What do you think?
Rate this book
Open and Relational Theology: An Introduction to Life-Changing Ideas
Most theologies suck. They’re too technical or they describe a God nobody understands. Sometimes the God portrayed sounds like a controlling boyfriend or absentee parent. Rather than woo or persuade, most theology books clobber readers into submission.This book is different. Thomas Jay Oord presents a theology that makes sense. It fits the way we live our lives and matches our deepest intuitions. To the surprise of some, it harmonizes with sacred scripture... at least the good parts. And it promotes a genuinely loving God.Open and relational theology is controversial. Oord and others have lost their jobs because they embrace it. Others have been booted from religious communities or shunned by families and friends. It’s that radical! Using understandable language and illustrations from everyday life, Oord explains the core ideas of open and relational theology. He reveals why this way of thinking is life-changing – for good – for so many.This theology doesn’t suck. People around the world are turning to open and relational theology. It answers our biggest questions about good and evil, purpose and freedom, love and science.Get a Copy of Open and Relational TheologyWhat they're saying..."Timely!" - Cody Stauffer & Craig Morton, All That's Holy Podcast"Cosmic!" — Pete Enns & Jared Byas, Bible For Normal People Podcast"Conceptual!" - Seth Price, Can I Say This in Church? Podcast"Inspirited!" - Jay McDaniel, Conversations in Process Podcast“Clear!” -Joe Smith and Drew Dunbar, Crisis of Faith Podcast"Radical!" - Shaleen Kendrick & Holland Fields, Desert Voices Podcast"Prodigious!" - John Williamson, Deconstructionists Podcast"Relieving!" - Joey Monteleone, Dismantle Podcast"Compelling!" - Loren Richmond Jr, Future Christian Podcast"Liberating!" - Melanie Mudge & Gary Alan Taylor, Holy Heretics Podcast"Magnificent!" - Tripp Fuller, Homebrewed Christianity Podcast“Enlivening!” - Michael Frost, In the Shift Podcast"Tantalizing!" - Jim Stump, Language of God Podcast"Captivating!" - Jason Elam, Messy Spirituality Podcast"Thought-Provoking!" - Gabriel Gordon, Misfits Theology Podcast"Interrogating!" - Todd Littleton, Patheological Podcast"Exceptional!" - Keith Giles, Peace Catalyst Podcast"Zesty!" - Mason Mennenga, A People's Theology Podcast"Tangible!" - Hayden Bruce, Pragmatic Christian Podcast"Clarifying!" - Mary-Anne & Andre Rabe, Question Your Answers Podcast"Trailblazing!" - Todd R. Vick, Reconstruction Rebel Podcast“Peace-Bringing!” - Chris Harman, Redrawing the Bath Podcast"Stimulating!" - Greg Boyd and Dan Kent, ReKnew Podcast"Punchy!" - Ryan T.
155 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2021
91 people are currently reading
234 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews
July 4, 2024
The ideas in this books are really interesting, and the layout is helpful. The author is very excited about his ideas, almost to the point of arrogance at some parts. This book is designed to be short and to the point (which can be a strength) but he sometimes fails to capture nuance and ends up straw-manning his opponents. That said, he does do his best to use qualifying statements when he makes big generalizations, and I think it would be impossible to explain in great detail all the varying views. I’m not sure I’m ready to call the ideas in this book “life changing” but they are certainly intriguing and perspective altering.
August 13, 2021
I always find Thomas Oord's writing very clear. His writing is not intended to be obscure or dense, but to be down to earth. At the same time, there is a lot of thinking behind what can sounds like very simple language.
I am not sure yet how Oord's relational theology fits with other ideas that I am drawn to (Orthodox theology, which also centers on love but has a different way of framing it - not sure whether in a compatible way or not!), but I know I find his line of thinking helpful in rigorously clarifying the implications of ideas about God. Good thinking about this must interact with Oord's thinking!
I am not sure yet how Oord's relational theology fits with other ideas that I am drawn to (Orthodox theology, which also centers on love but has a different way of framing it - not sure whether in a compatible way or not!), but I know I find his line of thinking helpful in rigorously clarifying the implications of ideas about God. Good thinking about this must interact with Oord's thinking!
July 5, 2021
I just finished "Open And Relational Theology: An Introduction to Life Changing Ideas," By Thomas J Oord
I respect that in the preface Oord warns that the book will deal with "...rape, death, and torture...." because as beautiful as the world is there are horrible things that theology has to deal with.
"Ignoring life's pain comes at a cost: irrelevance," p x.
Theology that ignores the pain of reality does no good.
Why:
Oord opens with some stories that are similar to one's I've had from a young age that deal with theodicy, hell, why pray, does what I do matter, and on and on. Open and relational theology goes to, and speaks to, these questions. (While Open and Relational theology is a big tent label that includes thought which differ they all seek to answer the same questions.)
Working from Dr. John Sanders models of God in "Embracing Prodigals" (great book) Oord expresses the four views Americans have about the Divine and then shows humility in that really scholars can argue for certainty of any of these models but a "Nurturant" model of God makes the most sense.
"When it comes to [models of] God, we can't be certain. But we aren't clueless," p 15.
To get a better view of the model of God open and relational theology proposes Oord compares and contrasts it to conventional models which claim God is timeless, man who knows the future as clear as the past. Another model sees God who doesnt respond to Creation; it doesnt matter to him since he can't change or really feel anything. Still another model sees God as all controlling. This model would see God as While E. Coyote over a drafting board before the creation event sketching out the birth of beautiful babies, marriages and love, the Holocaust, rape, murder and terrorist events which he desires to be in his good creation. Still another is the model which sees God as not being able to be in my presence due to my unholiness. So he sends his son to die and be the lens through which he chooses to see us. The next model would have God with full, unfailing knowledge of events as they will happen. See it as rather than draw the blueprints he just knows them flawlessly. Finally, this model is just an angry God with an itchy finger on the hell button because we are not good enough. These different models are usually cut and pasted together in a contradictory way leaning more on Greek metaphysics than God as revealed in Jesus Christ.
"We end up with a schizophrenic [model of] God who is timeless but intervening, angry but uninfluenced, and controlling but not around," p 18; an Authoritarian rather than Nurturing view of God.
To better and more coherently build a model of God Open and relational theology starts with God as love rather than power, for instance, since this is precisely what one sees stated in scripture and lived out in Jesus who is God "re-presented". Those are just two of the listed ways different people arrive at the open and relational model of God.
Open:
What does open mean? It means that what has yet to happen is not real. There really is nothing that makes up the "future" except the possibilities from decisions and actions made in the present. We currently live as though this is true. Scripture reflects God who acts as though this is true. If this is not true then there are no free choices. If the future is foreknown, though be it to God alone, then the future really can only land at one place for every "choice" we make. To me this makes God a helpless, apathetic onlooker to all good and evil.
Does God change? Yes, in His experience with His creation while staying the same in who He is as the God who is love (in His essence). What does this mean about prayer? Open and Relational theology would along with scripture affirm that prayer matters external of ourselves, changing reality, while other views have to say that prayer only changes us since the future as it will happen is flawlessly known by God.
