Page 15

those sacrifices. Only if God knows with certainty that sin's debt will be paid in the future death
of Christ can those OT sacrifices function as types by which God can genuinely forgive.

The Christian Life its Faith and Hope in God

Open theism's denial of exhaustive divine foreknowledge undermines the Christian's
confidence in the reliability and certainty of God's wise counsel and guidance for the
Christian life.

Consider the Suzanne story in Boyd's God of the Possible. What assurances can she be

given that God will do any better in his future leading than he has in the past? After all,
according to Boyd, he accepts the notion that God truly did give his best counsel and guidance
when he encouraged her marriage to the man that both he (God) and she learned over time was
so deeply hurtful. Denying that God knows the future in this way undermines confidence and
trust in accepting and following God's leading.

2.

Open theism's denial of exhaustive divine foreknowledge undermines the Christian's
hope that affliction, suffering, and trials in life are permitted by God for what he knows
will turn out to be ultimately good purposes (e.g., Rom. 8:28; c.f., Rom. 5:1-5; James 1:2-
4).

Adding to the above point is the problem that any assurance we might have had that these

hardships are part of a bigger wise and good plan is now taken away. God's plans change, and
frankly many, many things happen that he wishes didn't. God simply cannot give assurances
that things will work out for good because he doesn't know how the future will unfold. Face it,
we may encounter gratuitous evil at any turn, unexpected and unwanted by God, and utterly
pointless in its purpose for us. Don't expect God to know what you and I cannot know, viz., that
there are good purposes ultimately for this suffering. Accept it; this is the nature of life lived
with a God lacking such knowledge of the future.

3.

Open theism's denial of exhaustive divine foreknowledge promotes presumptuous
Christian prayers, in which we are encouraged to work together with God at devising
what is best for the future.

Oh, the implicit arrogance embedded in the notion that God takes into consideration what

I think before he and I decide together what is best to do, as if I, or we, could possibly contribute
something that could be joined with God's understanding and wisdom resulting in an overall
better plan. But hear how positively this is portrayed in the open view. Sanders writes:

It is God's desire that we enter into a give-and-take relationship of love, and this is not
accomplished by God's forcing his blueprint on us. Rather, God wants us to go through
life together with him, making decisions together. Together we decide the actual course
of my life. . . . To a large extent our future is open and we are to determine what it will
be in dialogue with God.

Ibid., 276-277.