Fatalism and Bivalence. Can be Theism Really Open?

In this paper, we consider the prospects of a particular response to the arguments for logical and theological fatalism: the thesis that there is no true future and that the propositions concerning the future have no truth-value. The difficulties of this position are stressed: on the logical level, the negation of the intuitive principle of bivalence, on the theological level, the view that God does not know the future. Some of these problems could be overcome: it is easy to define omniscience so that it does not include the knowledge of propositions lacking a truth-value. Other objections are more serious: an almost unanimous tradition has conceived God as provident and, above all, the Biblical evidence in favour of prophecy is very difficult to account for on the open theistic view.