"Evangelical society rejects concept of 'open theism'"

By Eric Gorski (RELIGION NEWS SERVICE, November 24, 2001)

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- Taking a stand in line with their conservative core, members of the Evangelical Theological Society have approved a resolution rejecting "open theism" - the belief that God does not fully know the future because people have been given the freedom to help shape it through their decisions. The society was far from united, however, on how to deal with the small number of scholars in their ranks who advocate open theism, which has been called heretical by some and enlightening by others. The issue dominated discussion at the society's 53rd annual meeting Nov. 14-16 in Colorado Springs.

The resolution, approved by about 70 percent of the 360 society members who cast ballots on Nov. 16, states, "We believe the Bible clearly teaches that God has complete, accurate and infallible knowledge of all events past, present and future including all future decisions and actions of free moral agents." About 18 percent of the voting members opposed the resolution and another 11 percent abstained.

The resolution's supporters characterized it as a "snapshot" of the society's opinion that would be used to guide future decisions on a critical issue. Critics called it an attempt to run open theists out of the society and a precursor to a vote to exclude them. Still others complained that the open-theism movement is far too new for members to take a stand on, and that the resolution would stifle discussion on an evolving issue.

Wayne Grudem, a member of the society's executive committee, which wrote the resolution, called it a "gentle nudge" for open theists to either change their minds or "seriously consider leaving." Grudem, of Phoenix Theological Seminary, and others say that open theism undermines the central evangelical belief of biblical inerrancy. Open theism, also called free-will theism, was introduced to the general public in 1994 with the publication of The Openness of God by five evangelical scholars. Dozens of books and articles - pro and con - have appeared since then. The issue caused a rift in the 900-church Baptist General Conference, which in 1999 narrowly rejected a motion challenging open theism. Open theism has found some popularity among Pentecostals, who are drawn to the idea of a spirited give-and-take with God.

John Sanders, a leading proponent of open theism and a professor at Huntington (Indiana) College, has written that "God does not control everything that happens. Rather, he is open to receiving input from his creatures. In loving dialogue, God invites us to participate with him to bring the future into being." Speaking at the annual meeting, Sanders defended open theism as part of a tradition of reform in church thought. He said that evangelicals have demonized other evangelicals over issues such as megachurches, women in clergy and dialogue with the Roman Catholic church, and open theism is "today's enemy that must be destroyed." He called those trying to squelch open theism the "evangelical Taliban."

Bruce Ware of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., countered that open theism undermines the deity of God and Jesus. He argued that under the openness view, substitutionary atonement - the belief that Jesus died for the sins of everyone - wouldn't be possible because Jesus could not have known at the time of his death who would be conceived and live in the future.

Ware, the author of God's Lesser Glory: The Diminished God of Open Theism, said that the death and resurrection of Jesus as part of God's plan would be uncertain under open theism. He said that a God that lacks exhaustive knowledge of human affairs and future events renders God "strikingly similar to pretender deities." Ware called open theism "unacceptable as a viable, acceptable model within evangelicalism."