"In those days Hezekiah became mortally ill. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came to him and said to him, "Thus says the LORD, 'Set your house in order, for you shall die and not live.'" 2 Then Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the LORD, 3 and said, "Remember now, O LORD, I beseech You, how I have walked before You in truth and with a whole heart, and have done what is good in Your sight." And Hezekiah wept bitterly. 4Then the word of the LORD came to Isaiah, saying, 5 "Go and say to Hezekiah, 'Thus says the LORD, the God of your father David, I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; behold, I will add fifteen years to your life.'"

(Piper's Observations are as follows):

1. All agree that God did not express an exception when he said, "You shall die and not live."

2. All agree that there was an implicit exception, perhaps: "You shall die, unless you repent and pray."

3. Boyd denies that God knew whether Hezekiah would fulfill the implicit exception.

4. Historic Christian exegesis affirms that God knew that Hezekiah would fulfill the
implicit exception.

5. Boyd says that it would have been disingenuous of God to say that Hezekiah was going to die if he knew that he would not die but live 15 more years.

6. But Boyd's own view also seems to make God disingenuous. Is God telling the truth when he says," You shall die, and not live," when he really means," You might die, but won't if you repent"? Boyd's criticism of historic Christian exegesis applies to himself at this point.

7. But it is not true that one must always express explicitly the exceptions to the threats one gives or the predictions one makes in order to be honest. One reason for this is that there can be a general understanding in a family or group of people that certain kinds of threats or warnings always imply that genuine repentance will be met with mercy.

Piper makes a good point about God's (apparent) disingenuity applying to Boyd's view as well.  And if there were no other Scriptural references to Hezekiah's repentance then I personally wouldn't bank on this passage strongly supporting either the Neo-Theistic view or the Classical one.

However, in the portions of Boyd's book - God of the Possible - on the Hezekiah episode he included a quote from Jeremiah 26:19, which says:

"Did (Hezekiah) not fear the Lord and entreat the favor of the Lord, and did not the Lord change His mind about the disaster He had pronounced?"

We have here an OT Prophet specifically telling the people of Israel that God experienced a change of mind in the Hezekiah scenario.  When Scripture interprets Scripture in such a manner, I'd have to side Boyd's view i.e. God didn't know for sure if Hezey would turn over a new leaf and thus His pronunciation of the king's death reflected a real possibility at the time and, thus, there would be nothing insincere about God's statements.  This is markedly different from the Classical view, in which Hezekiah's early death would have been an im-possibility in God's knowledge and, hence, would've meant slightly less than total sincerity on His part).

Similarly, when the king did eventually repent of his wicked ways, then God also genuinely repented of His judgment and proceeded to (genuinely!) add 15 years to a life which was about to end.

To quote Boyd, "Wouldn't Jeremiah be mistaken in announcing that God changed His mind...if in fact God's mind never really changes?"

(Furthermore, how can God be said to truly have added 15 years to Hez's life if God had never really intended to stop that life in the first place?)

Hence, the issue of whether or not the Classical view raises more problems with respect to God's sincerity and integrity in this passage is - in the light of Prophet Jerry's quote - irrelevant and thus totally ineffective as a rebuttal to open-theism.

It appears to be more holistic and valid to see Isaiah 38 as teaching that God experienced a true change of mind, a notion echoed and confirmed by yet another prophet.
 

AL