God's Immutability

Welcome, all.

If you haven't got one, let me tell you that there's a handout.

Deb, are you here?

Yes.

Deb's here.

I'm legally blind, and I can see some things, but not a lot.

Like, could everybody raise their hands?

Yeah, I only see about half of them.

So anyway, please bear with me.

I know you see half of them if you don't have any.

Because I thought I asked everybody to raise their hands,

and I only saw the left side of the room raise their hands.

So I don't know for sure.

You're absolutely right.

But such is life.

I will never tell.

Okay, okay.

Now, as we go through the class today, we will read some, not all, of the scriptures that are on the handout.

And I'm going to ask those of you who are able and willing to do so.

So when I ask for a scripture to be read, please don't wait for somebody else if you're able and willing.

You know, just dive right in there and say I will or something.

And I'll appreciate that very much.

Well, let's pray.

Heavenly Father, as we gather together in the name of your Son, Jesus,

we ask you to fill us with your Spirit and speak to us.

May we get to know you better and love you better, trust you more,

and live as your faithful children.

Make us, conform us more into the image of your Son, we ask.

Amen.

Several weeks ago, Tyler asked me to teach this class on God's immutability,

one in a series of classes on the attributes of God,

a subsection of what we might call systematic theology.

And a little bit later, I told a friend that I was going to teach on the immutability of God.

And he responded with something like,

oh, that is, can you get God to shut up?

And he made that attempt at humor, you know, thinking of mute, you know,

and those of us who have phones or, you know, participate in Zoom meetings.

And somebody maybe not familiar with systematic theology, you know,

when you speak of immutability, no, I can't mute that person.

And I wish I could.

But what that indicates to me is that the meanings of words change over a period of time.

If you ask somebody in the United States 150 years ago, you know, what immutability means,

they would say, well, it means that whatever you're describing does not change.

But today, that's less clear to a lot of people who we live with.

So much so that the author of the systematic theology that I recently got,

because I can't read much anymore, I got an audible book.

And the author of that book changed the topic in his systematic theology from immutability to unchangeability,

which I think is not a bad thing to do.

And I'm even taking it one step further, changing the title of the class from unchangeability or immutability

to the question, does God change?

Well, however you'd like to think about it, as we go through this study together,

you might be expecting that I will give you a concise and clear conclusion about the subject.

Clean and clear.

And when I got assigned the subject, I thought I'd be able to do that.

Hey, does God change?

No.

You know, how much more simple can it be?

But as I studied it and looked at what the Bible said,

though I think I learned some important and good things,

the goal that I had of tying up, you know, all the loose ends didn't happen.

So, today's lesson might be described better as an exercise in systematic theology that we'll do together

rather than just the presentation of my clear and complete study.

Well, as we talk about change, just to give it some thought context,

as we think about our world, there are some things that don't seem to change much,

like the sun or the stars or a mountain.

And then there are things that seem to change quite a bit, like weather or the news.

People, for the most part, are somewhere in between those.

You know, if we look at our bodies over a period of days or even a few years,

maybe somebody wouldn't detect any change.

Or in our personality over a period of time, they might not detect any change.

But somebody's opinion about something or how they react to a certain impulse, input, might change.

And because the Bible describes God as a person,

that might help us a little bit think about,

when we speak about the question, does God change?

You know, as a person, you know,

does he change in some ways?

Does he not change in any way?

I suggest that that would be a helpful idea to keep in mind.

Well, with that in mind, let's read the first two scriptures that you'll find on your handout.

And would somebody be ready to read the Numbers passage, 2319?

And again, the proper response is yes, if you're able and willing.

Good.

And would somebody else be willing to read that second passage,

several verses, Isaiah 38, 1 through 5?

All right.

Ralph, please read.

Verse 19.

God is not a man that he should lie,

nor a son of man that he should change his mind.

Does he speak and then not act?

Does he promise and not fulfill?

Very good.

Thank you.

I've read the Numbers.

Very good.

Yes.

Feel free to use whatever version you have available to you.

But thank you.

And the other, please read the Isaiah passage.

Sure.

So this is Isaiah 38, 1 through 5.

In those days, Hedekiah became sick and was at the point of death.

