At their November meeting in Colorado Springs the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) passed a resolution which reads, "We believe the Bible clearly teaches that God has complete, accurate, and infallible knowledge of all events past, present, and future, including all future decisions and actions of free moral agents." The resolution passed 253 to 66 with 41 members abstaining.

This reaffirming statement of traditional belief represents an official response to a decade-long ETS discussion of "open theism." Believers in the "openness of God" emphasize God's self-limitation in response to humans, based on the concept of free moral agency. Because God offers man choices between right and wrong, they believe that God chooses not to predetermine or foreknow those choices. Rather, God alters His plans based on human response.

Which approach best reflects the teachings of Scripture?

Not all Christian doctrines come directly from the Bible. The theological foundation of the traditional concept of God is rooted in Greek philosophy, as early Church Fathers of the second century sought to explain Christianity to the pagan world. Since educated pagans looked to philosophers rather than religion for answers, Greek philosophy was a dominant force in the cultural environment. The Greek influence on Judaism and Christianity is known as "hellenization."

The perfection of the deity was a prevailing concept of the philosophers. God could therefore not change, because any change from perfection would result in imperfection. Neither could He have any human qualities such as emotions. Since God knows everything already, He cannot be surprised or disturbed. In fact nothing can disturb God's peaceful bliss. Since God has no limitations, Plato even taught that God does not love. He believed that a self-sufficient being has no need for love. Since God is omnipresent, He does not move. Jewish philosopher Philo sought to wed these Greek concepts to Judaism, attempting to harmonize them with the Scriptures. He claimed that the many biblical passages that speak of God as having human qualities are "anthropomorphisms" that should not be taken literally. According to Philo, God is so above humanity that He has no contact with mankind. Rather, He delegates that duty to lesser beings. God is also nameless, because to name is to define, which constitutes setting limits.

So, according to Greek thought, God cannot change, cannot move, cannot learn, has no emotions and no name. Ah, but He is all-powerful. Yeah, right!

Unfortunately, many of these errant concepts are still present within the traditional concept of God.

The fact that man was made in the image of God suggests many similarities between God and man. How else could we have a relationship with Him? When we pray to God, we relate to Him in human terms because that is how He describes Himself in the Bible.