Posted on 01/03/2005 8:18:33 AM PST by kiriath_jearim
Open or Closed Case? Controversial theologian John Sanders on way out at Huntington. By Stan Guthrie | posted 12/22/2004
While John Sanders and the Board of Trustees at Huntington College in Indiana disagree on whether God exhaustively knows the future, they agree that his days as a theology professor at the evangelical school are running out. The issue, according to both Sanders and G. Blair Dowden, the college's president, is not Sanders' belief in open theology, but his notoriety in advocating the doctrine. Both acknowledged that others on the faculty hold the same open theology views.
"You can be an open theist," Sanders told CT. "You just can't be a well-known one. That makes this a very interesting case."
After an executive session of the board was held in October, Dowden told members of the faculty that there "was very little support for John's continued employment at Huntington." Neither Sanders nor Dowden expect him back for the 2005-2006 academic year, which begins next fall. Dowden told ct that while the controversy is "directly related" to open theism, there is no requirement for professors on the issue.
"Not at all," Dowden said. "We have some other faculty who are open theists, but they're not teaching theology or Bible. It's not a litmus test."
Sanders, who has taught at the school of about 1,000 students for seven years, has been a focus of controversy over open theism for the past four years, he said. In November 2003, Sanders narrowly avoided being expelled from the Evangelical Theological Society over his beliefs. Some society members believe open theology violates the society's commitment to scriptural inerrancy.
Huntington removed Sanders from the tenure track over the controversy, but school officials attempted to give him some financial security by signing him to three-year rolling contracts, automatically renewable annually, unless the administration or board says No. In the event Sanders were to be dismissed, he would receive payment for the balance of the contract.
Sanders told ct he expects to be relieved of his position shortly, and that Dowden has "made it clear that my contract will not be renewed after the 2004-5 academic year." Sanders said that he is looking into other teaching positions and research grants, but that he has no other options waiting in the wings right now.
Earlier reports in ct and the Chronicle of Higher Education that Sanders had been "fired" were inaccurate. Dowden, who called Sanders a "brilliant scholar" and "excellent teacher," has been a defender of Sanders.
"John has done everything we have asked of him," Dowden said. But Dowden said that the United Brethren in Christ, which sponsors the school, "finds open theism troubling—some [leaders find it] very troubling."
Dowden added that academic freedom, while important, is not absolute. "For all Christian colleges, academic freedom is bounded in some way."
Sanders said the school is not following its own guidelines. "I do believe that the right to publish and academic freedom statements that the professors actually are working under are being violated," Sanders said. "They are being trodden upon."
Some students at the school are upset. Joni Michaud, a senior history major who is a leader in a student group supporting Sanders, said the controversy is "a case study in academic freedom." The group meets weekly to discuss strategy, has sent letters supporting Sanders to the board, and is seeking to raise awareness among other students. Michaud said the treatment of Sanders violates the school's statements lauding the "benefits of controversy" in an academic setting.
"If Dr. Sanders is indeed fired, I will graduate with a much lowered opinion of the institution," said Michaud, a pre-law major. "I will probably not make any financial contribution, and I will discourage people from attending."
Such talk is no doubt troubling to administrators, who have announced a freeze in tuition rates for the 2005-2006 academic year. Huntington College, to be renamed Huntington University in mid-2005, says the annual U.S.News & World Report survey of colleges consistently ranks it as one of the top comprehensive colleges in the Midwest.
Dowden said the board will next meet January 19-23, and the fate of Sanders could be formally decided then.
[Stan Guthrie is senior associate news editor for Christianity Today]
http://www.carm.org/open.htm
Open theism, also known as free will theism and openness, is the teaching that God does not know all things. That is, He does not know the free will choices that people will make in the future because God either chooses not to know or because the future isn't knowable.
Is this biblical? What are the ramifications of such a teaching? Is this a dangerous movement? Does it exalt God? Read and find out why open theism is in error and is potentially very dangeous.
Your comments eagerly invited. :-)
Sounds like something Unitarians cooked up.
If God does know our free will choices and all the future ramifications, does allowing them to happen, mean He is tacitly giving His approval, and if He does know these results, is it truly free will?
If you define open theism correctly, and I assume you do, then it's clearly heretical by any traditional Christian (or Jewish) standards, Catholic or Protestant.
The usual view (except for Calvinists, who allow little or no room for free will) is that God knows everything, but that His foreknowledge of what an individual will do nevertheless does not FORCE him to do it. The individual still acts freely, his will enabled by God's prevenient grace.
Is a slave free ? We are slaves to sin or slaves to Christ.
Romans
11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad–in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls–she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”[d] 13Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”[e]
14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f] 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
Special rules apply when you're teaching theology. There is room for theological exploration in areas where doctrine has not yet been defined. But ultimately there must be boundaries that can't be crossed. And a church has the right to set those boundaries.
"Academic freedom" is getting to be a tiresome refrain and tedious defense for theological shenanigans.
???
Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants for God. 1 Peter 2:16
The teaching that God does not know the future is interestingly developed in Whitehead's thought. See especially Process and Reality which I read and failed to understand some 30 years ago. It seems to me that what Peter says about God's relation to time suggests that what we call the future is part of God's "now".
If I were going to work on this I'd re-read Whitehead first. My money is one its being non-Biblical and heretical. However, thinking that God beholds past present and future, so to speak, all at once, has its difficulties.
But then I never expected to understand God, and enjoying Him, not doping Him out, is what I hope for.
.... and how do they know God doesn't know?
Well put!!!
To those who are not sure about the extent of "free will", I would suggest an excellent book that my minister recommended to me:
"The Sovereignty of God" by A.W. Pink
Excellent read; clear explanation. Plus, the title should explain it all.
Neal
Thought you might be interested in this.
I suggest that you don't know as much about Calvinism as you think.
Thanks for the ping.
(BTW, after checking out your homepage, I must say you have an adorable daughter, but you already knew that)
John 8:34 - Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.
Romans 6:6 - For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin –– because anyone who has died has been freed from sin
1 Corinthians 7:22 - For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave.
I do not view the bible the same way you do.
And if God knows that an individual's "free will" choice will damn him, yet allows that person to make those choices, and has even created that person knowing that his choices will lead to his damnation, how can anyone logically affirm true "free will?"
They can't. The absolute predestining will of God is part and parcel of the mystery that is God. We are as He made us. Every hair numbered.
But God does not "force" anyone to do anything. Because of Adam's fall, all men are dead in sin and incapable of performing anything God-pleasing. Only after man has been regenerated by God's grace, can he hear the truth of Scripture and act righteously, according to God's plan for His creation, ordained by Him from before the foundation of the world.
Or else He's not God; He's Zeus.
Nothing else makes any sense. And Open Theism is blasphemy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.