One of the biggest questions Christians wrestle with is: Does God already know everything that will happen in the future? If He does, does that mean our choices are just part of a fixed script? And if He doesn’t, does that mean He isn’t really God?
Two main views have shaped this debate: the classical view of God’s foreknowledge and the more recent perspective known as Open Theism. Both are popular. Both try to defend God’s greatness. But I believe they can miss the heart of God — His love. And when we emphasize love, we find ourselves drawn toward the open view.
1. The Classical View: A Settled Future
Classical theism teaches that God knows the entire future in exhaustive detail, because it is fixed from eternity.
- God’s knowledge is perfect, so nothing can surprise Him.
- Every choice you make has already been known and settled.
- God is in complete control because He ordains all things.
At first, this sounds safe and comforting. But it raises questions:
- If everything is settled, are we really free?
- If God foreordained Adam’s sin, does that make God the author of evil?
- If billions are lost, and God scripted it all, does that truly reflect His heart of love?
In fact a lot of theologians believe in this, and this is the most predominant view in Christianity.
2. Open Theism: A Dynamic Relationship
Open Theism offers another way:
- God knows everything that can be known.
- The future is partly settled (what God has decreed) and partly open (free choices not yet made).
- God is infinitely wise, anticipating every possible outcome and ready to respond.
Greg Boyd puts it simply:
“God is so smart He doesn’t need to pre-settle everything. He can handle every possible future perfectly.” (God of the Possible)
In this view, God’s greatness is not seen in controlling every detail, but in His ability to bring good out of every situation. This gives emphasis on God’s character and love.
The roots can be traced to hints in thinkers like Clark Pinnock, who became a central voice in the modern debate. Alongside him, Greg Boyd articulated a biblical defense of open theism in works like God of the Possible, showing how Scripture depicts God as responsive, relational, and sometimes surprised. John Sanders contributed with The God Who Risks, arguing that God sovereignly chose to give humans freedom that shapes the unfolding of history. William Hasker and Richard Rice are also influential, with Rice having coined the term “open theism.”
Objections to Open Theism (and Why They Don’t Hold)
Objection 1: It undermines omniscience.
If God doesn’t know the future exhaustively, is He all-knowing?
👉 Answer: God knows everything — including all possibilities. For instance, a coin toss has two outcomes, and there are many instances with so many different possibilities. His greatness is seen in being ready for every outcome. Consider chess: who is truly the greatest player? Is it the one who forces the outcome from the very beginning by predetermining every move his opponent will make, or the one who can enter any situation on the board and still find a way to win?
Objection 2: It weakens sovereignty.
If God is reacting, is He really in control?
👉 Answer: Look at the world as it is — billions lost, evil rampant. Does that look like “control” in the classical sense? Open Theism actually strengthens sovereignty by showing God is never trapped.
He rules not by scripting everything but by working in the midst of chaos with man for a better outcome. John Sanders calls this “God’s resourceful sovereignty.”
Objection 3: It conflicts with prophecy.
The Bible often predicts the future with certainty. Doesn’t that prove it’s fixed?
👉 Answer: Some prophecies are fixed (like Christ’s death), but others are conditional. Jonah declared Nineveh would be destroyed — yet God relented when they repented (Jonah 3:10). So does that mean God was lying?
Prophecy shows God’s control, but not always a locked script. It reveals His intentions and warnings, which can shift if people respond.
5. A God who relates Means “Open Theism”
What I love about Open Theism is how it makes sense of passages where God:
- Regrets: “The Lord regretted that He had made man” (Genesis 6:6).
- Changes His mind: God relented from destroying Israel when Moses interceded (Exodus 32:14).
- Tests: God says to Abraham, “Now I know that you fear God” (Genesis 22:12).
In the classical view, these are brushed off as mere “anthropomorphisms.” But what if they mean exactly what they say? God is personal. He responds, engages, and is not aloof. If classical that would mean lying.
Clark Pinnock once wrote:
“The future is partly open, not because of any deficiency in God, but because God has chosen to make a world where love is possible.” (Most Moved Mover)
That’s the God I can love back — because His relationship with me is real, not pre-scripted.
✅ Conclusion: Love at the Center
Is the future fixed? Not entirely. And that’s good news.
The heart of God is love. Love requires freedom. Freedom carries risk. But God is so great, He is never outmaneuvered, never surprised beyond His ability to respond, and never without a plan to redeem.
Open Theism isn’t about diminishing God. It’s about magnifying His love, His relational heart, and His resourceful sovereignty.
The God of the Bible is not a cold author of a fixed script. He is the Father who walks with us, responds to us, and genuinely delights when we freely love Him back.
Leave a Reply