Creating God in the Image of Man?

by Norman L. Geisler

Does God Have Human Limitations? Who is God? What is he like? Why can we trust him? A growing group of Christian scholars is offering new answers to these timeless questions, challenging classical theism the traditional view of God held by most evangelical Christians. Some within the movement picture God with human limitations, rewriting classical beliefs that God is unchanging, all-powerful, and all-knowing with dire consequences for the Christian's life of faith. Creating God in the Image of Man is an examination and evaluation of this new "open" view of God. Dr. Norman L. Geisler offers an insightful critique of how this view seriously alters historic Christian belief. Geisler highlights the philosophical, theological, and practical problems of the view he calls "Neotheism" and sets forth a biblical defense of the traditional understanding of God. Dr. Norman L. Geisler is president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, North Carolina. He is the author of more than forty books on theology, the Bible, and apologetics.

Genres: Theology

191 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 1997

About the author

Norman L. Geisler (PhD, Loyola University of Chicago) taught at top evangelical colleges and seminaries for over fifty years and was a distinguished professor of apologetics and theology at Veritas Evangelical Seminary in Murrieta, California. He was the author of nearly eighty books, including the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics and Christian Ethics. He and his wife lived in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Reviews

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A STRONG CRITIQUE OF "OPEN THEOLOGY" ("NEOTHEISM") BY A NOTED APOLOGIST

Norman L. Geisler (b. 1932) is a well-known Christian apologist and co-founder of Southern Evangelical Seminary, where he formerly taught. Geisler resigned from the Evangelical Theological Society in 2003, after it did not expel Clark Pinnock, who advocates the "Open Theism" (or "Neotheism," in Geisler's term) view critiqued in this 1997 book. (For Pinnock's view, see 'The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God' and 'Most Moved Mover: A Theology of God's Openness.')

He wrote in the Introduction, "This book warns of a dangerous trend within evangelical circles of creating God in man's image... This view is called new theism or neotheism because it admittedly departs from the traditional view of God ... This venerable theistic tradition is now in danger of being lost, at least within an influential circle of Christian scholars."

He begins with two points: (1) that neotheism is a "significant deviation" from the God of the Bible and Christian theology, and (2) it retains key elements of traditional theism, "which warrants placing it within the broad spectrum of theism as opposed to panentheism." (Pg. 12)

A key issue is about the immutability of God. Neotheists appeal to biblical texts which speak of God "changing," "repenting," etc. But Geisler asks why the neotheists take these passages literally, while they don't take literally passages that depict God with arms, legs, eyes, and even wings. Moreover, he notes that even neotheists acknowledge that there are also biblical texts that depict God as unchanging, etc. (Pg. 83, 89)

He asserts that if neotheism is true, then we cannot trust the Bible as the infallible Word of God, since neotheists believe that God does NOT have an infallible knowledge of future free acts. (Pg. 129) Geisler points out that with such a view, there is no guarantee of ultimate victory over evil, since we cannot be sure that anyone will be saved without fettering freedom. (Pg. 139)

Geisler asks a lot of the "tough questions" regarding this new theological movement, and this book is essential reading for anyone studying Open Theism.

[Steve Croft · Rating 2 out of 5]

A friend gave me this book to help lead me back from my heretical 'open' view of God to the safe 'Classical' theology of Gods attributes. Unfortunately it had the opposite affect on me. The book is an attack on Open Theism (Geisler says he can't even bring himself to call it that, and so renamed it 'neotheism') and a defence of classical theism. He draws his line in the sand with the attributes outlined by Thomas Aquinas as the truth and then goes to war. My problem, however, is that he doesnt use scripture to defend his position, he uses philosophy, and bad philosophy at that...

For example, it goes something like this:
All Gods attributes chain into eachother, but start with his 'I AM' statement in Exodus. From this, they deduct Gods aseity. From this we get his simplicity, then his necessity, then his immutability and impassability and so on. All from this one verse.. The philosophy creates statements like the following quote:

"God is by his very nature an absolutely perfect being, if there were any perfection he lacked, then he would not be God"

oh yeah? why not? what verse says this.

Or this quote about Gods impassibility (without passion)

"God is without passion. For passion implies desire for what one does not have. But God as an absolute perfect being, has everything. He lacks nothing".

Isaiah 54:7-8
“For a brief moment I abandoned you,
but with deep compassion I will bring you back.
In a surge of anger
I hid my face from you for a moment,
but with everlasting kindness
I will have compassion on you,”
says the LORD your Redeemer.


I think these philosophers need to read the Bible and let the text speak without a philosophical lens. The bible I read reveals to me a passionate God who grieves his lost children, who throws a party when one repents, and who changes and grants requests from prayer.

Geisler didn't handle this book well imo. The arguments were weak and not defended with scripture for the most part. He also treated 'grey areas' as 'dangerous beliefs' without humility.