Open Theism: An Email Discussion

The following is an email discussion I had recently with someone regarding open theism. She wishes to remain anonymous, and so I will refer to her as "Jane". To avoid confusion, please note that the abreviation OT here stands for Open Theism.

----------

Lindsay: Are you already familiar with OT?

----------

Jane: I know a little about it. I have a friend who was majorly Calvinist and used to be kind of forceful with me about it several years ago, but then a few years later I found out that he had studied and embraced the concepts of open-theism. It kind of scared me at first even though hyper-Calvinism seemed yucky and not like God’s character to me. But as I let go of some of my pre-conceived ideas, OT seemed to make sense on most levels.



My understanding of it is that open-theists believe that God is all-powerful and will make his plans come to pass, but that He does not know what is unknowable, i.e., things that haven’t happened yet that He has not specifically planned.



There was a time when I really wrestled with the idea of God choosing people to go to hell, which some Calvinist friends were really pushing on me. I feel like a lot of Calvinists talk in circles and there is no way to really explore a concept with them ‘cause they say we can’t question God. It was so hard for me to think of God as choosing people’s eternity when so much in the Scripture talks about our choice.



A lot of the passages about 'chosen people' are misread, I think. Like, it seems a lot of the stuff in Galatians is referring to Israel, not to New Testament believers; and the Romans 9 stuff seems like it could be talking about people’s station in life and not necessarily their eternal destination; and in the Epistles, I think Paul focuses on believers being predestined to be conformed to Christ’s image, not predestined to believe in the first place…know what I mean?



But then there are other things that confuse me, like Psalm 139 about all the days of my life being written before there was even one day. That makes God sound like a micro-manager.


----------

Lindsay: I think your email makes a lot of sense, and you sound a lot like I did a few years ago. It's tough to rectify something that is so widely taught (Calvanism, in all it's variations) with so much of scripture that doesn't match up. In my experience, talking with other believers, they'd rather learn the scripted answers to the "problem texts", than actually search the scriptures for themselves to see if what they're being taught is actually correct - it was true of me, too, growing up. I trusted those who were teaching me, and gave very little thought or question to what they taught.



Your basic premise of OT is correct. I boil it down to this - God is free and able. He can write a new song, create a new thing, think a new thought. He is completely free. This is true of man, as well. I also agree with you, Christians, in the majority, do not rightly divide the word of truth (1 Tim. 2:15). They fail to recognize that there are passages that are to and about Israel, and passages that are to and about the Body of Christ; that salvation came first to the Jews, and was including the Law, and was rejected. Then God turned, cut off Israel and grafted in the Gentiles with a grace gospel.



As for Psalm 139, my understanding is that this psalm is about the formation and growth of the baby in the womb. Let's look at Psalm 139:16: But I would also like to look at verse 15: "My frame [bones] was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet informed. And in Your book they all were written, the days fashoned for me, when as yet there was none of them." First, notice that verse 15 refers to the physical bones. King David, inspired by God, wrote of how he was "skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth [a Hebrew idiom for the womb]."

My understanding - King David is talking about fetology here or the study of the development of the fetus in the womb. This becomes even more clear with the discovery of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick. DNA is information which instructs the cells to form a certain way. As I understand it, it's like a computer program of information which instructs machines to perform tasks. [This is a real dilemma for evolutionists, because information is not physical and can't come from the physical world. It would be like a Shakespereian play coming from a rock.]

What King David is saying here is that God, if He wants to, can look and see what sperm fertilized what egg and know many things. Since God wrote the DNA code, He could, by looking in the womb, know what King David would look like at age 10. He could know what David's hair color would be. He could know how tall he would be when full grown. He could know David's basic character. He could know all this because God is the author of the DNA code!

With the advances in the science of DNA, it is not unreal to believe that in the near future scientists will be able to "see the unformed body."

Did God know, while David was in his mother's womb, that David would commit adultery and murder her husband? No, no, a thousand times NO! This was not knowable unless God ordained him to murder and commit adultery. But Peter says that God is not the author of evil. When we say and believe this, we must sit back and consider what we are accusing God of. Again God could not ordain this and remain sinless. If God were to author this type of evil, sin would enter the Godhead, and God would come undone.

In all honesty, I am not sure if that explanation satisfies all of what the verses seem to say. But I wonder if "ordained" means something more like those things that God was determined to make come to pass --> that David would be in the Messianic lineage. God absolutely can intervene in the lives of men, without effecting our free will, if and when He wants to.

----------

Jane: I think what you said makes sense that the Psalm 139 passage could be talking about fetology and the possibility in DNA. And what you mentioned about God not ordaining David’s affair—that’s the kind of thing that I just can’t talk with Calvinists about. Their kind of thinking about God’s involvement in sin is so disturbing to me. It doesn’t make sense that God would cause someone to sin for His glory (which is always what I hear Calvinists say is the reason for it all). I know that He causes all things to work together for good…after it’s already happened. Like you said, God is free and able and He made us free to make things happen.



