[.ca] God's Lesser Glory (ISBN 1581342292)

Rigorous exegesis, sound thinking and careful discrimination:
Sometimes the Openness debate generates more heat than light, but Ware's book is a delightful exception. The volume is shot through with sound exegesis that demonstrates God's exhaustive and definite foreknowledge of the future choices of free agents. Chapter 4 corrects exegetical errors made by Openness Theology, and chapter 5 is Ware's refreshingly careful exegesis of a long list of passages that teach the traditional view. The book's argument is both penetrating and devastating. Rather than sweep the "partly open future" motif into the "dustbin of anthropomorphism," Ware shows that if an exegete takes the "open future" passages at "face value," as the Openness theologians think we should, then God would be ignorant of the present as well as the past, and He would need reminding of things. A "face value" hermeneutic proves too much for the Open Theists (reductio ad absurdum). The book also gives a helpful definition of the all too often undefined category of "anthropomorphism" on page 86. Unlike some theologians who have taken up their pens against this contemporary error, Ware rightly and judiciously discriminates between Open Theism and Arminianism. The former is outside the camp of evangelicalism, not the latter. This book never targets Arminianism; instead, it aims directly at the diminished god of Open Theism and proves that he is not the God of the Bible. Finally, throughout the entire work, the author's tone is urgent but kind, firm but loving, and polemical but pastoral. I heartily recommend this book to everyone who wants to know what the Bible says about God's knowledge of the future.

OPENISM EXPOSED AS ABERRANTLY IDOLATROUS:
Dr. Ware rates 6 stars for his fair and Scriptural expose' of Gregory Boyd's Open Theory of Bible interpretation,a Bi-Polar Processismic Philosophy lensing to synthesize a Neo-Theology. Dr. Ware systematically dismantles Openism by bringing the Bible to bear on Boydism. What are the major aberrancies of Openist Neo-Process Theory? 1)Rejection of Inerrant Bible. Boyd's own denomination Bapt. General Conference has as Affirmation of Faith "The Bible is Inerrant". Yet Boyd in his across-the-boundaryline latest book 'Across the Spectrum' patronizes the Historic Christian position of an error-free Word of God in favor of an error-ridden Scripture in matters not touching on 'faith & practice'. Ware and the rest of the Evangelical community wonder: just where,and who gets to decide which, Bible matters DON'T touch on matters of 'faith & practice'? Boyd's allegations cast doubt on Bible reliability. It is wondered why BGC Pres. Jerry Sheveland and Bethel College Trustees haven't counseled with Boyd about his anti-BGC Affirmation views (while on the clergy roster and a college prof), asking for retraction or resignation?? Will the BGC annual convention in June side with Boyd or the Bible on this one? The world wonders! 2)Rejection of specific Exhaustively Divine Definitive Foreknown Factuality prophecies like Elisha's Barley Futures in 2Kings; Gideon & Midianite Dream Sequence; Zechariah the prophet naming King Josiah 300 years in advance; Peter's triple denial (where Boyd has God 'squeezing' Peter to force 3 denials out of him, unwittingly eviscerating openism's libertarian agency with a divine override!); Jeremiah stating as future factuality that 2 false prophets would meet with a doom so memorable, Judah would quote a curse based on the judgment - Jer.29:21-22. 3)Boyd claims the title 'Evangelical' while advocating Neo-Processist ideas like non-literal hell, annihilationism, etc. Boyd claims that the Bible's descriptions of hell as 'outer darkness' and 'flames of fire' are self-contradictory, and can't both be true. Wrong again, Gregory! Aren't there heat energy waves not in the visible light spectrum (ultra-violet, micro-waves, etc.) that can generate tremendous heat energy yet no visible light? Or maybe Boyd hasn't heard of the out-of-body experience of a person who ended up in hell (instead of the usual tunnel of light or paradise). He stood on the shore of a huge lake or sea of flame, but it was dimly lit like zippo-blue-lighter fluid or propane flame emitting hardly any light. He was surrounded by a horrible,inky, suffocating pitch-blackness in the atmosphere all around. Like having it rain and shine at the same time, this man experienced 'outer darkness' and 'flames of lake of fire' simultaneously. Or just think of aerial photos of a forest fire or volcano lava flow at night. All darkness in the sky, with barely a glow of flame. Both at the same time. And both devastatingly real. All of the Bible's descriptors of hell, while hard for Boyd to imagine, show that the real hell must be infinitely worse than words can incompletely convey. 4)Finally, Ware shows how Openism fails the 'Glory Test'. Does the Bible's portrayal of Divine Attributes like Eternal Exhaustively Definitive Foreknown Factuality of free futures reflect Who the True Jesus is? Or Boyd's 'extensive indefinite forecasting' combined with 'infinite chess grandmaster level intelligence', processism's 'theo-repentism', limited quasi-omniscience, surrendered 'pre-creation-omnipotence', finitized pseudo-omnipresence, etc. more accurately depict the Bible's God to fullest magnified Glory? Which Jesus is to be worshiped?? He who has ears, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches! Stay tuned for Ware's forthcoming God of Greater Glory. Also, see the fine 'God Under Fire' and 'Beyond the Bounds' for equally devastating expose's of the misguided, misbegotten, misinterpretive neo-processist heterodox philosophtheology called Open Theory, with its origins in Boyd's doctoral dissertation TRINITY & PROCESS, a hybrid sterile mule mutated from a healthy horse(Historic Christianity)+ diseased donkey(Hartshornian Process Philosophy). "God is greater than our hearts, and He knows EVERYTHING." Not 'everything there is to know' or 'everything logically knowable' or 'everything as fact except free futures' or 'pretty much everything' or 'everything our genuine freedom confines Him to' or 'everything possible'. But EVERYTHING. Categorically. Unqualifiedly. Unrestrictedly. Unreservedly. Exhaustively. Free Future Factuality. Limitlessly. Omni-presciently. Without risk of contradiction. Settled in Transcendent Infinity-Eternity as if accomplished fact in Immanent Space-Time (though the Lord may change His stated intentions based on His unstated ones - see Jesus & Philip and the feeding of the 5,000 in John 6:6). "Dear children, keep yourselves from idols." (1John 5:21)