Relational:
The word is "Impassable" meaning "feels no pain." This has been part of a conventional model of God among many. Open and Relational theology believes God is relational with us and hurts when we do. Rather than making God in our image, we see that we are made in His and there should be some correspondence from Him to us. We see what seem to be the greatest characteristics in humans and believe that guided by scripture God is the epitome of these, mainly love. Love must be relational.
(Kudos for throwing in "St. Patrick's bad analogies" when covering the Trinity.)
Amipotent:
This section begins with a nice conversation on freewill. I find this fascinating because Oord holds that all creatures/organisms, from the most complex to the most simple, have a level of freewill (a magnitude of which is according to its level of complexity is how I read it) be they human, animal or cellular. As such, with everything as free, we see God's relationship with creation as one of persuasion. (Not going to lie here, this process thought of all-creaturely freedom is a place I've landed in relation to prayer though I still feel at home as an open theist.) So what is Amipotent? I'll leave it for the book but needless to say it is the power of God.
Present:
Oord gets into creation, science, ecology, and art here. Glad to see that he states open and relational theologians usually affirm evolution though with God involved at the forefront. I have to agree that conventional theologians don't tend to handle science well at all, historically. Process theology doesnt have the same issue and I'd say Open And Relational theology welcomes the conversation with science.
His coverage of and nuance to panentheism (over and against pantheism) is the most nuanced I've read. The only other Christian I've read who affirms panentheism was the Orthodox Kallistos Ware. I think this concept gives language to the Pauline "in Christ".
Oord covers a thought here that I've been thinking about: God can't be around sin. I believe even people who don't affirm Open and Relational theology need to rethink this in light of the incarnation of Emmanuel, God with us (sans theological gymnastics which split the hypostatic union).
Loving:
This is more of a personal chapter. Of all of the reasons and evidence Oord gives for Open and Relational theology's reality the most convincing is love. Open and Relational theology is the best framework for promoting love.
"...God necessarily loves because love comes logically first among divine attributes," p 124.
"Even though Jesus says love is the greatest command, Paul says the greatest of the virtues is love, and John says God is love, few theologies follow their lead," p 128.
SIDE NOTES:
Its awesome that Oord placed QR codes at the end of each chapter which linked to videos about the chapters subject matter. It's a new and fresh way to deliver.
This book is a great non-academic book. Don't let the "Theology" on the cover scare you from it.
Final thought:
I just finished the documentary "The Life, Blood, and Rhythm of Randy Castillo." Castillo was the drummer for Ozzy Osborne for five album before dying of cancer at the age of 51. When interviewing his mother she said that when he died she lost her faith in God. Through this book her haunting words wouldn't leave me. If for a reason like this or other tragedy, or some intellectual dissatisfaction you have, challenge your theology about God rather than giving up on Him. This is a good place to begin.
Very good book.
#OpenAndRelationalTheology #OpenTheism #ProcessTheology #ThomasJOord #ThomasJayOord #ThomasOord #TomOord #Calvinism #Determinism #TheologicalDeterminism #Arminianism #SimpleForeknowledge #Molinism #Theodicy
I respect that in the preface Oord warns that the book will deal with "...rape, death, and torture...." because as beautiful as the world is there are horrible things that theology has to deal with.
"Ignoring life's pain comes at a cost: irrelevance," p x.
Theology that ignores the pain of reality does no good.
Why:
Oord opens with some stories that are similar to one's I've had from a young age that deal with theodicy, hell, why pray, does what I do matter, and on and on. Open and relational theology goes to, and speaks to, these questions. (While Open and Relational theology is a big tent label that includes thought which differ they all seek to answer the same questions.)
Working from Dr. John Sanders models of God in "Embracing Prodigals" (great book) Oord expresses the four views Americans have about the Divine and then shows humility in that really scholars can argue for certainty of any of these models but a "Nurturant" model of God makes the most sense.
"When it comes to [models of] God, we can't be certain. But we aren't clueless," p 15.
To get a better view of the model of God open and relational theology proposes Oord compares and contrasts it to conventional models which claim God is timeless, man who knows the future as clear as the past. Another model sees God who doesnt respond to Creation; it doesnt matter to him since he can't change or really feel anything. Still another model sees God as all controlling. This model would see God as While E. Coyote over a drafting board before the creation event sketching out the birth of beautiful babies, marriages and love, the Holocaust, rape, murder and terrorist events which he desires to be in his good creation. Still another is the model which sees God as not being able to be in my presence due to my unholiness. So he sends his son to die and be the lens through which he chooses to see us. The next model would have God with full, unfailing knowledge of events as they will happen. See it as rather than draw the blueprints he just knows them flawlessly. Finally, this model is just an angry God with an itchy finger on the hell button because we are not good enough. These different models are usually cut and pasted together in a contradictory way leaning more on Greek metaphysics than God as revealed in Jesus Christ.
"We end up with a schizophrenic [model of] God who is timeless but intervening, angry but uninfluenced, and controlling but not around," p 18; an Authoritarian rather than Nurturing view of God.
To better and more coherently build a model of God Open and relational theology starts with God as love rather than power, for instance, since this is precisely what one sees stated in scripture and lived out in Jesus who is God "re-presented". Those are just two of the listed ways different people arrive at the open and relational model of God.
Open:
What does open mean? It means that what has yet to happen is not real. There really is nothing that makes up the "future" except the possibilities from decisions and actions made in the present. We currently live as though this is true. Scripture reflects God who acts as though this is true. If this is not true then there are no free choices. If the future is foreknown, though be it to God alone, then the future really can only land at one place for every "choice" we make. To me this makes God a helpless, apathetic onlooker to all good and evil.
Does God change? Yes, in His experience with His creation while staying the same in who He is as the God who is love (in His essence). What does this mean about prayer? Open and Relational theology would along with scripture affirm that prayer matters external of ourselves, changing reality, while other views have to say that prayer only changes us since the future as it will happen is flawlessly known by God.
Relational:
The word is "Impassable" meaning "feels no pain." This has been part of a conventional model of God among many. Open and Relational theology believes God is relational with us and hurts when we do. Rather than making God in our image, we see that we are made in His and there should be some correspondence from Him to us. We see what seem to be the greatest characteristics in humans and believe that guided by scripture God is the epitome of these, mainly love. Love must be relational.
(Kudos for throwing in "St. Patrick's bad analogies" when covering the Trinity.)
Amipotent:
This section begins with a nice conversation on freewill. I find this fascinating because Oord holds that all creatures/organisms, from the most complex to the most simple, have a level of freewill (a magnitude of which is according to its level of complexity is how I read it) be they human, animal or cellular. As such, with everything as free, we see God's relationship with creation as one of persuasion. (Not going to lie here, this process thought of all-creaturely freedom is a place I've landed in relation to prayer though I still feel at home as an open theist.) So what is Amipotent? I'll leave it for the book but needless to say it is the power of God.
Present:
Oord gets into creation, science, ecology, and art here. Glad to see that he states open and relational theologians usually affirm evolution though with God involved at the forefront. I have to agree that conventional theologians don't tend to handle science well at all, historically. Process theology doesnt have the same issue and I'd say Open And Relational theology welcomes the conversation with science.
His coverage of and nuance to panentheism (over and against pantheism) is the most nuanced I've read. The only other Christian I've read who affirms panentheism was the Orthodox Kallistos Ware. I think this concept gives language to the Pauline "in Christ".
