Marshall M degre e from Grace Theological Seminary and is a PhD candidate at Baptist Bible Seminary 1 Carl Henry God Revelation and Authority Vol V The God Who Stands and Stays Part ID: 195197
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "Wicks is Professor of Bible at the Word ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
* Marshall Wicks is Professor of Bible at the Word of Life Bible Institute. He has a Th .M. degre e from Grace Theological Seminary and is a Ph.D. candidate at Baptist Bible Seminary. 1 Carl . Henry, God, Revelation and Authority, Vol. V: The God Who Stands and Stays, Part One (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 1982) 241. 43 TMSJ 18/1 (Spring 2007) 43-68 IS IT TIME TO CHANGE? OPEN THEISM AND THE DIVINE TIMELESSNESS DEBATE Marshall Wicks * The recent po pula rity of Open Theism in evangelical circles has raised questions regardin e traditional doctrine of divine eternality, timelessness, or atemporality. The questions necess itate a t hree-part investigation of the subject. Part one inve of temporality studies which define time as either tenseless or dynamic. Part two compares the temporal position with th e atemporal. The classi cal p osition has been that God is timeless, but some recent evangelical scholars e 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 con sensus 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 that attempt to maintain temporality and atemporality simultaneously, but the co mposite approach proves to be nothing but another way of statin e atem poral position. A successful defense of the atemporal position proves O pe n Theism to be an unorthodox version of theism that should be rejected. * * * * * generation in Christian history has debated like ours about whether God is timeless or whether he has unending duration, that is, whether temporal exist ence ext ends interminably forward and backward.