Tuesday, July 16, 2019

Understanding Thomas Jay Oord's Model of God's Providence


NOTE: From July 8–12, 2019, I had the opportunity to attend a seminar taught by Thomas Jay Oord. For many believers, theology seems like something only academic discuss. Yet, whether we discuss it or not, we all (believers, agnostics and atheists) have a theology that we embrace and that impacts how we live day-to-day. My encouragement is don't let yours be a default, unexamined theology. Who you think God is and how you think God works in the universe–and in your life–absolutely determines how you live. So...think about it. I hope these notes inspire you to dig deeper.

Day One Summary

Here are some things I learned from Thomas Jay Oord on DAY ONE of week-long class he taught at Vancouver School of Theology (July 8-12).

Open and Relational Theology is an umbrella label for the variety of theologies that affirm at least the following:
1.     The future is open and undetermined to both us and God.
2.     God is relational. God affects us and we affect God.

There are basically three general views of God's Omniscience:
1.     Calvinist believe that God foreknows and foreordains everything.
2.     Arminians believe that God foreknows but does not foreordain.
3.     Open and Relational (O&R) theologians believe that God neither foreknows (for certain) nor foreordains.

The reason O&R theologians believe that God neither foreknows nor foreordains is because God has endowed humanity with free-will and that because the preeminent quality of God's nature is uncontrolling love. God takes each individual's free-will seriously and though he works to influence, inform, and even persuade, each person is free to make her/his own choices.

What I learned about O&R Theology on Day Two, will follow in later posts. If you want to learn on your own about Open and Relational Theology with each post I'll share a book or two you might want to check out.
"Uncontrolling Love: Essays Exploring the Love of God" - Edited by Thomas Jay Oord.



Day Two Summary (Part 1)

Here are some things I learned from Thomas Jay Oord on DAY TWO of week-long class he taught at Vancouver School of Theology (July 8-12).

Thomas Jay Oord outlined seven basic theological approaches to understanding God’s providence, that is, how God works in and with his creation.

1.     God is the Omnicause—that is God has, does and will cause everything that happens in the universe. Theologians who teach this model include John Calvin (1600s) and John Piper (present day).
2.     God Empowers and Overpowers—While God is the source of our freedom and God usually empowers, there are times when God overpowers. In other words, we have free will, but God intervenes whenever and however he determines to accomplish his will. All Plantinga and Roger Olson are modern theologians who espouse this view. This is perhaps the most popular model of God’s providence among conservative Christians.
3.     God is Voluntarily Self-Limited—God rarely intervenes to overpower our free will. God usually persuades but can be coercive when deemed necessary. This is similar to the above view but differs in degree. John Polkinghorne, Philip Clayton, Greg Boyd are modern theologians who espouse this view.
4.     God is Essentially Kenotic (terms to be explain on another day)—God’s nature is love and that love is self-emptying, others-empowering and God never violates creaturely free will. Thomas Jay Oord is the originator of this model (thus more explanation to come later).
5.     God is Present but essentially Uninvolved—God is not interactive, personal nor responsive to human experience. God is the glue of the universe. Paul Tillich and Gordon Kauffman are two modern theologians who espouse this model.
6.     God is the Initial Creator and a Current Observer—This is “Bette Midler’s God” who watches from a distance. God is a perfect creator and thus does not need to intervene in his creation. Michael Corey espouses this view.
7.     God’s Ways are Not Our Ways—This is not a model of God’s providence but rather an explanation of why we can’t come up with a model. God is utterly mysterious. We cannot really know who/what God is. We can only know who/what God isn’t. Apophatic theologians hold to this view (or lack of view).

Book Recommendation: "The Uncontrolling Love of God: An Open and Relational Account of Providence" by Thomas Jay Oord.



Day Two Summary (Part 2)

Here are some MORE things I learned from Thomas Jay Oord on DAY TWO of week-long class he taught at Vancouver School of Theology (July 8-12).

Thomas Jay Oord explained the difference between “voluntarism” and “essentialism” when it comes to God’s nature. “Voluntarism” states that God’s sovereign will is pre-eminent when it comes to God’s nature. So while God, for example, created free will creatures, God can override that free will and impose his own will on any or all of his creation. “Essentialism” states that there are certain qualities that are who God is and these qualities cannot change. For example, God cannot choose to NOT love; God cannot choose to NOT create; God cannot choose to NOT care.

He then explained what Open and Relational Theology means in terms of the following:
1.     God’s omniscience—God knows everything that can be known, but the future is not yet knowable because we have free will. God doesn’t see all of time as one viewing a parade from thousands of feet above, but rather God is in the parade, every part of the parade as it happens.
2.     God’s emotions—God experiences human emotions with but few exceptions (e.g., guilt). However, even those emotions God does not have, God perceives and is affected by.
3.     Our free will—We have genuine but limited free will. We, too, are limited in the choices we make because of the limitations of human nature and our individual natures.
4.     Petitionary prayer—If God knows and determines the future, why pray for God to act. If, however, the future is open, then we can pray that we will be aware of and responsive to God’s influence and persuasion. However, because God’s love is “uncontrolling” it would be fruitless to pray for God to intervene in a way that violates another’s free will.
5.     Our lives matter! God wants to, and does, work together with us to accomplish God’s loving will moment-by-moment. Also, everyone counts whether or not we choose to cooperate with God’s desire.

