -6)

I'm definitely looking forward to the replies. On the front end I'll say this: I'm looking for good info on the Open View perspective as I'm writing my position paper on the Open View... on what aspect however is up in the air. Because I've got ample information on the contra side here at school I'm lloking for equal info from the OV camp.

Blessings,

-justin

GregBoyd
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818

Posted 2/9/2002 6:03 PM (GMT -6)

Welcome aboard Justin.

With Protestants who ask this question, I always (tongue in cheek) answer that I suspect most early church open theists belonged to the same yet-undiscovered group as
* those pre-Augustinians who believed in total predestination
* those pre-anabaptists who believed in believers only baptism
* those pre-Calvinists who believed baptism was merely symbolic
* those pre-Calvinists who help to unconditional election, irresistible grace, total depravity, limited atonement, and the perseverence of the saints
* those pre-Methodists who held to something like Wesley's view of sanctification
* those pre-Wesleyans and pre-Pentecostals who held to baptism in the Spirit as a second work of grace
* those pre-Pentecostals who held to tongues as the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit
* those pre-Lutherans who held Luther's view that babies have a latent faith
* those pre-modern day Christians who held that babies automatically go to heaven

and so on and so on...

The point is that, with every protestant distinctive, this objection could have been (and often was) raised when the distinctive was first introduced.

So guess who's sounding very "Catholic" these days?

Doc

"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul

justinsbts
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 9

Posted 2/11/2002 5:15 AM (GMT -6)

Thank you eveyone for the replies, they are very thought provoking (Does anyone know if J Sander's ETS address is available on line? I'm having difficulty finding it).

The initial reason for the question wasn't ment to suggest a moving away from the church's historical grounding. Rather, I am wondering why this is only coming up in dialog now? Not to say giants don't walk among us now but I can't figure out why, if the Open View is so apparent that the giants in the church's history didn't think about this. I understand the argument about Greek philosophical influence but could it have really permeated the churches thought to the extent that everyone totally missed this boat? Didn't Tertullian say, "What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem"?

I appreciate this dialog and the paitence folks.

Trying to get my hands around the issue,

-j

GregBoyd
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818

Posted 2/17/2002 6:44 PM (GMT -6)

[Justin: I am wondering why this is only coming up in dialog now? Not to say giants don't walk among us now but I can't figure out why, if the Open View is so apparent that the giants in the church's history didn't think about this.

Doc: CAtholics response to Luther and Calvin precisely!

Also, when you compare the response open theists got in the 19th century with the one they're getting from many conservative evangelicals today, you can't avoid the impression that some conservative evangelicals are just a lot more narrow in terms of how tightly they define orthodoxy than Christians have been in the past.

Greg

"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 10:56 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual