Posted on 02/03/2004 5:46:23 PM PST by drstevej
No flames here.
I welcome all logical discord for this interesting problem. It would be helpful to provide solutions than issues. Thanks.
I think that a few points may help, in understanding this.
1. I utterly failed to provide any CONTEXT, for the passages I cited. Although my excuse is that the post was already too long, knowing the context of each verse is necessary for understanding any verse.
2. The context of these verses will (I believe) show that each is about a singular event. That is, each is describing one situation, and what God did regarding that event. Thus:
3. It may be, that none of these are describing a general characteristic of God. Maybe we must look at all of these verses, and many more, before we can make definitive statements abut whether God can or does change His mind.
Hope this helps.
DG
"The Problem of Pain" by C.S. Lewis might be a valuable little book for you during this uncertainty.
God is with you always.
God's house is a house of prayer.
I never knew that..God saved you so you could meet us huh?
**grin**
Consider that the God presented by Boyd is a uninvolved God that can not be trusted.
Why do you burden me with "open theology," and "Boyd?" What have I to do with them?
DG
Have you ever considered whether you "can only read" this passage as describing "part of the make up of God," because your theology requires it?
Is there any possibility that you are reading more into the passage than is actually there? Wouldn't it be better, to take the verse at face value? That way, we could also take the twenty-one other verses at face value, too. Then, it would all fit.
Certainly the other "I repented" verses are problematic but in every single case they denote action on the part of God, not God's character.
If a characteristic of God is "what He does not do-repent," how is it possible for Him to DO something [ " action on the part of God "] ("repent") which " He does not do-?"
Many of these verse uses the same Hebrew word "repent" as mentioned above.
Exactly!
Therefore you must interpret all action "I repented" verses in context of who God is and scripture.
This is good. If I were to say (on the other hand) that my UNDERSTANDING of a particular verse nullifies twenty-one other verses, that would NOT be good.
Just food for thought.
DG
Sorry, but this isn't my "theology" trying to understand these verses. I've been looking at this strictly as a logical issue and have taken all the verses at face value. Aside from the Bible the only weapon in my arsenel that I've used was prayer.
It is clear what makes this verse ("God is not man that He should repent") unique from the others grammatically and logically is the comparitive clause. While they may use the same Hebrew word my conclusion can only be these verses are talking apples and oranges. Some talk of the character of God and some talk of the actions of God.
I've NEVER said that one verse nullifies the other. In fact I believe the basic assumption was that all verses are in fact accurate. As we can see from these verses you must reconcile the actions of God with the character of God when interpreting the verses. This is a terrific illustration of where it is impossible to understand God's character by His actions. Thus you must understand God's character BEFORE you can understand His actions. This is an example where care must be taken to accurately handle the word of truth.
I try not to read into the scriptures but the flip side of that is the danger of purposely ignoring a piece of scripture which doesn't suit your theological understanding. Generally this rears it's head when we cannot reconcile one verse with another so we lump them all together and make a statement suited to our theology. Perhaps if I'm in error in my logic you could offer an interpretation of this verse for me?
Ok, let's look at strictly as a logical issue:
Posit a verse, we will call verse A. imagine that I believe that verse A can only be understood to say that God is proclaiming that His immutable character cannot do a certain act--"act XYZ."
Then we see many other verses, which explicitly, categorically, state that (in such and such circumstance) God DID DO "act XYZ." In fact, some of the verses seem to indicate that "act XYZ" may very well be part of the character of God.
Now, I (in the above example) believe that verse A can only be understood to mean that God CANNOT do "act XYZ." Someone comes by, and tells me, "Wait a minute, DG, it is illogical to believe that God CANNOT do "act XYZ," when all of those verses clearly and unequivocally state that God DID DO "act XYZ."
I would then have to make a choice:
1. I could continue to BELIEVE that verse A said what I believe it to mean,
OR
2. I could believe that all of the verses which clearly state that God DID DO "act XYZ," actually mean that the ability to DO "act XYZ" is a part of the Character of God.
_____________________
Since I am aware that I have believed several things (in the past) which later turned out to not be true, I think that I would (in the hypothetical above) decide to re-evaluate my understanding of verse A.
