2 of 2

Fifth, we need to practice intellectual empathy toward those with whom we disagree. We must say no to the temptation to caricature their position. We need to help one another come to the point where we can state the position of our opponent to our opponent's satisfaction. We have tried to provide an example of such intellectual empathy in our e-mail exchanges. Empathy does not legitimize shoddy thinking or necessitate that we treat each other with kid gloves. It does call us to listen carefully to the position with which we often strongly disagree. Moreover, in our exchanges we must note our areas of agreement, not merely our disagreements. Too often we evangelicals forget the incredible amount of faith and practice we share in common.

Sixth, after these five steps have been vigorously, faithfully, truthfully, and charitably pursued, we must acknowledge that there is surely a time to accept or reject a theological model. Some within the evangelical community, such as Michael Horton, are already convinced that the openness model is illegitimate; others, such as Gilbert Bilezekian, believe it is the freshest air since the Reformation. The debate needs to continue so that the issues can be further clarified. Our exchange represents just such an effort.

Copyright © 2001 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

See the discussion between John Sanders and classical theist Stephen Williams in our sister magazine Books & Culture: A Christian Review.

Other Christianity Today articles on openness theology include:

Has God Been Held Hostage by Philosophy? | A forum on free-will theism, a new paradigm for understanding God. (Jan. 9, 1995, reposted online May 11, 2001)

Truth at Risk | Six leading openness theologians say that many assumptions made about their views are simply wrong. (Apr. 23, 2001)

God at Risk | A former process theologian says a 30-percent God is not worth worshiping. (Mar. 16, 2001)

Did Open Debate Help The Openness Debate? | It's been centuries since Luther nailed his theses to a church door, but the Internet is reintroducing theological debate to the public square. (Feb. 16, 2001)

God vs. God | Two competing theologies vie for the future of evangelicalism (Feb. 7, 2000).

Do Good Fences Make Good Baptists? | The SBC's new Faith and Message brings needed clarity—but maybe at the cost of honest diversity. (Aug. 8, 2000)

The Perils of Left and Right | Evangelical theology is much bigger and richer than our two-party labels. (Aug. 10, 1998)

The Future of Evangelical Theology | Roger Olson argues that a division between traditionalists and reformists threatens to end our theological consensus. (Feb. 9, 1998)

A Pilgrim on the Way | For me, theology is like a rich feast, with many dishes to enjoy and delicacies to taste. (Feb. 9, 1998)

A Theology to Die For | Theologians are not freelance scholars of religion, but trustees of the deposit of faith. (Feb. 9, 1998)

The Real Reformers are Traditionalists | If there is no immune system to resist heresy, there will soon be nothing but the teeming infestation of heresy. (Feb. 9, 1998)

John Sanders earlier wrote an article for Christianity Today titled "The Perennial Debate | Christians have never agreed on the salvation for those who have never heard of Christ" (May 14, 1990).

Christianity Today articles by Christopher A. Hall include:

What Hal Lindsey Taught Me About the Second Coming | At UCLA, amid war protests and police helicopters, teachings on an imminent end made a lot of sense. (Oct. 25, 1999)

Adding Up the Trinity | What is stimulating the renewed interest in what many consider the most enigmatic Christian doctrine? (Apr. 28, 1997)

Into the Abyss | Reconciling faith with catastrophic loss. (Mar. 3, 1997)

Recovering the Church's Memory | An alternative to the willful amnesia of modern theology. (Dec. 9, 1996)

first page |  2 of 2

share this page

June 11 2001, Vol. 45, No. 8