Re: [asa] Re: asa-digest V1 #6228

At 04:38 PM 10/18/2006, mrb22667@kansas.net wrote:

>Quoting Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net>:
>
> > At 08:32 PM 10/17/2006, Merv wrote:
> >
> > >but there are other places in the O.T. where God does actually
> change his mind after being argued with.
>
> > @ A Wishy-Washy Deity?

>A Deity who wants relationship, rather. A programmer doesn't get
>much in the way of relationship with his programmed robot. This is
>why I propose the clay
>and potter analogy (Scriptural as it is) does not give us a complete
>story on this question. --merv

@ There IS no question about "the nature of God". He has certain
attributes, and one of them is omniscience. ~ Janice

"...The attribute of omniscience, of knowing all things, must be
clarified. Judeo-Christian belief holds that God is timeless. Past,
present and future for God can be seen as a whole. This much is
commonly asserted. What is sometimes not asserted as a corollary is
that God also knows how things would turn out if differently had a
different path been taken at every potential choice-making nexus. God
knew you would turn left at Main Street this morning; but He also
knows what would have happened had you turned right.

<http://www.tektonics.org/lp/painet01.html>Thomas Paine was not
particularly bright, but he rightly perceived that "prophet" in the
Bible meant more than simply "a predictor of the future". A prophet
was also a messenger and an exhorter. His words were never set in
stone. A key verse for this is Jer. 18:7-10 --
If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted,
torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its
evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had
planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom
is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and
does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

With this verse, and the fact that the role of a prophet was more
than just as a predictor, it is quite clear why it is pointless to
object when, for example, God withholds judgment upon Nineveh (Jonah
3:10). We may read it as a definitive prophecy, but it would be
understood by the hearers as exhortation allowing for the disaster to
be avoided. Following ancient rules of rhetoric and the constraints
of oral communication, as well as the nature of the Semitic mindset
which, as we note <http://www.tektonics.org/gk/hyperbole.html>here,
typically expressed itself in extremes, it would be less appropriate
for a prophet making a popular declaration to delineate possible
exceptions in his general proclamation. Such side-tracking would make
his message less memorable and effective in an era when retention and
effect was far more important in the short term than detailed
analysis. (G. B. Caird in The Language and Imagery of the Bible
[112ff] uses several passages cited typically by Skeptics in this
context as examples of "prophetic hyperbole" intended to express
matters in an unqualified way, yet hardly meaning that there was no
chance to escape judgment.)

Finally, let us make it clear what it means to say that God does not
"change". I do not think any skeptic or critic is so naive as to
think that this means that God is static, never does anything, or
never says anything. Nor can it be asserted to mean that God does not
alter stated plans in reaction to human freewill choices. Our quote
from Jeremiah shows that well enough. We will find that the
references to God not "changing" cannot hold up such a narrow interpretation.

Let's go now to an examination of verses that have been used in this argument.

Gen. 6:6-7 -- This (along with another, 1 Sam 15:11, regarding God
"repenting" over the choice of Saul) is the primary hinge point of
the skeptical argument alleging contradiction. But let's look at that
word "repent" more closely. Strong's gives this definition:

5162. nacham, naw-kham'; a prim. root; prop. to sigh, i.e. breathe
strongly; by impl. to be sorry, i.e. (in a favorable sense) to pity,
console, or (reflex.) rue; or (unfavorably) to avenge (oneself):
--comfort (self), ease [one's self], repent (-er, -ing, self).

Now here is a question: Is it not possible to grieve and feel sorry
over something -- even if we know that it is going to happen, even if
we cause it to happen? Of course it is. And there is no reason why
this cannot also apply to God, as we shall see.

Gen. 18:23-33. We won't quote this passage in entirety; suffice to
say: It is the incident in which Abraham intercedes with God on
behalf of Sodom, asking Him to spare the city in a classic ANE
"marketplace bartering" conversation which probably served to give
Abraham some idea what this new God of "his" was like!

Did God here offer to change His mind? Let's put it this way. The
story, and Jeremiah above, indicates that with intercession and/or
change, God will make a change in an announced plan.

But if God is omniscient, then He knew in advance what Abraham would
ask for -- and knew also what the end result would be. (Note that God
asks, clearly rhetorically [18:17], whether He should tell Abraham
what His plans are, and that the number of possible righteous goes
only to 10 -- the next logical increment, 5, would have been less
than the number of Lot's family of 6: Lot, his wife, his two
daughters, and their prospective grooms.

In essence Abraham is pleading for Lot's safety here!) God dealt with
Abraham in human terms for his own sake; but even before the
conversation started, the matter was decided. God did not change nor
compromise, but in fact, in feigning ignorance (v. 21), dropped a
very strong hint that intercession on Abraham's part was desired.

This incident was more than a typical ANE barter-exchange, then: It
was also a tone-setting meeting laying down the terms upon which God
would relate to His covenant people. He knew what they would do; but
He also wanted them to come to Him in their need. (And in any event,
since all 6 members of Lot's family eventually fouled up, it was
proven that there were no righteous people in Sodom on that day!)

This general principle of intercession -- which of course was always
foreknown -- can be seen in other cites commonly used in this
argument: Exodus 32:10-14; Numbers 16:20-35 and 44-50; 2 Kings
20:1-7, and Amos 7:3, 6. But let's look at some other key cites.

Numbers 23:19 -- The oracle of Balaam needs to be looked at it two
ways. First, what of this word repent? I think it is obvious that it
must be read in a different sense here -- "grieve" just doesn't fit
the bill! Second, the oracle itself notes that there were conditions
for the blessing (v. 21). This pretty obviously indicates that if the
conditions change, a "Jeremiah 18 reversal" will follow! (cf. also 1
Sam. 15:29, Ezek. 24:14. Moreover, keep in mind that this is said by
Balaam, who is trying to keep himself out of trouble with Balak for
giving out a prophecy blessing Israel rather than cursing it!)

Malachi 3:6 -- This is a "no change" verse, and we should immediately
remember what we have said above about such things. "Change" does not
refer to simply any possible change, but has specific contexts. Here,
it is said in the context of maintaining the covenant promise of
preservation to the Israelites in spite of their sins. A covenant
agreement is a serious thing -- it is a written contract! This was an
unconditional promise, unlike those under the Jeremiah 18 clause, and
God will not break it, and has not (though the Israelites did).

James 1:17 -- Finally, there is this reach into the NT. But again,
context makes for clear: James is discussing the ways of men and
their fickle, changing morals and treasures (1:2-16). This is the
regard in which he asserts that there is neither turning or variation
in God, and we are not justified in reading more than that into it.
It is not a statement of "ontological immutability" but one concerned
with "the unwavering character of God's faithfulness." (See Donald J.
Versput, "James 1:17 and the Jewish Morning Prayers." Novum
Testamentum 35, 1997, 177-191.)

----------
And now a response in reply to a criticism ..[snip] Click
here: http://tektonics.org/gk/godchangemind.html

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Oct 18 16:57:58 2006