Open Theism is a theological position that arose in the late 20th century, challenging traditional Christian understandings of God’s foreknowledge and sovereignty. Open Theists argue that, while God is omniscient, He does not have exhaustive knowledge of the future because the future is partly open and undetermined, particularly concerning human free will. According to this view, God knows everything that can be known, but the choices of free agents (human beings) are not fully knowable until they are made. Therefore, God is seen as genuinely responsive to human decisions as they unfold, adjusting His plans in real-time.
Open Theism differs from the classical Christian understanding of God’s omniscience, which holds that God knows all things—past, present, and future, including human choices—from eternity. The heresy of Open Theism challenges historic Christian orthodoxy, particularly on issues of divine foreknowledge, sovereignty, and the immutability (unchangeability) of God.
History of Open Theism
Origins in Modern Theology: Open Theism developed out of discussions about the nature of human free will and God’s interaction with the world. It arose as a reaction against Calvinism and other deterministic views of divine sovereignty. The seeds of Open Theism can be found in Arminianism, which stresses human free will and God's conditional election based on foreseen faith. However, Open Theism goes further by questioning God's exhaustive foreknowledge of the future.
Key Figures: Open Theism gained traction in the 1980s and 1990s, with theologians such as:
- Clark Pinnock: Pinnock was one of the primary advocates of Open Theism, promoting the idea that God has chosen to limit His knowledge of the future in order to allow for genuine human freedom.
- Gregory Boyd: Boyd argued that God’s knowledge of the future is limited to what can be logically known. Since human free will choices are contingent and not yet determined, Boyd claimed that God knows possibilities rather than certainties regarding future human actions.
- John Sanders and William Hasker were other significant proponents who helped shape the movement and further its theological foundations.
Controversy and Debate: Open Theism sparked significant debate within evangelical circles. Some viewed it as a legitimate alternative understanding of divine foreknowledge and human freedom, while others saw it as a dangerous departure from orthodox Christian theology. The Evangelical Theological Society (ETS), a prominent academic group, became a battleground for these debates in the 1990s and early 2000s. In 2001, a motion to expel Open Theists from the ETS was narrowly defeated, reflecting the intense controversy surrounding the issue.
Traditional Christian theologians, especially from Reformed and Calvinist backgrounds, argued that Open Theism undermined God’s sovereignty and immutability, core doctrines upheld throughout church history. Critics pointed to the theological and biblical dangers of limiting God's knowledge and the implications this has for God’s trustworthiness and providence.
Current Status: Open Theism remains a minority position within evangelicalism and is widely rejected by both Reformed and classical Arminian theologians. However, it continues to be advocated by some theologians and scholars, particularly in academic circles that explore the philosophical implications of divine omniscience and human freedom.
Theology of Open Theism
Open Theism is centered around a few key theological claims that distinguish it from both Reformed theology and classical Arminianism:
God’s Limited Foreknowledge: According to Open Theism, God knows all possibilities but not all actualities. God knows the present perfectly and all that can be known about the past and the future, but since human beings possess genuine free will, future free decisions are unknowable until they are made. This limitation is not seen as a deficiency in God’s knowledge, but rather as a logical necessity of maintaining true free will. God knows every possible outcome of human choices but does not know which specific choices humans will make.
Human Free Will: Open Theism strongly emphasizes libertarian free will, which means that human choices are genuinely free and not determined by external causes, including divine foreordination. Open Theists believe that for human beings to have meaningful free will, the future must remain open in certain respects, particularly regarding personal decisions. Thus, God does not determine or foreknow the outcomes of future free choices but allows them to play out.
God’s Responsiveness: One of the central tenets of Open Theism is that God is responsive to human actions in real-time. This means that God is capable of adjusting His plans and purposes based on how humans act and respond. Open Theists believe that this view enhances the biblical picture of God as a relational and dynamic being who interacts with His creation. God’s plans are described as flexible, not fixed from eternity, so He can respond to the free actions of His creatures as history unfolds.
Divine Sovereignty Reconceived: Open Theism redefines divine sovereignty in a way that is compatible with human freedom. Rather than God exercising meticulous control over every event in history, Open Theism asserts that God’s sovereignty is relational—God works with free human agents in a cooperative manner. This means that God can influence, guide, and shape the course of events, but He does not predetermine or know the outcomes of all actions, especially those involving free human choices.
God’s Love and Risk: Open Theists argue that God’s decision to allow for an open future reflects His deep love for humanity. By allowing human beings to make genuine free choices, God enters into a relationship of risk, where humans can choose paths that God did not predetermine or foreknow. This risk is seen as a demonstration of God's commitment to real love and relationship, rather than a mechanistic or controlling sovereignty.
Why Open Theism is Considered Heretical or Heterodox
Open Theism departs from historic Christian orthodoxy in several significant ways, leading many theologians to classify it as a heresy or, at the very least, a serious theological error. Key reasons for its rejection by traditional Christian theologians include:
Denial of God’s Exhaustive Foreknowledge: One of the most central tenets of classical Christian theology is that God possesses exhaustive knowledge of the future, including the free actions of humans. Scripture affirms God’s perfect foreknowledge (Isaiah 46:9-10; Psalm 139:1-4; Romans 8:29-30), teaching that God knows not only all possible outcomes but the actual future. Open Theism, by limiting God’s knowledge to possibilities, contradicts the biblical doctrine of God’s omniscience.
Undermining of Divine Sovereignty: Open Theism redefines sovereignty in a way that is incompatible with the biblical portrayal of God as the all-powerful ruler who decrees all things according to His eternal plan (Ephesians 1:11). By suggesting that God does not know or control all future events, Open Theism calls into question God’s sovereign control over history and the assurance that His purposes will be accomplished. Traditional Christian theology affirms that God’s sovereignty extends over all aspects of creation, including human actions, without undermining human responsibility (Proverbs 19:21; Acts 2:23).
Challenges to God’s Immutability: Open Theism’s portrayal of God as changing in response to human actions challenges the immutability of God, which is the doctrine that God is unchanging in His nature, purposes, and promises (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17). Classical theology teaches that God is outside of time and not subject to change. Open Theism’s emphasis on God’s dynamic interaction with creation risks portraying God as subject to temporal limitations, which conflicts with the traditional view of God as eternal and unchanging.
Security of God’s Promises: Open Theism raises concerns about the certainty of God’s promises and providence. If God cannot know the future with certainty, then it becomes unclear how God can ensure the fulfillment of His promises or His ultimate plan for redemption. For example, traditional Christianity teaches that God’s prophecies and promises will certainly come to pass because He knows and controls the future (Isaiah 46:10; Romans 8:28-30). Open Theism introduces uncertainty about whether God can guarantee the outcome of future events.
Rejection by Church Tradition: Open Theism has been widely rejected by the historical Christian church across denominational lines. The Council of Orange (529 AD) affirmed God’s sovereignty and foreknowledge in the context of human freedom and grace. The Westminster Confession of Faith, a cornerstone of Reformed theology, explicitly teaches that God has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, while affirming human responsibility (WCF 3.1). Open Theism stands in contrast to these historical affirmations of God’s complete knowledge and sovereignty.
Historic Christian Orthodox View
The historic Christian orthodox view holds to the following doctrines, which are challenged by Open Theism:
God’s Omniscience: Christian orthodoxy affirms that God is omniscient, meaning He knows everything—past, present, and future. This includes not only what will happen but also what could happen under different circumstances (1 John 3:20; Isaiah 46:10). God’s knowledge of the future is exhaustive, including all future free choices made by human beings.
Divine Sovereignty and Providence: Orthodoxy teaches that God is sovereign over all creation and that His eternal decree governs all things, including human decisions (Ephesians 1:11; Proverbs 16:9). This does not negate human responsibility or free will, but it does mean that God’s plans are unchangeable and will certainly come to pass (Romans 8:28-30). God's sovereignty and human freedom are seen as compatible, a view known as compatibilism.
Immutability of God: Classical Christian theology asserts that God is immutable—unchanging in His being, character, will, and purposes (Hebrews 13:8; James 1:17). While God interacts with His creation in real time, His eternal nature and knowledge are not subject to change or revision based on human actions.
Certainty of God’s Promises: Historic Christianity teaches that God’s promises are certain and trustworthy because He is both all-knowing and all-powerful (Numbers 23:19). God’s knowledge of the future and His sovereignty ensure that His redemptive plan will be fulfilled, providing assurance to believers that God will bring His purposes to completion (Romans 8:28-30; Philippians 1:6).
Conclusion
Open Theism is a theological system that seeks to uphold human freedom by arguing that God’s knowledge of the future is limited to possibilities rather than certainties. This view departs from historic Christian orthodoxy, which affirms God’s exhaustive foreknowledge, sovereignty, and immutability. Open Theism raises concerns about the reliability of God’s promises, the security of salvation, and the assurance of God’s ultimate plan. Throughout church history, the classical Christian view has maintained that God’s knowledge and sovereignty extend to all things, including human choices, while also affirming human responsibility. Consequently, Open Theism has been widely rejected as heterodox or heretical by the broader Christian tradition.
-----
Related Resources @Monergism