The Doctrine of God in the Theology of Heinrich Emil Brunner: A Theological-Biblical Assessment

Many debates in contemporary theology can be interpreted as revolving around questions concerning the doctrine of God and, with it, the way in which we are to construe God’s relationship to the world, the way in which we are to understand ‘the world’, and the ways in which God may be spoken of faithfully. Anglican liberal theology of the last century—for example, the outstanding work of Maurice Wiles—tended to a relatively parsimonious doctrine of God, generated as it was by the rather minimal affirmations a theologian could make in what was taken to be a philosophically justified way. It was not by accident that something like Deism was often the result. ‘Narrative’ theologies—such as those of Barth, Moltmann, and Jenson—eschew the God of the philosophers and develop their doctrine of God from the Christ-event or, more narrowly, from the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. These approaches are robustly Trinitarian and seek to be guided by what the church receives as orthodoxy, but their ‘dramatic’ structure can obscure the divine unity, and they can be regarded as sometimes blurring the distinction between God and the world. The question which arises is how to uphold the unity and aseity of God whilst allowing proportionate attention to the dramatis personae of salvation history.

ABSTRACT
 The purpose of this study is to have an overview of the theology of Karl Barth who is considered as one of the most influential theologians in contemporary Christian world. This study is of worthy in order to have an accurate grasp of the trend of modern Chriatian theology. After a brief survey of his life and works, this study provides an overview of Barth’s theology focusing on three major areas of his theology: the doctrines of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Barth’s emphasis upon the transcendence of God, the centrality of Jesus Christ in Christian theology, and the importance of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity should not be ignored for better understanding of the modern Christian theology. In a word, Barth’s theology has continuity of, and, at the same time, discontinuity from liberal theology.
 Keywords: Karl Barth, morder Christian theology, transcendence of God, centraliy of Jesus Christ, importance of the Holy Spirit, neo-orthodoxy, liberal theology

This chapter investigates the historical and theological development of the extra Calvinisticum from the Marburg Colloquy (1529) to the Consensus Tigurinus (1549). During this period, the proponents of the emerging Reformed tradition expanded the theological basis for the extra by incorporating additional arguments from Scripture, the church councils, and the church fathers. First, the chapter investigates the debate at the Marburg Colloquy demonstrating that the christological divergence between Zwingli and Luther was rooted not only in theological and hermeneutical method but also in the doctrines of God and anthropology. The chapter analyzes Zwingli’s final works, Fidei Ratio and Fidei Expositio, in which he presents a more robust understanding of the hypostatic union. The final section addresses the Consensus Tigurinus, written by Heinrich Bullinger and John Calvin, which offers the confessionalization of the extra in the Reformed tradition and effectively marks the definitive parting of ways within Protestantism over the Lord’s Supper.

This article brings Brevard Childs’s thesis concerning the nature of Scripture into dialogue with Karl Barth’s doctrine of revelation. It does so by reducing Childs’s thesis to its constituent building blocks in order to understand its logical structure and then comparing this structure to Barth’s understanding of the trinitarian pattern of God’s self-manifestation. The purpose is two-fold. On the one hand, it hopes to further understanding of Childs’s canonical approach by highlighting the centrality of the concept of “reality” to his understanding of the “canonical process.” On the other hand it hopes to contribute to the ongoing task of Christian hermeneutical reflection by illustrating the manner in which a doctrine of God and historical-critical speculation can be mutually illuminating.

