good example of how distinctions collapse in open theism. Even Jesus' assertion that
"God is spirit" could conceivably be surrendered as one more incursion of Greek
philosophy. He cites Mormon theologian D. Paulsen, among others, for support (35
fn.31) and appeals to Mormon criticisms of divine incorporeality as well as other
classical attributes (68fn.11). Is it not open theism, then, that disparages
anthropomorphism and cannot live with analogies as analogies?
But short of making this move to affirm divine corporeality, there seems to be no
theoretical reason to separate attributions of particular emotions from attributions of
particular limbs and organs.
treatment of divine emotion contrasts sharply with the picture that one obtains from
Pinnock's caricature.
with agnosticism (equivocity), citing John Macquarrie's concern that without a "univocal
core," theology "lapses into agnosticism" (25). Macquarrie and other liberal or
human suffering could be a reason for Divine compassion without being an efficient cause of it." Adams
captures what is really at stake here: "If something other than God causally affects God, however, God
can't be the first cause of every change, unless Divine passibility is just an indirect approach to Divine self-
change...If God could be totally or even nearly overcome by grief within God's Divine nature, God would
not only fail to have an ideal Stoic character (which those of us who flirt with passibility can live with),
God's providential control might be jeopardized. Do crucifixion, earthquakes, and eclipses signal that God
has `lost it' in Divine rage and grief?"
being a part of God's character [Summa contra gentiles I.90], he only objects to those affections which, if
they are had by anything, require that individual to be passive and to be in time. So that if there are
attributes which, though they in fact carry such implications when possessed by human beings, do not when
possessed by God, then Aquinas is ready to recognize the possibility of such in God. And clearly there are
such--love, joy, delight, care and grace, for example. God has each of these with the greatest possible
intensity and power."
without; that He dwells in holy calm and unchangeable blessedness, untouched by human sufferings or human sorrows for ever, --
haunting
The lucid interspace of world and world,
Where never creeps a cloud, nor moves a wind,
Nor ever falls the least white star of snow,
Nor ever lowest roll of thunder moans,
Nor sound of human sorrow mounts to mar
His sacred, everlasting calm.
Let us bless our God that it is not true. God can feel; God does love. We have Scriptural warrant for believing that, like the hero of
Zurich, God has reached out loving arms and gathered into His own bosom that forest of spears which otherwise had pierced ours.
But is not this gross anthropomorphism? We are careless of names: it is the truth of God. And we decline to yield up the God of the
Bible and the God of our hearts to any philosophical abstraction....We may feel awe in the presence of the Absolute, as we feel awe in
the presence of the storm or of the earthquake...But we cannot love it; we cannot trust it...Nevertheless, let us rejoice that our God has
not left us by searching to find Him out. Let us rejoice that He has plainly revealed Himself to us in His Word as a God who loves us,
and who, because He loves us, has sacrificed Himself for us