This is one of the most well known books written in recent days to support the open view of God. It was written on a popular level by a man who is unquestionably an excellent communicator. As a result, undoubtedly, many will be deceived by his arguments.
Boyd examines many Scriptures in his efforts to promote open theism. The problem is that the interpretation of these passages is largely dependent upon one’s presupposition about God. Boyd assumes that even for God much of the future is open – that is, God does not know what will happen; He therefore is at risk. This is in opposition to classical theology, which teaches that God has determined the future (Calvinism), or at least knows the future (Arminianism). Boyd dismisses classical theology by the accusation (found in all open literature) that it is rooted in Greek philosophy rather than the Word of God. Of course those who hold a classical view of God (whether Calvinist or Arminian) claim that their theology is grounded in Scripture.
This leads to one of the major deficiencies of God of the Possible ; Boyd does not significantly interact with the scriptural passages, which clearly teach the classical view. He mentions a few, rejects them with a sniff, and moves on. For example, the author devotes one sentence to “redefining” Romans 8:28, a powerful Scripture teaching normally used by classical theologians to support their position: “What ever happens, God will work with us to bring a redemptive purpose out of the event” (pp. 155,156). But of course the passage says no such thing. It reads “God causes all things to work together for good…” This is clearly an action taken by God. It says nothing about God working with us. This is the type of exegesis awaiting the reader of God of the Possible. Sadly, many will not notice this and will be won over by Boyd’s winsome style and polemic.