Oord covers a thought here that I've been thinking about: God can't be around sin. I believe even people who don't affirm Open and Relational theology need to rethink this in light of the incarnation of Emmanuel, God with us (sans theological gymnastics which split the hypostatic union).
Loving:
This is more of a personal chapter. Of all of the reasons and evidence Oord gives for Open and Relational theology's reality the most convincing is love. Open and Relational theology is the best framework for promoting love.
"...God necessarily loves because love comes logically first among divine attributes," p 124.
"Even though Jesus says love is the greatest command, Paul says the greatest of the virtues is love, and John says God is love, few theologies follow their lead," p 128.
SIDE NOTES:
Its awesome that Oord placed QR codes at the end of each chapter which linked to videos about the chapters subject matter. It's a new and fresh way to deliver.
This book is a great non-academic book. Don't let the "Theology" on the cover scare you from it.
Final thought:
I just finished the documentary "The Life, Blood, and Rhythm of Randy Castillo." Castillo was the drummer for Ozzy Osborne for five album before dying of cancer at the age of 51. When interviewing his mother she said that when he died she lost her faith in God. Through this book her haunting words wouldn't leave me. If for a reason like this or other tragedy, or some intellectual dissatisfaction you have, challenge your theology about God rather than giving up on Him. This is a good place to begin.
Very good book.
#OpenAndRelationalTheology #OpenTheism #ProcessTheology #ThomasJOord #ThomasJayOord #ThomasOord #TomOord #Calvinism #Determinism #TheologicalDeterminism #Arminianism #SimpleForeknowledge #Molinism #Theodicy
August 15, 2021
3.5/5
Thomas Jay Oord writes clearly and compellingly. My biggest gripe was the lack of biblical support. As an introduction to open theology, perhaps he thought that could come later. He also seems to be writing to more than a Christian audience, so perhaps he thought specific biblical references would distract from the ideas therein. In any case, it left the introduction to Open and Relational Theology lacking for me.
Thomas Jay Oord writes clearly and compellingly. My biggest gripe was the lack of biblical support. As an introduction to open theology, perhaps he thought that could come later. He also seems to be writing to more than a Christian audience, so perhaps he thought specific biblical references would distract from the ideas therein. In any case, it left the introduction to Open and Relational Theology lacking for me.
November 11, 2023
I saw a short interview with Oord where he talked about his theory of an "amipotent" god over an "omnipotent" god. Basically, Oord argues that bad things happen to good people because, although god is all loving, he is not all powerful.
I actually like this premise, although it isn't as revolutionary as Oord might think. Most ancient peoples believed that their gods were far from perfect and could even be injured and die. Oord takes a little from this ancient idea and adds "but he really, really loves you!" to it.
What I didn't like, however, was the fact that this should have been called "Open and Relational Christianity". This book is written from a Christian point of view (even baffilingly having a discussion of the trinity at one point, although I fail to see how that has any relation to Oord's central argument). I think Oord would have made a better point if he had just stuck to the idea of an amipotent god rather than HIS particular amipotent god. After all, his main thesis doesn't need to rest on any one religion's shoulders for him to make his point and it would have made non-Christian hellbound folks like myself a lot more open to what he was talking about.
Speaking of making his point, that's another thing I didn't like about this book. Even from a Christian point of view Oord provides few convincing points for his idea. He has a few bible quotes here and there but most of the book reads like: "Hey, wouldn't it be awesome if this were true!? It would make my fairy tales make MUCH more sense and I wouldn't feel like I'm worshipping a demonic scumbag of a god that loves torturing people!". While I agree that, yes, it would make much more sense, you could practically say anything with the amount of convincing he provides. In other words, not believing in a god at all makes even more sense (and has a hell of a lot more convincing arguments) than either an omnipotent or an amipotent deity.
Finally, the book is just a mess. Oord suggests reading a little bit every night but I have a Goodreads yearly quota to meet and fake internet points to win and no time for that foolishness. The entire book is broken up into index-card sized thoughts that make the whole book feel like Oord is just rambling at you after too much late night booze, weed, and pizza. Like "Whoah, dude....what if god is like....just a dude but really loves us and stuff?". That, added to the fact that his central idea (god is love but not all powerful) could also fit on an index-card makes this book feel like 100% filler.
I actually like this premise, although it isn't as revolutionary as Oord might think. Most ancient peoples believed that their gods were far from perfect and could even be injured and die. Oord takes a little from this ancient idea and adds "but he really, really loves you!" to it.
What I didn't like, however, was the fact that this should have been called "Open and Relational Christianity". This book is written from a Christian point of view (even baffilingly having a discussion of the trinity at one point, although I fail to see how that has any relation to Oord's central argument). I think Oord would have made a better point if he had just stuck to the idea of an amipotent god rather than HIS particular amipotent god. After all, his main thesis doesn't need to rest on any one religion's shoulders for him to make his point and it would have made non-Christian hellbound folks like myself a lot more open to what he was talking about.
Speaking of making his point, that's another thing I didn't like about this book. Even from a Christian point of view Oord provides few convincing points for his idea. He has a few bible quotes here and there but most of the book reads like: "Hey, wouldn't it be awesome if this were true!? It would make my fairy tales make MUCH more sense and I wouldn't feel like I'm worshipping a demonic scumbag of a god that loves torturing people!". While I agree that, yes, it would make much more sense, you could practically say anything with the amount of convincing he provides. In other words, not believing in a god at all makes even more sense (and has a hell of a lot more convincing arguments) than either an omnipotent or an amipotent deity.
Finally, the book is just a mess. Oord suggests reading a little bit every night but I have a Goodreads yearly quota to meet and fake internet points to win and no time for that foolishness. The entire book is broken up into index-card sized thoughts that make the whole book feel like Oord is just rambling at you after too much late night booze, weed, and pizza. Like "Whoah, dude....what if god is like....just a dude but really loves us and stuff?". That, added to the fact that his central idea (god is love but not all powerful) could also fit on an index-card makes this book feel like 100% filler.
July 4, 2021
One of the big questions of the Christian faith and theology has to do with whether the future is open or closed? Has God predetermined the flow of history or is each moment open with the future unknown? For some a predetermined future is comforting. God is in control and God will bring the anointed future to its appropriate close. For others, that vision of the future is problematic. It seems to undermine the role of human will. Are we preprogrammed robots or do we have a role to play in creating the future? Wrapped up in this conversation is the question of evil and suffering. If God is in total control of everything then is God responsible for evil and suffering. If so, how do we reconcile that with the claim that God is love? Now, we could, and many do, appeal to mystery. There are some things beyond our understanding, so just let it go? For many that works, for many others it doesn't. So, in response to what some might call "conventional theology" is what Tom Oord and others have called "Open and Relational Theology."
There have been a number of highly detailed scholarly explorations of "Open and Relational Theology," which itself is not monolithic. The word movement might be the best explanation for what Tom is introducing us to, because "Open and Relational Theology" comes in a variety of forms, including Process Theology and Open Theism. The former is rooted in the philosophical writings of Alfred North Whitehead and others, while the latter has its origins in evangelical theology, especially Wesleyan versions. Among those who have embraced and served as an evangelist for his movement is Thomas Jay Oord. While has written scholarly treatises on the nature of love and open theism, he has also given attention to making the message more available to a broader audience than the academic guild.