How did you come to your conclusions about open-theism? Did you read books, study on-line or talk with others with that frame of mind? Let me know of any books you think would be helpful for me to read. There are many people in my circle who are more toward the Calvinist side and some who are just freaked out by the idea of God not knowing the unknowable (which used to scare me, too!).


----------

Lindsay: I understand and agree that Calvinism is disturbing - you don't even have to be an extreme Calvinist. In my experience with those I've talked with, that's the direction they will go in discussion - even if they don't necessarily consider themselves Calvinist. I know someone who would believe that God orchestrates rape because if a pregnancy happened from that rape, and (this person believes) God planned every single life, then God must have known and/or planned that rape. As another example, someone in my circle struggles with serious health issues and firmly believes God planned it all from eternity past. Conditions get a little better - because a doctor discovered there was a needed adjustment in medication - and it's all God's doing. Things then get worse, and it's all Him, too. Makes God out to be awfully schizophrenic - in my opinion. Or I should say, instead of can't, He couldn't - since He did it all in eternity past, right?
Calvinism (with it's pagan roots traced back to Plato, Aristotle, and Augustine) is just so deeply-seated in Christian teaching today that most Christians don't recognize it, because they are taught to read their Bible with that presupposition.

I'm with you - at first the idea of God not knowing everything from eternity past to eternity future, was scary. But the more I thought and prayed about it, the more comforting it was. I know far too many Christians that are completely incapable of making decisions because they are so concerned they won't be "in God's will". It is ridiculous. When you realize, God's will is simply that you live as a holy witness in this world, decisions are much easier to make. No more reading the tea leaves. But I have had "seasoned" Christians say frankly, "I would not trust God, if He didn't know the future." That, to me, is incredibly sad. It is because of God's will - and by that I mean His will to be Holy and Righteous - that we can and should trust Him. One thing that sets our God apart is that He is a triune God; in this, there is accountability for God's goodness (they testify to one another - John 5:31-32). If I trust Him and know that He is utterly committed to righteousness, and He is *able* to make His intentions come to pass, it doesn't matter if He knows the entire future - He doesn't need to know it (it's unknowable, anyway), because He is FREE and ABLE. The CROSS shows us His commitment to good.

Well, how we got started was Brian went to a seminar a few years ago entitled 'Is The Future Open or Settled?' I think he always kind of had some thinking on this, he has always been a fan of Bob Enyart, who teaches OT. When we started looking for a new church in 2005, Andrew had a Sunday school lesson that taught him God was immutable. And that's when we really started talking about it. I think before that, I still was just numbly believing what I had been taught. I then went to the same seminar in January of 07, and it was just so simple to me. He showed the pagan roots of the settled view, and it was staggering.

I have also read some-but-not-all of the debate: Battle Royale X - Openness Theology: Does God Know Your Entire Future? - Bob Enyart vs. Dr. Samuel Lamerson. (a professor from D. James Kennedy's ministry). I know there are a couple authors, John Sanders and Greg Boyd, but I haven't read them. I also have a Predestination vs Free Will Bible study, which I think is really well done. I also would recommend The Plot to you, which is about rightly dividing the word of Truth --> dispensationalism. You touched on this a bit in your first email. I am almost finished reading it, and it is truly amazing.

----------

Jane: I have talked with a few people who’ve said similar things to what you've heard about God's role in rape, too. Their theology backs them into that corner. And while I think we can invite God into the details of our lives (and He can invite Himself, too), I don’t think He micromanages the universe. And when we do invite Him into those details, He does not cause or warrant evil. Still, He is big enough to allow things to be affected by our actions and still finds a way to weave his grand plan into it all. That spontaneity and creativity and intelligence and ability is even more amazing to me than thinking that He scripted every single moment of history. I think some people are comforted by fatalistic thinking, that their sickness or hardship was planned before time began. But the fact that God is able to heal/protect is comfort enough for me (usually!). I remember a passage where Paul said if he were killed and God still had a purpose for him, God could raise him up from the dead to complete his mission.

I know what you mean about people being concerned about God’s will as if it were a point on a map, where in reality it is just living in the power of His Spirit. I like how C.S. Lewis puts it in his Science Fiction book, Perelandra, “The going itself is the path.” So many people are paused waiting for specific instructions on where to go when God just wants us to be conformed to His image no matter where we go.

Thanks for the suggestions on authors/thinkers in this arena. I had no idea that Calvinism had pagan roots. About dispensationalism, have you heard of Clarence Larkin? I have a book of diagrams from a hundred years ago that he drew about the dispensations.

----------

And, that's all folks! I had more thoughts as I was putting this together, but I have decided to just leave this discussion as it was. Further discussion will happen, whether in comments or in future posts. Thank you, "Jane", for your thoughts and your time, and for allowing me to share this with the blogosphere. My hope and prayer is that it is beneficial in showing people who God really is.

~Lindsay