No Other God: A Response to Open Theism [Paperback]

John M. Frame (Author)

Product Details

• Paperback: 235 pages
• Publisher: P & R Publishing (October 1, 2001)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0875521851
• ISBN-13: 978-0875521855
• Product Dimensions: 8.5 x 5.5 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 11.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #357,654 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

19 of 26 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Predominately Excellent Contribution, July 21, 2003

By 

J. F Foster - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: No Other God: A Response to Open Theism (Paperback)

When it comes to matters of either theology or philosophy, being in a different camp then John Frame is not fun. Over the last 15 years or so, Frame has published a number of works on various topics that have taken Christian scholarship to a new level of freshness and coherence. This particular book, for the most part, falls into that category.

This contribution to the open theism debate, while not perfect, is a solid attempt to take on open theism on a variety of fronts. Unlike other critiques of open theism, Frame engages in an exegetical critique that is vital. But this book is not a purely exegetical critique, for it also engages open theism's presuppositions in the areas of hermeneutics and emotional imperatives that they bring to bear on the text. As a result, this book is one of the better books around in presenting a full orbed critique of open theism.

The result is a critique that exposes open theism for what it is - a philosophically and epistemically inconsistent worldview supported by dubious biblical exegesis and hermeneutical principles. Frame is outstanding in comparing the stated principles of open theism with the actual exegesis (to the extent that it can be called that) that actually violates their stated principles. He tends to be relentless not only in dismantling the legitimacy of libertarianism which is the lone guiding principle of the open theist program, but is also relentless in exposing the works of open theists as being AWOL when it comes to dealing with numerous biblical texts that militate against their system. It was refreshing to read a competent appraisal of the holes that tend to be gaping in the scholarship of the chief apologists of open theism.

I gave the book 4 stars mainly because while Frame's critique is full orbed and wide reaching, it suffered occasionally in what I felt was its unnecessary brevity. In particular, Frame's last chapter on the various theological ramifications of open theism was far too summary level and came off as an afterthought which was most unfortunate. The same can arguably be said about Frame's treatment of the love of God and how this attribute fits into a responsible attempt at a biblically based theology. Lastly, I would have appreciated a more in-depth critique of the literature that has been produced by open theists. I thought that Frame hit the highlights very well and dismantled many of the most serious errors of the movement as expressed in its writings, but there were many other areas that could have been covered here that weren't.

So overall, a very good contribution to this ongoing debate, but in my view, we are still waiting for a truly definitive treatise that systematically and exhaustively dissects open theism across the board in a responsible fashion. This work by Frame gets at least fairly close, but doesn't quite make it in my view.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars The Real Danger: Straw Men and Theological Determinism, July 7, 2011

By 

Joseph Wartick - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: No Other God: A Response to Open Theism (Paperback)

My bias: I came into reading this book looking for good arguments against open theism, a view which I think is unsupported by philosophy or Scripture.

Seldom have I read a book with which I find I disagree so strongly on some issues, while agreeing adamantly on others. Frame pulls no punches and is unafraid to make sweeping generalizations and assertions. Due to the fact I pretty much split the book in half as far as things with which I agree or disagree, I shall proceed by noting these areas and close with a few conclusions.

Areas of Agreement

One of the strengths of Frame's book is how clear his thinking is. His style of argumentation is precise, and he clearly lays out what he considers evidence for his positions. He is unafraid to make statements with huge implications.

A particularly interesting aspect of Frame's work was a brief historical look at the roots of Open Theism, leading it back to the Socinianism. Frame points out that advocates of Open Theism tend to portray their view as the "new theology on the block" despite the fact that it has been around (and rejected) for quite some time.

I believe Frame is correct when he argues against the centralization of any one attribute of God. Specifically, the centralization of love on Open Theism tends to ignore other important attributes of God (49ff). (Interestingly, Frame's own account of God unnecessarily over-emphasizes Sovereignty, though he disguises this by calling it "Lordship.)

Frame levels strong critiques against Open Theism's reading of Scripture. Open Theists tend to advocate the "straightforward" reading of texts which help their case. One of Open Theist's favorite passages is God testing Abraham. Yet Frame rightly notes that if there is a straightforward reading of the text, then God did not know the present truth of Abraham's heart, whereas Open Theists attempt to use this to support God not knowing the future (47). Further, if God was trying to figure out how Abraham would act in the future, then He was trying to do something He couldn't (determine what the libertarian free choices of humans would be) according to Open Theism. So the story's straightforward reading does not work to support Open Theism. Frame urges a similar examination of other passages, though he doesn't expand on it.

Areas of Disagreement

Despite these areas of agreement, I vehemently oppose Frame's position on several issues. Most notably, on theistic determinism, compatibilism, and libertarianism.

