First, the good. Eldredge points directly to the problem when he states that men in general don't feel needed or even welcome in a world that seems to have been designed for womenl. He also writes wrell, and I always think it's a good idea to do that.
And if that was all, everything would be great. Unfortunately, there's the bad. Specifically, there are two areas of concern. The first is a mistake even great philosophers have made: he assumes that his own experiences are normative. Not only does he think all his desires come from God because he's ssved, but he tends to identify his tastes and God's. Essentially, God becomes John Eldredge writ large.,
Potentially more problematic is his attitude toward God's omniscience. Eldredge repeatedly refers to the "risks" God took creating people with free will. Risk implies a lack of knowledge about the future that skirts dangerously close to Open Theism.
I would love to recommend this book, but I can't.
I don't think we should marginalize Open Theism quite so strongly. God is omniscient, but in his omnipotence, why can't he CHOOSE to limit his omniscience for his own glory? The Bible says he chooses not only to forgive our sins but forget them. Jesus said he would eventually tell some people: "I never knew you". Doesn't Calvinism actually limit God, saying that He "has" to know everything in advance? Maybe God wants to enjoy an infinite game of chess He created knowing that no matter what moves humanity or Satan makes He will ultimately win? Wouldn't that demonstrate His power more than just watching what he has predetermined play out?
ReplyDelete