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?

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 410 by marco]

As I have said, I believe you are overlooking a major technique in theology and philosophy: If we are going to talk about God, we have to give an affirmative content, provide s qualities. And that's what I am doing. If this is objectionable to you, then obviously philosophy is not your cup of tea and so dialogue is impossible. And if that's where you are at, OK with me. Just let me know. Also, if you object to the attributes I and others ascribe to God, then you should give your case why you feel those are wrong, which you haven't done.

Also, again, I think we are getting off the topic here, which is whether or not God changes.

[marco]

[Replying to post 410 by marco]

As I have said, I believe you are overlooking a major technique in theology and philosophy: If we are going to talk about God, we have to give an affirmative content, provide s qualities. And that's what I am doing. If this is objectionable to you, then obviously philosophy is not your cup of tea and so dialogue is impossible. And if that's where you are at, OK with me. Just let me know. Also, if you object to the attributes I and others ascribe to God, then you should give your case why you feel those are wrong, which you haven't done.

Also, again, I think we are getting off the topic here, which is whether or not God changes.

Well philosophy is certainly my cup of tea; else I would not have studied it. I have reservations about theology being a full academic subject, but that's of course a personal prejudice since I am rather opposed to soft options being included in the modern university syllabus.

You are misapplying or misusing or confusing, whichever, a technique in philosophy by introducing this aunt of yours. I am guessing you've heard it used facetiously somewhere and applied properly, and you are supposing its transference to the case here is relevant.

Now on the question of God and his qualities, which seems to be causing some communication difficulty, and I accept I am not the world's best communicator, the basis for discussing the Biblical God is that we have a divinely inspired text. We can accept this and examine God's changing mind. Thus, I would have no objection to discussing the qualities of the Biblical God, and hence his whimsical nature. In YOUR case, I can't detect any divine inspiration, however much you believe there is, and so the qualities you give your God do not come with a guarantee. They are home-made, and since your God is not divinely inspired, but an invention to explain this or that, his qualities - and so his change of mind - are of no use in a discussion. There is no trace of your Aunt Fanny here, but perhaps she's having tea somewhere.

Does your God change his mind - to bring relevance back? Well it depends on what attributes he is arbitrarily given. If we pretend there is merit in discussing this, we are hampered by the fact that all info emanates from you or your co-believers. Not a good way to discuss matters, even in theology. You summon whatever quality is necessary to give your God substance, and you allow him to change whatever mind he's given as the occasion demands.

But let us end the futility there. We disagree. Have a good day.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 412 by marco]

Well, then, I see, from your concluding sentences, that you wish to no longer discuss the matter with me and so I shall respect that and cease communicating with you on this subject.

[Danmark]

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."

One of the greatest tools Christian debaters have handed on a platter to the non theist is the insistence that God does not change, or does not change his mind. They are correct because an actual God would be unchanging; 'he'd' be beyond change.

However, the Bible presents a very different image of its imagined 'god.' This is demonstrated in the very beginning of that collection, in Genesis:

In Chapter 1 we find,
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.

By the 6th Chapter 'God' has reversed himself.

The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.�

For the Christian the change in 'God' is even more dramatic. In fact, the change is so complete an entirely new religion must be created.

[McCulloch]

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

One of the greatest tools Christian debaters have handed on a platter to the non theist is the insistence that God does not change, or does not change his mind. They are correct because an actual God would be unchanging; 'he'd' be beyond change.

Most definitions of God, all powerful, all knowing, eternal, etc. preclude his being able to change his mind. The God described in the Bible changed his mind.

The conclusion is trivially obvious. The God described in the Bible is not God.

[Joe1950]

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."

One of the greatest tools Christian debaters have handed on a platter to the non theist is the insistence that God does not change, or does not change his mind. They are correct because an actual God would be unchanging; 'he'd' be beyond change.

However, the Bible presents a very different image of its imagined 'god.' This is demonstrated in the very beginning of that collection, in Genesis:

In Chapter 1 we find,
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.

By the 6th Chapter 'God' has reversed himself.

The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.�

For the Christian the change in 'God' is even more dramatic. In fact, the change is so complete an entirely new religion must be created.

