Post #35 The Doctrine of God - An Introduction To God's Divine Simplicity

 

Introduction: 

       In the last post I briefly mentioned the doctrine of "Divine Simplicity" at the beginning before finishing out our study of God's Divine immutability and omnipresence. Interested readers may view the last post here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2024/02/post-34-doctrine-of-god-p2-divine.html. 

    Matthew Barrett in his book "Simply Trinity - The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Holy Spirit", writes the following about what is meant by "Divine Simplicity",

"To confess God as one is also to confess God is one. He is one by nature, he is one in nature."

    What Barrett is stressing here is God's one undivided nature or essence. What makes God, God, and what makes up God is, well, "God". There is nothing in God that isn't God by nature. This is what Barrett is saying. He then goes on,

"He is not made up of parts but a God without parts. There is in Him no composition, nor can He be compounded by parts. If He could, then He would be a divided being (parts are divisible by definition), a mutable being (parts are prone to change), a temporal being (parts require a composer), and a dependant being (parts require a composer)."

    When Barrett speaks of "parts", what is he meaning? When the doctrine of Divine simplicity asserts "God without parts", by "parts" is meant how we typically talk about things in the created realm that makes them what they are, or what we call "properties". I as a human being have the "properties" or "parts" of being a physical or material body, and an immaterial soul, with a mind, emotions, a will, and containing that innermost "part" - my human spirit. Such properties or "parts" have developed and grown over time. When we speak of people, universes, or angels, we talk about them as having "parts" or properties that combine together to make them what they are. In my soul are the functions of mind, emotions, and will. I think, feel, and choose way differently than I did when I was younger. As the Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:11, 

"When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things."

    When we talk of God having "no parts", we mean that in discussing His being and attributes, we don't have "being" in one pile and "attributes" in another pile. If God had these as "properties", this would entail He was somehow constructed to become the God He is today - which would make the parts or process of making God "God" to be greater than God Himself. Divine simplicity is crucial to preserving the unity of God in His being and attributes. James 1:17 reminds us, "Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow."

 

    As we continue on in our study of the doctrine of God, I want to spend this post and the next few exploring this fundamental doctrine in the overall study of theology proper. To aid myself and the reader alike, I will underline certain terms in the first part of this posting that will come in handy as we move forward.  

My Boyhood Fascination With Model Cars

      When I was a boy, I came to enjoy the hobby of building model cars. Whenever my parents and I would go to the store, they would allow me to purchase a model kit - along with assorted paints and glue. I can recall sitting up until the "wee-hours" of the morning assembling the kit from the parts. The box included the "parts" for the car. Now think about what I just said above about "parts" with respect to creatures on the one-hand, and God not having "parts" on another. The analogy I am about to share will hopefully serve to shed further light.

        The nature or "essence" of such cars were certain materials such as plastic (molded clear and colored parts) along with rubber tires, metal axles and my favorite - the decals. Once I began the project of assembling and painting the model, although I had the parts, paint and glue, one could legitimately say that until completion, the given model car did not yet exist. The assembling of the model represented a certain "potential" for it becoming what was pictured on the box. Once I completed a given model car, I would proudly bring it to my father for him to inspect and approve. The car as assembled, officially "existed" in the sense that all of its parts were fitted together to complete the "form" recognized on the box. 

Model cars, universes, humans and angels are "complex" and thus created things

        The opening illustration does serve a purpose besides that of a charming memory. As we build on some of the terms used in the story, we can begin to understand what is meant by "complexity" with respect to what classifies all created things. Model cars represent a feature common to all created objects and beings - including human beings - a feature deemed "complexity" by theologians and philosophers. Words change usage and meaning with time - with terms such as "complex" and its opposite, "simple",  being no different. 

       Whenever anything is described by the term "complex", we're not referring to that object or person as "too difficult to be truly known". Instead, the word "complex", as used in describing a given object or being, refers to how it is composed of parts and how such parts or properties relate to the whole of its being. 

       The opposite concept that is the focal point of today's post and the next is the term "simplicity". Simplicity describes how something is "not composed of parts" and whose whole being and attributes have existed from all eternity (more on this later). It will be argued that God alone occupies, in the most purest sense, what is meant when we say He is "Divinely simple". 

    By describing first what defines "complex" objects and beings, we are presenting a contrast that will aid us in beginning to understand what we mean when we that God, by essence and existence, is not composed of parts.   

       So, back to model cars and such. The model car illustration entails an object that has parts. The "parts" represent the various features that require assembly by an assembler (which, in the case of the above illustration, would involve a model-car builder). Complex entities also involve their essence (that is, "what" makes an object or being what it is") as coming before their existence (that is, "how" an object or being carries forth what it is upon the completion of its creation). 

       Model cars, people and universes have, at some point in their past, had potential to become what they were. All created things had a beginning and at some point neither had "essence" nor "existence". The model car did not even have its parts formed at some point in its past. However, a designer and a factory produced the parts - making kits that contained "potential" model-cars. Only when the car was constructed did it go from a "potential" to an "actual car". 

       Our universe, at sometime in the finite past, did not exist. The Old and New Testament scriptures (i.e. Genesis 1:1; Psalm 33:6; Romans 11:36; 1 Corinthians 8:6) tell us that God created all things by the word of His mouth. Moreover, current findings by astronomers have corroborated models of the universe that give strong evidence to the universe having a beginning. The universe was "assembled" from nothing to become "something" - containing all sorts of "parts" (i.e. atoms, forces, planets, galaxies, ourselves). The universe is the biggest example of a "complex" object.

       Then we come to beings such as ourselves. Human beings are "composite" or "complex". Scripture indicates that, at bare minimum, human beings are non-physical minds or souls endowed with freedom of the will and moral intuitions (see Genesis 1:26; 2:7; Numbers 16:22; 27:16). Human beings are immaterial persons dwelling in and interacting with a physical body composed of a brain with trillions of neurons connected to a body of bone, muscles and blood (Genesis 1:26; 2:7; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 4:12). 

      Further distinctions show human beings are special above their animal counterparts in how they are made in God's image. The image of God refers to how humans are created with the potential for interaction with God (Genesis 1:26; 9:6; Psalm 8:1-4; Hebrews 11:1,6). 

        Human beings fit the category of "complexity" or "composite" as described above. In other words, there was a point when each human being's essence was nothing more than 23 chromosomes from each parent. Once conception took place, the immaterial aspect of personality or soul (i.e. "life") initiated the existence of that person in embryonic form (since they had not ever pre-existed). Those physical and non-physical elements, which represented a "potential but not-yet person", came together in the womb to become an "actual" person in the fullest sense (Psalm 139:7; Jeremiah 1:5; Galatians 1:15). The "essence" or "stuff of existence" comes before the final composition or "existence" of the above examples. Such qualities describe such things as "complex" and thus created things.

       So, what about the angels? Even angels, which are described as "ministering spirits" (Hebrews 1:14) and "flames of fire" (Psalm 104:4), are "complex", since there was a point that they didn't exist and God's formation of their immaterial "essence" or "whatness" came before they were completed as His servants that do His bidding (Job 38:7; Psalm 104:4; Revelation 19:10).

God is not "complex" or composed of parts, but rather, is what is referred to as Divinely simple

      As noted earlier, words can change their meanings or add additional senses over time. Whenever we come to God and describing what sets Him apart from all creation, the term "simple" is employed by some theologians and philosophers. By the term "simple", we're not at all saying God is easy to figure out or that we can comprehend Him in all His entirety. Instead, the term "simple", as used millennia ago by Christian thinkers in the ancient church such as Irenaeus of Lyons (180 A.D.) and middle ages (Anselm of Canterbury 1078 A.D. and Thomas Aquinas, 1270's) refers to how God is not composed of parts. 

      Furthermore, in contrast to "complex" created beings and things whose "essence" proceeds their "existence" (that is, the stuff they're made of, including various traits, require composition by a composer to bring them from a state of "potentially being something" to "actually being something" or existence), a simple being like God is eternally complete. All of God's traits and attributes by way of His "existence" (i.e. "how God is God") and His eternal, immaterial nature by manner of His "essence" (i.e. "what God is as God) have eternally and simultaneously continued as one, living, uncreated reality. 

