Reply:

Polkinghorne does reject the "one act" creation of a timeless deity as per classical theism (see pg 82 of "The faith of a physicist" 1996 edition) but I cannot say how exactly he works out God's relation to time from this statement. As often happens, he makes a negative objection but does not offer a constructive alternative, at least in this context... His rejection of the timeless deity is tied to his commitment to God as personal.

Tyler

Reply:

In his book, The Faith of a Physicist, Polkinghorne rejects the idea of a timeless God, pp. 60-61. On p. 62 he speaks of God's vulnerability and of his suffering love. From what he says in these instances and elsewhere in the book, I think it would be fair to say that he would at the very least be sympathetic to the openness position.

Alec Brooks

Reply:

Polkinghorne is an open theist. It must be noted, however, that the term "open theism" has not been used by European thinkers. In a discussion with Polkinghorne in the summer of 2001 I asked him if was an open theist. He was not familiar with the term and asked me to define it. When I did he rerplied: "Yes, I affirm that position." You can read his affirmation of openness in a book he edited "The Work of Love: Creation as Kenosis" (Eerdmans, 2001). A number of open theists state their position in this book including Arthur Peacocke, Jurgen Moltmann, Keith Ward and Paul Fiddes.

John Sanders
Professor of Philosophy & Religion
Huntington College
2303 College Ave Huntington, IN 46750