What do you think?
Rate this book
Most Moved Mover: A Theology of God's Openness
In 1994, Clark Pinnock along with four other scholars published The Openness of God , which set out a new evangelical vision of God—one centered on his open, relational, and responsive love for creation. Since then, the nature of God has been widely discussed throughout the evangelical community. Now, Pinnock returns with Most Moved Mover to once again counter the classical, deterministic view of God and defend the relationality and openness of God.
This engaging defense of openness theology begins with an analysis of the current debate, followed by an explanation of the misconceptions about openness theology, and a delineation of areas of agreement between classical and openness theologians.
Most Moved Mover is for all evangelicals, regardless of their viewpoint, as it lays out the groundwork for future discussions of the open view of God.
This engaging defense of openness theology begins with an analysis of the current debate, followed by an explanation of the misconceptions about openness theology, and a delineation of areas of agreement between classical and openness theologians.
Most Moved Mover is for all evangelicals, regardless of their viewpoint, as it lays out the groundwork for future discussions of the open view of God.
218 pages, Paperback
Published October 1, 2019
2 people are currently reading
3 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
September 17, 2024
PINNOCK EXPANDS UPON THE “OPEN VIEW” OF GOD
Clark H. Pinnock (1937--2010) was Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at McMaster Divinity College, and author of books such as 'Reason Enough: A Case for the Christian Faith,' 'Set Forth Your Case,' 'A Wideness in God's Mercy: The Finality Of Jesus Christ In A World Of Religions,' 'The Openness of God,' 'The Grace of God and the Will of Man,' 'The Scripture Principle,' etc.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 2001 book, "I entitled the book 'Most Moved Mover' because... it contrasts what the Bible highlights as to the nature of God and what, in this case, Aristotle suggested as a representative Greek philosopher. Aristotle spoke of God as an unmoved mover, which contrasts sharply with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob... The present book aims to re-present the open view of God in the light of many useful criticisms and a few fresh reflections. It aims at keeping the conversation alive and hopes to contribute further to it." (Pg. 7, 9)
He describes the "open view" that "God freely decided to be, in some respects, affected and conditioned by creatures and he established things in such a way that some things he desires may not happen... God does not control everything that happens but sovereignly decided to make a world in which creatures could respond to God and where he would make himself available for such relationships." (Pg. 5)
He says, "It astonishes me that people can defend the 'glory' of God so vehemently when that glory includes God's sovereign authorship of every rape and murder... and his holding people accountable for deeds he predestined them to do and they could not but do." (Pg. 16)
He states, "I take it that the Fall into sin went contrary to the will of God... and sheds light on the nature of God's sovereignty. The will of God is not something that is always done but something that can be followed or resisted." (Pg. 40) Later, he adds, "We are not asked to believe that God exercises all-controlling sovereignty and still holds human beings morally responsible. The Bible is coherent and the contradiction is imaginary. All-controlling sovereignty is not taught in Scripture. There may be mysteries that go beyond human intelligence but this is not one of them. One can hold both to divine sovereignty and human freedom because sovereignty is not all-controlling. The Bible, not rationalism, leads to this solution." (Pg. 55)
He argues, "In a certain type of apologetics people emphasize precise fulfillments, but the fact is that prophecies are often vague as to the nature and timing of their fulfillment and do not require us to assume exhaustive foreknowledge. Long-range forecasts are often symbolic and vague in matters of detail (e.g., Daniel and the Revelation). Few biblical prophecies allow us to assume exhaustive foreknowledge. No one is required to read them in such a way and cancel out the texts of hesitation." (Pg. 51)
He adds, "God, in order to be omniscient, need not know the future in complete detail. Were he to know it, we would have to suppose that it is already determined that human freedom is illusory. Our decisions would then settle nothing because there is nothing left to settle.... Of course, God has the power to deal with every circumstance that arises but he cannot have, and does not need total knowledge in advance of every detail. God is a highly resourceful and capable person... How boring it would be for God to have to reign over a creation project, each molecule of which has its predestined place! There would be nothing for God to do." (Pg. 100)
He also speculates, "Most people... think that God chooses to be associated with a body, while being himself formless. That may be so, but it is also possible that God has a body in some way we cannot imagine and, therefore, that it is natural for God to seek out forms of embodiment. I do not feel obliged to assume that God is a purely spiritual being when his self-revelation does not suggest it." (Pg. 34)
Later, he adds, "corporeality is a subject that ought to be on the modern agenda and which has been neglected hitherto. We need to consider more carefully what form of corporeality would be appropriate to ascribe to God." (Pg. 81)
He contends, "We have to face the face that, if nothing happens outside the will of God, there is no genuine evil. If he is in control in a monopolistic sense, everything that happens has to have a reason. Even the Holocaust has to have a reason and has to contribute in some way to the greater good, if only we would see it from God's point of view... Surely there is no way that sinners can be held responsible for evil if God secretly controls them... The blueprint model of divine providence, in which each evil serves a higher purpose and every gruesome detail contributes to the beauty of God's work, makes the problem of evil insoluble... Believe in a God who ordains and/or allows ever evil to exist (including the burning of children) cannot be sustained." (Pg. 133)
He adds, "God did not know all along what Hitler, or Adam, would do with his freedom. If he did, that would imply that he thought that Hitler's evils could serve a purpose and that it was better that, on balance, they happen rather than they not happen. Surely not! God gave Hitler freedom but it was not settled ahead of time how he would use it." (Pg. 138) He also adds, "[In] conventional theism... Evil things happen because they somehow fit into his plan, which makes it hard to hate evil without hating God. Why, God may be teaching us a lesson or something. When you get mugged, you should thank God for it!" (Pg. 176-177)
He admits, however, "The continuation of salvation depends, in part, on the human partner because the relationship of personal and reciprocal... Believers are secure in the condition that they continue in faith, which is a process not completed until the end of the journey. One may fail to persevere until the end and not receive what was promised... I cannot pretend that the open view of God is very appealing at this point. It may make sense of the biblical exhortations and it may follow from a personal model of salvation but it does not appeal to our self-interest." (Pg. 170)
Controversial, but thought-provoking and stimulating reading, this book is a substantial elaboration of Pinnock's "openness" views, and should be studied by anyone interested in this issue.