      These thoughts, hopefully, direct our minds toward contemplating what kind of God God is and why He is worthy of our worship. For now, we will end today's post and continue on in the next. 

More next time.....

Post #34 The Doctrine of God: P2 Divine Omnipresence and Immensity - Distinctions, Reflections, and Applications

Introduction:

     As we once more explore the wonderous eternal nature of the Biblical God, we are to be reminded of how God's attributes and nature are related. God's attributes are not a group of "parts" that attach somehow to God's being like lego bricks to a base. As theologian James Dolezal is fond of saying "all that is in God is God", which means the attributes are of the same "substance" as the Divine nature because the attributes themselves are but full expressions of the selfsame nature. In future posts I'll deal with what is called "Divine Simplicity", which is at the heart of the classical Christian theism being studied in this current series. 

    Suffice to say, the attributes of God are full expressions of the Divine essence. God doesn't "have" attributes, instead, He is His attributes. Put another way, God's love means God is loving by nature. This is what John refers to when he writes in 1 John 4:8 and 4:16 "God is love". Or again, God's holiness means God is holy by nature, as expressed by the psalmist in Psalm 99. To say God is unchangeable means He is so by nature, as God Himself expresses in Malachi 3:6. As to God's impassible emotional life, we mean He is impassible or constant in His affections by nature, as touched upon in Numbers 23:19 and 1 Samuel 15:29.  Whatever other attributes we speak of pertaining to the Biblical revelation of God, identical remarks can be made of them as well. The 17th century author William Ames summarizes our point in his work "Marrow of Theology", "The attributes of God set forth What God is, and Who he is." I only touch upon these truths to remind ourselves that whichever attribute we will speak of or have covered thus far, we are still looking at the same undivided essence of the One God revealed in Scripture - this includes our current topics of Divine immensity and omnipresence.

Divine Immensity and Omnipresence more closely defined

    We spent time in the last post noting how Divine omnipresence and immensity operated within the Trinity here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2024/01/post-33-doctrine-of-god-p1-divine.html. As I noted in the last post, omnipresence speaks of how God by nature is everywhere present at all points. Divine immensity tells us that God cannot be contained nor bounded by anything. In this post we want to explore how God's  omnipresence and immensity operate relative to the created order.

    One of my favorite Biblical passages to consider about God's omnipresence is Psalm 139:7-12,

"Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? 8 If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold,You are there.9 If I take the wings of the dawn,
If I dwell in the remotest part of the sea, 10 Even there Your hand will lead me, And Your right hand will lay hold of me. 11 If I say, “Surely the darkness will over whelm me, And the light around me will be night,” 12 Even the darkness is not dark to You, And the night is as bright as the day. Darkness and light are alike to You."

    In having discussed briefly how omni-presence was already operative within the Trinity from all eternity, it makes sense that this perfection would spill-over into the very universe God made. It is helpful to do a thought experiment about omnipresence to help us grasp a little bit of the enormity of this perfection.



    The above photograph is that of the so-called "Sombrero Galaxy" (so-called due to its resemblance to the hat), or as known by its more technical designation "M104". Astronomers tell us that the Sombrero Galaxy is some 28 million light years from earth and measures 50,000 light years across (see NASA's link to this galaxy at https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_283.html ). 

    It is amazing to think that God is as much present at that Galaxy as He is here with me in the chair in which I am typing this post. Remember, omnipresence describes God occupying every point in and throughout the created order.

    So what about God's immensity? The 19th century Baptist theologian J.P. Boice in his "Abstracts of Systematic Theology" describes immensity as follows,

"God is not confined to space any more than he is measured by time."

Boice later adds,

"When, therefore, we speak of God’s immensity, we mean more than his filling all space, just as when we speak of his eternity, we mean more than his existing throughout all time."

