Does God change his mind?

[OnceConvinced]

A Christian member of our forum recently pointed out a bible contradiction for all to see:

This verse was presented first:
Numbers 23:19 "God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind."

The Christian then attempted to trump it with a contradictory scripture where God DOES change his mind, thus exposing a blatant bible contradiction:

Jeremiah 18:8 "But if that nation about which I spoke turns from its evil way, I'll change my mind about the disaster that I had planned for it."

Here are further verses that show God changing his mind:

Exodus 32:14
So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Amos 7:3
The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD.

Jeremiah 18:10
if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it. (wow this is a verse where God says he will break his promise!!)


So questions for debate:

Does Got change his mind?
If he does change his mind, how do we know he hasn't changed his mind about much of what he expected from us in the New Testament?
If he does change his mind, how can we really know what he wants of us today?

[polonius]

[Replying to post 243 by polonius.advice]


[center]

Pass the Holy Syrup[/center]

God is a unity. "Hear O Israel the Lord is one"

The ONE might have a lot of layers. Like a stack of pancakes.
God is ONE stack ... different levels of yumminess.

RESPONSE: Are you suggesting that God has parts?

[polonius]

Numbers 23:19 (New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

19 God is not a human being, that he should lie,
or a mortal, that he should change his mind.
Has he promised, and will he not do it?
Has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?

Summa Theological " Thomas Aquinas

I answer that, From what precedes, it is shown that God is altogether immutable.

First, because it was shown above that there is some first being, whom we call God; and that this first being must be pure act, without the admixture of any potentiality, for the reason that, absolutely, potentiality is posterior to act. Now everything which is in any way changed, is in some way in potentiality. Hence it is evident that it is impossible for God to be in any way changeable.

Secondly, because everything which is moved, remains as it was in part, and passes away in part; as what is moved from whiteness to blackness, remains the same as to substance; thus in everything which is moved, there is some kind of composition to be found. But it has been shown above (I:3:7) that in God there is no composition, for He is altogether simple. Hence it is manifest that God cannot be moved.

Thirdly, because everything which is moved acquires something by its movement, and attains to what it had not attained previously. But since God is infinite, comprehending in Himself all the plenitude of perfection of all being, He cannot acquire anything new, nor extend Himself to anything whereto He was not extended previously. Hence movement in no way belongs to Him. So, some of the ancients, constrained, as it were, by the truth, decided that the first principle was immovable.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 251 by polonius.advice]

Are you suggesting that God has parts?

If he did.. how would I know?

I said MIGHT.
You are the one who seems to KNOW that it doesn't.
I'm skeptical of your knowledge, of course, mainly because it doesn't make sense.

The Bible passage says that God is ONE.. it doesn't say that it doesn't have parts. Some Christians believe that it has three.

Three IN ONE... like a stack of three yummer pancakes.

Or, just one pancake, if you prefer: Eggs, Milk and flour.
Or, if you prefer on your plate : One pancake, a little butter and a whole lotta holy syrup.
[center]
Some WHOLES are composed of many many PARTS[/center]

[polonius]

[Replying to post 251 by polonius.advice]

Are you suggesting that God has parts?

If he did.. how would I know?

I said MIGHT.
You are the one who seems to KNOW that it doesn't.
I'm skeptical of your knowledge, of course, mainly because it doesn't make sense.

The Bible passage says that God is ONE.. it doesn't say that it doesn't have parts. Some Christians believe that it has three.

Three IN ONE... like a stack of three yummer pancakes.

Or, just one pancake, if you prefer: Eggs, Milk and flour.
Or, if you prefer on your plate : One pancake, a little butter and a whole lotta holy syrup.
[center]
Some WHOLES are composed of many many PARTS[/center]

RESPONSE: How you would know God does not have parts is by using common sense. As Aquinas explained in his Summa Theologica:

I answer that, The absolute simplicity of God may be shown in many ways.

First, from the previous articles of this question. For there is neither composition of quantitative parts in God, since He is not a body; nor composition of matter and form; nor does His nature differ from His "suppositum"; nor His essence from His existence; neither is there in Him composition of genus and difference, nor of subject and accident. Therefore, it is clear that God is nowise composite, but is altogether simple.

