This book is a critique of Clark Pinnock’s collection of five essays called, “The Openness of God.” This series of chapters critiques this book chapter by chapter. It would be best if the reader had Pinnock’s book in front of them while reading. The Openness Theory states that because we have libertarian free will, not only are the five points of Calvinism false, but the traditional attributes of God, omniscience and omnipotence are also false.
In order to leave man free to contradict his eternal purposes God does not override man’s freewill and has limited both his power and his knowledge. In fact, God does NOT know anything in the future which is dependent on a human free will choice. His power to alter the course of events is likewise curtailed.
Preface and Index of Chapters and Topics
Chapter 1: What Is The New Freewill Theism?
Chapter 3: Historical Reconsiderations
Chapter 4: Clark Pinnock on Theology
Chapter 5: Philosophical Implications
Chapter 7: SOCINIANISM AND THE LIBERAL DELUSION
Finally, I’m beginning to understand the problem with Pinnock. Thanks for clearing up the controversy and explaining the basic differences.
Thank you. The polemics were more than enough.
OV theologians are dangerously teetering towards process theology. I can’t believe they’d go so far criticizing Greek thought while they overlook the same Greek influence on human autonomy & free will.
Pinnock is quite correct. I don’t see where you invalidated his arguments at all.
And Calvinism is not only incorrect, it is all absurd and even wicked, because it posits a most cruel fatalism.
Your confession that you don’t understand my objections to Dr. Pinnock is noted. Your statement that you think something called “Calvinism” is fatalistic shows you don’t understand either Calvinism or fatalism. Try reading my book No Place For Sovereignty available at BookFinder.com for less than $10 used, and if you have any rational objections beyond mere denial, I would be glad to respond.
My objection is that the scriptures, from cover to cover, describe God as an engaged person, rather than a static person. God doesn’t merely eminate, as Calvinism suggests. He expresses his sovereignty, not by *dictating* men’s actions but by judging them. For example yours – your actions. Those are all your own. You give account, he passes sentence accordingly. He didn’t force you to be what you are. See?