As an atheist I have to defend my Christian friends on this one. I stated in a previous post that there is nothing inherently superior of being "unchanging". In fact, isn't the ability to adapt and adjust a sign of higher intelligence than the inability to do so? In my way of thinking, a god that can change his mind (or more correctly adapt) is superior to one who refuses to change no matter what.
The god of the Bible responds to new situations. He does not really "change his mind" as much as he acknowledges new situations and acts accordingly. Those humans are being bad. Kill em. Is he really changing his mind or just responding?
Of course, you could argue that a really smart god would not have made humans in the first place. He would have anticipated the problems caused by these beings he created. But then, nobody's perfect !
(PS. I used the word perfect just to get a rise out of the CAT!).

[marco]

For the Christian the change in 'God' is even more dramatic. In fact, the change is so complete an entirely new religion must be created.

Very true. It would seem that the psychopathic monster who destroyed all life in a fit of rage became, after rehabilitation, merciful and loving, although of course his "love" did have a tinge of his old ways about it. He showed his immense love by having his son crucified, but love is love and change is change.

[Danmark]

For the Christian the change in 'God' is even more dramatic. In fact, the change is so complete an entirely new religion must be created.

Very true. It would seem that the psychopathic monster who destroyed all life in a fit of rage became, after rehabilitation, merciful and loving, although of course his "love" did have a tinge of his old ways about it. He showed his immense love by having his son crucified, but love is love and change is change.

Yes, this God changes as man's view of 'him' evolves. The reason is obvious.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 414 by Danmark]

What you say is true of Christianity historically. Since the Bible is not a book of metaphysics or systematic theology, the early church, as it worked its way into the intellengencia, incorporated Hellenic metaphysics and standards of perfection. The Greeks enshrined the immune and the immutable. Transferred over into Christendom, this meant God was defined as wholly immutable, void of body, parts, passions, compassion, wholly independent of cretin, wholly outside creation. God was Aristotle's Unmoved Mover baptized Christian. And up to the 20th century, that has been the reigning doctrine of God. Call that classical theism.

Many still assume that the classical model is only one model of God in Christendom, this classical model. However, that is no longer true. Since the 1940's, neo-classical theism has become a major movement in contemporary Christian thought. I am a neo-classical theologian. We hold the classical model is unrealistic and offers a lopsided concept of perfection. We hold dynamic, contingent aspects represent perfections and so essential in any complete description of God. If God cannot change, if nothing can make any difference in god, then saint or sinner, it's all the same to God, who remains blissfully indifferent. But who can put any real faith in such a wholly indifferent, insensitive God? I know I can't. Neo-classical theism is also labeled process theooogy. And in process, God and the world are mutually interdependent. Hence, God is the most sensitive one, the most changeable one.

When it comes to the Bible, we get but snap shots of God that often seem to conflict. If many passages speak of God as immutable, around 100 passages do speak of God as changing, e.g., Gen. 6:6, Hosea 11:8. Classical theism tended to write such passages off a mere figures of speech that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual nature of God. However, I challenge that. If the biblical metaphors are to have any real meaning, they must in some way correspond to the actual nature of God. Otherwise, they are meaningless and we should drop them.

I'm just giving a very quick review here. I would be happy to discuss the matter in more detail. Again, you are right. The Bible does speak of god as changing.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 415 by McCulloch]

In a way, you are correct. As I noted in another post here today, the traditional or classical Christian model of God came largely from Hellenic metaphysics, not Scripture. Because the Greeks enshrined the immune and the immutable, Christian dogma insisted that God does not change in any respect whatsoever.
The problem that many have overlooked is that the church has provided two conflicting models of God. Call the Hellenic model the philosophers' model of God. That is the God of the creeds, confessions. But at the same time , Christendom has also proclaimed what might be termed a religious model of God. That is the concept of there being a genuine interaction between God and ourselves. And such a concept does insist on change in God.

Today, many of us theologians are seeking a solution here, giving the doctrine of God a major facelift, opening up avenues of thinking that enable one to attribute dynamic, contingent aspects to God.