    To distinguish these two perfections of God: God's immensity deals with God's relationship to space; whereas omnipresence deals with how God occupies every point in space. Immensity tells me God cannot be confined by space, and thus transcends it; whereas omnipresence informs me God's presence expresses His being as wholly present, entirely at work, and in every point of all creation. Psalm 139:7-12 was shown as a good example of God's omnipresence. 1 Kings 8:27 reminds us of God's immensity,

“But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain You, how much less this house which I have built!"

    A New Testament counterpart to 1 Kings 8:27 is found in Stephen's speech in Acts 7:49, quoting Isaiah 66:1,

"Heaven is My throne, and earth is the footstool of My feet; what kind of house will you build for Me?’ says the Lord,
‘Or what place is there for My repose?"

    It is because God is immense (transcendant and not bounded by all He has made) that He can be omnipresent (active and present in all He has made). Acts 17:24-28 features these attributes working together,

"The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’

    Paul's point is that God is not bounded by His creation, and thus doesn't require a temple (hence God's immensity). As He is omnipresent, God is not localized as He would be if he were like one of the pagan deities. Rather, God's omnipresence in and through all things and His immensity above and outside all things means He can be wholly present and at work equally and everywhere.

    Author A.W. Tozer, in his classic book "Knowledge of the Holy", writes of God's omnipresence (and we could include God's immensity),

"The doctrine of the divine omnipresence personalizes man’s relation to the universe in which he finds himself. This great central truth gives meaning to all truths and imparts supreme value to all his little life. God is present, near him, next to him, and this God sees him and knows him through and thorough."

Practical distinctions to note when talking about God's immensity and omnipresence.

    As we move forward, Elmer Towns in his very accessible systematic theology entitled, "Theology for Today", notes on ppgs 119-121 some observations about God's omnipresence and immensity that aids us in application to our lives. I'll use some of his headings and then comment on each of them for our application.

1. God's omnipresence is a manifestation of His immensity.

    As we've noted already, Divine immensity means God's nature knows no limits and is not enclosed by space. God's omnipresence means He is everywhere in, through and at every point in space and outside of it. God is not confined to my little circle of life and circumstances. He is immense. He operates wholly and completely in and outside my circumstances, due to Him being also omnipresent. Recourse back to Psalm 139 shows us how David applied these two attributes to his life's circumstances. 

2. God's omnipresence allows for His transcendence. 

    What Towns is speaking of here is God's relationship to the universe itself. God as transcendance is to the created realm as an author is to a book. The author operates outside the thought-world of the book he or she is writing. With that said, theologians will often speak of another attribute that works in tandem with "transcendance", namely God's "immanance". Again, the author of a book, though "transcendant" to he thought-world of the characters and plot, nonetheless operates in and through the plot and characters to move along the plot to the intended conclusion. 

    God's omnipresence and immensity operates along these lines of transcendance and imminance. The prophet Jeremiah in Jeremiah 23:23-24 is where I find confirmation of these observations,

“Am I a God who is near,” declares the Lord, 'And not a God far off? 24 Can a man hide himself in hiding places so I do not see him?' declares the Lord. 'Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?' declares the Lord." 

3. God's omnipresence means He will manifest Himself in some places more than others. 

    We know by definition that God's omniscience means He is everywhere. When God makes His presence known, He is raising the apprehension of His creatures so that they can sense Him, interract with Him, and respond to Him. Ultimately, there is no place where God's influence and presence is not felt. I tend to use three terms when describing how God makes known His omnipresence and immensity. 

    The first is what we call God's "Providential presence" or omnipresence proper. God is everywhere present in a general sense, working forth His will and wisdom throughout all of the creation and through the wills of people (Acts 17:22-28). 

    The second sense in which we can apprehend God's omnipresence and immensity is what I call His "covenantal presence". This includes an environment fitted to sensing God's presence already at work, specifically in the local church where God's Word is preached and the ordinances of Lord's Supper and Baptism are practiced. The second Person of the Trinity, the incarnate Son, mediates this "covenantal dimension" of God's omnipresence and immensity in the lives of Christians and the church (see Ephesians 1:22-23). 