Trinitarian spirituality. John Owen and the doctrine of God in western devotion. By Brian Kay (foreword J. I. Packer). (Studies in Christian History and Thought.) Pp. xiv+222. Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2007. £19.99 (paper). 978 1 84227 408 8 - Volume 60 Issue 2

Recognizing the philosophical underpinnings of Lactantius’s argument is the first step toward understanding his theology. This chapter demonstrates the fundamental continuities between Lactantius and earlier Latin Christian apologists, elucidating his theological grammar in order to identify the technical discourse presupposed in his arguments. The first section examines Lactantius’s criticism of philosophical arguments about the highest good in order to show that he understands virtus in terms of causal relations built upon the technical sense of power. Recognizing the causal logic inherent in his language clarifies our reading not only of Lactantius’s polemic against the traditional gods but also of his doctrinal theology. The chapter then proceeds to examine Lactantius’s doctrine of God, demonstrating the continuity of his understanding with Tertullian, Cyprian, and Novatian. A third section argues that Lactantius’s critique of the Roman gods does not offer a merely moral or ad hominem attack. Rather, Lactantius asserts that philosophical interpretations of the pantheon are self-defeating because they violate their own basic axioms. Lactantius’s doctrine of God is expressed in the course of this critique, which clears the ground for the Christological narrative that follows in Institutio 4.

