Open View Theism is a false view of God and human freedom that needs to be refuted biblically and logically. It's a gross theological error invading the church today. However, it is not right to misrepresent them, or any of our opponents for that matter, in our refutations. I recently read the following in R. Scott Clark's Foreward to Murray and Stonehouse's The Free Offer of the Gospel. He is seeking to briefly describe the position and rationalism of the Open View Theists.
It's not;false to describe omniscience as the view that "God knows all that is logically possible to know," even as it is not false to say that "God's omnipotence means that God can do all that is logically possible to do." The Open View Theist assumes that man has the power of contrary choice, and therefore their future decisions are outside the scope of that which is logically possible to know. That's their error. Dr. Clark doesn't describe the OVT position carefully, so it could be misleading. Overall, his Foreward is good and worth reading in addition to Murray and Stonehouse on The Free Offer of the Gospel.
Omniscience is redefined to mean that God knows only what can be known. The future, they argue, cannot be known, therefore God does not know it.There is nothing wrong per se with saying that "Omniscience means that God only knows what can be known." I would not say that this is a "re-definition." What the Open View Theists are saying is that, since God can only know what is logically possible to know (this is true and compatible with versions of classical theism), it follows that he cannot foreknow what creatures will freely (read libertarian free will here) choose to do before they actually do it (this is patently false). This is because they are said to have libertarian free will, or the power of contrary choice (another false assumption). The OVT's want to take the classic definition of omniscience, but import their own libertarian assumptions into the formula so that omniscience does not include future free will decisions, i.e. God does not exhaustively foreknow the future. They are not saying that God cannot know the future. They are saying that God cannot know the future decisions of creatures who possess libertarian free will.
It's not;false to describe omniscience as the view that "God knows all that is logically possible to know," even as it is not false to say that "God's omnipotence means that God can do all that is logically possible to do." The Open View Theist assumes that man has the power of contrary choice, and therefore their future decisions are outside the scope of that which is logically possible to know. That's their error. Dr. Clark doesn't describe the OVT position carefully, so it could be misleading. Overall, his Foreward is good and worth reading in addition to Murray and Stonehouse on The Free Offer of the Gospel.
3 comments:
Hey Tony,
Nice article. I wanna drop one comment, though - I think Greg Boyd and some other OT's I've ran across argue differently. I think I've heard some say that God CAN know everything past, present and future exhaustively, but out of 'love' and wanting to have a 'real relationship' with His creations, He voluntarily limits His omniscience to 'general outcomes' (i.e.- God will win) and a few specific cases of overriding human free will (which Boyd has conceded to in more than one publication). The rest of time, He leaves the 'details' to us.
Oh, and by the way, I don't believe OT folks are believers. I believe the 'god' they serve is not the Almighty, Omniscient, Ever-present Yahweh of Isaiah 40-49.....but an idol of their minds with some Christian terminology plastered over him.
Soli Deo Gloria.
Hi Kerry,
Thanks for the qualification concerning Boyd and others. I'll have to look into their arguments in more detal on that issue.
I am not inclined to think of Open Theists as believers either, at least those who persist in their denial of exhaustive divine knowledge. There may be some genuine believers in their group who are just confused for a time.
Post a Comment