Ricky asks, “Can you write an answer to Open Theology? I’m looking to answer a friend who hold to this heresy.”
I prefer the term Open Theism. We are all to be like the Bereans of Acts 17:11 who searched the Scriptures daily to see if the teaching they were hearing from Paul was correct. If Open Theism meant being open to God’s Word, I’d be all for it.
Unfortunately, Open Theism means something far different from being open to what God is saying in His Word.
The One who is open in Open Theism is God, not humans. This view says that God does not know the future fully. He knows what He will do. But since humans are free moral agents, He cannot and does not know what they will do. Open Theists say that the future is partially, but not fully, known by God.
Here is how GotQuestion.org defines it (see here):
“Open theism,” also known as “openness theology,” the “openness of God,” and “free will theism,” is an attempt to explain the foreknowledge of God in relationship to the free will of man. The argument of open theism is essentially this: human beings are truly free; if God absolutely knew the future, human beings could not truly be free. Therefore, God does not know absolutely everything about the future. Open theism holds that the future is not knowable. Therefore, God knows everything that can be known, but He does not know the future.
Greg Boyd is a pastor who has promoted Open Theism. His book Letters from a Skeptic, defending Open Theism, has been an international best seller. He has a website called reknew.org. I’ve read several of the articles there.
Boyd holds to annihilationism, meaning that those who don’t come to faith will cease to exist (see here). While some Open Theists believe in annihilationism, others believe in Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT). The two views are not connected.
Open Theists tend to reject Lordship Salvation, which requires commitment, surrender, and obedience in order to receive everlasting life. At least they do so formally.
However, most Open Theists believe in a softer form of Lordship Salvation. They say that repentance, understood as turning from sins, is a component of faith and is required for salvation. They try to eliminate the charge that they believe in works salvation by claiming that repentance is not a work.
They also say that perseverance in good works is the guaranteed result of the new birth. In this way, most Open Theists backload the gospel and base their assurance partly on the promise of everlasting life to the believer and partly on their continued good works.
There are four major reasons why Open Theism is bad:
- Open Theism rejects the inerrancy of Scripture since many prophecies are supposedly guesses by God rather than guarantees of what will happen.
- It backloads the gospel and bases assurance at least partly on good works.
- It requires turning from sins in order to be saved.
- Open Theism essentially rejects God’s sovereignty, immutability, and omniscience. In this view, God is unable to prevent humans from committing terrible acts because He does not learn of their terrible acts until after the fact.
I found an excellent explanation and critique from evidenceunseen.com (see here).
Open Theism sounds good to many people. But it is a dangerous form of false teaching.
