Abstract
This chapter addresses the intersection of open theism and the pastoral problem of evil. It argues that, in spite of what Greg Boyd claims, open theism's implications actually make the pastoral problem of evil more difficult. Boyd explained that he indeed rejected the concept of substitutionary atonement. He opposed understanding the divine economy in a way that implied every bit of Christ's sacrifice had to be accounted for in some particular sin or other. The loving character shown in the picture of the atonement is inconsistent with a God who would act harmfully to the author in other circumstances. The chapter focuses on God's moral trustworthiness and not the trustworthiness of His sovereign ability. Boyd locates open theism's advantage, in responding to the pastoral problem of evil, in the relationship between love and freedom as characterized by the open view.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
