Fienberg highlights openness theology as one that attempts to “deify man or
humanize God.”1 In a society that has moved closer to the assumption of “if it
feels good it must surely be good”, there is the ever-growing problem of
having no established standard from which to compare. Feinberg describes
Descartes’ involvement in this domino effect of stripping away society’s trust in
the biblical standard of the day by moving the origin of thought from that of
God, to that of human consciousness. While looking at the standard of self for
very long at all, we quickly realize human’s ability to “misinterpret and
misrepresent data”.2 Tim Keller, in his book, Preaching, highlights the fickle
nature of self and how easily our identity is influenced. Keller explain, an
Anglo-Saxon man living centuries ago would have had at the forefront of his
thinking and behavior the attempts to match the standard of his culture, this
being the display of a conqueror and a valiant triumphant man. Quickly
stomping any opposition both in war and in public would have been perceived
as wonderful qualities to be revered in this society. If this same warrior were
to struggle with same-sex attraction, he would most certainly not identify with
this behavior. The valiant warrior aspects of this man would those he projected
and identified with. Fast forward to present day placing this f young man in his
prime with the same tendencies would hopefully seek anger management and
likely identify with or as his sexual desires.3 In this scenario, a few of the
variables of era and culture are seen to drastically shift the standard. To make
the open theological standpoint even more slippery, the age of a manner of
thinking seems to have some influence on the accepted establishment of it
being truth. ‘New’ has become the prerequisite of acceptable and ‘old’ should
prompt the self-instigation of change.
Open theology also promotes individual liberty based on the assumption that
humanity is fundamentally good. This belief claims that humans, if left to
manage themselves, will make their environment better. The scientific
discoveries of the recent past are used as evidence in this claim.4
Although many great advances in medicine and science have been
accomplished by humans, we must look at the drivers that have made these
possible in the world we know today. The promotion of the gospel is most to
blame for the establishment of schools and societal structures that make
education more available to the surrounding population. Education made way
for science and science provided the advancements in medicine. We must also
look at the motivation of individuals to broadcast these benefits to others
around the world. Not all those that go out of their way to travel great
distances to help others are Christians, but the motivation to devote one’s self
to the benefit of stranger is rarely found to be within one’s self.
Well agrees with the belief that truth cannot be found within self, stating, “Our
culture says we must go into ourselves to know God”5 and “How is it that our
culture may get in our way of knowing God as he has revealed himself to
be?”6 Wells expounds on the deeper factors of internal self, agreeing that there
is a subjective portion of the gospel that is then experienced and known to be
true at the core of our internal being. This alignment is truly a renewal and
transformation, an internal experience.7
1 Feinberg, John, S. No One Like Him: The Doctrine of God. (Wheaton: Crossway,
2006). 82.
2 Ibid., 87.
3 Timothy Keller. Preaching: Communicating Faith in an Age of Skepticism.
(Viking Press, 2015). 320.
4 Feinberg, Doctrine of God. 92.
5 Wells, David, F. God in the Whirlwind: How the Holy Love of God Reorients Our
World. (Crossway,2014). 18.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid., 17.
