I apologize for my tardiness in continuing my series on "Theological Infallibility". The basic question is this - "How should I respond to the inherent uncertainty that comes with being human while building a Theology?" I mentioned that uncertainty seemed to strong a response, and that humility was more of an attitude than a proactive response.
Another possible response is, "openness" (yes, it's a word). In today's society, if you want to insult someone just call them, "close-minded". You can bet money that everybody who's trying to be somebody is remaining "open" to all the options. But what exactly does it mean to be open. It's a little hard to define.
The idea of being open in your Theology basically means that you're unwilling to "close" the door of your mind and thus become "bias" towards a certain position. Someone who is truly open, won't build a theology based on a solid foundation, because he/she must remain open (free from commitment) even in regards to foundational issues.
However some would argue that the whole idea behind opening your mind is so that you can eventually close it. In other words, you open your mind to all the options, weigh the evidence, and make a decision - case closed (pun intended). Others find virtue in remaining perpetually open to all options, regardless of how strong the evidence points towards something.
There are a lot of things I like about the idea of being open in your Theology. (not to be confused with Open Theism which denies God's ability to know the future) However, being open comes with a lot of risks. I am much more attracted to, and will discuss in the next post, a modified position, which I call - conversation.