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]
3
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]3It 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]3The 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.
3
3
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]3Feinberg 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]3One 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]
3
3
Bibliography:
&
Feinberg, John S.3No One Like Him the Doctrine of God. Illinois: Crossway
Books, 2001.
3
Wells, David F.3God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God Reorients
Our World. 2nd ed.
33333333Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014.
3
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy A Peer-Reviewed Academic Resource.
“Open Theism.”
3333333333Last modified. www.iep.utm.edu.
3
3
3
[1]3333333“Open Theism,” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy A Peer-
Reviewed Academic Resource, last modified, www.iep.utm.edu.
3
[2]3John S. Feinberg,3No One Like Him the Doctrine of God3(Illinois:
Crossway Books, 2001), 81-148.
3
[3]Ibid. 90 p.33
[4]33333333David F. Wells,3God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God
Reorients Our World, 2nd ed. (Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014), 1.
3
[5]John S. Feinberg,3No One Like Him the Doctrine of God3(Illinois:
Crossway Books, 2001), 81-148.
[6]333333David F. Wells,3God in the Whirlwind How the Holy-Love of God
Reorients Our World, 2nd ed. (Wheaton Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014), 1.
