Banner

Theologically Correct Pseudo Scholars

Dr. Robert Morey  |  October 12, 2007

I have been lecturing and writing on what is now called the “Open View” of God since the early 1980’s. Of course, the modern title for this damnable heresy is absurd. It should be called, “The Closed View” of God because they close the future to God’s knowledge and control. But then liberals have always painted their heresies with virtue’s colors. The trains that took the Jews to the concentration camps during WWII were called, “The Charitable Transportation for the Poor.” Go figure!

Crowne Publishers published my first book on the issue, The Battle of the Gods, in 1989. In this 316 page book, I documented in great detail the history of “finite godism” throughout church history and secular philosophy. I named the “evangelicals” who had fallen into this heresy such as Clark Pinnock, Youth with A Mission, Bethany House Fellowship, Brother Andrew, Gordon Olson, etc. .

The book had recommendations on the back cover by D. James Kennedy, Walter Martin, and John Ankerberg. It received rave reviews from dozens of theological journals and well-known theologians.

I then wrote a review of Boyd’s book, Trinity and Process (NY: Peter Lang) that revealed that he denied the omni-attributes of God. I irrefutably documented his heresies. Dozens of well-known theologians recommended my review. Nevertheless, I was attacked on national radio by Hank Hannegraaff on “The Bible Answer Man.” He defended Boyd by attacking my
motives and character.

Since Hank “Handicap” only had a high school education and was ignorant of theology, philosophy, Greek, Hebrew, church history, the Bible, the cults, etc., I could understand him being stupid. Boyd was on his CRI Journal editorial Board.

But I was surprised when Hannegraaf had the Passantinos, Rhodes, Samples, Miller, etc. attacked my review as “dishonest.” Since they could not answer my arguments, they attacked me personally.

Hank had the Passantinos write a vicious review of my review of Boyd’s book, Trinity and Process. Their defense of Boyd was so inept and ignorant that I wrote them and asked them if they had ever read Boyd’s book. They admitted they had not bothered to obtain or read Boyd’s book! They were defending a book they had never read! The same was for all the idiots at CRI. None of them had read the book before rushing out to defend it by trashing me.

I offered to loan them my copy if they would read it. The Passantinos refused my offer and said that they did not need to read it. I have the correspondence in my files. I concluded that CRI was now in the hands of pseudo intellectuals who did not feel the need to read the primary source materials.

My book, Battle of the Gods, and my review of Boyd’s book motivated Jim Kennedy to ask me write a detailed exegetical refutation of the heresy from the Greek and Hebrew Text. The book, The Nature and Extent of God’s Knowledge (CSP) was published in 1999. It is a very detailed exegetical refutation and the heretics have run from it ever since.

You can imagine my surprise when I picked up Wayne House’ book, Charts: Open Theism and Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2003) and found him ignorant of the issue and my extensive refutation of it. This confirmed my view of House that he is a typical pseudo-scholar who does not do adequate research.

I met House only once and it was a bad experience. I was scheduled to be on a panel at an EMER conference In Atlanta, GA. The panel was composed of two Catholics and two Protestants. I looked forward to dealing with the two Catholics, one was an apostate Protestant and the other was a Jesuit.

Although the conference literature listed me on the panel, when I arrived, I was told that House had kicked me off the panel. You can imagine my shock. After spending the money to be there, I was thrown off the panel without any regard for me or the many people who came to hear me.

I found House and asked him why he had thrown me off the panel. He said I was too Protestant! He put a Catholic lover (CRI’s Ken Samples) in my place. He went on to defend popery so much that the two Catholics at one point offered him a seat on their side of the panel.

I asked House if he was going to allow questions from the audience. He looked shocked and asked if I planned to attend the panel discussion. Of course, I was going to be there and I was going to stand up and ask some questions of the two Catholics.

When House opened the discussion, he said that no questions would be allowed from the audience! I felt raped a second time. Not only had House betrayed the original agreement for me to be part of the panel, but, he was so afraid that I would ask questions that would disrupt his ecumenical love fest that he would not even allow me to ask questions!

All this came to mind as I read House’s inept book. I could see him holding a love fest with “Open View” heretics. He did not put them outside of the Christian church, where they belong, along with Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses.

All this led me to write this blog about the pseudo-scholars who dominate the evangelical world today. They do no exegetical work to define, document or defend their theology or apologetics. They are ignorant of past treatments of the issues. I have coined a new phrase that describes them: “Theologically Correct.”

Just like the “Politically Correct” crowd, the “Theologically Correct” crowd is intolerant of anyone who will not compromise or sell out to religious humanism. But, thank God, there are still “seven thousand” who have not bowed the knee to Baal and we are launching a new Reformation to overthrow the heresies of today. To Him be the glory, Amen!