Review of "What Does God Know And When Does He Know It?" by Millard J. Erickson

Ahhhhh (sigh of relief), saving the best for last. This is the final book in my personal series on Open Theism, and it was like a breath of fresh air. This is the book I'd been waiting to read on OT. 


What I Liked: Although much more highly academic in nature, finally someone tackles the arguments both for and against OT in the original Greek and Hebrew. Truly, Erickson traces and deconstructs each argument in the way only the best systematic theologians can. 


From hermeneutic inconsistencies, to directly answering the challenges brought forth from the front-runners of OT, Erickson presents a case against the open view of God and for the classical view that is hard to deny. 


What I Didn't Like: This is less of a critique and more of a word to the wise: This book is much harder to access than the previous mentioned volumes in my personal series. This is not to say that it is impossible to understand, but I did find myself feeling like I was reading a textbook more than anything else. 


My only criticism is that Erickson doesn't present his case for classical theism until he basically reviews the purpose/arguments of the book throughout the last two shorter chapters in the book. Now, this is also a great thing because his deconstruction of the OT view throughout the book is so spot-on that little needs to be said in direct defense of the classical view. 


My Favorite Quotes:
(with this book being so based upon nearly flawless argumentation, it is hard to pull just anything out of context to quote, but here are a couple that can stand on their own.)
- "The open theist appeal is not a call to return to an earlier, purer version of biblical understanding [like the Protestant Reformation]. It is a call to something new to the mainstream of orthodox Christian thought."
- "Similarly, for God to know what he is to do requires in some cases his knowing what humans will do. his predictions about the coming of his Son required knowing that humans would persist in their wicked ways. His prediction of the resurrection of Jesus assumes that he will be rejected and put to death."


Recommendation:
I would recommend this to anyone who already has at least a basic understanding of the current debate between open theism and classical theism. It would also help if you have a basic understanding of philosophical/theological terms as Erickson does little explaining, and uses much jargon. This book is for the inner academic in us all.