BOOK REVIEWS Ue11tlation and Theology: The Gospel as Narrated Promise. By RONALD F. THIEMANN. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame, 1985. Pp. x + 272. $23.95. The author, recently named dean of Harvard Divinity School, wrote this book as chairman of the Religion Department at Haverford College. A Lutheran, he pays tribute to Hans Frei of Yale University as his principal mentor. Influenced by I<'rei's narrative theology, he argues for a doctrine of revelation understood as God's narrated promise. Narration, Thiemann contends, is essential for revelation, which is the doctrine of God's identifiability. We identify persons by ascribing character traits to them on the basis of their pattrrns of behavior. God\; patterns of hrhavior are made known through the biblical narrative. Promise, for Thiemann, is an essential category hecause it is the mode by which the biblical text encounters its readers, inviting them to put their trust in the God who was the principal agent of the history of Israel and of Jesus Christ. Faith, discerning God's identity ns thr suhject of the biblical text, goes out to him as a living reality. Thiemann's thesis of course implies that Christian revelation is given in the Bible, that the Bible is predominantly narrative, and that the main theme of the biblical narrative is the prevenient God who enacts his intentions and addresses the reader through the text. Faithful discipleship is the appropriate response to God's self-giving love as disc'.oscd in Jesus Christ. Thiemann illustrates these principles <"oncrrtrly hy a ch:ipterlength analysis of the Gospel of 11/fatthew. Thiemann defends his theolog·ical options on the ground that the alternatives do not sufficiently protect the divine prevenience. This doctrine, he holds, must be safeguarded not only because it was formally taught by the Council of Orange but also-and, one would gather, more fundnmentally -because it is implied " by a cluster of Christian convictions concerning God's promises, identity, and reality " (80-81). According to Thiemann it is a " common conviction shared by all those who confess the name of Christ . . . that all human life, including our theological thinking, is ultimately dependent on the creating, sustaining, and redeeming grace of God" (70). Apart from the rather broad use of the term "grace" this statement would be aceeptahle to very man~' Christians , including myself. In the course of establishing his own position 'l'hiemann develops au 169 170 BOOK REVIEWS incisive critique of a number of rival approaches. He rejects the "foundationalism " of classical apologetics which, as he understands it, would seek to justify Christian faith by reference to some kind of self-evident, noninferential experience from which it could be deduced. On the basis of a critical analysis of Thomas Torrance and several earlier theologians, he concludes that no such unassailable starting point exists. Thiemann also rejects the transcendental turn to the subject, which he ascribes to David Tracy and David Burrell, on the ground that this reduces biblical revelation to a generic human experience and ends by undermining the truth-status of all particular religious claims (187). Finally, Thiemann maintains that new theologies which dispense with the category of revelation (Gerald Downing, Gordon Kaufman) or give it no necessary function (David Kelsey) surrender the Christian conviction of God's prevenience and make faith dependent on purely human initiative. A nonfoundational defense of God's prevenience, according to Thiemann , has three distinct emphases. First, its justification of Christianity is conducted from within a conceptual framework supported by Christian faith, community, and tradition. Second, such a reflection evaluates and criticizes Christian doctrine and practice according to criteria internal to Christian faith. Third, this reflection seeks to justify its tenets holistically , by reference to the structures imbedded in the entire system of Christian beliefs and practices. Thiemann considers it proper to justify individual beliefs retrospectively by showing their importance for defining Christian identity. Thus he tries to show that a rejection of God's prevenience as a "background belief" would require " a radical and unwelcome revision in our understanding of Christian identity" (78). He makes use of " reflective equilibrium" and retrospective justification in ways strongly reminiscent of Francis Schussler Fiorenza's Foundational Theology (1984)-a book possibly published too late for Thiemann to refer to. Both he and Fiorenza, however, rely on authors such as John Rawls. In opposition to the foundationalists Thiemann, wisely in my opinion, eschews any sharp dichotomy between the "first-order" language of faith and the " second-order" language of theology. Christian theology, he maintains, must be carried on within Christian faith and must adopt patterns of speech that are consonant with Christian sources and premises. Theology, he asserts, "has no rationale independent of the first-order language of faith" (75). In particular, he denies that any successful account of Christian belief can be furnished by pointing to the religious experience supposedly available to all human beings. I find myself in agreement with practically all Thiemann's major positions . I applaud his skillful defense of revelation theology without recourse to rationalistic foundationalism or subjectivistic transcendentalism. BOOK