And Isaiah the prophet, the son of Nema,

came to him and said to him,

Thus says the Lord,

Set your hearts in order, for you shall die,

and you shall not recover.

Then Hezekiah sent his face to the wall and prayed to the Lord,

and said, Please, O Lord,

remember how I have walked before you in faithfulness,

and made a whole heart,

and have done your good in your sight.

And Hezekiah wept bitterly.

Then the word of the Lord came to Isaiah.

Go and tell Hezekiah,

Thus says the Lord,

the God of David,

your father.

I have heard your prayer.

I have seen your tears.

Behold, I will add 15 years to your life.

Thank you.

Now,

as some people would look at these two passages,

they would see a tension or a paradox.

Others may not.

But let me tell you what I see.

In the Numbers passage,

it is said of God,

Does he speak and not act?

And I think that means,

Does he say he's going to do something,

and then not do it?

But in the Isaiah passage,

God makes clear to Hezekiah

that he's going to die soon.

He's not going to recover from the illness.

He speaks.

But then,

his action is something else.

He does not,

in a sense,

do what he said he was going to do.

So,

this is an example of the challenge

of doing

systematic theology.

Systematic theology can be thought of

studying

what

all of the Bible

teaches

about a particular topic.

In this case,

the unchangeability of God,

or does God change?

And so,

sometimes,

you have passages in Scripture

which seem to be

in tension

with one another.

For those and other reasons,

systematic theology

is a really good idea

because if you

don't look

at all of the,

what the Bible says

about a topic,

you'll have

unorganized theology

instead of an organized

or systematic

theology.

So,

doing systematic theology

is a good thing,

but unless

you are a genius

and have lots of time

to study the Bible,

you're going to be

at a great disadvantage

if you don't

stand on the shoulders

of the giants

who have gone before you

with regard to

the study of the Bible

and systematic theology.

And so,

I

certainly recommend

when you're studying

a topic like this

to see what others

have said.

And again,

the book

that I

have listened to

on this topic

and was a foundation

for my study

is

Systematic Theology

by Wayne Gruden.

And here

is his

summary statement

about

the unchangeability

of God.

And as I read it,

I'd like you to think

about this question.

Do I think

this is right?

You know,

based on my knowledge

of the Bible

such as it is,

does this sound

like a good summary

of what all of the Bible

teaches

about God

and change?

God is unchanging

in his being,

his perfections,

purposes,

and promises.

Yet,

God does

act and feel,

feel emotions.

I should probably

have somebody else

reading this.

Tyler,

would you be willing

to pick up on this?

Yet,

God does act

and feel emotions

and he acts

and feels differently

in response

to different situations.

Thank you.

All right.

So,

how does that sound

to you?

Do you find yourself

in

strong agreement

with it?

You know,

maybe agreement

or,

nah,

I think there are

some significant errors.

strong agreement

based on your

present thought.

Strong.

Strong.

I have no idea

how many hands

are up now.

Were there a few?

Are there any for,

you know,

not sure?

I'll ask Deb

to tell me.

One.

Okay.

And how many,

no,

I think there are

some real problems

with this.

And I'd almost

raise my hand

on this

at this point

because

when I first read it,

I thought,

yes,

this is good,

but as I

started reading

through scriptures

that Gruden

presented

and others,

I thought,

ah,

boy.

And maybe

the biggest

problem I have

is the word

promise

because,

again,

the meanings

of word

changes

in a culture.

And,

but,

in any case,

whatever your

initial impression,

why don't we

take this

as somebody

who's studied

a lot

and who has

studied other

people who've

studied a lot

and go through

the parts

and see what

we think

the Bible

teaches

about this.

So,

let's start

with

God

does not

change

in his

being.

So,

would somebody

please read

Psalm 102,

25 through

27?

I will.

Yes,

thanks.

No one else's?

Okay.

Feel free.

Somebody else

is going to

surely want

to beat you

next time,

but you

have it.

In the

beginning,

you laid

the foundations

of the earth

and the heavens

out of the

work of your

hands.

They will

perish,

but you

remain.

They will

all wear

out like

a garment,

like clothing.

You will

change them

and they

will be

discarded.

But you

remain the

same and

your years

will never

end.

The children

of your

servants

will live

in your

presence.

Their

descendants

will be

established

before you.