Mostly excellent refutation of Boydism:
Bruce Ware has been one of the more prominent evangelicals leading the charge against open theism in evangelical circles. He was one of the key speakers at the most recent meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society which ultimately voted better than 2 to 1 to reject open theism's proposal of a God of limited omniscience. This book is Ware's written attempt to discredit the theology, philosophy, and claims of open theism. For the most part, I think he succeeds. For everything that is taken up in this book, Ware's analysis is devastating to open theism. Ware effectively cuts through much of the sweet talk that's popular in open theism and methodically exposes the many negative ramifications of the openness view in terms of theology and daily Christian living. Ware's critique is very good in taking somewhat complex theological and philosophical material and making it accessible to lay people without watering down the concepts. He also does a good job of quoting extensively from a number of prominent open theism apologists, particularly Greg Boyd. In my view, after reading this book, it would be highly difficult for someone to try and suggest that Ware was erecting a strawman and arguing against that, rather than fairly discrediting the actual premises of open theism as articulated by its leaders. I gave the book 4 stars instead of 5 because I thought that Ware's analysis, while outstanding in the areas that are covered, could have been more exhaustive. To me, among the most problematic ramifications of open theism is the reality that open theism, by definition, must acknowledge at the very minimum the possibility of biblical errancy and fallibility. In my view, one cannot consistently be an open theist as well as a believer in biblical inerrancy, since a great deal of the prophetic material written in the Bible requires the exact kind of divine foreknowledge of the future that open theists say God doesn't possess. At the very least, open theism has to acknowledge that their view requires, for example, that the entire book of Revelation MIGHT prove to be wrong, since by their own view, the prophetic proclamations only represent God's best guesses of what might happen, rather than being part of a divine blueprint that's already in place. In addition, the other major theological problem with open theism is that it requires a fundamental redefining of the substitutionary atonement of Christ's death on the cross. If God doesn't know the future, that means that God could not know with absolute certainty that Christ's death would accomplish anything, since it is conceivable that nobody could have responded to it and believed. This raises huge problems both about the character of God (what are we to think of a God who willingly allows His only Son to be brutally sacrificed if He didn't know for sure that anything good would come from it), as well as what Christ's death on the cross is supposed to represent. Ware has verbally expounded on these critical points in various speeches and lectures, but neither issue is discussed in this book. Because I believe these issues represent monumental theological deficiencies in the openness view, a book worthy of 5 stars would have comprehensively explored these issues. Because Ware does not, I am compelled to give the book 4 stars instead because of its non-comprehensive critique. But having said that, I strongly stress that what Ware DOES cover in this book is outstanding and represents a very able and formidable refutation of open theism and its implications on the faith overall, as well as individual believers. He effectively shows that open theism is purely a human concoction that requires repeated caveats in order to cover up its rather obvious shortcomings - caveats which are actually in contradiction with the stated principles of open theism. Similar to Geisler's refutation of 'neotheism' in another book, Ware effectively shows not only that open theism is an internally inconsistent mess as a matter of scholarship, but also that open theism cannot deliver on many of the rosy promises it makes to undiscerning Christians who are intrigued by this redefinition of God. Ever since this book came out, Boyd and company have been playing defense, and it is clear why this is.

