• Analyze Feinberg’s assessment of openness theology.
There are so many different types of “Theology theories” that it is becoming quite
sickening. From reading Feinberg’s assessment, it appears that he is taking a
scientific approach. The openness theory, or theism, was developed in 1994 by a
group of evangelicals who took on a challenge to discuss the openness of God.
“A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God by Clark Pinnock
Richard Rice, John Sanders, William Hasker, and David Basinger. Philosophers of
religion.”[1]
• Discuss at least three theological reasons for agreement or
disagreement with Feinberg. These reasons should not be given as
mere personal preferences but should instead reflect solid
biblical/theological data that support the position
It appears that anything can be a study of theology, such as the study of science
(false God), the study of modern theology, which is a philosophical view from a
secular standpoint given to the human society by men who were so bright that
they are intellectually dumb before the Lord Almighty. Such as Rene Descartes,
whose goal was to get people to see God as a mathematical equation. Although
he was a genius, his lack of belief influenced others to renounce their beliefs in
Jesus and to depend on themselves rather than depend on the Lord. A third
theological reason for disagreement would be Naturalism, as discussed by David
Griffin. He contends the “Theology of Self” knowledge “Griffin explains, two
worldviews were possible with this metaphysical doctrine On the one hand
following Descartes’ mind-body dualism, one could opt for a dualistic
understanding of things.”[2] It is fascinating that this view, as Feinberg writes,
“posit the physical, natural universe plus immaterial human selves or souls distinct
from the material order.”[3] The Bible clearly states that Mankind was created in
the image of God, and God gave him dominion over all that is on Earth for one
purpose, and that is to be fruitful and multiply. Mankind has taken it upon itself to
worship the creation instead of the Creator.
• Does Wells agree with Feinberg? Explain.
Modern society has concluded that Wells is in agreement with Feinberg. The
reason being that they both seem to recognize that above all else, it is God who is
at the center of any and all studies, albeit science, philosophy, Christology, and as
a contemporary thought. Wells discusses salvation and the impact it has on an
individual and his perspective of salvation also. “There is only one kind of
salvation in the Bible because there is only one Mediator between God and
sinners.”[4] Feinberg also makes a similar statement in chapter two of his book.
He goes on to say that “he does not want there to be a misunderstanding
because he intends to make his presentation for the model of God that is
consistent both with scripture and with the main view on God that conservative
Christians have held throughout the centuries.”[5] One major factor that is
different that modern society has noticed is the focus between the two texts.
Wells focuses on relationships, and Feinberg seems to focus on the teaching of
what modern society would call “those Great Thinkers.” Wells said it very well
when he speaks of the second “challenge about the extraordinary bombardment
on the mind that goes on every day from a thousand different sources that leave
us distracted with our minds going simultaneously in multiple directions. How
then can we receive from Scripture the truth God has for us if we cannot focus
long enough, linger long enough, to receive the truth.”[6]
Bibliography:
Feinberg, John S.
No One Like Him the Doctrine of God
. Illinois: Crossway Books,
2001.
Wells, David F.
God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God Reorients Our
World
. 2nd ed.
e e e e e e Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy A Peer-Reviewed Academic Resource. “Open
Theism.”
e e e e e e e e Last modified. www.iep.utm.edu.
[1] e e e e e “Open Theism,” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy A Peer-Reviewed
Academic Resource, last modified, www.iep.utm.edu.
[2] John S. Feinberg,
No One Like Him the Doctrine of God
(Illinois: Crossway
Books, 2001), 81-148.
[3]Ibid. 90 p. e
[4] e e e e e e David F. Wells,
God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God Reorients
Our World
, 2nd ed. (Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014), 1.
[5]John S. Feinberg,
No One Like Him the Doctrine of God
(Illinois: Crossway
Books, 2001), 81-148.
[6] e e e e David F. Wells,
God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God Reorients
Our World
, 2nd ed. (Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014), 1.