    The third sense that we can talk of God's omnipresence and immensity involves what theologians call His "manifest presence". This is often-times referred to how God makes His presence known and felt, primarily in Heaven among the glorified saints who have passed on from this world to Heaven (Hebrews 12:22-24). God's manifest presence can be at times experienced here in this life, whether in unusual seasons of revival, such as when He filled the tabernacle or temple in the Old Testament, or when He so moved in His church to revive it, as in the first Great awakenings of New England led by the likes of Jonathan Edwards in the 17th century

4. God's omnipresence implies His omnipotence and omniscience. 

    As Towns rightly points out, any one of the so-called "omni" attributes presupposes the other two. God must have all power in order to directly affect every point and moment in time and space as the omnipotent God, henceforth referring back to His omnipresence. In like manner, God must know the outcomes and means by which the effects of His causing all things occurs by way of His omnipotence. 

    The practical ramifications of God's omnipresence is brought home in the following observation by Towns: 

"The fact that God is means that God is here and now. He comforts, guides and protects the believer with His omnipresence. And the fact that God is here, implies that God is everywhere." 

    Certainly such Bible passages as Psalm 23 or where Jesus in His incarnation could walk the earth as man while still holding sway over creation as God (see John 3:13; Colossians 1:13-16) gives us great comfort in knowing that He will never leave us nor forsake us (see Matthew 28:18-20).

Final thoughts for our application: 

    Today we've looked at God's omnipresence and immenisty. God's omnipresence covers the highest, deepest, largest, most remote and darkest regions of created reality and life. This is the God you and I need dear reader. God's omnipresence is that constant reality that is unimpaired by life's darkness, isolation, overwhelming moments, deepest valleys and highest obstacles. God's immensity tells me He can work forth His will and purposes for me beyond the horizon of my immediate circumstances. God is not limited. Let us thank God today for His omnipresence and immensity.

Post #33 The Doctrine of God: P1 Divine Omnipresence and Immensity Within the Trinity.

Introduction: 

    In today's post I want to begin by quoting a prayer from the early church father, Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390 A.D.) that I heard Dr. Carl Trueman mention in the closing of his recent lecture "Classical Theology and the Modern Mind", 

“Oh all-transcendent God, what words can sing your praises? No word does you justice. What mind can probe your secret? No mind can encompass you. You are alone, beyond the power of speech, yet all that we speak stems from you. You are alone beyond the power of thought, yet all that we can seek conceive springs from you. All things proclaim you, those endowed with reason and those bereft of it. All the expectation and pain of the world coalesces in you. All things utter a prayer to you a silent hymn, composed by you. You sustain everything that exists and all things that move together. You are the goal of all that exists. You are the one and you are the all, yet you are none of the things that exist - neither apart nor the whole. You can avail yourself of any name. How shall I call you, the only unnamable, all transcendent God?” 

    That prayer touches upon the two attributes of God that are of interest in today's post - omnipresence and immensity. To say God is "omni-present" means He is everywhere ("omni") present at every point in all of creation, wholly and completely. To say God is "immense" describes His relationship to all of creation, whether visible or invisible, in how nothing can contain God. Together, the attributes of immensity and omnipresence confront us with the very nature of God Himself who is Father, Son, and Spirit. What I want to specifically consider today is how we can speak of God's omnipresence and immensity within His own nature as He is as Father, Son, and Spirit. In other words, how do we talk of God as omnipresent and immense before there was a creation? These explorations will serve to show that these attributes are intregal to our overall understanding of the doctrine of God.

A word on how God's Divine nature and attributes work in relationship to the Persons of the Trinity

    In our continuing study of "Theology Proper" or the doctrine of God, we once again remind ourselves that the goal of this overall study is to understand what the Bible teaches about the being, attributes, and identity of God. As we will focus today upon God's omnipresence and immensity in more detail, I felt it necessary to remind us of how the Divine nature operates within and among the three persons of the Godhead. 

