Reading 11/12/07
Update: Edited to correct the date in the header from 10/12/07 to 11/12/07. I truly have not invented a time machine!
Here’s some things that caught my attention:
- Richard Rice Discusses Open Theism
20 years ago I read his book The Openness of God when it was first released. I was intrigued by its ideas of open theism then, and I continue to be intrigued now. I appreciated the summary of key issues provided in this post by David Larson. (From the Spectrum Magazine blog/Association of Adventist Forums). - Hard and Soft Legalism
OK, I’m a legalist, but so was Jesus. If the point of this series is to show that N. T. Wright isn’t 100% in the reformed camp, then I suppose it’s succeeding. As a matter of Biblical studies, not so much. - What is at stake is the very nature of Anglicanism (from Gentle Wisdom) and Romans and Rhetoric Again. (Hat tip: Lingamish on the second post.)
The key arguments are about the Bible statements regarding homosexuality. This is a particularly contentious topic, of course, and I would urge charity on all who participate in it. None of the participants have taken their stands lightly, in my view, and all deserve serious consideration.
Such are the varied topics of which I read with interest!
Hi Henry,
2 out of 3 caught my eye immediately. Open Theism is something which I find very interesting – and helpful. I loved Pinnock’s “Most Moved Mover”. Still can’t say I’m fully in the Open Theism camp though. Also, as an Anglican, our ongoing sorry saga is always near to the forefront of my attention.
Actually, the biggest thing I noted about your post, was its seems that you guys in Florida are way ahead of us Canadians when it comes to Daylight Savings Time. We just went back an hour last week but from the title of your post it seems you fell back an entire month!
We can’t count votes either! I guess that makes it “Monthlight” savings.
Thanks for the catch.
BTW, I forget to mention that while I’m attracted by open theism, I’m not ready to defend it myself. I see good things about it, but I’m also left with questions. In many ways I’m happier saying that God is eternal, and I don’t really understand how his foreknowledge and free will interact.
That is less satisfying, but to me “open theism” almost answers too much, and takes away too much of the mystery. Does that mean it’s wrong? No, it just makes me nervous, for whatever that’s worth!