First, libertarianism. Frame correctly notes that the core of Open Theism is the assumption of libertarianism. Yet his critique of libertarianism is wrongheaded. He caricatures libertarians as believing that choices are made in the absence of any motivation. He writes, commenting on the libertarian view, "if our decisions are caused by anything or anyone (including our own desires), they are not properly our decisions... to be responsible, we must be able to do otherwise" (121). Yet this is explicitly not libertarianism. Peter van Inwagen, for example, explicates libertarianism by saying "...that someone's acts are undetermined does not entail that they are uncaused" (van Inwagen, An Essay on Free Will, Oxford: 1983, p. 14).

But Frame explicitly centers his critique of libertarianism on a contra-causal account of freedom, saying, for example, "If guilt presupposed libertarian freedom, then in order to show that Hubert [a man accused of robbing a bank] is guilty, the prosecutor would have to show that his decision to rob a bank had no cause..." (126). But again, libertarians deny this very type of contra-causal freedom, so Frame is arguing against a straw man. Because Frame thinks libertarianism is so utterly central to Open Theism, this means that the core of his critique fails to hit home.

The problem with Frame's counter against libertarianism is that it barely touches the surface of the philosophical arguments for the position. He correctly rails against the idea that our actions are just random occurrences, but incorrectly assumes that this is libertarianism.

Finally, the greatest area of disagreement I have with Frame is on his view of omnidetermination. Consider the following two quotes:

"The uniform witness of Scripture is that the evils of this life come from God" (140).

"...[I]t is important to see that God does in fact bring about the sinful behavior of human beings, whatever problems that may create in our understanding" (68).

I'd be curious to see how Frame reconciles these assertions with the constant witness of Scripture that God is just; fair; good; opposed to evil; etc. Frame utilizes several verses to support his position, but he makes primary those which say God uses "all things" and verses which say calamities are from God. But regarding the former, this can easily refer simply to permissive will, and regarding the latter, the verses he uses are out of context (and even were one to grant the "straightforward reading," one could counter by saying the calamities are not every evil action, but merely those things which God uses-i.e. storms, other nations, etc.-to instruct His people). Frame, like many theological determinists, is not building even on sand, but on a void. Literally saying that God causes evil is so utterly repugnant and contrary to Scripture that this view overshadows all the good things Frame has to say.

Conclusions

Ultimately, No Other God is on target in a few ways, but it is wildly gunning the wrong direction on too many issues. Frame's philosophical case against libertarianism is off the mark, he fails to deal with the strong philosophical arguments for libertarianism, and his view that God literally causes evil is baseless. Interestingly, while I went in reading this book looking for some good arguments against Open Theism, I came out with the realization that theological determinism is a far more dangerous doctrine indeed.

21 of 30 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Scholarly Endorsements, October 26, 2001

By A Customer

This review is from: No Other God: A Response to Open Theism (Paperback)

It is with a sense of relief that I turn from the amateurish and even wrong-headed writings of the "openness" theologians to this work by John Frame. He is as much at home in the historical dimensions of the debate as in the theological; he is as much in command of the interpretation of the relevant biblical texts as he is of the philosophical issues. With its wholly admirable freshness and a crisp incisiveness, this book is something both to read and to give to friends. A sad mark of the theological ignorance of our times is that Socinianism can dress itself up in new terminology and pass itself off as evangelical theology instead of a pernicious error frequently and roundly condemned. Frame's antidote is both needed and effective."

D. A. CARSON
Research Professor of New Testament
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

Open theism is bad news. The appearance of this book is good news. Precisely because God is closed and not open to the nullification of his purposes (Job 42:2), he has opened a future for believers that is utterly secure no matter what we suffer. The key that would open the defeat of God is eternally closed within the praiseworthy vault of his precious sovereignty. With the Bible as his criterion, John Frame delights to show when it is good to be closed and when it is good to be open.

JOHN PIPER
Senior Pastor
Bethlehem Baptist Church

John Frame's No Other God presents the serious minded, biblically faithful, and philosophically responsible reflections of a seasoned theologian regarding the profoundly misguided open view of God. While portions of Frame's criticism could be directed more generally to classical Arminianism's commitments to libertarian freedom and the centrality of the love of God, yet much of Frame's deepest concern focuses upon a range of distinctively and deeply distressing aspects of the post-Arminian openness model. Here one will see vividly so much that is wrong with open theism while encountering afresh the beauty and glory of the true and living God of the Bible.

BRUCE A. WARE
Professor of Christian Theology
The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

Combining exegetical good judgment, sound theology, and profound philosophical insight, Professor Frame has written exactly the book we need today to put into the hands of Christians attracted to the allegedly "new" doctrines of so-called open theism. Open theism leaves believers with a god who is not merely "too small" but irrelevant to our lives, our needs, our goals. And John Frame spells this out clearly in this easy-to-read but comprehensive and compelling critique. It is "must reading" for all Christians today.

ROBERT B. STRIMPLE
Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology
Westminster Theological Seminary in California