In a previous book that he tilted God Can't: How to Believe in God and Love after Tragedy, Abuse, and Other Evils, Tom addressed the question of evil and whether God is able to control the events of history. That is, if God is love, and love is non-coercive, then can God control all things? Writing from an "Open and Relational Perspective," Tom answers no to that question.
In this book, Tom offers an introduction to Open and Relational Theology in a way that both makes it attractive to those who are questioning their faith in God and does so in a way that is accessible to the non-specialist. This isn't a full-fledged systemic theology. It doesn't explore in detail matters of theology such as Christology or pneumatology. This is more foundational, setting a floor so that one can understand what purveyors of this movement mean by "open" and "relational." The former focuses on the way the future unfolds. The latter focuses on the way in which God interacts with creation in the process of history unfolding. In the course of this discussion, of course, we gain a greater understanding of the nature of God who is revealed in the person of Jesus.
Standing at the center of Tom's vision of God is love. It is the foundational element in his theology and the foundation for understanding the way in which God relates to creation. Part of this conversation has to do with how God creates, and from this perspective creation is ongoing. It embraces evolution as a process but insists that God is present in and with the process. Thus, he argues this theology is pro-science but not given to scientism. The book also addresses questions of salvation and what that looks like. In that vein, Tom notes that if we affirm that God is love, then it is impossible to affirm the idea that God might condemn persons to eternal torment in hell. That doesn't mean he is embracing universalism. Some in the movement do, but not all. That's not the point here. The point is one of whether a loving God can inflict eternal punishment on human beings.
Tom offers this book up as an invitation to those who are questioning their faith to embrace what he calls "life-changing ideas." For all those who find "conventional theology" unattractive, here is a vision of God that is very different and that offers a way of living that is faithful to the way of Jesus. Now, not everyone will find this attractive. The vision of God offered here lacks the omnipotence and power that many expect of God. It might appear that this God is "too small" and yet it makes a lot of sense.
While this book is offered up as an introduction, Tom recognizes that people will want to dive deeper into "Open and Relational Theology." So, with that in mind, he provides a listing of resources that speak to specific dimensions of theology from an "Open and Relational Theology." Thus, we will find resources that cover everything from atonement to sexuality and marriage. Some of the books are written by Process Theologians. Others by Open Theists. And full acknowledgment, Tom mentions my own work under biblical studies and church and ecclesiology. Thus, I am numbered among those who are part of this movement.
I highly recommend this book as a first read for anyone interested in the movement. From there one can dive deeper, following the guidance Tom gives in the listing of resources.
There have been a number of highly detailed scholarly explorations of "Open and Relational Theology," which itself is not monolithic. The word movement might be the best explanation for what Tom is introducing us to, because "Open and Relational Theology" comes in a variety of forms, including Process Theology and Open Theism. The former is rooted in the philosophical writings of Alfred North Whitehead and others, while the latter has its origins in evangelical theology, especially Wesleyan versions. Among those who have embraced and served as an evangelist for his movement is Thomas Jay Oord. While has written scholarly treatises on the nature of love and open theism, he has also given attention to making the message more available to a broader audience than the academic guild.
In a previous book that he tilted God Can't: How to Believe in God and Love after Tragedy, Abuse, and Other Evils, Tom addressed the question of evil and whether God is able to control the events of history. That is, if God is love, and love is non-coercive, then can God control all things? Writing from an "Open and Relational Perspective," Tom answers no to that question.
In this book, Tom offers an introduction to Open and Relational Theology in a way that both makes it attractive to those who are questioning their faith in God and does so in a way that is accessible to the non-specialist. This isn't a full-fledged systemic theology. It doesn't explore in detail matters of theology such as Christology or pneumatology. This is more foundational, setting a floor so that one can understand what purveyors of this movement mean by "open" and "relational." The former focuses on the way the future unfolds. The latter focuses on the way in which God interacts with creation in the process of history unfolding. In the course of this discussion, of course, we gain a greater understanding of the nature of God who is revealed in the person of Jesus.
Standing at the center of Tom's vision of God is love. It is the foundational element in his theology and the foundation for understanding the way in which God relates to creation. Part of this conversation has to do with how God creates, and from this perspective creation is ongoing. It embraces evolution as a process but insists that God is present in and with the process. Thus, he argues this theology is pro-science but not given to scientism. The book also addresses questions of salvation and what that looks like. In that vein, Tom notes that if we affirm that God is love, then it is impossible to affirm the idea that God might condemn persons to eternal torment in hell. That doesn't mean he is embracing universalism. Some in the movement do, but not all. That's not the point here. The point is one of whether a loving God can inflict eternal punishment on human beings.
Tom offers this book up as an invitation to those who are questioning their faith to embrace what he calls "life-changing ideas." For all those who find "conventional theology" unattractive, here is a vision of God that is very different and that offers a way of living that is faithful to the way of Jesus. Now, not everyone will find this attractive. The vision of God offered here lacks the omnipotence and power that many expect of God. It might appear that this God is "too small" and yet it makes a lot of sense.
While this book is offered up as an introduction, Tom recognizes that people will want to dive deeper into "Open and Relational Theology." So, with that in mind, he provides a listing of resources that speak to specific dimensions of theology from an "Open and Relational Theology." Thus, we will find resources that cover everything from atonement to sexuality and marriage. Some of the books are written by Process Theologians. Others by Open Theists. And full acknowledgment, Tom mentions my own work under biblical studies and church and ecclesiology. Thus, I am numbered among those who are part of this movement.
I highly recommend this book as a first read for anyone interested in the movement. From there one can dive deeper, following the guidance Tom gives in the listing of resources.
January 13, 2023
I’m a big fan of open and relational theology (ORT). It makes sense, feels right, and draws me deeper into a mystery that is God.
April 5, 2023
Easy to read for anyone just learning about open and relational theology.
July 20, 2021
Thomas Jay Oord has offered us a number of books about different aspects of open and relational theology in the past. Here, he pulls them together in an excellent introductory overview. By combining theology with personal stories, Dr. Oord grounds his thoughts in the real world. Throughout, Dr. Oord keeps returning to one question: What is God like? It is that question that is perhaps the most compelling aspect of Open and Relational Theology.
In addition to the great value of the ideas offered, there are 2 additional features I appreciated about this book: 1. At the end of many chapters, there are QR codes that link to videos related to a specific aspect of the chapter. 2. There is an expansive topical bibliography. Both these features make it extremely easy to dive further into a specific topic that interests you.
In addition to all this, this book is fun. Yeah, I said it-this is a book about theology that is *fun*. Who wouldn't want to read a book that has sections titled "Chocolate Ice Cream", "A Pet Rock" and "Artist and Muse"? There's even a chapter whose first line reads "Imagine an extraterrestrial being sent you an email..."
Read this book because the content is helpful and enlightening. Read this book because the topics are intriguing and will make you want to know more. And read this book simply because it's fun.
In addition to the great value of the ideas offered, there are 2 additional features I appreciated about this book: 1. At the end of many chapters, there are QR codes that link to videos related to a specific aspect of the chapter. 2. There is an expansive topical bibliography. Both these features make it extremely easy to dive further into a specific topic that interests you.
