Journal: Masters Seminary Journal
Volume: TMSJ 18:1 (Spring 2007)
Article: Is It Time To Change? Open Theism And The Divine Timelessness Debate
Author: Marshall Wicks

---

TMSJ 18:1 (Spring 2007) p. 43

Is It Time To Change? Open Theism And The Divine Timelessness Debate

Marshall Wicks^a

The recent popularity of Open Theism in evangelical circles has raised questions regarding the traditional doctrine of divine eternality, timelessness, or atemporality. The questions necessitate a three-part investigation of the subject. Part one investigates the present status of temporality studies which define time as either tenseless or dynamic. Part two compares the temporal position with the atemporal. The classical position has been that God is timeless, but some recent evangelical scholars have come to view God as a temporal being, with some others theorizing that He is both temporal and atemporal. The temporal position criticizes atemporalism in three ways: (1) the Bible presents God as a temporal being; (2) the modern consensus is that God is temporal; (3) atemporality is a result of the influence of Greek philosophy on Christian doctrine; (4) the idea of a timeless God is incoherent. In each case, the criticisms prove to be invalid. Part three examines positions that attempt to maintain temporality and atemporality simultaneously, but the composite approach proves to be nothing but another way of stating the atemporal position. A successful defense of the atemporal position proves Open Theism to be an unorthodox version of theism that should be rejected.

* * * * *

No generation in Christian history has debated like ours about whether God is timeless or whether he has unending duration, that is, whether temporal existence extends interminably forward and backward.1

TMSJ 18:1 (Spring 2007) p. 44

Significant portions of Process Theology have been imported into evangelical thinking through the medium of Open or Freewill Theism. Though Open Theism claims to be significantly different from Process Theology, enough similarities exist to make the astute observer suspicious. In keeping with postmodern maxims regarding tolerance, most critics of Open Theism have attempted to see both positives and negatives in their analyses. This is in many ways very commendable. However, the result has been widespread confusion throughout the evangelical camp with regard to several traditional attributes of God.2 Some were already deemed redundant or misleading. Others were subjected to new and more intense analysis than previously accorded. The purpose of this article is to look at one of these divine attributes, divine eternality or timelessness, and to ascertain whether it needs to be rejected, redefined, or reaffirmed in light of recent philosophical and exegetical contributions.

The nature of this doc...

visitor : : uid: ()