REVIEWS 171 In my own Models of Revelation I made little explicit use of the categories of narrative and promise, but they are harmonious with my general approach . I rely more on the category of symbolic or saeramental communication . Thiemann might agree that Israel and Jesus Christ, as God's agents in human history, are in fact " real symbols" of the divine. By their very being they make present the hidden reality of the God who calls created persons through them into union with himself. They are thus pledges and anticipations of the age to come. The category of promise, when applied to such historical figures, could seem to tie revelation too narrowly to certain verbal expressions in the Bible, but Thiemann, while attending primarily to the linguistic component, seems open to the idea of promise "enacted" in the persons and events of the biblical narrative. In this wider understanding promise may be classified as " sacramental." A few shortcomings of the book, or personal difficulties of the present reviewer, should probably be detailed. In writings influenced by Hans Frei, including Thieman's, the biblical narratives seem to be exempted from historical criticism. Thiemann himself discusses them as pure narrative without raising the question of their objective validity. He seems to assume that these stories give true accounts of the way things are, for if they were products of fantasy or illusion they could scarcely bear the theological weight that Thiemann places on them. Granted that " Scripture depicts a God who continually keeps his promises" (154), the reflective inquirer would be justified in asking for some grounds for holding that this depiction is veridical and is not simply wishful thinking. If Thiemann had given more attention to this problem, his book might better succeed in providing, as it claims to do, " a reasoned theological account of Christian faith and hope" (7). Without such assurances the decision of faith could appear arbitrary and irresponsible. I fully agree with Thiemann's insistence on the divine prevenience, but I find some obscurity in his treatment of the connection between God's prevenience and any human response. Does God effectively influence the decision of faith 7 At one point Thiemann asserts that God is " the creator of the universe, the redeemer of a sinful humanity, and the reconciler of a broken world" (108). These terms seem to me to imply causality. Yet Thiemann repeatedly rails against understanding God's prevenience in causal terms (98, 109, et passim) . Possibly Thiemann is assuming that causality must necessarily be deterministic, but in many philosophical traditions causality is not so narrowly understood. God's prevenience would be more intelligible if it were presented in causal, though not deterministic, terms. I was not surprised to find in this book certain characteristically Lutheran motifs such as the " unconditionality " of justification and its antecedence to all human merits. Properly understood, this is not simply 172 nooK m~vrnws good Lutheranism but is basic Christian doctrine as understood by Catholics also. Thiemann, however, goes further. At one point, relying on Robert Jenson, he asserts that, on peril of works-righteousness, justification or salvation must not be conceived as any kind of causal process involving interaction between the divine and human agencies. While asserting this, he also denies that human beings are purely passive in their own justification (96-97). The idea that sanctification is a process involving the activity of both God and creatures is well rooted in the Lutheran as well as the Catholic tradition. Perhaps because he treats the whole question so briefly, Thiemann does not seem to me to provide an intelligible alternative. As should be obvious by this point, Thiemann's book deals with a multitude of crucially important questions. It enters into the very heart of the contemporary debate about revelation and theological methodology, and makes many insightful contributions. For the most part, I am enthusiastic about his approach, which seems to offer a highly promising alternative to the theological options he rejects. What I regard as shortcomings in this book are partly due to its relative brevity, granted the vast range of topics on which it touches. But the very breadth of the horizons makes this book especially stimulating and arouses the reader's eagerness to hear more from its talented author. The Catholic University of America Washington, D.C. AVERY DULLES, S.J. The Triune God: Persons, Process, an(l Community. By JOSE.PH A. BRACKEN, S.J. College Theology Society: Studies in Religion, 1. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1985. Pp. viii + 208, incl. Glossary, Bibliography and Index. $22.50 (cloth), $11.75 (pb.). Among the questions that urge themselves upon contemporary practitioners of theology few are more masic than that of the reconstruction of theology itself. How radical a reconstruction (and thus a corresponding deconstruction) is called for~ This volume represents Joseph Bracken's option on the issue. He is willing to wager all on an integral attempt to begin everything anew with the resources for a systematic theology provided by the thought of Alfred North Whitehead. This includes drawing upon other authors who have expanded upon, and in some ways altered, the seminal thought of Whitehead. Earlier attempts at something like this that come readily to mind are: Daniel Day Wil- ...