In addition to all this, this book is fun. Yeah, I said it-this is a book about theology that is *fun*. Who wouldn't want to read a book that has sections titled "Chocolate Ice Cream", "A Pet Rock" and "Artist and Muse"? There's even a chapter whose first line reads "Imagine an extraterrestrial being sent you an email..."
Read this book because the content is helpful and enlightening. Read this book because the topics are intriguing and will make you want to know more. And read this book simply because it's fun.
August 30, 2021
This book is an ideal book to introduce Open and Relational Theology to someone who is not familiar with theological and philosophical jargon. It is full of real life examples of struggles people have with God and faith. Tom attempts to deal with ORT (Open & Relational Theology) independently of his specific position as a Process theologian. However, sometimes the Process emphasis comes through. He deals with this difference in the Appendix and considers that which is common to all as more important than those aspects which differ. "God is relational, and the future is open. I then celebrate, ponder, and argue over the diverse ways to understand these ideas and others".
And so he deals, in the first chapter, what is meant by "Open" - that is to say that the future is open and not a closed book. The implication here is that God does not know the future. This is not saying that God's knowledge is limited and there are things outside God's knowledge of which God is ignorant. Rather he is saying that the future simply does not exist. The future is open and God is a living God involved in all processes in time working towards the highest good - we are free agents who can respond accordingly. The author notes "Over forty times, biblical writers say God "repents." This does not mean that God turns from sin; it means that God has a change of mind. The lover of us all planned to do one thing but alters course to do something else in response to creation. A timeless god can't alter course, but a living God can...." The implications are further developed that God learns and God changes - while this is contrary to established theologies, Tom argues that it is the God Christians actively engage with moment by moment regardless of their theological concepts. He then goes on to deal with prayer concluding that the God we pray to is open. He concludes: "To be consistent, I recommend they stop believing in the conventional God and embrace the theology they already practice."!
Tom then deals with the term "relational". We are all connected to one another and to our environment. This is highlighted in our time more so with the increasing concern with climate change. God is central to this relational whole in which each of us has a part to play. Consequently, God also feels. "What may seem obvious is actually a minority view among leading theologians of yesteryear. And it’s uncommon in some circles today.” To be honest I have only met one Christian in my time who has ever actually stated that God does not feel but I am aware of Reformed theologians who would say that but for the O/R theologian God not only feels because "God became flesh" in the person of Jesus Christ but because God is intra-connected (my word) with creation (Pan-theism). Given that God is open and 100% involved in all the changes that happen moment by moment, this intensifies the amount of feeling God must have in all our joys and sadnesses. This corresponds with my experience. As I watched some marvellous photos of nature on TV tears came to my eyes. I wondered why and I had just been watching with sadness the troubles in Afghanistan. The thing is the closer you get to God the more you feel - the more beautiful things fill you with joy and the grief that is around us fills us with sadness and the tears arise from the attempt to hold the tension together. I wonder how God with infinite knowledge and passion feels this moment? One can only reflect once again and return to both the tragedy and beauty of the Cross. This book helps us to take steps towards seeing and feeling this God who rather than being the "Unmoved mover" (Aristotle and Aquinas) but rather the "Most moved Mover"!
It makes sense that Tom deals with the subject of love - in his word "Amipotent" dealing with free will. Those who negate free will are actually engaging in free will in their refutation - Tom calls this an "experiential non-negotiable". Love and free will are both relational necessities. In the author's words "O/R thinkers might say God persuades instead of coerces. Or that God empowers but doesn’t overpower. Or that God invites rather than forces. They use relational verbs to talk about what God does: call, inspire, lure, insist, weep, trust, transform, give, risk, share, console, and
more. They rarely if ever say God controls or abandons, because love wouldn’t act that way." So God's ways are best defined by the 'power of love' rather than 'the love of power'. Tom goes on to anticipate questions that arise from this assertion. In this chapter he deals with the term "Theodicy" - how people attempt to resolve Gods power and love and the evidence we have in our experience. "More people initially embrace open and relational theology for its solution to questions of evil than for any other reason." This is true for me.
The next chapter deals with O/R ideas of creation, salvation and the afterlife.
The final chapter is my favourite as Tom presents a final passionate appeal to love as his primary motive. "My number one goal is to live a life of love. That goal gives purpose to my life. It is my primary intention". I don't know Tom personally but I've watched him in videos and read a lot of his work and can vouch for the sincerity of his words. He invites us to love as God loves us - not just historically but moment by moment. He sums it up: "I can’t stop God from loving me, because God’s love is uncontrollable. But God can’t control me, because God’s love is uncontrolling." A robust theology of love ... "listens with the heart and works with the head". He critiques Augustine's God as well as Nygren's concept of Divine love and concludes with an appeal to embrace Open and Relational theology.
This is certainly a good book to start and I highly recommend it!
++++
NB The book also has a barcode scan at the end of each chapter. I haven't finished these yet but they link to a YouTube clip. I have found these particularly useful as they often go deeper as Tom answers questions that we often have but can't put into words. There is also a very comprehensive list of books for further study. I have read a few and highly recommend them.
And so he deals, in the first chapter, what is meant by "Open" - that is to say that the future is open and not a closed book. The implication here is that God does not know the future. This is not saying that God's knowledge is limited and there are things outside God's knowledge of which God is ignorant. Rather he is saying that the future simply does not exist. The future is open and God is a living God involved in all processes in time working towards the highest good - we are free agents who can respond accordingly. The author notes "Over forty times, biblical writers say God "repents." This does not mean that God turns from sin; it means that God has a change of mind. The lover of us all planned to do one thing but alters course to do something else in response to creation. A timeless god can't alter course, but a living God can...." The implications are further developed that God learns and God changes - while this is contrary to established theologies, Tom argues that it is the God Christians actively engage with moment by moment regardless of their theological concepts. He then goes on to deal with prayer concluding that the God we pray to is open. He concludes: "To be consistent, I recommend they stop believing in the conventional God and embrace the theology they already practice."!
Tom then deals with the term "relational". We are all connected to one another and to our environment. This is highlighted in our time more so with the increasing concern with climate change. God is central to this relational whole in which each of us has a part to play. Consequently, God also feels. "What may seem obvious is actually a minority view among leading theologians of yesteryear. And it’s uncommon in some circles today.” To be honest I have only met one Christian in my time who has ever actually stated that God does not feel but I am aware of Reformed theologians who would say that but for the O/R theologian God not only feels because "God became flesh" in the person of Jesus Christ but because God is intra-connected (my word) with creation (Pan-theism). Given that God is open and 100% involved in all the changes that happen moment by moment, this intensifies the amount of feeling God must have in all our joys and sadnesses. This corresponds with my experience. As I watched some marvellous photos of nature on TV tears came to my eyes. I wondered why and I had just been watching with sadness the troubles in Afghanistan. The thing is the closer you get to God the more you feel - the more beautiful things fill you with joy and the grief that is around us fills us with sadness and the tears arise from the attempt to hold the tension together. I wonder how God with infinite knowledge and passion feels this moment? One can only reflect once again and return to both the tragedy and beauty of the Cross. This book helps us to take steps towards seeing and feeling this God who rather than being the "Unmoved mover" (Aristotle and Aquinas) but rather the "Most moved Mover"!