Thank you.

So,

to me,

that sounds

like a clear

statement.

God

remains the

same.

And I

read that

and,

but I

was expecting,

well,

actually,

a number

of other

passages

from the

Psalms

or other

parts in

the Bible

because this

idea that

God doesn't

change was

so,

you know,

firmly set

in my

mind.

I thought

there would

be a lot

of texts

that would

explicitly

say this.

But what

Gruden

presents and

what I

could find

only include

the passages

from Hebrews

about which

Jesus is

described

and this

passage from

Psalm 102

is quoted

and it

refers to

Jesus.

Now,

we who

believe that

Jesus is

God would

certainly say

yes,

with regard

to God's

divine nature,

you know,

this is

reaffirmation

that God

doesn't change

and I would

agree with

that.

And then

the second

passage in

Hebrews

says that

Jesus is

the same

yesterday,

today,

and forever.

So,

I think,

ah,

boy,

I expected

more proof

texts,

that is,

texts that

give evidence,

you know,

that God

doesn't change

for this.

But,

the fact that

I accepted

it so easily

makes me think,

yeah,

all that I've

read in the

Bible,

even if it

doesn't,

you know,

there aren't

many passages

that seem

to be

proof texts

in my mind,

still it

resonates with

me.

Like,

there's an

implication of

this,

you know,

over and

over again

throughout

Scripture.

So,

I say,

okay,

yeah,

I'm willing

to accept

that.

Any thoughts

or questions

before we

move on?

Well,

let's look

at

perfections

then.

And,

I didn't

like this

word,

I thought

characteristics

or character

of God

might

communicate

to us

more clearly.

but,

would

somebody

please

read

the

Malachi

passage,

Malachi

3,

6 and

7.

Yeah,

thanks.

Thanks.

So,

what

perfection

of God

is stated

here that

doesn't

change?

What

characteristic?

Faithfulness.

Faithfulness.

And,

that may

be a

really good

answer.

But,

can

Josh or

somebody

else kind

of spell

that out?

How does

this mean

that God

is faithful?

Or,

you know,

what,

how is that

at least

implied?

Because

faithfulness,

I don't

think,

does it

appear in

the passage?

No.

I did

get the

same idea.

Yeah,

good.

Yeah,

this idea,

they're not

consumed

because he

has not

changed,

and so his

promises

have,

he's still

going to

act according

to the

promises

that he

made to

them.

So,

his,

as we

say,

faithfulness

is why

he's not

consuming his

people,

even though

they've

disobeyed

him.

But there

is a,

but there

also is

a condition

like,

return to

me and

I'll

return to

you.

So,

it's not

exactly

paradox.

paradox.

So,

and here's

my systematic,

I think you

guys were all

trying to do

systematic

theology here.

You know,

you're trying

to take this

passage and

put it

together with

all that the

rest of the

Bible says

about this

issue,

you know,

coming to a

clear statement

of the

teaching.

And this

was mine.

God remains

the same

in that

when people

repent,

you know,

he responds

to them.

So,

you know,

by implication

you could say

God is a

forgiving God

and he

doesn't change

with regard

to that.

But there's

some theology

there,

which is fine.

We're doing

systematic

theology.

We're trying

to say,

ah,

okay,

not just

what this

passage

necessarily

states,

but what

it clearly

implies,

what it

means for

us.

So,

and we

have some

other passages

there.

I included

the Lamentations

one,

which again

is not a

statement,

but would

somebody

please read

Lamentations

322,

which is

the basis

in part

for the

hymn,

Great is

Thy

Faithfulness.

Yes.

Yeah.

So,

it doesn't

say it

never changes,

but at

least it

never

disappears.

It never

ceases to

be.

So,

close.

Well,

the next

perfection,

or rather

aspect of

God,

which is

said not

to change

are his

purposes.

And for

this,

I think

there was

lots of

scriptural

evidence,

very clear,

very direct.

I don't

list all

of them

here,

but would

somebody

please read

Psalm

38?

Yeah.

11.

that one.

Yeah,

that one.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thanks.

All right.

And would

somebody read

the several

verses listed

there for

Ephesians?

Ephesians 1,

Ephesians 1:4

verse 4,

for he chose

us in him

before the

creation of

the world

to be holy

and religious

in his sight.