    God's being and attributes summarize His nature, essence, or being. I often use the phrase "what God is" to refer to His essence; and the phrase "how God is" to talk about the attributes or perfections of God. As for God's identity, I use the phrase "who God is" to point us to the Biblical truth of the Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 

    We can never make God's being and attributes something like a "fourth" piece of God on the one side, and the Triune persons as somehow "parts" of God on another side. Rather, the Biblical and historical doctrine of the Trinity asserts that God's being is equivalent to His attributes (what theologians call "Divine simplicity"). The term "simplicity" derives from the Latin "simplex", meaning "unmixed, uncompounded, and uncomposed". 

    Thus, God's attributes aren't like a cake recipe that has eggs, flour, salt, sugar, baking soda, baking powder, and water to make a cake. Those said ingredients are not cake, but instead their own respective substances, composing together the said cake. When we say "God, by nature, is His attributes", we're meaning that all that is in God is God. In reference to the "stuff" or substance of Divine being (eternal, unchangeable, omnipresent, omniscient, and all the rest), each perfection is an active expression of the Divine nature. In this classical, historical understanding of Theology proper, each attribute operates as an action of the Divine nature. 

    Consequently, the Divine nature or essence of God resides entirely and wholly in each of the Divine persons, with each distinguished only by their eternal relationship to one another - what theologians call "eternal relations of origin". How is this spelled out historically and Biblically? 

    The Father begets or communicates the Divine nature to the Son. In a portion of the historic Athanasian creed we are reminded, "The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten".  Sometimes early theologians, such as Gregory Nazianzus (cited above) and later John Calvin called the Father "the fountain of the Divine nature within the Trinity". The Father and Son's co-equality, co-eternality are affirmed in these statements, with the idea of designating the Father as "unbegotten, not made" for the purpose of distinguishing Him from the person of the Son. 

    The Son is defined historically and Scripturally as "the only-begotten" from the Father (John 1:14,18; 3:16; 1 John 4:19). What this means is that the Son is truly God by nature. All the divine attributes of the Divine essence which the Father has maps point-by-point, quality-by-quality in the Son. Biblically, the entire Divine nature resides in the Son as much as it resides entirely within the Father (see Colossians 2:9). Both Father and Son share the undivided, simple, Divine essense (John 10:30; 1 Corinthians 8:6-7). 

    The Holy Spirit, in His co-equality and co-eternality with Father and Son, is said to "proceed" from them both. In other words, the same divine essence is communicated to the Spirit by way of "spiration" or breathing forth from the Father through the Son (see John 15:26). To quote the Athanasian Creed once more, 

"Now this is the catholic (i.e. 'universal') faith: We worship one God in Trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being."

The nature of God, the Trinity, and the Divine attributes of omnipresence and immensity

    Again, the whole divine nature resides in the Spirit as much as it does in the Son and the Father. The Three Persons, in turn, mutually indwell one another, thus enabling us to say that the one undivided essence of God truly is in the Three Persons (see John 14:21-23). When we consider the Divine nature in the Trinity, we include of course the attributes of omnipresence and immensity. Since the eternal relations between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitutes their sharing of the Divine nature, the nature itself necessarily includes omnipresence and immensity. 

    God cannot be contained by any created thing. Before there was a creation, God as a Trinity was self-sufficiently existing. With no such things as time and space coordinate with God's existence, we can say that God has existed from all eternity without boundaries, "inhabiting eternity" and persisting, world without end, from eternity to eternity (Psalm 90:1-2; Isaiah 57:15; Hebrews 1:10-12). 

    These truths are at the very heart of what we talk about when referring to God's "immensity".

    On the same token, the Divine nature is wholly and completely in the Divine persons of the Trinity. The nature and attributes of the Divine essence, being forever truly in the Father without beginning, is communicated by the Father's eternal begetting of the Son. Within the Trinity itself, the whole eternal essence truly and wholly fills each person - as one author notes, "three times over". 

    Jesus Himself affirms this point of the "Father indwelling Him and He indwelling the Father" (John 10:38; John 14:10-11). Thus, before God created the heavens and the earth, the attributes of Divine omnipresence and immensity were being expressed by His very nature among the Father, Son, and Spirit.

    In our next post we will continue discovering further truths about God's omnipresence and immensity, noting how they work in relationship to all that God has made.