It makes sense that Tom deals with the subject of love - in his word "Amipotent" dealing with free will. Those who negate free will are actually engaging in free will in their refutation - Tom calls this an "experiential non-negotiable". Love and free will are both relational necessities. In the author's words "O/R thinkers might say God persuades instead of coerces. Or that God empowers but doesn’t overpower. Or that God invites rather than forces. They use relational verbs to talk about what God does: call, inspire, lure, insist, weep, trust, transform, give, risk, share, console, and
more. They rarely if ever say God controls or abandons, because love wouldn’t act that way." So God's ways are best defined by the 'power of love' rather than 'the love of power'. Tom goes on to anticipate questions that arise from this assertion. In this chapter he deals with the term "Theodicy" - how people attempt to resolve Gods power and love and the evidence we have in our experience. "More people initially embrace open and relational theology for its solution to questions of evil than for any other reason." This is true for me.
The next chapter deals with O/R ideas of creation, salvation and the afterlife.
The final chapter is my favourite as Tom presents a final passionate appeal to love as his primary motive. "My number one goal is to live a life of love. That goal gives purpose to my life. It is my primary intention". I don't know Tom personally but I've watched him in videos and read a lot of his work and can vouch for the sincerity of his words. He invites us to love as God loves us - not just historically but moment by moment. He sums it up: "I can’t stop God from loving me, because God’s love is uncontrollable. But God can’t control me, because God’s love is uncontrolling." A robust theology of love ... "listens with the heart and works with the head". He critiques Augustine's God as well as Nygren's concept of Divine love and concludes with an appeal to embrace Open and Relational theology.
This is certainly a good book to start and I highly recommend it!
++++
NB The book also has a barcode scan at the end of each chapter. I haven't finished these yet but they link to a YouTube clip. I have found these particularly useful as they often go deeper as Tom answers questions that we often have but can't put into words. There is also a very comprehensive list of books for further study. I have read a few and highly recommend them.
July 24, 2021
It felt like the author didn’t quite have enough material for the book. Points were repeated, there were lots of breaks, and some wandering.
From a theological perspective, maybe the ideas weren’t fleshed out enough but I don’t see how a lot of the answers he offers were really much different. For instance, with prayer, if God is in all places, he still doesn’t need us to pray for him to ‘learn’ as Oord would say.
Overall left me with a ton of questions about Open and Relational theology and this book didn’t seem to do it justice.
From a theological perspective, maybe the ideas weren’t fleshed out enough but I don’t see how a lot of the answers he offers were really much different. For instance, with prayer, if God is in all places, he still doesn’t need us to pray for him to ‘learn’ as Oord would say.
Overall left me with a ton of questions about Open and Relational theology and this book didn’t seem to do it justice.
July 5, 2021
It’s nice to finally have a book written for the average reader…. Opens and relational theology is worth checking out, whether you agree with it or not
December 28, 2021
One of the most transformational and spiritually defining book I've read.
August 23, 2021
As intended, this book is a great introduction to a big-tent understanding of open and relational theological frameworks at the lay-reader level. Oord is clearly passionate and deeply invested in his writing, and offers a rousing articulation of the beauty he finds in a theology that centers love above all else. This causes many implicative ripples that run counter to "conventional theology" (his catch-all for more traditional or mainstream theological models and logic). For example, rather than God being outside of time and all-knowing of the future, God is aware of the infinite possible unfoldings of the present moment but not their final outcome. In this sense, God is not only capable of changing, but inherently undergoing it at all times; I thought Oord's distinction between God's changing experience and unchanging essence was a highlight of the book in elucidating why the idea of God being impacted by creation does not lead to an inability to trust God. God is also relational at their being, omnipresent to the point of sharing in the experiences of existence, and "amipotent" rather than omnipotent (or impotent). The latter is a term coined by Oord, combining "ami" (love) and "potent" (power) with the implication that God, as a being whose very nature is love, cannot exert coercive control over another, and instead participates in the world by continuously compelling and inspiring cooperative action.
I find the open and relational outlook compelling and intuitive, and already had some familiarity with it before reading this. Ultimately, I was pretty disappointed that Oord only differentiated it from conventional theologies and not process theologies. There's even a small section focused on trying to parse them apart, which he essentially cops out of doing. Even reading through his recommended readings list at the end, many are explicitly aligned with process thought, so I still don't think I could give a good answer as to what is unique about O&R (though I suspect it has something to do with metaphysics). Also, I was a little underwhelmed by the writing; I think the straightforward, plain-spokenness which would be a strength to many felt a bit too vague, simplistic, and at times even strawman-y to me. Maybe I'll check out another of Oord's books on the more academic end of the spectrum and see if it helps to fill in some of the blanks I'm left with after this one?
I find the open and relational outlook compelling and intuitive, and already had some familiarity with it before reading this. Ultimately, I was pretty disappointed that Oord only differentiated it from conventional theologies and not process theologies. There's even a small section focused on trying to parse them apart, which he essentially cops out of doing. Even reading through his recommended readings list at the end, many are explicitly aligned with process thought, so I still don't think I could give a good answer as to what is unique about O&R (though I suspect it has something to do with metaphysics). Also, I was a little underwhelmed by the writing; I think the straightforward, plain-spokenness which would be a strength to many felt a bit too vague, simplistic, and at times even strawman-y to me. Maybe I'll check out another of Oord's books on the more academic end of the spectrum and see if it helps to fill in some of the blanks I'm left with after this one?
December 3, 2022
The sad thing about this "open and relational theology" is that I can be aboard with much of it without losing touch in so-called "conventional theology". Thomas Jay Oord makes the big blunder of taking all the previous theologies that have been refined for two thousand years, bundling them together as one thing, and then making their theology a straw man, that he then rails against.
The origins of this theology are clearly political, or more precisely, postmodern - and this is apparent in the end where Jay Oord lists up where you can find "open and relational" thinkers, and those include feminists, intersectionals, muslims, and progressives - but not conservatives. Examples within the book point at this same direction, and thus this theology is not inspired and formed first and foremost from the bible but from the cultural postmodernists.
As a libertarian, I'm abroad with lots of the ideas here and I'm challenging myself on these areas constantly, without breaking with everything of the refinement history has bought us, just to use two bad atheistic memes to represent the core of the theology I'm against. Even so, Jay Oord, manages to find an example from this conventional theology that he claims is not found in the bible, as if that is a standard he holds - where so much in "open and relational" theology is cherry-picked and not found in the bible as it is presented here, but rather formed to a theology based on cultural flows.
As Jay Oord points out, there are many deeper books that explain and extend on what is written in this introduction, but this book makes you think that they have to bend many a traditional biblical belief in order to achieve this. Then again, Jay Oord kind of says this in the introduction, and so admits not being on biblically sound ground.
I'm open to thinking that there is more to theology than expressed in the bible, but if things are explained in the bible to a degree that can be elaborated by theologians like Augustine and Aquinas, then those are worthy of consideration, reading, and understanding - and usually, they bring tremendous insight into the cores of Chrisitan belief. One can not dismiss theology as easily as Jay Oord here does.