Secondly, because every composite is posterior to its component parts, and is dependent on them; but God is the first being, as shown above (I:2:3).

Thirdly, because every composite has a cause, for things in themselves different cannot unite unless something causes them to unite. But God is uncaused, as shown above (I:2:3), since He is the first efficient cause.

Fourthly, because in every composite there must be potentiality and actuality; but this does not apply to God; for either one of the parts actuates another, or at least all the parts are potential to the whole.

Fifthly, because nothing composite can be predicated of any single one of its parts. And this is evident in a whole made up of dissimilar parts; for no part of a man is a man, nor any of the parts of the foot, a foot. But in wholes made up of similar parts, although something which is predicated of the whole may be predicated of a part (as a part of the air is air, and a part of water, water), nevertheless certain things are predicable of the whole which cannot be predicated of any of the parts; for instance, if the whole volume of water is two cubits, no part of it can be two cubits. Thus in every composite there is something which is not it itself. But, even if this could be said of whatever has a form, viz. that it has something which is not it itself, as in a white object there is something which does not belong to the essence of white; nevertheless in the form itself, there is nothing besides itself. And so, since God is absolute form, or rather absolute being, He can be in no way composite. Hilary implies this argument, when he says (De Trin. vii): "God, Who is strength, is not made up of things that are weak; nor is He Who is light, composed of things that are dim."

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 254 by polonius.advice]

How you would know God does not have parts is by using common sense.

I said God MIGHT be made up of parts... I am not claiming to know.

I'm an agnostic, I don't claim to know anything whatsoever about the existence or characteristics of any gods or goddesses.

____________

A request:

• 
  
  Could you reflect to me what I meant by that "stack of pancake" analogy, so I can know if we are on the same page?
  
  

____________

[William]

[Replying to post 243 by polonius.advice]

One can't have an ignorant God. Sorry!

So you are thus saying that the GOD of the Bible, is not really a GOD then?

[polonius]

[Replying to post 243 by polonius.advice]

One can't have an ignorant God. Sorry!

So you are thus saying that the GOD of the Bible, is not really a GOD then?

RESPONSE: I'm saying the Bible provides a largely fictional description of God. You are not reading actual history for the most part, but imaginary accounts.

[polonius]

[Replying to post 243 by polonius.advice]

One can't have an ignorant God. Sorry!

So you are thus saying that the GOD of the Bible, is not really a GOD then?

RESPONSE: I'm saying the Bible provides a largely fictional description of God. You are not reading actual history for the most part, but imaginary accounts.

Do you really claim that a loving God directed that the children of unbelievers be put to death? Or is that just a story?

[William]

I am not claiming anything in particular about the bible GOD.

I have said in numerous posts on this board that I think the Earth is a living self aware autonomous Entity, which is how some of the stories in the bible can be explained and that I agree not all of the stories are truthful in context with that. I consider the Earth Entity to being a GOD but not the GOD. See here for more detail on that. {LINK}

Can you give some examples where the bible gets it right about GOD?

[hoghead1]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

Malachi 3:5-7 is saying God will change to accommodate us. That is why I brought it up. God persists in certain attitudes, true; but rather than denying change in God, such fixity insists upon change. "That I might return to you" means a change on God's part. See, for example, Jeremiah 15, where God says he has turned his back on Israel, dismissed them, distanced himself from them.

All decision making means a pervious period of indecisiveness. Decision is the resolution of a period of indecisiveness, where you consider the alternatives, prior to making up your mind. Otherwise, it wouldn't be decision-making. Also, as I pointed out, if God cannot change, then God cannot utter a single sentence, cannot express his decisions.

I already pointed out where the NT says God changes. I Cor. 13 is a good example. Now, Christ went from childhood to adulthood, so Christ then changed, put aside childish things. Also, it should suffice to point out OT passages to illustrate that the Bible understands God as changing.

I believe I already pointed out major biblical passages where the future is iffy for God. And these have to be borne in mind when you consider what is meant by predestination in the Bible. I don't think it means predestination in the sense of God knowing and having determined exactly what specific individuals will do what. I think it is more of a general statement. God knows ahead of time there is a real possibility some will sin, not accept God, etc.