• 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.
f f f f f Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy A Peer-Reviewed Academic Resource.
“Open Theism.”
f f f f f f f Last modified. www.iep.utm.edu.
[1] f f f f “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. f
[4] f f f f f 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] f f f f David F. Wells, God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God
Reorients Our World, 2nd ed. (Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014), 1.