The origins of this theology are clearly political, or more precisely, postmodern - and this is apparent in the end where Jay Oord lists up where you can find "open and relational" thinkers, and those include feminists, intersectionals, muslims, and progressives - but not conservatives. Examples within the book point at this same direction, and thus this theology is not inspired and formed first and foremost from the bible but from the cultural postmodernists.
As a libertarian, I'm abroad with lots of the ideas here and I'm challenging myself on these areas constantly, without breaking with everything of the refinement history has bought us, just to use two bad atheistic memes to represent the core of the theology I'm against. Even so, Jay Oord, manages to find an example from this conventional theology that he claims is not found in the bible, as if that is a standard he holds - where so much in "open and relational" theology is cherry-picked and not found in the bible as it is presented here, but rather formed to a theology based on cultural flows.
As Jay Oord points out, there are many deeper books that explain and extend on what is written in this introduction, but this book makes you think that they have to bend many a traditional biblical belief in order to achieve this. Then again, Jay Oord kind of says this in the introduction, and so admits not being on biblically sound ground.
I'm open to thinking that there is more to theology than expressed in the bible, but if things are explained in the bible to a degree that can be elaborated by theologians like Augustine and Aquinas, then those are worthy of consideration, reading, and understanding - and usually, they bring tremendous insight into the cores of Chrisitan belief. One can not dismiss theology as easily as Jay Oord here does.
September 22, 2021
I enjoy and appreciate Thomas Jay Oord’s theology and writings. Yet I struggled with this book. I know Oord was intending to write a primer, but I could have used much more depth and intellectual challenge. I found the examples too simple, and because of that more difficult to relate to my life.
Watching Oord’s lectures via the links in each chapter helped solidify the concepts, along with listening to various podcast interviews, and in some cases the lectures and podcasts were more stimulating than the basic concepts outlined in Oord’s book. There was also significant overlap with other of Oord’s writings, and perhaps that was part of feeling I wanted more.
All in all, I am attracted to open and relational theology, finding the “open” part easier to comprehend, and a better fit with my current spiritual state than the “relational.” Yet both parts are needed for a satisfactory partial and provisional answer to the problem of evil, and making sense of life and experience.
My favourite quote from this book: “The God of open and relational theology experiences moment by moment in relation to creatures and creation. God responds, repents, redeems, renews, resists, rebuilds, receives, reconciles, regrets, rejoices, relents, remembers, restores, reunites, returns… and those are just the “re” activities. Each requires a time sequence. A change. A God who “re” acts must change—at least change in some ways.”
Watching Oord’s lectures via the links in each chapter helped solidify the concepts, along with listening to various podcast interviews, and in some cases the lectures and podcasts were more stimulating than the basic concepts outlined in Oord’s book. There was also significant overlap with other of Oord’s writings, and perhaps that was part of feeling I wanted more.
All in all, I am attracted to open and relational theology, finding the “open” part easier to comprehend, and a better fit with my current spiritual state than the “relational.” Yet both parts are needed for a satisfactory partial and provisional answer to the problem of evil, and making sense of life and experience.
My favourite quote from this book: “The God of open and relational theology experiences moment by moment in relation to creatures and creation. God responds, repents, redeems, renews, resists, rebuilds, receives, reconciles, regrets, rejoices, relents, remembers, restores, reunites, returns… and those are just the “re” activities. Each requires a time sequence. A change. A God who “re” acts must change—at least change in some ways.”
Read
December 20, 2022A book which attempts to set forth a theology of God is made more credible when it gives an explanation of how the author does theology, what sources are accepted, what hermeneutic is operative, how we know anything about God. The hermeneutic here seems to be to argue against an extreme form of predestination-ism (Calvinism?), and in favour of what the author deems acceptable or preferable.
He lost me at the beginning of the second chapter, with the question “Is God more like a caring mother or a ruling king?” Of course “caring mother” is going to win in the popularity stakes – but good theology can recognise that both images are images, that all metaphors limp, that both contain some truth, and that the good things in both can be held together. It’s not “either/or”, it's “both/and”.
All that is good in this book can be found within the teaching of the Catholic church. Yes, really. The claims that more traditional theologies teach, for example, that God does not relate to people – well, have you ever lived in a house with a picture of the Sacred Heart on the wall? Everything that is good and credible here – and that is not lacking – has already been taught, is taught, in a more rigorous way, in some of those “traditional” theologies that the author tries to take down.
He lost me at the beginning of the second chapter, with the question “Is God more like a caring mother or a ruling king?” Of course “caring mother” is going to win in the popularity stakes – but good theology can recognise that both images are images, that all metaphors limp, that both contain some truth, and that the good things in both can be held together. It’s not “either/or”, it's “both/and”.
All that is good in this book can be found within the teaching of the Catholic church. Yes, really. The claims that more traditional theologies teach, for example, that God does not relate to people – well, have you ever lived in a house with a picture of the Sacred Heart on the wall? Everything that is good and credible here – and that is not lacking – has already been taught, is taught, in a more rigorous way, in some of those “traditional” theologies that the author tries to take down.
August 28, 2024
Solid explanation/introduction to Open and Relational Theology.
I actually came to many of these conclusions on my own by way of common sense and my education as a psychotherapist/art therapist.
I didn’t really realize that they were so controversial within the Christian community. I am a member of the United Church of Canada and I do feel that there is a strong sense that God is Relational - coming from pulpit.
But the piece that is particularly interesting to me is what do you do with all the other pieces that show God not to be relational? Perhaps theology from the middle ages, for example, that has stuck around till today influencing our concept of God. God's omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, omnibenevolence, free will, and plan all contradict each other with the proof of evil and pain.
Are we allowed to just drop that there is a plan? Or say that God isn’t omnipotent? Oord says we can…. I tend to think he’s correct. The future is not set and God doesn’t necessarily know the future because it isn’t written yet? I have to think on this.
I actually came to many of these conclusions on my own by way of common sense and my education as a psychotherapist/art therapist.
I didn’t really realize that they were so controversial within the Christian community. I am a member of the United Church of Canada and I do feel that there is a strong sense that God is Relational - coming from pulpit.
But the piece that is particularly interesting to me is what do you do with all the other pieces that show God not to be relational? Perhaps theology from the middle ages, for example, that has stuck around till today influencing our concept of God. God's omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, omnibenevolence, free will, and plan all contradict each other with the proof of evil and pain.
Are we allowed to just drop that there is a plan? Or say that God isn’t omnipotent? Oord says we can…. I tend to think he’s correct. The future is not set and God doesn’t necessarily know the future because it isn’t written yet? I have to think on this.
June 26, 2022
Definitely an intro that doesn’t dig too deep. Probably pretty mind blowing if these ideas are new and you’re coming from, like he suggests, a choice between conventional theology or no belief.
A of lot what he expresses can be pretty simply found in the fact that God is love, Jesus is God and the image and picture we get of who he is- so how he acts and the things he does sync up with a lot of his wishes, and the Kingdom of God. Its odd he wouldn’t start with Jesus at the center of this theology instead of the problems or questions. Rather he’s working him in as a side piece near the end. It’s also quite interesting how focused he is on finding definitive answers and creating labels, which is what he identifies as problems with other conventional theologies.