Theologians seeking to respond to the ecological crisis seldom turn to the theology of Karl Barth as a resource. In fact, some suggest that his doctrine of God is too monarchical and leads to unnecessary hierarchies between God and humans, or between humans and the rest of nature. This article counters this trend and begins a dialogue with Barth, especially on the place of non-human nature in his thought. While agreeing with the substance of Barth's theology, it is argued a number of critical additions and revisions are appropriate, especially concerning his doctrine of election. The article first briefly outlines Barth's doctrine of election and then, second, examines various New Testament passages on election and non-human nature. This second section will examine the prologue of John's Gospel, Colossians 1:15–20 and Romans 8:18–23. As key texts in Barth's exposition, it will be noted how he passes over important connections between election and nature found in them. Guided by the green exegesis of Richard Bauckham, it will be argued that nature is not merely the stage for the drama between God and humanity but that it is also an object of God's election and thereby participates in reconciliation and redemption. The third part of the article suggests various points of commensurability, correction and addition to Barth's theology arising from the biblical material examined. This includes points concerning theological epistemology, the atonement, anthropology and the theology of nature. For example, Romans 8 suggests that creation groans in anticipation of redemption. Barth's view of the cross, especially the Son's taking up of human suffering, is extended to suggest that the cross is God's way of identifying with the suffering of nature and its anticipation of redemption, and not just human sin and salvation. The most important revision, however, is to be made to Barth's doctrine of election. It may be summarised as follows: in Jesus Christ, God elects the Christian community and individuals for salvation within the community of creation. The article concludes by suggesting areas of dialogue with other types of ecotheology, especially ecofeminist forms.

This article contrasts the accounts of mystery used to combat idolatry found in the theology of Karl Barth and in contemporary apophatic theology. It describes Barth’s account of mystery as distinctly Protestant in its soteriological nature and basis in contrast to recent apophatic accounts of mystery based on the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo. These divergent theologies of mystery—as either light or darkness based on different dogmatic res—ultimately reveal contrasting commitments in the doctrine of God. For both, Jesus Christ is the light of God’s gracious revelation. However, the movement in apophatic theology is from the light of Christ to the mystery of divine darkness, while in Barth’s theology Jesus Christ is the luminous mystery of God that dispels the Deus absconditus. This article argues that idolatry is better counteracted by Barth’s positive concept that mystery is grace and filled with content in Jesus Christ.

Wolf Krötke and Eberhard JUngel are among the most sophisticated theologians writing in Germany today. Both have recently retired, the former from Humboldt University in Berlin and the latter from the University ofTübingen. Their theology is marked by a common and rigorous yielding to God's self-disclosure in Jesus Christ. While their respective writings include extensive comment on and work in a variety of different doctrinal themes—most notably, the doctrine of God—and theologians—most notably, Karl Barth—each has demonstrated an abiding interest in the doctrine of the divine attributes. Their focus has been on describing, albeit with different emphases, what the doctrine of the divine attributes looks like when it begins with the God who comes low in Jesus Christ, rather than a God who more resembles some kind of supreme being.

We have gathered to reflect on the significance of the Willingen Conference of 1952 for our today. Willingen did not understand itself to be an end in itself, It was conceived as a milestone (1) on the road towards an in-depth understanding of that, in turn, would lead to a renewed endeavour establish faithful obedience among the nations. The concept of missio Dei was only used in passing at the conference, and it was only later, through the publication of G. Vicedom (2), that it came to sum up the new approach and me sage of the conference so precisely. Willingen 1952 was the first time that was so comprehensively anchored in the doctrine of God. That was source of relief, to start with, since had again fallen into crisis after the second world war, albeit proclaimed the great event of the 20th century the first world conference in Edinburgh. Expectations began to crumble. At Whitby, in 1947, we hoped that the most testing days of the Christian at least for our generation, lay behind us ... But here at Willingen clouds and thick darkness surround the city, and we know with complete certainty that the most testing days of the Christian in our generation lie just ahead. (3) Vast, promising fields were closed (e.g. China) under the Cross characterized the mood that was marked no long by hope but by concern, if not depression. Anchoring in God was relief. Die Sach' ist dein, Herr Jesu Christ (The cause is yours, Lord Jesus Christ), had always been a popular hymn in missionary circles, but now this line took on a new theological dimension. God, the triune God, was seen to the initiator, missionary and fulfiller of mission. Since, however, the question of missio hominum was only touched upon at the conference the differences visible beforehand persisted, and to this day still lurk in the background theology debate. On the one hand, there is the rejection of church-oriented by J. Chr Hoekendijk, who saw the church as an appendix of God's coming into the world, the actual missio Dei (4). On the other hand, one can typically quote Freytag, who so esteemed the of the church that it became the sign the last days, and the very meaning of world history. (5) Even if the two positions indicate extremes, they are still operative below the surface today, and may be discerned even in the magazines put out by different associations. The magazines of church-run societies primarily deal with social problems in the countries of the churches overseas. The evangelical magazine however, focus on the personal experience of faith and conversion, and refer to the relevant social environment at most when their missionaries come under pressure from other religions. The Hamburg-based Association of Protestant Churches and Missions in Germany (EMW) uses a compromise definition: Of course is an invitation to believe, and to talk about the meaning of life. It is the working for liberation, human rights and human dignity. Mission is the struggle against racism and economic exploitation, and works for reconciliation and justice. Mission is connected with the debt issue and about establishing a reconciled global community. (6) Even if K. Schafer clearly states that for him evangelism is the heart of mission, and the different accents in understanding depend on the respective situations, he, too, still cannot escape the criticism levelled at Hoekendijk and his approach, viz. that of expanding the concept of to the point where it becomes imprecise and meaningless. The criteria of differentiation are lacking. Why does the commitment to a more just world come under mission when it applies to Latin America (a commitment shared with the trades unions) but not when it applies to Germany? Where is the criterion for classifying anti-globalization activists as engaging in missionary activity in one instance, and not in another? …

Professor William Lane Craig argues that a particular set of concerns about the Christian doctrine of penal substitution (namely, that Jesus of Nazareth was sacrificed for the sins of humanity) can be satisfied. This article provides rebuttals to said replies in an attempt to render plausible the claim that God exists to the extent that God is perfectly just, and that divine justice requires, among other things, that God never engage in the harming of innocents, consistent with any doctrine of retributivism worthy of the name. The doctrine of God, then, must remain consistent with unqualified negative retributivism. Any theism which might suggest otherwise violates such vital considerations of justice and fairness and must be rejected.

Biblical Theology Christopher T. Begg, Fred W. Guyette, and J. Edward Owens Christopher T. Begg Catholic University of America Fred W. Guyette Erskine College and Seminary J. Edward Owens OSST, University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio TX 2620. [Messiah in the OT] Andrew T. Abernethy and Gregory Goswell, God's Messiah in the Old Testament: Expectations of a Coming King (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2020). Pp. xiii + 292. Paper $29.99. ISBN 978-0-8010-9975-5. At the start of the introduction to their joint volume, A. and G. offer the following statement about what the book is about (p. 1): "The subject of this book is fundamental to a proper understanding of the faith we profess, for the name of our faith (Christianity) and the name given to its followers (Christians) derive from a core belief that Jesus of Nazareth is the 'Christ' (Messiah). In terms of a definition of 'messiah' and 'messianism' in this book these terms are understood to refer to the hope of the coming of a royal agent who will serve God's kingdom purposes, an expectation that Christians believe finds fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Put simply, a messianic passage or book in the Old Testament is one in which this royal figure is prefigured, anticipated, predicted, or described." Against this background, A. and G. trace the canonical unfolding of the messiah concept in the Hebrew Bible from its opening in the Pentateuch through its conclusion in Chronicles in a sequence of 15 chapters as follows: (1) The Seed, the Star, and the Template in the Pentateuch; (2) The Need for a King in Judges; (3) The Book of Ruth and the House of David; (4) The Heart of Kingship in 1–2 Samuel; (5) Failure and the Royal Ideal in 1–2 Kings; (6) Royal Messianic Expectations in Isaiah; (7) The Death and Rebirth of Kingship in Jeremiah; (8) The Prince Forecast in Ezekiel; (9) Kingship for a United Nation in Hosea; (10) David's Booth in Amos; (11) Davidic Rule in Micah; (12) The Sprout, the Divine Shepherd, and Messenger of Zechariah and Malachi; (13) The Portrait of David in the Psalter; (14) Where Is David in the Book of Daniel?; and (15) Kingship and the Temple in 1 Chronicles. A 16th chapter ("Looking Forward to the New Testament") enlarges the perspective beyond the OT and is itself followed by a conclusion, a bibliography, and indexes of Scripture and ancient writings, names of modern authors, and subjects.—C.T.B. Google Scholar 2621. [The Doctrine of Creation; Abraham Kuyper] Bruce Riley Ashford and Craig G. Bartholomew, The Doctrine of Creation: A Constructive Kuyperian Approach (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2020). Pp. xi + 430. $50. ISBN 978-0-8308-5490-5. Apart from the doctrine of God, no doctrine is as comprehensive as that of creation. It is woven throughout the entire fabric of Christian theology. It goes to the deepest roots of reality and leaves no area of life untouched. Across the centuries, however, the doctrine of creation has often been eclipsed or threatened by various forms of Gnosticism. Yet, if Christians are to rise to current challenges related to public theology and ethics, we must regain a robust, biblical doctrine of creation. According to A. and B., one of the best sources for outfitting this recovery is Dutch Neo-Calvinism. Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck, and their successors set forth a substantial doctrine of creation's goodness, but recent advances in this tradition have been limited. Now in their volume, A. and B. develop the Kuyperian tradition's rich resources on creation for systematic theology and the life of the church today. In addition to tracing historical treatments of the doctrine, the authors explore intertwined theological themes, such as divine omnipotence, human vocation, and providence. They draw on diverse streams of Christian thought while remaining rooted in the Kuyperian tradition, with a sustained focus on doing theology in deep engagement with Scripture. [End Page 978] Approaching the world as God's creation changes everything. Thus, this volume concludes with a consideration of its implications for current issues, including those related to philosophy...

‘… the ethical question—at least, if it is intended and understood in a way which is meaningful from the Christian and theological standpoint—cannot rightly be asked and answered except within the framework, or at any rate the material context, of dogmatics. True man and his good action can be viewed only from the standpoint of the true and active God and His goodness’ (C.D. 111.4, p. 3). Ethics, for Barth, is a part of Dogmatics. This explains the heavily doctrinal setting of his treatment of the Sabbath commandment. It is part of the doctrine of Creation: the Sabbath is ‘The Command of God the Creator’—the title indeed of Chapter XII, which takes up the whole of volume C.D. 111.4. The nature or character of the God revealed in the Scriptural account of Creation, who in Jesus Christ is also Redeemer and Sanctifier, determines our view of the nature or character of His command. His command is good, and its aim is our goodness, our sanctification, our freedom before God. ‘Man's action is good in so far as he is the obedient hearer of the Word and command of God…. Ethics has to understand the Word of God as the fulness, measure and source of this sanctification’ (p. 4). This doctrine of God is General Ethics. Special Ethics is the teaching of how man is to respond to the command of this God.

Does God react? Can God be disappointed? Does God repent? In the 1990s, a heated controversy over God's openness divided evangelical theologians in North America. On one side stood conservative evangelicals who affirmed God’s sovereignty, omniscience, and omnipotence based on traditional doctrines of Calvinist Puritanism. On the other side were thinkers with Pietist, Methodist, or Pentecostal leanings convinced that the doctrine of God should be made more consistent with the evangelical experience of divine activity and loving involvement. In this volume, Swiss theologian Manuel Schmid analyzes evangelical open theism and assesses its strengths and weaknesses from a continental perspective. Not only does his training in German Protestant theology illuminate this debate among evangelicals, but it also develops connections with other lines of thought in contemporary biblical studies and systematic theology that take seriously God’s relationality, risk-taking, and anthropomorphic divine attributes. This book appeared in German in 2019 as Gott ist ein Abenteurer [God is an adventurer] translated somewhat less excitingly into English as God in Motion. Chapter One provides a chronology of how and why divine openness divided North American evangelicals. The flame was lit by a 1994 volume The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God co-authored by Clark H. Pinnock, Richard Rice, John Sanders, William Hasker, and David Basinger, which became a manifesto for the movement. Open theology harkens back to the sixteenth-century Dutch thinker Jacobus Arminius who disputed with John Calvin and rejected Calvinist doctrines on predestination and divine foreknowledge. Schmid traces developments in open theism in early middle and late phases over the decades. He points out that while in The Openness of God process theology, based on Whitehead’s philosophy, is quickly dismissed as unbiblical, later proponents of open theism such as Gregory Boyd and Thomas Oord are more receptive to its conception of God’s capacity for change. Schmid situates the evangelical open theism controversy within historical biblical criticism and German theology, legitimating it as an international movement. Chapter Two examines evidence for open theism in scripture, a primary source for evangelical theologians who affirm biblical inerrancy. The Hebrew Bible in particular includes narratives that depict God responding to human decisions and even repenting. Schmid delves into the hermeneutics of specific verses that contain the motif of God’s openness and opposing views based on passages that appear to support Calvinism. For example, God makes a covenant with Abraham that relies on human obedience, and it seems that God responds and adjusts as events unfold, which may be interpreted as indicating anthropomorphic qualities in God. Schmid observes that a form-critical approach to the Bible could explain discrepancies in how God is portrayed based on the date of textual composition, however, evangelicals try to reconcile any internal contradictions within the Bible. Chapter Three unpacks how proponents of God’s openness attack the tradition of classical theism. Not only do they argue that classical theism’s perfect, unchanging deity is incongruous with the Bible, but they blame Greek philosophy for distorting how God is understood conceptually. Open theists accept the ‘Hellenistic thesis’ found in nineteenth-century German theology, and developed notably by Adolf von Harnack, which dichotomizes Christianity and Hellenism, the God of the Bible and the God of philosophy based on Platonism and Aristotelianism. Schmid points out that evangelical open theists use the designation ‘classical theism’ broadly to lump together contemporary Calvinism with Augustinianism and Catholic doctrines of the patristic and medieval eras. He appreciates refinements of open theism such as John Sanders’ more nuanced reflection on the Christianization of Hellenism, as opposed to outright rejection, and Gregory Boyd’s observation that open theists reject the principle of negative transcendence to characterize the majesty of God by the negation of human attributes. Schmid shows that recent German scholarship on the Hellenization of Christianity can advance and refine evangelical objections to Hellenistic essentialization. Evangelical open theists embrace a more anthropomorphic concept of God. However, they run into difficulties explaining why some passages about God’s mind changing should be taken literally and others, such as those attributing body parts to God, should not. Recent scholarship in biblical studies on anthropomorphic texts by Terence Fretheim, Walter Brueggemann, and contemporary German scholars can assist evangelicals in defending the biblical evidence for God’s openness theologically. Chapter Four turns from biblical to systematic theology and inspects how open theists define classical divine attributes to accommodate divine responsiveness. God’s omniscience and foreknowledge, for example, are reframed as divine wisdom which includes divine love and trust allowing humans freedom. Divine omnipotence becomes liberating power, sharing power, and participating together with human beings in salvation history, and divine immutability becomes reliability and steadfastness in devotion to humanity. The intent is to be faithful to classical doctrines understood as including divine openness. Perhaps the most ambitious section of the book is an excursion through the works of famous twentieth-century Protestant theologians Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Jurgen Moltmann, and Wolfhart Pannenberg. These thinkers share striking motifs and motivations with North American open theism: they seek a more biblical and less abstract concept of God, they reformulate the divine attribute of immutability to mean faithfulness and constancy, and they redefine divine power as love and self-limitation rather than control. It is fascinating to see how ideas about God’s openness developed on both sides of the Atlantic. But according to Schmid, apart from Gregory Boyd’s Trinitarian process theology, North American evangelical open theists have not developed a systematic theology of divine attributes. He suggests that a hermeneutic centered on divine self-revelation in Christ and the social Trinity would serve this purpose. The conclusion draws on Walter Brueggemann’s Theology of the Old Testament to explore the Bible’s polyphony regarding God’s essence. Schmid takes this line of thought further with reflection on the work of recent German theologians who accept that biblical narratives cannot be fully unified as they depict God. He considers the need for more reflection on biblical interpretation by North American open theists. The inconsistency of biblical depictions of God can be reconciled by a hermeneutic that accounts for priority placed on certain biblical passages. For example, a Christological hermeneutic would center the interpretation of biblical testimonies around the love of God incarnated in Jesus Christ. Such a step would bring clarity to open theists' embrace of anthropomorphic biblical passages and systematize how they relate biblical God-talk to the theology of God’s nature. A final lesson from the openness of God controversy is that evangelicals would do well to tolerate some degree of ambiguity in understanding the attributes of God, rather than become destructive against members of the evangelical fold. This book provides a fair academic perspective on a contentious past debate within evangelicalism. Yet it demonstrates continuing interest in the theological implications of biblical depictions of God which appear anthropomorphic, not only as an academic exercise, but to formulate who God is conceptually in a way consistent with lived faith in a God who responds with love.