Maybe we should all just stop and count to ten.:
I had a nice, long, maybe even scholarly review of this book ready to go but then I thought, "You know, there's been toomuch angry ink spilled over this subject already." So I ditched all my really juicy points and am just going to give you the short version: On the whole, this book is an unwelcome addition to the open theism debate. Even if Ware's arguments are correct (a big if, in my opinion), his unending sarcasm and invective pretty much guarantee that no open theist is ever going to be able to listen to him. If you want to learn about open theism, this book is definitely not the place to start. Ware just doesn't seem able to sustain the fair-mindedness he manages to show in his early chapters. He draws too many unwarranted conclusions and produces too many distortions of the open thiesm position. Instead, I would suggest the Intervarsity Press book "Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views", and the many works referenced therein. (This is available from Amazon, by the way.) I will give Ware credit for one thing: he does show that the open theists have not produced iron-clad arguments in defence of their position. He shows that they have their work cut out for them, particularly in regard to prophecy. (He thinks his arguments along these lines pretty much put an end to open theism, but I think that is far overstating the case.) If you are somewhat familiar with open theism and are maybe thinking of taking the open theism plunge, you should definitely look before you leap and familiarize yourself with some of the arguments Ware makes. But I really don't think this book is the place of choice to do it. Again, I would start with "Divine Foreknowledge" and move on to the works referenced there. If you want a very good overview of the more traditional approaches to the foreknowledge question, I can't think of a better book than Linda Zagzebski's "The Dilemma of Freedom and Foreknowledge" (ISBN 0195065581 -- don't know if Amazon carries it or not), but be prepared to digest some real philosophical red meat!

HIGHLY RECOMMEND!:
I was so thankful to find this book. I had some disturbing feelings about the open view and Greg Boyd. I visited Boyd's church several times, but something was not right. I also knew a couple who attended there. The wife was a HUGE Dr. Boyd follower. She ended up divorcing her husband and neither Dr. Boyd nor his church stepped in to help. His advice was similar to the advice he shares in another book about the woman named Susanne. Open theism is a very harmful belief system and Bruce Ware has the knowledge of it to be able to present it as he does in this book. It was not until I read this that I really understood why I was so inwardly bothered at Boyd's church and I understood why this wife felt there was nothing wrong with divorcing her Christian husband. The open view is actually very liberal and it is an extreme teaching of grace that pushes grace beyond the "boundaries" in the Bible. This made sense when I thought of this couple's divorce. She would say, "Well God is going to forgive me" and I know her beliefs came from Dr. Boyd's teachings on God who is truly a "lesser" God because Boyd's God does not require obedience. Ware presents this philosophy clearly although some of it was hard for me to follow because I am not familiar with philosophy and various beliefs (like Armenism). I hope he will write another book on the open view and I would encourage this for all Christians to read so that they are not deceived by the open view's teachings. I do hope though that all future books like this will be more in layman terminology because for those unfamiliar with many of the terms, it can be hard to read.