Greg Boyd Explain’s His Open Theism

Many of us who deeply care about sound teaching and biblical theology have been concerned about the teachings of “Open Theism” where certain Evangelical scholars like Clark Pinnock and others seem to be suggesting that God is not truly omniscient. I have heard that Greg Boyd is also an Open Theist, and this troubled me because I really like Greg and feel that a lot of his teaching is is a good counter balance to the idolatry and the unbridled nationalism of the Christian Right. So I was not too happy when I learned that he espoused Open Theism. So I decided to email him and ask him just where he was coming from. To my surprise, Greg took time out of his busy schedule to email me his thoughts. I have to say, after reading Greg’s unfiltered views on Open Theism, I now can see how thoroughly biblical his views are. But don’t listen to me or his critics, read him for yourself. The link below is the email in its entirety and it was posted with Greg’s knowledge and permission.

Greg’s Letter.doc

Losing That Salty Taste

The Rise and Fall of Ralph Reed

My New Hero

My wife sent me a New York Time’s article about a pastor named Greg Boyd from St. Paul,  Minnesota. He has both preached and written against the Christian Right and their insistence on politicizing our faith to the degree that we have alienated and demonized gays, people who support abortion, and everyone who is on the left side of things politically in this country. Frankly, I have been fed up for quite of how some Christian  leaders have demagogued on these issues.

What I like about Greg, is that he clearly is not “for” homosexuality and abortion, he just does not think politics is the best way to confront these issues. I wholeheartedly agree. I have said for a long time that we should find other ways to confront issues like abortion and homosexuality outside of politics. Our conversations on these important issues should certainly be public and out in the open, but not tinged by politics. I really think that the approach of Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, Bauer, et.al, is wrongheaded and has only caused the people we want to engage with the gospel of Jesus Christ to distance themselves from us because they think that we are their enemies.  Well, I don’t want a gay man seeing me as a homophobic bigot. I want him to see me as a follower of Jesus and fellow sinner who loves him right where he is, even if he never comes out of homosexuality or accepts Jesus.

The African Presence in the Bible

The following is an outline of a talk I give to black college and university students:

Introduction

I wish that there was never a need for something like a Black History Month. I kind of agree with Morgan Freeman. I wish race did not matter, that everyone would understand that Black History is really American history. Can you explain to me why I am ashamed of slavery when it was not my fault? And please tell me why I am always relieved when I find out that the person who committed some sort of heinous crime is not black? Further, why do I always cringe when I hear an inarticulate black person on TV, and why is it always the brothers and sisters that Jay Leno picks on in his “Jay Walk” segments on the Tonight Show?

I wish that there was no need to give a talk like this.
But here I am, and there you are.

Let me take you back to where we were: Hear this quote from Genovese’s, Roll Jordan Roll

“Massa, may I ask, you something?”
“Ask what you please.”
“Can you ‘splain how it happened in the fust place, that the white folks got the start of the black folks, so as to make dem slaves and do all de work?”
The younger helper, fearing the white man’s wrath, broke in:
“Uncle Pete, it’s no use talking. ‘It’s fo ‘ordained. The Bible tells you that. The Lord fo’ordained the Nigger to work, and the white man to boss.”
“Dat’s so. Dat’s. so. But if dat’s so, then God’s no fair man!

Is God no fair man, as Uncle Pete suggests? Were black people foreordained to work and to be slaves, and white people to be their masters? Is that so? Does the Bible confirm that black people were to be nothing more than slaves? Where does this argument come from and is it actually true?

I. The Table of Nations in Genesis 10. Three sons of Noah, Japheth, Ham, and Shem. Japheth is traditionally known as the progenitor of European people; Ham of African people, and Shem of Middle Eastern and Asiatic people.
II. “The Land of Ham.” 1Chron. 4:40; Psa 105:23; 27; 106:22
III. How do we know that these people were black? The meaning of Ham = “hot”, or “burnt” and Cush.”black”

Genesis 10:6-20 (New International Version)

6 The sons of Ham:
Cush, Mizraim, Put and Canaan.

7 The sons of Cush:
Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteca.
The sons of Raamah:
Sheba and Dedan.

8 Cush was the father of Nimrod, who grew to be a mighty warrior on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; that is why it is said, “Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the LORD.” 10 The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar. 11 From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah 12 and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city.

13 Mizraim was the father of
the Ludites, Anamites, Lehabites, Naphtuhites, 14 Pathrusites, Casluhites (from whom the Philistines came) and Caphtorites.

15 Canaan was the father of
Sidon his firstborn, [f] and of the Hittites, 16 Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, 17 Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, 18 Arvadites, Zemarites and Hamathites.
Later the Canaanite clans scattered 19 and the borders of Canaan reached from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha.