And then

verse 11

is in him

we were

also chosen,

having been

predestined

according to

the plan

of him

who works

out everything

in conformity

with the

purpose of

his will.

And then

did you want

also?

Yeah.

Three,

nine,

two,

three,

nine,

to a letter.

In the

middle of

a sentence

it says,

and to

make plain

to everyone

the administration

of this

mystery,

which for

ages past

was kept

hidden in

God,

who created

all things.

His intent

was that

now,

through the

church,

the manifold

wisdom of

God should

be made

known to

the rulers

and authorities

in the

heavenly realms

according to

his eternal

purpose that

he accomplished

in Christ

Jesus our

Lord.

Yeah.

So,

I think

this teaching

is very

well supported

in scripture.

And maybe

part of the

reason for

that is it

has great

practical

importance for

us.

You know,

what if

God's

purpose

changed?

You know,

yes,

at one

time,

my purpose

was that

everyone in

Christ would

be glorified.

But the

plan has

changed.

And no,

you know,

you experience

the Holy Spirit

in this life,

but then you

die and that's

the end of

you.

That's my

new purpose.

So,

it's good

to know.

I'm so

glad to

have this

knowledge of

God that

his purposes

don't change,

including his

purpose for

those of us

who are in

Christ.

Now,

promise.

I'd like

both of

these passages

read,

the Numbers

passage and

the 1st

Samuel passage.

So,

somebody please

read Numbers.

In fact,

I think we've

read it before,

but bears

repeating.

God is not

man that he

should lie,

or a son of

man that he

should change

his mind.

Has he said

it and will

he not do

it, or has

he spoken

and will

he not

fulfill it?

Thank you.

And,

my

memory is

that at

least in

one translation

the word

promise is

used.

But,

even if it

isn't used,

it's implied

there.

And now,

will somebody

please read

1st Samuel

2.30.

Got it.

Therefore,

the Lord,

the God of

Israel declares,

I promised

that your

house,

the house of

your father

should go in

and out

before me

forever.

But now,

the Lord

declares,

far be it

from me.

For those

who honor

me,

I will

honor,

and those

who despise

me shall

be lightly

esteemed.

Now,

at least on

first reading

to me,

it sounds

like God

made a

promise,

and he's

saying,

no,

not anymore.

And,

there are

various ways

we could

understand that.

one is

what is

meant by

promise.

You know,

that we

might see

different

levels of

a promise,

like an

oath,

you know,

is one

level of

a promise,

or just

saying

something

might be

seen as

a promise.

And,

that certainly

applies to

people.

Does it

apply to

God?

You know,

are there

different

kinds of

promises?

And,

I'm not,

I certainly

don't understand

a lot of

that long

passage,

Hebrews 6

through 7.

But,

as I read

it,

I get the

idea,

you know,

that it's

applying,

it's stating

that there

are promises,

and then there

are promises.

And,

it applies

that,

for me,

in

unexpected

way.

So,

you know,

if I were

editing Gruden

here,

you know,

I'd cross

out promises

because,

you know,

I'm just

not sure

that leaving

that statement

as it is

is the

most helpful

summary for

me of what

the Bible

teaches.

Maybe I'm

wrong.

Very likely,

but,

you know,

that's where I

am in my

current study.

Well,

here we

are,

and we

have,

well,

just before

we leave

the areas

in which

Gruden

says God

is unchanging,

let's talk

about application.

What

difference

does it make

to us,

here and

now,

that God

doesn't change

in the way

the Bible

says he

does not

change.

I think

what's interesting

to us is that

we're able to

orient ourselves

to God.

It's not like

we think that

who God is

today,

and we

orient ourselves

in our purposes

and priorities

to him,

but that,

oh,

man,

tomorrow is

different.

We have to

do this

process.

Because he's

unchanging,

we are able

to orient

our being,

not perfection,

imperfections,

purposes and

promises around

his character

and nature

rather than

around our

own.

We can,

and boy,

we should.

Because it's

the right

thing to do,

because we

have promises

in the Bible

that God

will bless

those who

do just

what was

said.

Yeah.

Matt,

drawing on

something you

said earlier

about we

don't have

to kind

of wonder

whether God's

going to come

through because

of his fixed

purposes.

Yeah.

I think that

practically that

remains a lot

of fear,

and it really

engenders

faith,

trust,

trust,

really.

do you

know anybody

who,

you know,

seems to

have the

habit of

saying they'll

do something

and then

doesn't do

it?

God is

not like

that.

And that

is a good

thing.

Joy,

peace,

as we

meditate on

that.

all right,

well,

we will

move on,

and the

next part

of Gruden's

summary is

that,

hmm,

that's not

what I want.

Okay,

here it is.

God,

hmm,

I'm not

reading this.

Okay,

can somebody

read the

yet?

That's good,

right there.

Now,

you might

wonder,

you know,

what's the

big insight

here?

Why,

in this

section or

description of

God's

unchangeability,

does Gruden

feel that it's

important to

say,

God

acts,

God

feels

emotion,

unchangeable

and I

think,

pretty sure,

the reason

that he

puts that

in there

is because

in the

history of

theology,

including the

present,

there are

people who

say things

like,

you know,

if God

really doesn't

change,

then he

can't act

or feel.

You know,

theologically

or philosophically

speaking,

you know,

if we say

that God

is unchanging,

kind of like

a mountain,

you know,

it doesn't

act,

it doesn't

feel,

it's frozen

in time

or in

space,

and if it

were to do

something,

then that

would change

it.

You know,

if it

experienced

an avalanche,

then it

will have

changed.

changed.

So,

what

Gruden,

I think,

is responding

to is

something that

can be

called,

hmm,

does anybody

see?

Process

theology,

which says,

no,

we really

can't say

that God

doesn't

change,

because then

he couldn't

act or

feel.

even some

really good

evangelicals

maybe get a

little bit of

this,

even though,

and they may be

right.

For example,

one of my

favorite professors

at the seminary I

went to many

years ago,

said that God

really never felt

grief.

And so,

when talking about

do not grieve the

Holy Spirit,

that passage,

he would say,

you know,

now God has

things planned

from the

beginning,

he knows,

you know,

the greater good

that's coming

through suffering,

so he really

never feels

grief.

And so,

we could say,

the author

there,

Paul,

you know,

didn't really

mean that God

could feel grief,

but speaking of

God as if he

were a person,

you know,

if we did this

to a person,

they would feel

grief,

so you don't

want to do

it.

And,

you know,

somehow it's

saying,

so we shouldn't

do this either,

even though God

really can't be

grieved.

And it had that

sense that,

you know,

God has the

end plan from

the beginning,

he knows it has

a great good,

and so he really

can't grieve

about,

you know,

the best world,

you know,

that's come to

be.

Well,

there may be

some logic to

that,

but...

doesn't he

express grief

over and

over again

as he interacts

with the nation

of Israel

and the Old

Testament?

Probably.

And then,

also,

with Jesus,

you know,

that,

you know,

we can just

look at Jesus

to see,

you know,

his emotions

and his

feelings

that are

expressed

throughout the

apostles.

so here

was my

favorite

theology

professor

at Gordon

Conwell

Seminary,

you know,

saying something,

and at least

from my

perspective,

he had

this clear

understanding

of God

based on

an awful

lot of

scripture,

and then

he took

those parts

of scripture

that didn't

seem to

quite fit

with that

and conformed

them to

his systematic

theology.

You know,

I agree

with what

Debbie just

said.

Now,

it could

be that

God is

beyond our

understanding,

and that,

you know,

what the

Bible says

about him,

there may be

things,

just like in

science and

in nature,

you know,

as we study,

as I've

studied physics,

you know,

I know there

are things

about the

way the world

works that

just,

don't make

sense,

that we

can't

logically

put together.

It's beyond

us.

And so,

I think it's

good to do

systematic

theology,

but if we

sometimes come

away and

say,

you know,

this didn't

seem to

work out

as I

hoped,

you know,

that may

be all

right.

It may

be that,

well,

it is.

Somebody could

probably quote

the end of

Romans 11,

you know.

Quick comment,

and you mentioned

before that if

you don't have

a systematic

theology,

you're incredibly

imbalanced.

Yes!

And if you're,

your ministry

will be incredibly

imbalanced because

you're going to

get to a

Hebrew 6 passage

and you'll say

one thing,

but then you'll

say the

completely opposite

thing when you

get to another

passage and

you need to,

you need to

understand how,

you know,

I like the

thing,

the idea of

New York City,

you have to have a

map of the entire

city to understand

how things connect

together,

you know.

Yeah!

There's no

contradictions in

the Bible,

but when you

are contradicting

yourself week

after week based

on the text

you're getting

to,

I think you're

becoming incredibly

imbalanced.

People are,

you know,

where is this guy

going?

Where is he

going?

I don't know.

Yes!

So systematic

theology I think

helps to see the

entire Bible and

how it all fits

together like a

big map of Europe

and like these are

how it's situated,

but you know,

sometimes the map

has to change if

you understand the

Bible's, you know,

the Bible's an error

and not our

systematic theology

and sometimes our

systematic theology

needs to be changed

based on what the

scripture is saying

and over the world.

Yes!

And I remember

in one of my

philosophy classes,

the teacher said,

now,

you can criticize

an author by saying,

I don't understand

what they're saying

here.

And sometimes

that's a valid

criticism,

except if you're

stupid and,

you know,

other people

understand it,

you know,

but you just use

the excuse,

I don't understand

it.

So with regard to

some of these

tensions,

you know,

there are some

things I look at

and I say,

I just can't make

sense of that.

And for right now,

I just have to

leave it.

And other people

look at it and

they say,

no,

I really think I

understand how

these things fit

together.

And they may be

right.

But,

you know,

if we don't have

it all put

together,

you know,

I think it's,

at least under

some circumstances,

good to acknowledge

that.

So,

that's one of the

challenges.

Now,

where are we

here?

Okay,

the other thing,

the other

reason why

another thing

kind of related

to process

theology is

what was

somewhat popular

in some parts

of evangelical

theology,

like in the

1990s,

the openness

of God.

And with

regard to

passages

like

1 Samuel 15,

10,

that's probably

written down

there several

times,

but could

somebody please

read 1 Samuel

15,

10.

Yes.

15,

10.

Give it a shot.

The word of the

Lord came to

Samuel.

I regret that I

have made Saul

king.

Good.

He has turned

back from following

me and has not

performed my

commandment.

Okay.

Samuel was angry

and he cried

to the Lord

on him.

I'm just

impressed that

Samuel wasn't

ready to give

up on Saul

yet.

Recently,

you know,

I heard

somebody say

about another

Christian,

you know,

they just

aren't doing

what they

should do.

You know,

how can I

get them

to change?

And I

think that's

what Samuel

was praying

or concerned

about.

You know,

how can I

get Saul

to change?

How can I

get God

to change?

I think,

but the

main point

was that

first thing.

I regret

that I

made Saul

king.

This is

how the

openness of

God

treatment

would come.

Now,

God can

know everything,

king,

but he

chooses

not to

know some

things about

the future.

So,

God

chose

to make

Saul

king,

but he

did not

choose to

access his

possible information

about the

future,

and didn't

know exactly

how things

were going to

turn out.

And so,

when Saul

disobeyed God,

Saul regretted it,

or some

translations may

say, you

know, he

repented that

he made Saul

king.

Words, both

of which,

usually for us,

include some

significant change

or lack of

knowledge.

and so,

this is how

the openness

of God people

treated passages

like this.

They dealt

with the

tension by

saying,

well, maybe

God chose

not to know

what Saul

was going to

do, and

then he

really, you

know, this

is a very

plain, accurate

description of

how God

felt when

Saul

disobeyed

over and

over again.

well, that

is maybe a

valid attempt

to try and

do justice

to what that

passage says,

and I think,

you know, to

the Hebrew

that lies behind

it, you know,

and all those

kinds of good

study things.

In my mind,

it, you

know, solves

one problem

and introduces

a thousand

others.

So, you

know, again,

systematic

theology.

I don't think

this is a good

way to go.

It doesn't

really help

us in the

end.

So...

The openness

of God

is not the

good way

to go.

Thank you

for that

clarification.

Yes, yes.

That's my

opinion.

And I

don't encourage

any of you

to study that

unless you

have a special

reason for

that.

Okay, so,

but there

are a number

of passages