Book Recommendation: “Divine Echoes: Reconciling Prayer with the Uncontrolling Love of God” by Mark Gregory Karris.



Day Three Summary

Here are some things I learned from Thomas Jay Oord on DAY THREE of week-long class he taught at Vancouver School of Theology (July 8-12).

Thomas presented, in greater detail, his model especially as it relates to the problem of evil and suffering. In fact, he proposed “a solution for the problem of evil.” First, he stated the problem.
·      If God is able to do absolutely anything, God would be able to prevent any occurrence of genuine evil.
·      If God is perfectly loving, God would want to prevent every occurrence of genuine evil.
·      However, events of genuine evil occur.
·      Conclusion: Either God does not exist, or one of the first two statements is wrong—that is, either God is not able to do absolutely anything OR he is not perfectly loving.

Next, he defined “genuine evil” as any event that, all things considered, makes the universe worse that it might have been. That evil can be the result of human free will, other creaturely interactions and/or natural evil. He next explained the realities of random events, law-like regularities, human and other creaturely free will and agency, the existence of values and the fact that we can know something true about the universe we observe (i.e., not everything is subjective). However, we cannot know the full truth about the universe nor can we know truth with absolute certainty. The same holds true when it comes to what we know about God. Thus, there is plausible faith—reasonable trust. I, personally, love this because it so fits with some sage advice I once heard—we need to hold to our beliefs with humility.

Oord’s solution to the problem of evil and the core of his model of providence begins with God’s nature as love: a self-giving, others-empowering and uncontrolling love. Therefore, God can’t do certain things because this is God’s nature. God cannot withdraw freedom from a perpetrator of evil. God cannot interrupt law-like regularities to prevent evil or stop random events that result in evil.

Book recommendation: “God Can’t: How to Believe in God and Love after Tragedy, Abuse and Other Evils” by Thomas Jay Oord.



Days Four & Five Summary

Here are some things I learned from Thomas Jay Oord on DAYS FOUR & FIVE of week-long class he taught at Vancouver School of Theology (July 8-12).

I learned two new words:
1.     Panentheism. Note, this is not “pantheism” but “panENtheism”. Literally, “pan” means all/every, “en” means in and “theism” means God. So “Panentheism” means “all in God.” Many reference Paul’s statement to the Athenians in Acts 17—“for in him we live and move and have our being as some of your own poets have said.” The main point is this: God is not “out there” but rather God is present with us, or as Paul wrote, “God is not far from each one of us,” or as one person paraphrased this, “God is at your elbow.” Since God is present with us, God is relational. God is influenced by creation as he also influences creation. God experiences creation.
2.     Theocosmocentrism. That’s a mouthful, right? Again, “theo” means God, “cosmo” is cosmos, i.e., the universe and “centrism” means central. Some points based on this are: (1) We cannot understand God well without reference to creation and we cannot understand creation well without reference to God; (2) God necessarily exists and God necessarily creates. It is God’s very nature of love that necessitates that God creates. Just as God cannot NOT love, God cannot NOT create. God essentially loves all creation. It is God’s nature to love creation—every minute aspect of the universe is loved by God.

I was exposed to some different ways to conceive of the afterlife, based on this premise of the uncontrolling love of God. The main point I need to further ponder and that has serious implications for the conservative evangelical teaching is this: If God’s nature is uncontrolling love, does God stop loving when our lives on this planet end or does God continue to love and thus continue to influence and persuade?

On the final day, Thomas reviewed Pope Francis’ 2015 Encyclical Letter “Laudato Si’” (Praise Be to You). It is a letter written to discuss the critical environmental issues our world is facing and is an impassioned and intelligently written plea for people of all stripes to work together to prevent further damage and to undo the damage we’ve already caused. As he writes, “This sister [the earth] now cries out to us because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our irresponsible use and abuse of the goods with which God has endowed her. We have come to see ourselves as her lords and masters, entitled to plunder her at will. The violence present in our hearts, wounded by sin, is also reflected in the symptoms of sickness evident in the soil, in the. Water, in the air and in all forms of life. This is why the earth herself, burdened and laid waste, is among the most abandoned and maltreated of our poor; she ‘groans in travail’ (Rom 8:22).” What I was deeply convicted of by this session was how conservative evangelical theology has little if anything to say about our responsibility to the rest of God’s creation. We teach and we act as if the only really important part of God’s creation is humanity, the rest is expendable. This universe is God’s creation. We are not its masters and lords; we are its stewards!

Book Recommendation: “In Whom We Live and Move and Have Our Being: Panentheistic Reflections on God’s Presence in a Scientific World” edited by Philip Clayton and Arthur Peacocke.




No comments:

Post a Comment

Introducing My "Skeptics Believe" Website

Greetings: If you are one of the readers/subscribers to this blog, you've noted I've not published any posts here since early March....