Glad to hear Sanders is revising his 'God who Risks'.  Personally though, I feel it would be best if OV folks left their open theism where it started: as a framework for understanding divine nescience.  Surely, it extends beyond the question of God's knowledge because it implies LFW and synergism, but there are so many ways that can be worked out, I wonder if a coherent OVT worldview is even possible.

As far as soteriology and the question of hell are concerned, I would be most delighted if OVTers would take their hints from NT Wright, Andrew Perriman (www.opensourcetheology.net) and company.  An eschatology which understands the nature of Jewish apocalyptic literature and prophecy will necessarily better our understanding of judgment talk in the NT.  Once talk of judgment is properly contextualized, 'hell' falls into the background.  I am more and more convinced that the Bible says relatively little about people's 'eternal destinations', and much more about our mission as the people of God (in our 'post-eschatological' situation) than anything else (cf. Perriman's book 'The Coming of the Son of Man' and anything by Wright).  Although we owe it to ourselves to show (from Scripture and philosophy) that hell as eternal conscious torment is below God (as revealed in Jesus) and below God's justice.