Post #32 The Doctrine of God - P5 Divine Impassibility, Human Passibility, And How They Illuminate Our Understanding Of Jesus Christ And His Cross

Introduction:

    In our current doctrine of God series, we've spent some extra time exploring that particular perfection of God that pertains to His constant, unchanging emotional affections - the doctrine of Divine Impassibility (DDI). As a reminder, the term "impassible" refers to not being happened or affected upon from the outside. God's emotional life flows from what He is as the unchanging God and who He is as the Triune God. He is forever merciful towards the pitiable, wrathful towards sin, and just toward what is right. Impassibility tells me that God is never more loving nor was ever less loving, since that affection emerges from what He is as a loving God. For review, we can note what was looked at in the last four postings,

1. An introduction to DDI here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/12/post-28-doctrine-of-god-gods-constant.html

2. How Divine impassibility is related to God's unchanging nature or immutability here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/12/post-29-doctrine-of-god-p2-introduction.html

3. How DDI explains why God not suffering reveals Him to be far more in-tune with our sufferings than if He suffered in His Divine nature here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2024/01/post-30-doctrine-of-god-p3-divine.html

4. Then in our last post, we discussed how an impassible God still has affections, and how the Bible speaks of God's emotional life here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2024/01/post-31-doctrine-of-god-p4-divine.html 

    As we draw our exploration of the doctrine of Divine impassibility (DDI) to an end in this overall series on "The Doctrine of God", we need to understand how the Divine and human natures of the Son of God operate in how He expresses His emotions, and why that sheds light upon the meaning of the cross.  

 Understanding how the Son was Divinely impassible and human passible at the cross.

    We first need to understand the historic Christian confession of the Son's two natures. We can begin with the Chalecedonian Creed of 451 A.D. I'll cite its opening statements,

"We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [that is, sharing in the same nature] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial (sharing in the same nature) with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin."

    We note the opening line of how Jesus Christ is "truly God" and "truly man". In affirming the two natures of Christ, we acknowledge the Son having two ways of expressing His existence. His Divine nature is how He expresses Himself Divinely - without beginning, eternal, and unchanging. As we've argued in these last several posts, God by nature has a constant emotional life, with affections expressed from within himself and not imposed upon from the outside.  God always hates sin. He always loves those upon whom He set His affection and foreknew (Romans 8:29-31, Baptist faith and Message 2000 Article 5). He is always willing to show mercy, compassion, and pity. These expressions arise from the kind of God, God is. The Son, as truly God, was impassible.

    When the Son became incarnated as the man Christ Jesus, He expressed Himself humanly. To say "humanly" means being finite in knowledge, strength, and not possessing characteristics such as omnipresence. For our discussion here, the incarnate Son would express His affections in a passible way - just like ourselves - with the exception of sin. He ever remained the One Person, the Son, having two natures of which He partook, each with their own respective qualities. 

    One more creed, the Athanasian Creed, describes the two natures of Christ in the following excerpt that is relevant to our discussion in this post,

"Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ. He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity. He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures. For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man. He suffered death for our salvation. He descended into hell and rose again from the dead."

How the Son's impassible Divine nature and passible human nature can help us better understand the cross 

   The cross is the place we go to see how well any understanding of the person of Christ holds water. It is at this juncture that we see the relevance of our whole discussion on impassibility (and its opposite "passibility"). 

    The Son, as truly God by nature, approached going to the cross impassively (that is, with constant emotions of mercy, justice, and love). Hebrews 10:5-7 tells us of what the Son was doing prior to His entrypoint into history via the incarnation. 

    As the Divine Person of the Son took unto Himself a truly human nature, He would suffer or be "passible" as a man. As man, the incarnate Son would experience what it was like to have pain, sorrow, and rejection happen to Him. As the man Christ Jesus, the incarnate Son would become "passible", undergoing His "passion", His "suffering", and having Divine wrath inflicted upon Himself. (see Isaiah 53:4-5). The sufferings of the Son of God would fulfill all the Old Testament predictions of He being "the Lamb of God" and "being a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief". He as God by nature would ensure that as the impassible God, He could always be the Savior who is always merciful, pardoning sin and forgiving the transgressions of His people (see Exodus 34:6-7; Psalm 136). 

