Open Theism

[Philip]

Anyone familiar with this? It strikes me as heretical.

[MariaRegina]

Theism is considered to be heretical because it denies the Holy Trinity.

[MariaRegina]

From: http://www.antithesis.com/features/open-theism.html

In its redefinition of the nature of divine providence, open theism adjusts the entire picture of God's sovereignty and involvement in our lives. Open theism's denial of exhaustive divine foreknowledge provides the basis for the major lines of difference between the openness view and all versions of classical theism, including any other version of Arminianism. The implications of denying that God knows what the future holds are enormous. It is incumbent upon us to take this proposal seriously and weigh the evidence...

No wonder all the Baptists are up in arms against Open Theism.

[Maximus]

Sounds a bit like a modified Pelagianism.

Isn't that kind of what Rabbi Kushner gets around to in his book, When Bad Things Happen to Good People ?

I think it amounts to a poor attempt to cope with the problem of evil.

[II Paradox II]

Anyone familiar with this? It strikes me as heretical.
Open Theism is the belief that God cannot know the future when it depends on the actions of free creatures (because they don't exist yet to know). God can have a sort of middle knowledge in this view, but it amounts to God's infinite ability to guess very well, not the sort of all-knowing of contingent events that Molina had in mind.

The best way to think about it is that it is not so much a theory about the nature of God per se, but a theory about the nature and metaphysics of free-will. The key idea in Open Theism is that the free actions of any creature do not exist as objects of knowledge till they are done. Ergo - God cannot know them because they don't exist yet.

IMHO - it is definitely a heresy. I would imagine that most everyone on these boards would agree with that sentiment, *Editted by Philip*

[Patristic]

Open theism is similar to Molinism, which I am quickly becoming fascinated with, but that is another story altogether, but does contain some vast fundamental differences which separate the two. Several of today's prominent open theist's used to be proffessed Molinist's, but it makes me wonder how much they understood Molinism to begin with. Most opem theists adhere to an A theory of time and believe that God is temporal, because He sovereignly chooses to be so. Thus, God cannot know the future extensively because the future has not occurred and is not able to be known. Instead of allowing for would counterfactuals and middle knowledge as Molinist's do which allows God to forecast the future perfectly and plan accordingly, Open Theist's argue for might counterfactuals where God knows every person so well that he can accurately forecast and predict what is going to happen. Open theist's also argue that the future is partially defined and partially open, and therefore they believe that the verses of Scripture saying God changes His mind and repents are not anthropomorphisms, but actually describe God changing His mind in those rare instances where His predictive power was not correct.

[Philip]

Patristic,

Could you recomend some reading material?

[Patristic]

Philip,

Here is Greg Boyd's website which has a lot of good material for starters.
http://www.gregboyd.org/

As for books I think Boyd's God of the Possible is good, as well as Clark Pinnock's, The Openness of God, and John Sander's book, The God who Risks.

[Maximus]

Patristic -

Glad to see you here.

Say, have you read Jaroslav Pelikan's The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine or any of its individual five volumes?

If you have not, I think Chapter 6 of Volume 1 ( Volume 1 - The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600) ) would greatly interest you. It is entitled "Nature and Grace" and includes a discussion of the path the Church carefully trod between the extremes of Pelagianism and the fatalism implicit in some of what St. Augustine wrote. There are some excellent references to the works of Sts. John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins, and Faustus of Riez refuting Augustinist fatalism.

As a former Calvinist, I think you would really enjoy it. ;)

[Patristic]

Thanks for the recommendations Maximus, I know my local library has a copy of that book so I should be able to read that particular chapter.