is it Possible For God to "repent/Change His Mind?"

[Skandelon]

Here is an example of definitive statement vs non definitive.

Definitive: I do not repent.

Non Definitive: I repented.

Many atheists use this to show that the bible contradicts itself and therefore cannot be true. But that is not the case.

I do not repent means that never will God repent of anything because that is a defining statement about who God is.

I repented is a statement specifying what God has done. If it really meant that he really repented then you have an absolute clear contradiction in the bible and the bible could be thrown out as obviously flawed. We know that isn't the case though and we understand the passage that is a seeming contradiction to be an anthropomorphism, thus the contradiction is non existant and the bible is vindicated.

By that logic how you do defend any paradox or mystery in the text?

Definitive: God is one.

Non Definitive: Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God.
(also, not sure how you define what is "definitive" and what is not)

Could it not be true that an omnipotent God chooses to limit some part of his ability within time and space? When Cliff Lee (famous pro pitcher) plays ball with his 7 year old does he pitch a 98 mile per hour fast ball just because he has that ability? See my point?

 

[Osage Bluestem]

By that logic how you do defend any paradox or mystery in the text?

Definitive: God is one.

Non Definitive: Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God.
(also, not sure how you define what is "definitive" and what is not)

Could it not be true that an omnipotent God chooses to limit some part of his ability within time and space? When Cliff Lee (famous pro pitcher) plays ball with his 7 year old does he pitch a 98 mile per hour fast ball just because he has that ability? See my point?

The same way it has always been done. The demonstration I gave is the law of non contradiction that all orthodox christian theologians have always employed in order to determine systematic biblical theology. It is the formula of the reformation.

The bible is clear that God knows everything and is omnipotnet and unchanging and that is why he can be trusted in the first place.

The only reason some christians get into a theological mess and become pray for logical atheists who run rings around them and make a mockery of the bible and theology as compared with simple logic is because those christians have abandoned the clear teachings of God in all his attributes without contradiction, in favor of ideas that suite their limited notions of justice. Conforming God to the image of man is always a recipe for disaster and it is proven in the forefront of the faith in the apologetics battle. Calvinists don't have this problem and we run rings around the atheists because we simply accept what the bible says and even they admit we are the most biblical and honest of all christians.

 

[Skandelon]

Also, what keeps one from simply reversing those?

Definitive: I repented.

Non Definitive: I do not repent.

And then you could "explain the second statement away" by saying something like, "God doesn't repent of sin because he doesn't sin, but he may repent of other apparent choices (i.e. His choice to punish evil)."

Why not just take both revealed truths as being true and accept the mystery as we do with the trinity?

 

[Winman]

By that logic how you do defend any paradox or mystery in the text?

Definitive: God is one.

Non Definitive: Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God.
(also, not sure how you define what is "definitive" and what is not)

Could it not be true that an omnipotent God chooses to limit some part of his ability within time and space? When Cliff Lee (famous pro pitcher) plays ball with his 7 year old does he pitch a 98 mile per hour fast ball just because he has that ability? See my point?

It is obvious God does limit himself at times, as when Jacob wrestled the Lord and prevailed against him.

Gen 32:24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.
25 And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.
26 And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.
27 And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob.
28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.
29 And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there.
30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Jacob tells us the man he wrestled with was God in vs. 30. And vs. 25 says the Lord "prevailed not" against Jacob. We see in vs. 26 that the Lord asked Jacob to let him go, and this was after Jacob's thigh was put out of joint! Jacob was stubborn and would not let go of the Lord. And we see in vs. 28 that the Lord himself said Jacob prevailed in this wrestling match.

So, obviously when God appeared to Jacob in this passage God was limited.

 

[Skandelon]

Conforming God to the image of man is always a recipe for disaster

But its the authors of scripture who "conform" God to the image of man, not us. We're just using the same terminology to explain and understand God as the scripture employees. If any of us on this board said something like, "A man prayed and God relented," every Calvinist here would chime in with a word of correction because they are "misrepresenting" or "lowering" the view of God, yet that is exactly what the author of Genesis said about God. Why not "correct" or even "rebuke" that author as being misrepresentative and "conforming God to the image of man?"

