Tag Archives: open theism

Revisiting free will, in conversation with Robert Picirilli (1)

Posted on August 29, 2018

A four-way conversation Among the theological decisions we must make if we are to have a theology and practice which both have an inner coherence, one of the most far reaching is our choice of model regarding God’s work in the world. How we understand the nature of the freedom God has given to his moral creatures is a key factor in that decision. This is a matter I have studied and ruminated about for … Continue reading →

Posted in Divine Knowledge, Providence, Theology Proper | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

My compatibilist model: a response to some questions

Posted on July 30, 2015

John Johnson wrote a lengthy comment on my post responding to Jerry Walls and my compatibilist proposal. He raises some substantive questions and I think it better to deal with them in another post rather than to reply in a lengthy comment or a number of smaller comments. Because John’s questions are of a sort often raised to positions like mine, I think they deserve careful consideration. 1.  If God is meticulously in control, why … Continue reading →

Posted in Divine Knowledge, Providence, Theology Proper | Tagged , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Dallas Willard and open theism

Posted on May 15, 2013

I was saddened by the death of Dallas Willard at what looks like a relatively young age (77) from my present perspective. But he made a great contribution to the world during his life. I am one of the many who were informed, inspired, and challenged by his writings and by his godly example as a fine scholar, a brilliant teacher, and a faithful and humble follower of Jesus. As I have read tributes to Willard … Continue reading →

Posted in Theology Proper | Tagged , , , | 8 Comments

Calvinism, Molinism, Arminianism, and Open Theism: monergism/synergism at the macro and micro levels.

Posted on February 7, 2013

Last November, I linked to a post by Roger Olson in which he accepted Open Theism as an option within Arminianism but rejected Molinism because he viewed it as a form of determinism. Initially, I agreed with Roger about Open Theism, but I disagreed with him about Molinism. After further thought, I proposed a more nuanced understanding, in which Arminianism, Open Theism, and Molinism are all distinct forms of synergism. Earlier this week, I mentioned … Continue reading →

Posted in Theology Proper | Tagged , , , , , | 11 Comments

Responses to Boyd’s open theist model of providence

Posted on December 13, 2012

 The questions that expose the incoherence of the neo-Molinist account of divine providence . . . establish that the God of open theism is an ambivalent and arbitrary warrior who cannot be trusted to rule in every situation in a way that minimizes evil and maximizes good for his creatures. (Helseth, 222) Molinism [handles the problem of evil better than open theism] for God permits horrible evils only in view of morally sufficient reasons, whereas … Continue reading →

Posted in Books, Providence | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Boyd’s open theist model of providence

Posted on December 6, 2012

            We come now to the fourth model in Four Views on Divine Providence, as Gregory Boyd puts forward his understanding as an open theist.  Gregory A. Boyd’s model of providence Christocentric criteria proposed for assessing models of divine providence Boyd posits that Jesus is the key to understanding the nature of God’s governance in the world and so he identifies four christocentric criteria by which models of providence should … Continue reading →

Posted in Books, Providence, Theology Proper | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Further thoughts concerning Molinism and Arminianism

Posted on November 13, 2012

A few days ago, I responded to Roger Olson’s opinion that Open Theism is a form of Arminianism but Molinism is not. I’ll wrap that conversation up with these citations of our further conversation in the comment thread of Roger’s post, particularly regarding Molinism. Roger wrote: Thanks, Terry. I don’t consider Greg Boyd a Molinist. His “might counterfactuals” are not at all what traditional Molinism/middle knowledge claims. His “neo-Molinism” is not, IMHO, any version of … Continue reading →

Posted in Theology - General | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Are open theism and Molinism forms of Arminian theology?

Posted on November 10, 2012

Roger Olson has addressed an interesting question: are open theism and Molinism forms of Arminianism or not? He thinks that open theism is but Molinism is not. I agree with Roger Olson that open theism is a sub-category of Arminian theology but I disagree with his assessment that Molinism does not belong there. Here is the slightly edited comment I wrote on his blog post (though it has not yet been approved there).  I speak … Continue reading →

Posted in Theology - General | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Restorationist and Open Theist responses to a determinist model of providence

Posted on August 3, 2012

I have described and interacted with W. L. Craig’s Molinist response to Paul Helseth’s omnicausal (determinist) model, and now we’ll consider the other two responses presented in Four Views on Divine Providence. Ron Highfield’s response Ron Highfield, representing what Dennis Jowers calls a “Restorationist” position, notes that his view and Helseth’s view are closer to one another than to either of the other two positions. But Highfield attributes his “fundamental agreement with Helseth’s view,” not … Continue reading →

Posted in Books, Providence | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments