Clayton Diltz does an excellent job laying out the road to Open Theism, and using it as a template, I will follow the road less traveled to what I believe is a biblical view of God’s relationship with man. The issue deals with our understanding of God’s relationship with time. God is eternal, and He created time when He created the physical universe. So for sure He exists outside of time, where everything is before His mind, if you will, at the same time, which is no time at all. But is that the only way the Bible describes God, as transcendent? No. God possesses the quality of immanence; He can operate within time, dealing with things in sequence. What the road to the partial openness of God requires is that God can operate within time and not say God cannot choose to operate this way. My view of course is God, because He is all-powerful, could choose to operate this way, and that is just what He did. The second fork in our bumpy road, deals with whether the Bible teaches we have limited free will, being able to act autonomously within the confines allowed by God, or whether our choices are illusions, the past dictates our choices so we really make “non-choices”. This redefines the meaning of choice as used in the Bible to mean non-choice. Not a viable option for me. But the range of our autonomous choices is limited by God, and He does alter the limits during our lifetime if it is according to His purpose, such as hardening the folks in Romans 11, they could no longer choose to trust in the gospel. The third fork in the road has to do with the extent of God’s knowledge. Does God know everything imaginable, or does God know what He chooses to know, such as not remembering the sins He forgives. Could God know the future exhaustively? Of course, otherwise something would be impossible for God. I think God knows whatever He chooses to know, and this includes everything in the past and present, but only what He has deterministically predetermined in the future. Thus Jesus can tell Peter how Peter will die before it happens, even though Peter will make some choices inconsistent with God’s overall plan for Peter along the way, as pointed out by Paul. God does not interact with everyone in the same detail, as in the case of David’s life plan, but He brings about what is consistent with His will. So if His will is for us to choose to trust in God and Christ autonomously, then He will bring that about, and not pre-determine that choice. When God fulfills prophecy He brings it about, He causes it to happen, rather than foretells what He knows about a supposedly existent future viewed from outside of time. This is the view presented in scripture and is consistent with God operating within time. And the last fork in the bumpy road to the partial openness of God deals with how God acquires knowledge. If you accept the view that God in eternity knew everything imaginable, then God cannot learn or react to information and alter His action. But, if you accept that God knows whatever He has chosen to know, then He can acquire knowledge of what He chose not to predetermine, the autonomous actions of His creation, because if He had predetermined them, then when we repent it would not bring Him glory. Next, God, operating within time, can acquire knowledge about our heart by searching it, or He can choose to test us for the two-fold purpose of strengthening us and in the case of Abraham and Isaac, creating a “type” of Christ as an illustration. Now as why this bumpy road did not lead to open theism, lets consider that they took biblical truths, and then like Calvinism, extrapolated a doctrine that takes scripture too far. Why could God not choose to know future contingent actions? Could He not look into our heart and character and see how we would react if He put us into a situation. Of course He could. Recall that Jesus said if His miracles had been performed elsewhere, they would have repented? Now He did not do the miracles there, but He knew the hearts of the people there, and therefore knew that if they had seen the miracles, what they would have done in a situation that never happened but might have happened. Does God make mistakes that He regrets because He blundered? Of course not, God is perfect in all that He does. But just because I discipline my child out of love, does not mean I do not regret sincerely what pain and suffering I caused. God regretted the flood and chose not to do it again, but the flood was not a mistake, but a perfectly necessary action by our perfect God to bring out His perfect purpose. Why all the sound and fury trying to disparage sound biblical views. Because if the partial open view of God is true, then the beliefs in the older doctrines, God knows everything imaginable, and God ordains whatsoever comes to pass are shown to be in error. The old doctrines nullify rather than soundly interpret verse after verse covering these issues. Recall that Peter said Jesus knows everything? (John 21:17). But Jesus did not know everything imaginable; He did not know the time of His second coming. What was in view was Jesus knew everything about Peter, or more broadly, everything about those He encountered because He could search their hearts. To claim this supports the God knows everything imaginable view is simply unsound, in my opinion.