Why? Because you recognize the author of scripture as an AUTHORITY that can't be corrected. So, you will rebuke no names like me for saying the same thing that the author of Genesis said. Why is it ok for scripture to explain God in anthropomorphic terms but its not ok for me to understand those terms, believe them and then use those same terms to teach others about God?

 

[Winman]

Why is it ok for scripture to explain God in anthropomorphic

Why do people say the scriptures liken God to men, Genesis 32:24 says directly that Jacob wrestled with "a man" who we find out is God.

Gen 32:24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.

The scriptures do not say Jacob wrestled with someone like a man, they say Jacob wrestled with a man. And in the following verses we find out this man was God.

Not saying I understand this, but this is what the scriptures directly say.

 

[Brother Jeremy Slone]

I guess what I'm asking is this: Is it ok to understand and relate to God in the terms He chose to reveal himself? He reveals himself as a God who relents in response to the prayer of a righteous man, a God who is moved by a persistence, pleased by faithfulness, and found by those who earnestly seek Him. Should we explain such revelations of God away with more complex systematized verbiage (i.e. God knows what you will pray before you pray it and He is the one who will move you to pray for what He is already planning to do...etc)

I don't think I am explaining revelation away with more complex systematized verbiage but regarding scriptures with other scriptures as I understand them. Hebrews 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; ..... John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. Philippians 2:12 ....., work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.Your statement isn't to bad and I don't mean to be critical but wouldn't explain it in the same manner. As I would not put God passive in those things but active. I would not use the word relenting in the manner you did. For he is satisfying his own holiness through Christ in us. I beleive God is accomplishing this in us through Christ by the Holy Spirit. Not so much relenting but accomplishing it to satisfy his Holy Standard. Us coming by faith and seeking him is because he gave us a new nature and he is working it with Christ being the reason and our coming a reflection of that. So our persistence doesn't move God as much as it is a reflection of God already being moved for Christ's sake to causes us to be persistent. The will and do he already worked in us according to his own good pleasure. I look at it not as I move God but God moves me. I hope you can see the point I am making and hope I don't cause you to roll your eyes but to me this is very important to give all credit and glory to God for what I do that is received by him. Like Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:10 .....; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Though Paul was in obedience to his call yet he gave all the glory to God.

Why not just understand and believe the revelation of God we have instead of attempting to add to it with speculative theological jargon?

Well if I am attempting to add to your statement with speculative theological jargon than I am sorry but this is a debate forum and just want to make clear my convictions on the matter. I also am not saying you have to go into that when you address a congregation in preaching but that it should be understood at some point in the growth of a christian.
Romans 11:34-36 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen. He is the start by his Spirit, He brings us through Christ by his Grace through Faith, And we have peace because he has his satisfaction of Holiness because of the blood of the Lamb. So all the glory Goes to God.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Also, what keeps one from simply reversing those?

Definitive: I repented.

Non Definitive: I do not repent.

And then you could "explain the second statement away" by saying something like, "God doesn't repent of sin because he doesn't sin, but he may repent of other apparent choices (i.e. His choice to punish evil)."

Why not just take both revealed truths as being true and accept the mystery as we do with the trinity?

Because since God has been definitive about not repenting or changing and knowing everything then the notion that God would repent of something contradicts all three. It simply cannot be without a major theological disaster that undermines the whole bible. That is how we observe the law of non contradiction. Definitive statements cannot be interpreted any other whay then the way they are writen. non definitive statements fall under teh interpretive umbrella of the definitive statements.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

But its the authors of scripture who "conform" God to the image of man, not us. We're just using the same terminology to explain and understand God as the scripture employees. If any of us on this board said something like, "A man prayed and God relented," every Calvinist here would chime in with a word of correction because they are "misrepresenting" or "lowering" the view of God, yet that is exactly what the author of Genesis said about God. Why not "correct" or even "rebuke" that author as being misrepresentative and "conforming God to the image of man?"

Why? Because you recognize the author of scripture as an AUTHORITY that can't be corrected. So, you will rebuke no names like me for saying the same thing that the author of Genesis said. Why is it ok for scripture to explain God in anthropomorphic terms but its not ok for me to understand those terms, believe them and then use those same terms to teach others about God?

