We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
Doesn’t the open view demean God’s sovereignty?
The Open view demeans God’s sovereignty only if one assumes that “sovereignty” means “meticulous control.” By why think this is the way God wants to rule the world? The biblical narrative presents a God who gives humans (and apparently angels) free will, who is flexible and creative in running the world, and who relies at least as much on his wisdom as he does his power. (Think about it–if God controlled everything he’d never have to rely on his wisdom at all).
This view of sovereignty, I would argue, is much more exalted than a meticulously controlling view. In the open view, God is free to determine some aspects of the future according to his will and to anticipate and address his creatures’ choices within the parameters he has established for them. He is free to cultivate real, meaningful and transforming relationships with them, to respond to their fervent and effectual prayers, and even to empty himself and become one of them in the person of Jesus Christ so that they could be reconciled to him. God’s sovereignty is not threatened by these things—rather, it is amplified all the more by them. A smaller god would feel threatened if he didn’t meticulously control everything. The confident God of Scripture is not.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism
Related Reading
What did Jesus mean when he said he came not to bring peace, but a sword (Mt 10:34)?
Given Jesus’ uniform teaching about loving enemies and abstaining from violence, and given that his followers were known for their refusal to engage in violence for the first three hundred years of church history, it’s obvious that Jesus wasn’t saying he came so that his disciples would use swords. The context of Jesus’ comment makes…
Video Q&A: Do you think Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are saved?
Does Greg believe that everyone goes to Heaven regardless of their beliefs? Find out here.
Does your “dispositional” ontology avoid substantival categories?
Question: In Trinity and Process you argue against a “substantival” ontology and instead advocate a “relational,” “process” and/or “dispositional” ontology in which being, being-in-relation and being-in-process are one and the same. In your view, entity x is its relation to entity y (and all other relations) and is the disposition to interact with y (and…
Sermon Clip: Does Romans 9 predestine you to Hell?
Did God predestine you to Hell? Can he even do that? In this short sermon clip, Greg Boyd talks about his own struggles when trying to understand Romans 9 which on the surface seems to imply that God determines who goes to heaven and hell. In the full sermon, Greg takes a deep look at…
Re-Thinking Divine Sovereignty
Many people in the church have been taught that divine sovereignty is synonymous with unilateral control. Some have even argued that if God is not in control of everything, then something must be in control of him. Still others have proposed that if God is not sovereign over all, then he has no sovereignty at…
Lord Willing? Part 3
In this final segment of Greg’s discussion with Jessica Kelley about her book Lord Willing?, Jessica talks about how to respond to someone who is grieving or in crisis. You can find part 1 here and part 2 here. We’re so grateful that Jessica took the time to share her story with us. We know…