Indeed, a proposition can be true even if it has undesirable consequences. But those consequences can still refute Christianity if the religion ends up being incoherent. The question is whether the open theist can hold onto the rest of Christian theology, or whether the open theist's version resembles enough of the standard picture to be considered Christian.

Biblical arguments for open theism would interest Christians and especially inerrantists, but not so much me. I don't regard the Bible as a worthy basis for metaphysics or for ultimate truth. And I'd be astonished if you couldn't argue just as easily from the Bible against open theism as you could for it.

But as theological poetry, open theism has the benefit of being more consistent with quantum mechanics and with existentialism. As I say in "The American Duo of Political Christianities," liberal Christianity reduces to secular humanism, and open theism seems to me liberal with its emphasis on human freewill.