An anthorpomorphic term simply communicates a complicated Divine truth in simple human terms. That's really it.

God never changed his mind but delivered mercy instead of what justice demanded. He always knew he would do that, he never changed his mind about it. It is a communication of God's righteousness in his delivering mercy instead of justice.

 

[Brother Jeremy Slone]

But its the authors of scripture who "conform" God to the image of man, not us. We're just using the same terminology to explain and understand God as the scripture employees. If any of us on this board said something like, "A man prayed and God relented," every Calvinist here would chime in with a word of correction because they are "misrepresenting" or "lowering" the view of God, yet that is exactly what the author of Genesis said about God. Why not "correct" or even "rebuke" that author as being misrepresentative and "conforming God to the image of man?"

I guess I did but then I tried to look up the word "relenting" in my King James Bible and could not find it. Could you give me the chapter and verse for it so I could check my bible and look at it. Thankyou

 

[Skandelon]

Because since God has been definitive about not repenting or changing and knowing everything then the notion that God would repent of something contradicts all three. It simply cannot be without a major theological disaster that undermines the whole bible.

So, you think mysteries or paradoxes or even apparent contradictions related to the infinite qualities of God is a disaster that undermines the whole bible? Is our faith really that weak?

Plus, wouldn't you agree there are different types of "repenting" or relenting? I might repent for doing wrong, or I might relent in my desire to spank a child for lying to me. Are those two equal? Of course not. There is a huge difference in my repenting for doing evil and my relenting in judgement of another who has done evil. While the scripture claims God would never do the first (because he never does evil), it clearly indicates he does do the latter. Why does scriptures denial of the first contradict the latter in your mind?

 

[Osage Bluestem]

Why do people say the scriptures liken God to men, Genesis 32:24 says directly that Jacob wrestled with "a man" who we find out is God.

Gen 32:24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.

The scriptures do not say Jacob wrestled with someone like a man, they say Jacob wrestled with a man. And in the following verses we find out this man was God.

Not saying I understand this, but this is what the scriptures directly say.

In the case of the wrestling with a man. We know that there are preincarnate manifestations of Christ all over the Old Testament. In this case both are true because both are true about Christ regarding the hypostatic union. He is fully man and fully God. So if the Holy Spirit is speaking in eternity it is accurate to call he who Jacob wrestled with both God and man.

 

[Skandelon]

An anthorpomorphic term simply communicates a complicated Divine truth in simple human terms. That's really it. .

I understand that. And why would scripture use these "simple human terms?" So people, like us, can understand God better, right?

So, then what is wrong with us understanding and explaining Him by those same terms?

 

[Osage Bluestem]

So, you think mysteries or paradoxes or even apparent contradictions related to the infinite qualities of God is a disaster that undermines the whole bible? Is our faith really that weak?

No. However, what you are calling a mystery in this case in your theology is not a mystery in mine. Calvinism has defined it and it has lng been written down. We indeed have an explaination.

Plus, wouldn't you agree there are different types of "repenting" or relenting? I might repent for doing wrong, or I might relent in my desire to spank a child for lying to me. Are those two equal? Of course not. There is a huge difference in my repenting for doing evil and my relenting in judgement of another who has done evil. While the scripture claims God would never do the first (because he never does evil), it clearly indicates he does do the latter. Why does scriptures denial of the first contradict the latter in your mind?

God doesn't repent. God doesn't change. God knows everything. There is nothing that influences or has power over God. He doesn't learn.

I see no reason to fight against him as he is. I do not have any problems with a Sovereign God. Biblically it can;t be any other way. I find it impossible to defeat the notions of atheistic thinkers outside of the scope of systematic biblical theology aka - calvinism. Calvinism is the only christian theological system an atheist cannot slip through. All he can do is reject it. The reason for that is because it is the only theological system that is indeed biblical.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I understand that. And why would scripture use these "simple human terms?" So people, like us, can understand God better, right?

So, then what is wrong with us understanding and explaining Him by those same terms?

Those passages were not meant to explain who God is but what God did. That is a huge difference. What he did was deliver mercy when justice called for destruction. It is a different subject entirely than when God describes his character and personality as I do not repent or do not change. It is simply communicated that God delivered mercy. We need the whole bible to get the whole picture or we would then be led to believe that God was unjust, but we know that he is just and that justice was satisfied in Christ.

 

[Skandelon]

I guess I did but then I tried to look up the word "relenting" in my King James Bible and could not find it. Could you give me the chapter and verse for it so I could check my bible and look at it. Thankyou

First, in my last post, I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were doing those things, I was referring in general to those who seem to over complicate and systematize otherwise simply understood revelations of God. (if you want to address more specifically the passages you quoted we can do that on another thread)

Second, here are some passages to consider:

Ex 32:9
The Lord said to Moses, "I have seen these people, and I know that they are very stubborn. 10 So now do not stop me. I am so angry with them that I am going to destroy them. Then I will make you and your descendants a great nation." 11 But Moses begged the Lord his God and said, "Lord, don't let your anger destroy your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with your great power and strength. 12 Don't let the people of Egypt say, 'The Lord brought the Israelites out of Egypt for an evil purpose. He planned to kill them in the mountains and destroy them from the earth.' So stop being angry, and don't destroy your people. 13 Remember the men who served you -- Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. You promised with an oath to them and said, 'I will make your descendants as many as the stars in the sky. I will give your descendants all this land that I have promised them, and it will be theirs forever.'" 14 So the Lord changed his mind and did not destroy the people as he had said he might.

1 Chronicles 21:15
And God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it. As he was destroying, the Lord looked and relented of the disaster, and said to the angel who was destroying, "It is enough; now restrain your hand." And the angel of the Lord stood by the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.

Amos 7:6
So the Lord relented concerning this. "This also shall not be," said the Lord God.

Jonah 3:10
Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

 

[Skandelon]

No. However, what you are calling a mystery in this case in your theology is not a mystery in mine. Calvinism has defined it and it has lng been written down. We indeed have an explaination.

But even Calvinism has paradoxes and mysteries, so by your logic these things should destroy your faith. Just because your system provides an explanation for some of the mysteries doesn't dismiss the rest.

I see no reason to fight against him as he is. I do not have any problems with a Sovereign God. Biblically it can;t be any other way. I find it impossible to defeat the notions of atheistic thinkers outside of the scope of systematic biblical theology aka - calvinism. Calvinism is the only christian theological system an atheist cannot slip through. All he can do is reject it. The reason for that is because it is the only theological system that is indeed biblical.

First, if Calvinism is true there is really no need to "defeat the notions of atheistic thinkers," since the effectual call (or the irresistible regenerative work of the Spirit) is the only means that has the power to do that....you just need to preach the gospel pure and simple. Debating the nuances of your dogma has no power.

Second, your view isn't necessarily 'biblical.' It is actually a systematic theology, not purely biblical. To be purely biblical is to read the story of how God planned to destroy Israel but Moses prayed and God relented and to believe it as presented. To systematize it to fit your dogma you must add qualifications to that purely biblical story to make God appear differently that the biblical story alone presents Him. So you can take the pure biblical approach and allow people to believe what they read, or you can take the systematized approach and add qualifications to the biblical story to change the perspective of how God relates to Moses.

 

[Winman]

First, in my last post, I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were doing those things, I was referring in general to those who seem to over complicate and systematize otherwise simply understood revelations of God. (if you want to address more specifically the passages you quoted we can do that on another thread)

Second, here are some passages to consider:

Ex 32:9
The Lord said to Moses, "I have seen these people, and I know that they are very stubborn. 10 So now do not stop me. I am so angry with them that I am going to destroy them. Then I will make you and your descendants a great nation." 11 But Moses begged the Lord his God and said, "Lord, don't let your anger destroy your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with your great power and strength. 12 Don't let the people of Egypt say, 'The Lord brought the Israelites out of Egypt for an evil purpose. He planned to kill them in the mountains and destroy them from the earth.' So stop being angry, and don't destroy your people. 13 Remember the men who served you -- Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. You promised with an oath to them and said, 'I will make your descendants as many as the stars in the sky. I will give your descendants all this land that I have promised them, and it will be theirs forever.'" 14 So the Lord changed his mind and did not destroy the people as he had said he might.

1 Chronicles 21:15
And God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it. As he was destroying, the Lord looked and relented of the disaster, and said to the angel who was destroying, "It is enough; now restrain your hand." And the angel of the Lord stood by the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.

Amos 7:6
So the Lord relented concerning this. "This also shall not be," said the Lord God.

Jonah 3:10
Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

My bible says "repented", not "relented".

Jonah 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

God did repent too, as he had told Jonah to preach Ninevah would be overthrown earlier.

Jonah 3:1 And the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the second time, saying,
2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.
3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.
4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

People says God never changes, well, that cannot mean that God never changes his mind, because he surely did in the case of Ninevah. Note that Jonah said "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown." God didn't say maybe, and he didn't say perhaps. This is clearly a declaration of what God intended to do. But when the people repented of their sins, God repented of the evil he had said he would do unto them.

Those who say God never repents are in error.

 

[Brother Jeremy Slone]

First, in my last post, I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were doing those things, I was referring in general to those who seem to over complicate and systematize otherwise simply understood revelations of God. (if you want to address more specifically the passages you quoted we can do that on another thread)

Second, here are some passages to consider:

Ex 32:9
The Lord said to Moses, "I have seen these people, and I know that they are very stubborn. 10 So now do not stop me. I am so angry with them that I am going to destroy them. Then I will make you and your descendants a great nation." 11 But Moses begged the Lord his God and said, "Lord, don't let your anger destroy your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with your great power and strength. 12 Don't let the people of Egypt say, 'The Lord brought the Israelites out of Egypt for an evil purpose. He planned to kill them in the mountains and destroy them from the earth.' So stop being angry, and don't destroy your people. 13 Remember the men who served you -- Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. You promised with an oath to them and said, 'I will make your descendants as many as the stars in the sky. I will give your descendants all this land that I have promised them, and it will be theirs forever.'" 14 So the Lord changed his mind and did not destroy the people as he had said he might.

1 Chronicles 21:15
And God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it. As he was destroying, the Lord looked and relented of the disaster, and said to the angel who was destroying, "It is enough; now restrain your hand." And the angel of the Lord stood by the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.

Amos 7:6
So the Lord relented concerning this. "This also shall not be," said the Lord God.

Jonah 3:10
Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

In Ex32:9 My understanding here would be that Moses is a type and shadow of Jesus Christ and this would be the reason God acted in this manner that we may understand Christ. Much like the time Abraham took Isaac up mount moriah.

Now I had a brother in Christ show me this one in Jeremiah to prove to me that God did not know what man would do.

Jeremiah 18:8-10 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

Now we can know from this God may have a blessing for us that we lose for our disobedience and if we are doing wrong then we can be blessed if we stop and do right. But this was to the Nation Israel and they always ended up doing wrong. I believe God knew they would do wrong. They were compelled to by God and Christ in his day, but he was to come and be rejected but it would be on them and not God. Their judgement was for there actions.

As far as God not knowing what they would or would not do is not what I get from this passage. It was not written so we could get something like that about God. But it was done that we should understand their is a judgement for wrong and a blessing for doing right and because we find ourselves in one or the other that we should still take heed to what we shall do. I also think in the very declaration of this that some repented of their evil and some didn't cease from their good and God knew that too.

I don't think the word "repent" there changes the immutability and purpose of God though. Those things are still true. God punishes evil and blesses those in his word but still all the glory goes to God who has mercy on us. He is not repenting like a man but blessing or punishing. God's people who are saved by his grace still have an outward carnal nature. If we lean to the flesh we die and if we lean to the spirit we live but if any man have not the spirit of Christ he is none of his. They will just always error.

 

[MB]

Could God somehow had "limited" Himself to knowing All possible outcomes at all times, but allow for man to choose the decision and than God responds according to the best Plan he had for each decision made?

Not talking about when He direct intervenes, like when he had preordained the coming of Jesus, death and resurrection, but referring to those times he would 'allow" things to occur?

The Bible says very plainly that all things are possible with God.
MB