The paradoxes we live with. A few thoughts to ponder. If I live with “openness theology,” would I ever truly hold anyone to anything? Why would I assume any system of rules whether religious or logical? Would not a de-systemization be just as incongruent, for not knowing the future, and God not knowing it either, should truly mean nothing can be assumed, even such thoughts as “alienation within society.” On what grounds can “openness” doctrine predict future human behavior even predicated upon past human experience if the future truly is “open?”
If I am an atheist, why would I truly worry about anything? Is not life purely random? If so, on what grounds do I prioritize suddenly some higher value to something, such as “human rights?” If life is not “purely random” and no higher power has made it thus, on what grounds or from what source can purposefulness, attach greater value to one facet of life over another? Furthermore, since with this paradigm there is a homogeneity to life, making all things equal since all things are inherently random, whatever be the “value” attached to all things, how can this value be different from one atheist to another? What accounts for such a differentiation? I speak completely theoretically at this point, for I do not believe anyone has or ever will live treating all things as equally random.
However, if either the atheist or the openness theology candidate were to be consistent with their paradigms, I think the end result would be quite ironic. Both would live in the present, presuming nothing! Both would have no need to defend or fight for anything! But I've been wrong before. I wonder though, how right am I this time? One more thing, if I have misrepresented "openness theology" I think that is because it is open for debate:)