What is Open Theism?

Understanding Genesis 6:6; Isaiah 46:10; Jeremiah 18:7-10

Open theism (also called openness theology or the open view of God) is a theological position that emerged in the late 20th century, primarily within evangelical Christianity. It proposes that while God is omniscient — knowing everything that can be known — the future free decisions of human beings cannot be known in advance, even by God, because they do not yet exist as knowable facts. The future is genuinely 'open,' not a closed script that God reads in advance.

The Core Claims

Open theism rests on several interconnected propositions:

1. God is omniscient — he knows everything that can be known. This is not in dispute.

2. Future free choices are not yet real. If a person has genuine libertarian free will — the ability to choose between real alternatives — then their future choice does not yet exist as a fact. It is a possibility, not an actuality.

3. God cannot know as certain what does not yet exist as certain. If tomorrow's free decision is genuinely undetermined, then even God cannot know it as determined. This is not a limitation on God's power but a statement about the nature of reality: you cannot know a fact that is not yet a fact.

4. God knows all possibilities exhaustively. God knows every possible choice, every possible outcome, every possible future path — and he is infinitely wise in responding to whichever path is chosen. He is never surprised, never caught off guard, never at a loss.

5. God takes risks. Because the future is genuinely open, God's plans involve real risk — the possibility that creatures will choose against his desires. Creation itself was a risk; the incarnation was a risk. God's sovereignty is expressed not through meticulous control but through resourceful wisdom — achieving his purposes through an open, dynamic interaction with free creatures.

Key Proponents

Open theism was articulated in its modern form primarily by:

• Clark Pinnock (1937-2010) — Canadian Baptist theologian, author of Most Moved Mover (2001)
• Greg Boyd — pastor and author of God of the Possible (2000), perhaps the most widely read popular defense
• John Sanders — author of The God Who Risks (1998), a foundational academic work
• William Hasker — philosopher, author of God, Time, and Knowledge (1989)
• Richard Rice — Adventist theologian, wrote the early articulation in The Openness of God (1980)

The landmark collaborative volume The Openness of God (1994), co-authored by Pinnock, Rice, Sanders, Hasker, and David Basinger, brought the view to widespread attention.

Biblical Arguments For Open Theism

Open theists appeal to numerous biblical texts that they argue are best explained by genuine divine openness:

God changes his mind. Multiple passages describe God relenting, regretting, or altering his plans in response to human action:

• 'The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled' (Genesis 6:6)
• God relents from destroying Israel after Moses's intercession (Exodus 32:14)
• God relents from sending disaster on Nineveh after their repentance (Jonah 3:10)
• Jeremiah 18:7-10 describes God's plans as conditional: 'If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned.'

Open theists argue that if God already knew with certainty what would happen, these passages are misleading — God never really 'regretted' or 'relented' because the outcome was known all along.

God tests and discovers. Some passages depict God as genuinely learning through testing:

• 'Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son' (Genesis 22:12 — God to Abraham after the binding of Isaac)
• 'I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me' (Genesis 18:21 — God before Sodom)

God expresses surprise and disappointment. Isaiah 5:1-7 portrays God as a vineyard owner who 'looked for a crop of good grapes, but it yielded only bad fruit.' The parable's emotional force depends on genuine expectation and genuine disappointment.

Biblical Arguments Against Open Theism

The traditional view — held by Reformed, Catholic, Orthodox, and most Arminian theologians — is that God's foreknowledge is exhaustive and certain, including all future free choices. Key texts:

Isaiah 46:9-10 — 'I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come.' God declares that he knows the future comprehensively — 'the end from the beginning.' This is among the strongest texts for exhaustive divine foreknowledge.

Psalm 139:4 — 'Before a word is on my tongue you, LORD, know it completely.' God knows David's words before he speaks them — including words that are freely chosen.

Psalm 139:16 — 'All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.'

Acts 2:23 — 'This man [Jesus] was handed over to you by God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.' The crucifixion involved real human free choices (Judas's betrayal, Pilate's decision, the crowd's demand), yet it was foreknown by God and part of his deliberate plan.

Matthew 26:34 — Jesus predicts Peter's denial with specific detail: 'Before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times.' This is foreknowledge of a free human decision with precise certainty.

Romans 8:29 — 'For those God foreknew he also predestined.' The traditional reading connects foreknowledge with predestination — God's knowledge of future free choices is the basis for his sovereign plan.

Theological Critique

Critics of open theism raise several concerns:

1. It diminishes God's sovereignty. If God does not know the future with certainty, can he guarantee his promises? Can Romans 8:28 ('all things work together for good') be trusted if God is navigating an unknown future?

2. It undermines prophecy. Biblical prophecy includes detailed predictions of future free actions (Cyrus named by name 150 years before his birth in Isaiah 44:28; the details of the crucifixion). If future free choices are unknowable, how did God reveal them?

3. The anthropomorphism argument. Classical theologians argue that passages describing God 'regretting' or 'discovering' are anthropomorphic — describing God's actions in human terms that accommodate our understanding. Just as God does not literally have hands or eyes (despite biblical language), God does not literally learn or regret. The emotional language is real — God genuinely grieves over sin — but it does not imply ignorance.

4. Historical consensus. Open theism has no significant support in the church's 2,000-year theological tradition. The early church fathers, the medieval scholastics, the Reformers, the Counter-Reformation, and the vast majority of modern theologians across all traditions affirm exhaustive divine foreknowledge. Open theism's proponents acknowledge this and argue the tradition was wrong.

The Evangelical Controversy

Open theism created a significant controversy within evangelical Christianity in the late 1990s and early 2000s:

• The Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) debated whether open theism was consistent with its doctrinal basis (inerrancy of Scripture). In 2001, a motion to exclude open theists failed to reach the required two-thirds vote.
• Several denominations issued statements rejecting open theism (the Baptist General Conference voted against it in 2000)
• Greg Boyd's church faced significant criticism, and the issue became a flashpoint in the debate over the boundaries of evangelical orthodoxy

The Deeper Question

At its core, open theism is an attempt to resolve the age-old tension between divine sovereignty and human freedom. How can humans be genuinely free if God already knows with certainty what they will do? Classical Arminians answer: foreknowledge does not cause the event — God foresees what humans freely choose. Calvinists answer: God ordains all things, and human responsibility is compatible with divine determination. Open theists answer: genuine freedom requires a genuinely open future, even for God.

Each position has biblical texts in its favor and biblical texts it must interpret carefully. The debate ultimately concerns the nature of God, the nature of time, and the nature of freedom — questions that have occupied the greatest minds in Christian theology for two millennia.