Clark H. Pinnock (1937--2010) was Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at McMaster Divinity College, and author of books such as 'Reason Enough: A Case for the Christian Faith,' 'Set Forth Your Case,' 'A Wideness in God's Mercy: The Finality Of Jesus Christ In A World Of Religions,' 'The Openness of God,' 'The Grace of God and the Will of Man,' 'The Scripture Principle,' etc.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 2001 book, "I entitled the book 'Most Moved Mover' because... it contrasts what the Bible highlights as to the nature of God and what, in this case, Aristotle suggested as a representative Greek philosopher. Aristotle spoke of God as an unmoved mover, which contrasts sharply with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob... The present book aims to re-present the open view of God in the light of many useful criticisms and a few fresh reflections. It aims at keeping the conversation alive and hopes to contribute further to it." (Pg. 7, 9)
He describes the "open view" that "God freely decided to be, in some respects, affected and conditioned by creatures and he established things in such a way that some things he desires may not happen... God does not control everything that happens but sovereignly decided to make a world in which creatures could respond to God and where he would make himself available for such relationships." (Pg. 5)
He says, "It astonishes me that people can defend the 'glory' of God so vehemently when that glory includes God's sovereign authorship of every rape and murder... and his holding people accountable for deeds he predestined them to do and they could not but do." (Pg. 16)
He states, "I take it that the Fall into sin went contrary to the will of God... and sheds light on the nature of God's sovereignty. The will of God is not something that is always done but something that can be followed or resisted." (Pg. 40) Later, he adds, "We are not asked to believe that God exercises all-controlling sovereignty and still holds human beings morally responsible. The Bible is coherent and the contradiction is imaginary. All-controlling sovereignty is not taught in Scripture. There may be mysteries that go beyond human intelligence but this is not one of them. One can hold both to divine sovereignty and human freedom because sovereignty is not all-controlling. The Bible, not rationalism, leads to this solution." (Pg. 55)
He argues, "In a certain type of apologetics people emphasize precise fulfillments, but the fact is that prophecies are often vague as to the nature and timing of their fulfillment and do not require us to assume exhaustive foreknowledge. Long-range forecasts are often symbolic and vague in matters of detail (e.g., Daniel and the Revelation). Few biblical prophecies allow us to assume exhaustive foreknowledge. No one is required to read them in such a way and cancel out the texts of hesitation." (Pg. 51)
He adds, "God, in order to be omniscient, need not know the future in complete detail. Were he to know it, we would have to suppose that it is already determined that human freedom is illusory. Our decisions would then settle nothing because there is nothing left to settle.... Of course, God has the power to deal with every circumstance that arises but he cannot have, and does not need total knowledge in advance of every detail. God is a highly resourceful and capable person... How boring it would be for God to have to reign over a creation project, each molecule of which has its predestined place! There would be nothing for God to do." (Pg. 100)
He also speculates, "Most people... think that God chooses to be associated with a body, while being himself formless. That may be so, but it is also possible that God has a body in some way we cannot imagine and, therefore, that it is natural for God to seek out forms of embodiment. I do not feel obliged to assume that God is a purely spiritual being when his self-revelation does not suggest it." (Pg. 34)
Later, he adds, "corporeality is a subject that ought to be on the modern agenda and which has been neglected hitherto. We need to consider more carefully what form of corporeality would be appropriate to ascribe to God." (Pg. 81)
He contends, "We have to face the face that, if nothing happens outside the will of God, there is no genuine evil. If he is in control in a monopolistic sense, everything that happens has to have a reason. Even the Holocaust has to have a reason and has to contribute in some way to the greater good, if only we would see it from God's point of view... Surely there is no way that sinners can be held responsible for evil if God secretly controls them... The blueprint model of divine providence, in which each evil serves a higher purpose and every gruesome detail contributes to the beauty of God's work, makes the problem of evil insoluble... Believe in a God who ordains and/or allows ever evil to exist (including the burning of children) cannot be sustained." (Pg. 133)
He adds, "God did not know all along what Hitler, or Adam, would do with his freedom. If he did, that would imply that he thought that Hitler's evils could serve a purpose and that it was better that, on balance, they happen rather than they not happen. Surely not! God gave Hitler freedom but it was not settled ahead of time how he would use it." (Pg. 138) He also adds, "[In] conventional theism... Evil things happen because they somehow fit into his plan, which makes it hard to hate evil without hating God. Why, God may be teaching us a lesson or something. When you get mugged, you should thank God for it!" (Pg. 176-177)
He admits, however, "The continuation of salvation depends, in part, on the human partner because the relationship of personal and reciprocal... Believers are secure in the condition that they continue in faith, which is a process not completed until the end of the journey. One may fail to persevere until the end and not receive what was promised... I cannot pretend that the open view of God is very appealing at this point. It may make sense of the biblical exhortations and it may follow from a personal model of salvation but it does not appeal to our self-interest." (Pg. 170)
Controversial, but thought-provoking and stimulating reading, this book is a substantial elaboration of Pinnock's "openness" views, and should be studied by anyone interested in this issue.
Displaying 1 of 1 review