You have the same choice to make. You can maintain your faith in what you believe the verse means, or you can try to look at what the verse actually says. I think that you will see that your present belief about the meaning of this verse is "adding something to" what the verse actually says.
I know, however, that this kind of re-evaluation is very hard for us to do. Therefore, I will not try to force you to change your mind, that is up to you.
DG
I just wanted to know how you would interpret:
"God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?" Numbers 23:19
I can now interpret God's statement that He "repented" (was sorry, disappointed, etc.) of His action with Saul. God didn't changed His mind. Telling Samuel He was sorry, disappointed, etc. conveyed to Samuel God's fury with Saul
Your point is well taken. Unfortunately, it also leads to another difficulty:
If God not only has knowledge of everything which will occur in the past or the future, (as some believe) and if NOTHING happens, except by the determined intention and will of God; (as some believe) then God both CAUSED the actions of Saul, and FORKNEW those actions. That is, God caused Saul to act in the way he acted, and thus God knew exactly what would (and did) happen.
Assuming the above, how is it that God " was sorry, disappointed.." about His (God's own) act? How is it, that God could react with " fury" against Saul, if God had forced Saul to do those acts, as if Saul were some kind of meat puppet?
If I were to make a robot, out of metal, and were to program it to do break bottles over my skull, at whom should I direct my anger, if I soon grew weary of having bottles broken over my head? Should I blame my creation (the robot) or should I accept the blame for my own actions?
I just wanted to know how you would interpret:
Numbers 23:19
"God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent;
Has He said, and will He not do it?
Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?"
I would prefer to let it be, as it stands. But, as I am sure that this answer will not satisfy, I will work on it, and get back to you.
DG
1. My preference is to leave the verse "as is," but, of course, in context. Anything that I "add" to it is likely to be at least partly inaccurate, if not completely wrong.
2. I have not (yet) been successful in finding a literal interlinear version (online) of the Hebrew Bible. Although I have begun a word-by-word translation (using online lexicons) I am having difficulties in getting over half of the Hebrew words translated.
These notwithstanding, let's look at the context:
[This passage is discussing the history if the Israelites, during the exodus from Egypt]
[NASB]
http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=Numbers+22&NASB_version=yes&language=english&x=15&y=10
Numbers 22:
2 Now Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the
Amorites.
3 So Moab was in great fear because of the people, for they
were numerous; and Moab was in dread of the sons of Israel.....
5 So he sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor, at....
[Apparently, Balaam was some sort of prophet, apparently of God.]
7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the
fees for divination in their hand; and they came to Balaam and
repeated Balak's words to him.
8 He said to them, "Spend the night here, and I will bring word back
to you as the LORD may speak to me." And the leaders of Moab
stayed with Balaam.
9 Then God came to Balaam and said, "Who are these men with
you?"
10 Balaam said to God, "Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has
sent word to me,
11 'Behold, there is a people who came out of Egypt and they cover
the surface of the land; now come, curse them for me; perhaps I may
be able to fight against them and drive them out.'"
[Balak wanted Balaam to curse the Israelites.]
12 God said to Balaam, "Do not go with them; you shall not
curse the people, for they are blessed."
13 So Balaam arose in the morning and said to Balak's leaders, "Go
back to your land, for the LORD has refused to let me go with you."
[God said, "Don't go!" He also said, "you shall not curse the people..."]
[So, Balak sent them back, with a promise of more money]
18 Balaam replied to the servants of Balak, "Though Balak were
to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not do anything,
either small or great, contrary to the command of the LORD my God.
19 "Now please, you also stay here tonight, and I will find out what
else the LORD will speak to me."
20 God came to Balaam at night and said to him, "If the men have
come to call you, rise up and go with them; but only the word
which I speak to you shall you do."
21 So Balaam arose in the morning, and saddled his donkey and
went with the leaders of Moab.
[Balaam told them that he "could not do anything...contrary to the command of the Lord."]
[BUT...This time, God told Balaam to GO with them. It APPEARS as if God has changed his mind.]