20 These are the sons of Ham by their clans and languages, in their territories and nations.
IV. Sons of Ham: Havilah and Cush in Gen. 10:6 & 7 and the possible connection to Gen. 2:10-13: A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush.. Was Adam an African, and hence Noah and his family African too? No one argues that humanity has its genesis, pun intended, in Africa, so it is quite probable that Adam was African, and by extension, so was Noah and his family.
V. The Curse of Ham/Canaan Gen. 9:18-27. First, the curse is not on Ham, it is on Canaan. Second, Ham had other sons (we will look at this in a moment), and they did not participate in the curse. Third, Canaan was the progenitor of the land of Canaan, also known as the promised land, the land flowing with milk and honey. This was the land that the Israelites eventually took over after leaving Egypt and passing through the Red Sea and wandering around the desert for 40 years. Surely the curse of Canaan has to see its fulfillment with the children of Israel conquering Canaan. Further, the Greeks were seen as descendants of the Canaanites by the Jews. (interview with Hillel Rabbi at Oberlin College)
VI. The first civilizations, Gen 10:8-12 (Cush); 13-14 (Egypt); 15-20 (Canaan).
VII. It is from Nimrod, son of Cush, who founded the land of Babel, the same Babel where a tower was built (Gen. 11:1-9) to reach “the heavens”. The scripture reads that God eventually comes down, confounds their language and scatters them over the face of the earth so that they will not be one, and hence, be able to do anything they wish (I will come back to this).
VIII. Moses’ Cushite wife. Was Zipporah the same woman? Num. 12:1; Ex 2:16-21
IX. David & Bathsheba Bath = daughter Sheba = Descendant of Ham, Solomon was the son of both of them.
X. Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. According to Yamauchi’s Africa and the Bible Sheba was most certainly located in Southwest Arabia, but this does not necessarily render the descendants as non-black. Ethiopic tradition has the Queen of Sheba in Ethiopia, but this does not square with recent scholarship.
XI. Solomon’s wives and concubines (700 wives and 300 concubines). Many were of Canaanite heritage, and one wife was the daughter of a pharaoh.

XII. Africa and Prophets: Isaiah 18:1-2; Is. 20:5; Nah.3:9; Zeph. 3:10
XIII. Psalm 68:31 Envoys will come from Egypt: Cush will submit herself to God.

Part Two. The New Testament Witness

I. Is Jesus a Black Man? Rev. 1:12-1512I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13and among the lampstands was someone “like a son of man,”[b]dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

II. The Genealogy of Jesus: Rahab, Boaz, Bathsheba, Solomon in Mark 1 and Luke 3
III. Simeon from Cyrene, the bearer of the Cross of Christ: Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26

A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross.

IV. Acts 2: 10, Africans at the founding of the church.
V. Acts 8:27-39. The first Gentile convert, the Ethiopian Eunuch.
Acts 11: 20 & Acts 13; Acts 11:26 The first “Christ Ones”, and the Beloved Community. The Tower of Babel reversed.

The Church in Antioch
19Now those who had been scattered by the persecution in connection with Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, telling the message only to Jews. 20Some of them, however, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news about the Lord Jesus. 21The Lord’s hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord.

22News of this reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23When he arrived and saw the evidence of the grace of God, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts.

25 The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.

1In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. 2While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.

Conclusion:

Acts 2: A New Unity and a Redeemed Humanity

I mentioned above how in Genesis 11 God knocked down the Tower of Babel (probably a “Ziggurat” a sort of temple that wss probably used for astrological and astronomical purposes by the ancient Chaldeans) and scattered humanity and confounded their language. Here in Acts 2, we see the reverse of this curse. Humanity is now coming back together from all the known parts of the world. They were Jews and Jewish proselytes from Europe, Africa, and Asia. The “tongues of fire” more than likely represent a common language that all people everywhere can understand.

Racism is the worst kind of sin because it runs directly counter of God’s vision for humanity. We are to be a reconciled, Christ-centered people, who find our identity in the one who hung on a tree on a ugly hill two millenia ago.

We should be able to celebrate diversity, because God does, and He made us different and diverse, because He is too big to be contained by just one kind of race, ethnicity, gender, or nation.

Jubilee & Juneteenth

Okay, I am a month late with this, but bear with me:
On September 22, 1862, President Lincoln that slaves in all slaveholding states that were at war with the union would be set free on January 1, 1863. Freedmen (i.e., free blacks, usually in the northern states) in the North went to their churches in droves on December 31, 1862 to have WatchNight services, where they would “watch” for freedom.

However, the message of freedom did not reach the slaves in Galveston, Texas until June 19, 1863. To this date, the sons and daughters of former slaves in this country celebrate “Juneteenth” (as the freed slaves in Galveston came to call that special day) on annual basis. It is a huge deal here in humble Oberlin, Ohio, the center of abolitionism back in the day.

The watch words on the mouths of the freedmen in the north when they first heard the rumor that the slaves would be set free, as well as the slaves finally hearing about the Proclamation, was, “This is the Year of Jubilee!”. They were referring to a passage in Leviticus 25 that spoke of debts being canceled and slaves going free. This was exciting indeed but based on poor exegesis, because verses 44-46 has God saying that it is okay for His covenant people to own slaves, but not of their fellow Hebrews, but only from amongst the gentiles. A fellow Hebrew could only be a bond servant, but would have to be set free during the Year of Jubilee.

However, this all flip flops in the New Testament where Jesus develops a new community and new people whom He calls His Church. Now, all of us who claim Jesus as Master are part of the covenant community.  This means that God’s original intention for Jubilee is to set everything right for everyone. There are not to be any slaves at all, and God wants all of His people to be heirs of the Kingdom, not debtors or slaves to the State.

Jubilee then is about a new kind of community based on right relationships and justice. So those former slaves actually had it right.

In a deeper sense, Jubilee is about reconciliation between God and us, and with one another. It is the dropping of barriers between Jew and Gentile, black and white, male and  female, illegal immigrant and citizen. Jubile is really about the Kingdom and Jesus’ Reign. This is why Jesus died, to bring us to God and to one another.

I really believe that for us to truly understand the meaning of the Kingdom and the purpose behind the very idea of Church, we must lean into what Jubilee and Pentecost are really about. If we are not reconciled in every sense of that word then we are not really being the Church that we are called to be.

A Jealous God?

I used to think that those places in the OT where God called Himself "jealous" was an unfortunate anthropomorphism that put God in a bad light and made Him an easy whipping boy for my atheist friends. In some ways it was a bigger problem than the problem of evil, because we have God actually admitting to a negative human trait, not so much dealing with a syllogism where we can (rightly in my view) insert "mystery" as the easy answer. But a recent conversation with the chaplain at Oberlin College changed my mind on this.

We were having a chat one day in his office a few months ago and started telling me that jealously is not bad, and that in fact, it was even a necessary and appropriate emotion, I immediately balked. I was certain that the scriptures spoke against jealousy. He stuck to his guns saying that the scriptures speak against envy, but there is no biblical injunction against jealously. He explained this by saying that envy is all about coveting something that does not belong to you. Jealously is about being indignant about someone whom you are in covenant relationship with consorting with another.

It is wholly appropriate for a woman to be jealous when her husband is cheating on her. He made a promise to be with her only, and not with anyone else. Further, she is not only jealous for her sake, but for the sake of their relationship and for their children. You cannot truly love someone and cheat on them at the same time.

When i started thinking about this argument, it began to make sense to me. I then began to apply this to God and His relationship with us. I now understand that is also appropriate for God to be jealous of us when we forsake Him because He alone is our creator and we have a covenant relationship with Him and with no other. If He were not jealous then He would not care. Just like a man who does not care about his marriage enough when his wife consorts with another man and does nothing about it, and perhaps uses it as an excuse to commit adultery himself. No, if God could not be jealous, He could not care. It is not enough to say that He shoud be happy because someone else can make us happier. That argument may or may not work in human relationships, but it cannot work with God because ultimately, the best gift that God can possibly give anyone is Himself. Nothing else comes close.

Cycling Up To Freedom Land

Anyone who knows me knows that I am avid cyclist. I even ride in inclement weather even when there is snow and ice on the ground. Yet the longest I have ever ridden on a bike is only 40 to 50 miles. I have been dreaming to do a century ride for the past few summers, but never put a plan together. So I decided to do some research on the web and see if I could find a safe route from Oberlin to Columbus, Ohio, which is actually a bit more than 100 miles one way. What I found instead excited me beyond belief: The Adventure Cycling Association in Partnership with the Center for Minority Health is planning a route beginning in Alabama, and ending in Canada, to comemorate the Underground Railroad. The exciting thing is that route goes through Xenia, Columbus, and Oberlin. I minister in Xenia, network in Columbus, and live in Oberlin, but I bike in all three places.

I feel a certain call to this. I plan on going on the maiden voyage next summer. Right now, I am working to get the word out to as many African American cyclists about this new route. I also want to get entice more African Americans to start riding to experience the health benefits of cycling. I took up cycling to deal with an arthritic knee and diabetes. I now have just about no pain at all in my knee, and my diabetes is under control because of my regular exercise. Get on a bike and get free from the bondage of poor health.

A New Location

I decided to follow my friend Ant to WordPress. I like the minimalistic look, and in someways WordPress is easier to manipulate and edit than Blogspot. I am still getting the hang of things, so please be patient.

