Several posters here seem to me to ignore an important presupposition of classical Arminian theology and of open theism.  (I could probably list some other theologies that also affirm God’s self-limitation, but our discussion has been mostly about these.)  That presupposition is that, in creation, as in incarnation (with important differences) God limits himself.  All Calvinists that I know affirm some kind of divine self-limitation, although they are much less likely to promote it as a crucial theological idea than,… Read more

Someone asked me why I am not an open theist.  I respect open theists for their dedication to biblical exegesis and for their determination to emphasize the personal nature of God.  I am also attracted to open theist as a solution to the problem of evil.  (Which I, personally, do not think Calvinism can solve.  Arminianism does a better job in that it does NOT say God foreordained or rendered sin and evil certain.  The distinction between God’s antecedent will… Read more

For some time now I’ve been concerned about the term “postmodernism”–especially as it is thrown around and discussed by self-identified evangelical scholars.  Very little agreement seems to exist about what it means.  (That’s true outside of evangelical discussion as well, but here I’m mainly concerned about the discussion among evangelicals.)  Thus, if we are not even talking about the same thing, the debate simply creates more heat than light.  My first encounters with evangelical opinions about postmodernism were when I… Read more

Rarely do I intend to use this blog to engage in debate; I see it rather as an opportunity to express my own theological views (or often just musings) and let others debate them.  However, I’m puzzled about some of the outstpoken Calvinists’ tendency to ignore a major issue I raised with regard to free will. To my Calvinist interlocutors I ask: If free will as uncaused choice is logically incoherent, what about God’s decision to create the world?  I… Read more

A couple days ago I wrote here about the controversy over open theism among evangelicals.  I regard it as a sad episode riddled with misinformation, misrepresentation and even, too often, outright demagoguery.  The tenor of the controversy is one thing; the truth status of open theism is another thing.  I was writing then primarily about the controversy.  I believe that, for the most part, it was left unfinished.  The anti-open theists, mostly Calvinists, won the day insofar as they persuaded… Read more

Dear readers, Don’t despair!  (As if you would!)  I will be back.  (Some of you may wish not!)  Today is the first full day of classes and I have much last minute preparing to do.  And my mind is distracted by the thought of getting to know so many students and introducing my subjects to them.  Occasionally I will skip a day (maybe even two once in a while), but let the discussions continue.  I will do my best to… Read more

In the January 9, 1995 issue of Christianity Today I reviewed the then new book The Openness of God and ended by raising a question about the maturity of evangelicalism: “How do American evangelical Christians handle theological diversity? Have we come of age enough to avoid heresy charges and breast-beating jeremiads in response to a new doctrinal proposal that is so conscientiously based on biblical reflection rather than on rebellious accommodation to modern thought? This may be the test.”  Needless… Read more

I have forwarded posts with which I strongly disagree, but I don’t have time to correct every misconception or misrepresentation of Arminianism or other theological systems.  However, I would like to clarify a couple points about classical Arminianism.  Classical Arminianism does NOT say God never interferes with free will.  It says God NEVER foreordains or renders certain evil.  This relates to the issue of Arminianism and inerrancy.  An Arminian COULD believe in divine dictation of Scripture and not do violence… Read more

On Monday (the Lord willing) I will post something here about open theism and the evangelical debate about it.  For now, let me just say that I am very glad to see some of my former colleagues from that Christian liberal arts college (where I taught for 15 years) joining the discussion here.  I want to say for their benefit that during that most agonizing debate over open theism they, my colleagues, were always supportive.  Even those who did not agree… Read more

A common response to my rejection of the term “inerrancy” is “If the Bible contains a single error, how can we know it is God’s Word?”  First, let me say again: It is the TERM “inerrancy” that I reject, not the authority or trustworthiness of Scripture.  AND every inerrantist I know or have read admits there are errors in Scripture as we have it today.  Only the original autographs were inerrant in the strictest sense.  What I want is an… Read more