22 But God was angry because he was going, and the angel of
the LORD took his stand in the way as an adversary against him.
[Although God had explicitly TOLD Balaam to GO, now, He is "very angry because he was going." And sent an angel to stop him. It APPEARS as if God has changed his mind.]
34 Balaam said to the angel of the LORD, "I have sinned, for I
did not know that you were standing in the way against me. Now
then, if it is displeasing to you, I will turn back."
35 But the angel of the LORD said to Balaam, "Go with the men, but
you shall speak only the word which I tell you." So Balaam went
along with the leaders of Balak.
[Now, the angel (of God) orders Balaam to "GO with the men." Again, it APPEARS as if God has changed his mind.]
Numbers 23
1 Then Balaam said to Balak, "Build seven altars for me here, and
prepare seven bulls and seven rams for me here."
2 Balak did just as Balaam had spoken, and Balak and Balaam offered
up a bull and a ram on each altar.
3 Then Balaam said to Balak, "Stand beside your burnt offering, and I
will go; perhaps the LORD will come to meet me, and whatever He
shows me I will tell you." So he went to a bare hill.
4 Now God met Balaam, and he said to Him, "I have set up the seven
altars, and I have offered up a bull and a ram on each altar."
5 Then the LORD put a word in Balaam's mouth and said, "Return
to Balak, and you shall speak thus."
7 He took up his discourse and said,
"From Aram Balak has brought me,
Moab's king from the mountains of the East,
' Come curse Jacob for me,
And come, denounce Israel!'
8 "How shall I curse whom God has not cursed?
And how can I denounce whom the LORD has not denounced?
[So, Balaam went, (as ordered by God) but God told him NOT to curse Israel.]
[Balak took Balaam to another place, with the same result:]
17 He came to him, and behold, he was standing beside his burnt
offering, and the leaders of Moab with him. And Balak said to him,
"What has the LORD spoken?"
18 Then he took up his discourse and said,
"Arise, O Balak, and hear;
Give ear to me, O son of Zippor!
19 "God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent;
Has He said, and will He not do it?
Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
20 "Behold, I have received a command to bless;
When He has blessed, then I cannot revoke it.
[After this, Balak took Balaam to another place, with the same (predictable) results.]
________________________
Now, let us consider the subject verse, within this context:
Balak wanted Balaam to do TWO things:
1, He wanted Balaam to go to him, at Moab.
2. He wanted Balaam to CURSE Israel.
It appears or seems that God changed his mind several times, regarding whether He wanted Balaam to GO to Moab.
God did not change His mind, regarding His command to Balaam, to NOT CURSE Israel. I think that God was saying (through Balaam) that he was not going to change his mind: He was going to continue to order Balaam to BLESS Israel, and NOT allow him to CURSE Israel.
19 "God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent;
Has He said, and will He not do it?
Now, why did God (apparently) treat the "going" differently than He treated the "cursing?"
Although I have not studied this adequately (yet) my first impression is this:
God had explicitly BLESSED Abraham (and his descendants [who were, at the time of Balaam, Israel]).
Genesis 12
1 Now the LORD said to Abram,
"Go forth from your country,
And from your relatives
And from your father's house,
To the land which I will show you;
2
And I will make you a great nation,
And I will bless you,
And make your name great;
And so you shall be a blessing;
3
And I will bless those who bless you,
And the one who curses you I will curse.
And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed."
Genesis 22
16 and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the LORD,
because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son,
your only son,
17 indeed I will greatly bless you, and I will greatly multiply your
seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on
the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their
enemies.
18 "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed,
because you have obeyed My voice."
He had SWORN, by Himself. I think that this blessing, and swearing, is a basic issue, regarding whether God allows Himself to "change His mind."
DG
p.s. These are merely the opinions which I currently hold. I do not consider them to be binding on anyone else.
Formatting error: All of the first several paragraphs should have been bold.
Also, here is the verse, in question, in Hebrew. I want to see if this forn comes through:
äùòé àìå øîà àåää íçðúéå íãà-ïáå áæëéå ìà ùéà àì .äðîé÷é àìå øáãå The font is Microsoft Word Web Hebrew AD DG
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.