Too Perfectionistic to Post

I think that one of the reasons why I have not posted for so long is that I want everything I have to say to be perfectly thought through and weighty. Plus, I have been spending way too much time on Maurice’s message board. Anyway, I am back and I have some things to yack about from the mundane to the sublime.

An Evangelical Critique of the Christian Right

Check this out from Charles Marsh writing in the New York times:

Op-Ed Contributor
Wayward Christian Soldiers

By CHARLES MARSH
Published: January 20, 2006

IN the past several years, American evangelicals, and I am one of them, have amassed greater political power than at any time in our history. But at what cost to our witness and the integrity of our message?

Recently, I took a few days to reread the war sermons delivered by influential evangelical ministers during the lead up to the Iraq war. That period, from the fall of 2002 through the spring of 2003, is not one I will remember fondly. Many of the most respected voices in American evangelical circles blessed the president’s war plans, even when doing so required them to recast Christian doctrine.

Charles Stanley, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Atlanta, whose weekly sermons are seen by millions of television viewers, led the charge with particular fervor. “We should offer to serve the war effort in any way possible,” said Mr. Stanley, a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention. “God battles with people who oppose him, who fight against him and his followers.” In an article carried by the convention’s Baptist Press news service, a missionary wrote that “American foreign policy and military might have opened an opportunity for the Gospel in the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.”

As if working from a slate of evangelical talking points, both Franklin Graham, the evangelist and son of Billy Graham, and Marvin Olasky, the editor of the conservative World magazine and a former advisor to President Bush on faith-based policy, echoed these sentiments, claiming that the American invasion of Iraq would create exciting new prospects for proselytizing Muslims. Tim LaHaye, the co-author of the hugely popular “Left Behind” series, spoke of Iraq as “a focal point of end-time events,” whose special role in the earth’s final days will become clear after invasion, conquest and reconstruction. For his part, Jerry Falwell boasted that “God is pro-war” in the title of an essay he wrote in 2004.

The war sermons rallied the evangelical congregations behind the invasion of Iraq. An astonishing 87 percent of all white evangelical Christians in the United States supported the president’s decision in April 2003. Recent polls indicate that 68 percent of white evangelicals continue to support the war. But what surprised me, looking at these sermons nearly three years later, was how little attention they paid to actual Christian moral doctrine. Some tried to square the American invasion with Christian “just war” theory, but such efforts could never quite reckon with the criterion that force must only be used as a last resort. As a result, many ministers dismissed the theory as no longer relevant.

Some preachers tried to link Saddam Hussein with wicked King Nebuchadnezzar of Biblical fame, but these arguments depended on esoteric interpretations of the Old Testament book of II Kings and could not easily be reduced to the kinds of catchy phrases that are projected onto video screens in vast evangelical churches. The single common theme among the war sermons appeared to be this: our president is a real brother in Christ, and because he has discerned that God’s will is for our nation to be at war against Iraq, we shall gloriously comply.

Such sentiments are a far cry from those expressed in the Lausanne Covenant of 1974. More than 2,300 evangelical leaders from 150 countries signed that statement, the most significant milestone in the movement’s history. Convened by Billy Graham and led by John Stott, the revered Anglican evangelical priest and writer, the signatories affirmed the global character of the church of Jesus Christ and the belief that “the church is the community of God’s people rather than an institution, and must not be identified with any particular culture, social or political system, or human ideology.”

On this page, David Brooks correctly noted that if evangelicals elected a pope, it would most likely be Mr. Stott, who is the author of more than 40 books on evangelical theology and Christian devotion. Unlike the Pope John Paul II, who said that invading Iraq would violate Catholic moral teaching and threaten “the fate of humanity,” or even Pope Benedict XVI, who has said there were “not sufficient reasons to unleash a war against Iraq,” Mr. Stott did not speak publicly on the war. But in a recent interview, he shared with me his abiding concerns.

“Privately, in the days preceding the invasion, I had hoped that no action would be taken without United Nations authorization,” he told me. “I believed then and now that the American and British governments erred in proceeding without United Nations approval.” Reverend Stott referred me to “War and Rumors of War, ” a chapter from his 1999 book, “New Issues Facing Christians Today,” as the best account of his position. In that essay he wrote that the Christian community’s primary mission must be “to hunger for righteousness, to pursue peace, to forbear revenge, to love enemies, in other words, to be marked by the cross.”

What will it take for evangelicals in the United States to recognize our mistaken loyalty? We have increasingly isolated ourselves from the shared faith of the global Church, and there is no denying that our Faustian bargain for access and power has undermined the credibility of our moral and evangelistic witness in the world. The Hebrew prophets might call us to repentance, but repentance is a tough demand for a people utterly convinced of their righteousness.

Charles Marsh, a professor of religion at the University of Virginia, is the author of “The Beloved Community: How Faith Shapes Social Justice, from the Civil Rights Movement to Today.”