2 Kings 20
Hi All ~
Many thanks to those of you who have thought so daringly, boldly, and biblically to produce such a fine site and great materials.
I am an Arminian pastor of a large growing church (web site below) who is being won over to the Open Theist concept. I have also read some critiques of open theism and have found them more rhetoric than rational study.
The one objection that I could not respond to was regarding Hezekiah’s added fifteen years in 2 Kings 20. It was pointed out to me that the heir to the throne after Hezekiah was born during those 15 years. Had God not added these years to his life, he would not have had an heir when he died. Was it necessary for an unbroken bloodline of kings to rule Israel, or would God have been able to establish another person as king other than Hezekiah’s son if he had not added the extra years? Of course, this objection was raised to point out that God always intended for Hezekiah to live the extra 15 years.
Your thoughts on how to respond to this would be most appreciated.
Faith, Hope, & Love to you,
Reply to Bruxy:
It seems to me that this question is of the same pattern as many others–”How could God keep his promise if he did thus and such?” We forget that many of God’s statements are made in an unconditional way but are actually conditional. For instance, in 1 Samuel 2:30 God says that he had promised Eli that his sons would be priests forever in Israel, but God changed his mind on that. In 1 Samuel 13:13 God said to Saul that his descendants would have been kings forever, but he changed his mind and gives the kingly line to David. We try to hold God to a punctilious fulfillment of his word instead of leaving the way he fulfills it up to God. I do not see that God had to have an unbroken blood line from David, but even if he did, were there no other descendants of David than Hezekiah?
Dr. John Sanders
- Clear as Day: Metaphorical and Literal Readings of Scripture in the Open Theism Debate
- Open Theology & The Church 2013 Conference
- Why Simple Foreknowledge is Still Useless (In Spite of David Hunt and Alex Pruss)
- Divine Reciprocity and Epistemic Openness in Clark Pinnock’s Theology
- Divine Relationality and Theodicy in The Shack
- Mapping the Terrain of Divine Providence
- Polkinghorne, is he an Open Theist?
- Are any Reformed theologians sympathetic too or proponents of open theism?
- If God controls everything, isn’t his foreknowledge a moot point?
- So how does prevenient grace fit in with Open Theism?