On the whole, nothing incredibly new if you’re familiar with these aspects already, definitely leaves a lot of detail and context to be desired but he does leave that open in his resources he recommends
A of lot what he expresses can be pretty simply found in the fact that God is love, Jesus is God and the image and picture we get of who he is- so how he acts and the things he does sync up with a lot of his wishes, and the Kingdom of God. Its odd he wouldn’t start with Jesus at the center of this theology instead of the problems or questions. Rather he’s working him in as a side piece near the end. It’s also quite interesting how focused he is on finding definitive answers and creating labels, which is what he identifies as problems with other conventional theologies.
On the whole, nothing incredibly new if you’re familiar with these aspects already, definitely leaves a lot of detail and context to be desired but he does leave that open in his resources he recommends
July 2, 2022
I am a deconstructed "exvangelical" christian. The reasons are many, but where I found myself was like many others: lost and mourning the death of a major part of my identity. Over the past couple of years (yup, you guessed it, corresponding to the COVID-19 pandemic and political turmoil in my country, the USA) I've been struggling to find my identity spiritually.
Oord's book manages to express what I've been practicing for the past year or so. Turns out, my beliefs and theology have a name: open-relational theology.
I still have questions about the differences between Oord's open-relational theology, process theology, and open theism, but this book does a great job explaining the basics in layman's terms.
If you are deconstructing, or like theology and the writings of those like: Rob Bell, Rachel Held Evans, Greg Boyd and the like, I can say you'd appreciate this book too.
Oord's book manages to express what I've been practicing for the past year or so. Turns out, my beliefs and theology have a name: open-relational theology.
I still have questions about the differences between Oord's open-relational theology, process theology, and open theism, but this book does a great job explaining the basics in layman's terms.
If you are deconstructing, or like theology and the writings of those like: Rob Bell, Rachel Held Evans, Greg Boyd and the like, I can say you'd appreciate this book too.
July 18, 2021
What a great introduction to open and relational thinking. What is God like? In this book Oord presents a different perspective, summarizing the views of related thinkers and his own views. God is love and love is a relational , non-coercive word. Does God know everything, past, present and future? If so, how can we have free will? God’s view of the future is described as open, not knowable. God knows all the possibilities just not which one that will come to pass.
He does a good job of keeping the content very accessible and easy to follow. As well as describing places where there is disagreement among open thinking.
Personally, this view connect# strongly with me. The challenge is believing that love is a powerful enough force to give God the future God wants.
He does a good job of keeping the content very accessible and easy to follow. As well as describing places where there is disagreement among open thinking.
Personally, this view connect# strongly with me. The challenge is believing that love is a powerful enough force to give God the future God wants.
March 30, 2024
I’ve been wanting to learn more about process theology for a while, and found this book to be a good primer. His stated intention was to make the writing simple enough for everyone to be able to understand, and perhaps that is why I didn’t find it as in-depth as I had been hoping for. Apparently I like complicated 😅 I didn’t think the ideas felt all that “life-changing”—it all seemed fairly obvious to me. But maybe that’s because I’ve already been more immersed in the process-thought world than I had realized, so it wasn’t really saying anything particularly new to me. Guess I just need to keep digging further into it, but I’m glad to have read this book as an introduction.
February 6, 2025
This is a great primer for anyone wanting to learn what open and relational theology is all about. There were not many new ideas for me, since I am familiar with open and process theologies, and I have read one of Oord's other books (God Can't). But even with being familiar with these ideas, I found it a valuable read. There were some new angles and nuggets I had not thought about before. The book doesn't go super deep, but I'm sure that is by design, and is a strength in this case. If you want to go deeper on various topics, Oord provides a section at the end with many reading recommendations.
May 17, 2023
As an introduction to the concepts, it’s fine.
I found the writing, particularly the anecdotes of individuals sprinkled throughout a bit too flat. Simplistic. They gave the feeling of filler material intended to fluff the word count.
Was it a bad read? No.
Would I read it again? Probably not.
Would I recommend it to someone interested in open and relational theology? Eh. The bibliography is a good resource, but I honestly would probably refer an interested party to one of Oord’s podcast interviews.
I found the writing, particularly the anecdotes of individuals sprinkled throughout a bit too flat. Simplistic. They gave the feeling of filler material intended to fluff the word count.
Was it a bad read? No.
Would I read it again? Probably not.
Would I recommend it to someone interested in open and relational theology? Eh. The bibliography is a good resource, but I honestly would probably refer an interested party to one of Oord’s podcast interviews.
May 20, 2023
Extremely Helpful!
Especially for those of us who are relatively new to aspects of Open and Relational Theology, an overview is essential. We can find ourselves struggling to understand the big umbrella and all that it holds. As usual, Thomas Jay Oord does a masterful job explaining his topic in ways that are accessible and profound. In doing so, he opens us to an understanding of God that makes sense in a 21st century context. If, like me, you just can't believe things that your mind rejects, tis book is essential reading!
Especially for those of us who are relatively new to aspects of Open and Relational Theology, an overview is essential. We can find ourselves struggling to understand the big umbrella and all that it holds. As usual, Thomas Jay Oord does a masterful job explaining his topic in ways that are accessible and profound. In doing so, he opens us to an understanding of God that makes sense in a 21st century context. If, like me, you just can't believe things that your mind rejects, tis book is essential reading!
November 14, 2021
A really good basic introduction. But if you've read any other book on the subject, like the writer's previous book God Can't, a lot of the material here is pretty redundant.
I'd also recommend God Can't over this, because I feel like most non-experts are interested in open & relational theology as a way to better understand the problem of evil more than an evolutionary universe, prayer, or free will, and that book addresses that more comprehensively.
I'd also recommend God Can't over this, because I feel like most non-experts are interested in open & relational theology as a way to better understand the problem of evil more than an evolutionary universe, prayer, or free will, and that book addresses that more comprehensively.
June 20, 2023
This was the introduction I needed when I first discovered open and relational theology. Sure he skips a lot of nuance but with broad strokes Thomas still explains open and relational thinking extensively and convincingly. I was already convinced of open relational thinking going into this book and hoped that it would help consolidate my thoughts and give me new things to think about. It did all that, AND gave me an extensive resource section in the back. I can't recommend this book enough!
December 10, 2023
Like what he's doing and enjoy his writing so this deserves a longer review, but my main critique boils down to this: I don't see why God can't be out of time. There's no real reason I see to bind God by chains he forged, I guess I'm still a fundamentalist in that I see God as all good, and yet all powerful. He is present in our pain, and yet allows it. I appreciate Oord attempting to solve this issue, but in the end I think he just steers around it.
January 22, 2024
This is my first book reading in the Open and Relational Theology perspective. This is a good introduction to the new theological thinking. Very readable. Very clear. I will move on to other books by Thomas and people who are joining him in this new wave of Christian thinking. It addresses many concerns that challenge Christians in their view of God. Love is at the centre of this theology and being open to change is very encouraging in adjusting one's view of God.
July 12, 2021
Learning about Open and Relational theology has changed my spiritual life and as a result of that has changed my mental life and as a result of that, being an enneagram one who lives in his head, has changed my whole life! This book has encouraged me to relax and enjoy an open, relationship with God who I call “The Great Love.”
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews