A Critical Understanding of Thomas Jay Oord’s Kenotic Theism versus Classical Theism- Two Fundamentally Different Concepts of God

Résumé

This article argues that the theological framework proposed by Thomas Jay Oord, particularly his concepts of "uncontrolling love" and a kenotic, risk-taking God, is not a mere reinterpretation or development of classical theism but represents a fundamental and irreconcilable departure from its core metaphysical tenets. Classical theism is defined by its commitment to divine omnipotence as absolute power, divine impassibility, immutability, and atemporality. In contrast, Oord’s relational theism posits a God whose very nature is uncontrolling love, rendering God inherently incapable of coercion, necessarily passible and vulnerable, and temporally engaged with an open future. By systematically contrasting these two systems across the doctrines of divine power, divine nature and suffering, God’s relationship to time, and the nature of providence and theodicy, this article demonstrates that Oord’s project constitutes a distinct theological paradigm. The analysis reveals that Oord’s resolution to the problem of evil is achieved by dismantling the metaphysical foundations upon which classical theism is built, presenting a choice not between two interpretations of the same divine being, but between two fundamentally different conceptions of God and reality.

Citer ce document

Accès au document

Texte intégral en lecture en ligne, réservé aux abonnés SPHAERO et aux membres de l'institution. Se connecter

Voir l'article sur le site de la revue

Auteur(s)

Statistiques

Consultations : 1

Téléchargements : 0