    In short, the Son of God, as truly man, did indeed suffer for our sins. As truly God, He Divinely remained merciful, loving, and just. By Divinely offering Himself as the believer's High Priest and humanly as the Lamb of God, the ncarnate Son could fulfill both roles.  

Why affirming an impassible Divine nature and passible human nature in the Incarnate Son guards against heresy.

    Some may argue that the Father must have had a bad day when Jesus died on the cross. Yet whenever we look at the Trinity, and Divine impassibility, we must understand that God was in complete control of what all occured at the cross.  

    It was not that the Trinity was disconnected from the cross, since as we've already noted, the cross was pre-planned by the Trinity from all eternity. If for anything, the Father's sending of the Son was a constant expression of mercy and love, while also being an unchanging expression of His justice (see Romans 3:21-24).

    The Son, experiencing and undergoing the events of the cross as a man, did indeed suffer as a man. As the incarnate Son of God, his emotions as man would had been "passible" or subject to undergoing suffering. This understanding prevents us from succoming to an ancient heresy that suggested it was the Father who suffered on the cross (called "patripassionism"). The Father, Son, and Spirit were involved inseperably in the outpouring of wrath at Calvary. 

    As I noted earlier, the Son was both Priest and sacrifice. He as a Divine Person would had experienced the wrath of God, which includes feeling the sense of absence of God's blessing and favor. Mysteriously, in ways we do not comprehend, the incarnate Son would be both ever beloved and the very object of wrath all at once. Hebrews 7:26-27 perfectly captures my otherwise feeble attempts to grab hold of this point,

"For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself."

Bringing home some applications 

    By noting the two natures of the Son (truly Divine and truly human), we can preserve the Divine impassibility of the Son in His deity, while recognizing that as man, it was the Son alone who endured the suffering in the cross. I agree with R.C. Sproul who once noted about the hymn "And can it be", that rather than singing,

"Amazing love, how can it be, that thou my God shouldst die for me".

We ought to sing a change in lyrics which rightly focus upon the Son bearing our sins, suffering in His humanity,

"Amazing love, how can it be, that thou my LORD should die for me."

    Author Samuel Renihan, writing in a 2016 article for the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, gives this pastoral application of Divine impassibility, and God's love shown at the cross,https://www.placefortruth.org/blog/trinity-impassibility-what-denied

"God cannot be moved to be anything other than what he is, he cannot be acted upon in that highest of metaphysical senses, nor is his existence time-bound like ours in which we interpret and react to objects. Furthermore, God’s love is immutably set upon his Son, Jesus Christ. Thus, those who are in the Son by faith cannot be separated from the infinite, eternal, immutable, and impassible love of God in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:39)."

Closing thoughts:

    In today's post we attempted to further our understanding the doctrine of Divine impassibility (DDI) by seeing how it functions in three major areas. We first distinguished God's affections by how He expresses such impassibly. Again, to go back to author James Dolezal's descriptions in an earlier post, we can say God truly cares, and that He does so constantly or impassibly. 

    We secondly were reminded of how the Bible speaks of God in two ways, figuratively or analogically and directly as He truly is. Divine impassibility speaks of God as He truly is. In His relating to His creatures, their experience of God changing emotions shows the changes occuring with them as they transfer from being exposed to one emotional perfection to the next (from, say, wrath to mercy). 

    Then finally, we looked at the Son's two natures as God and man. We noted the differences between Him as Divinely impassible God and a truly passible man. As impassible deity, the Son constantly looked forward to accomplishing redemption, since He and the Father and Spirit, with one will, as one God, agreed upon the provision of salvation. The Son, as was appropriate to Him being the Eternal redeemer of sinners, would come be man for our sakes. By becoming a passible man, the incarnate Son could suffer and die in fulfillment of Scripture. 

    

Post #31 The Doctrine of God - P4 Divine Impassibility, How An Impassible God Can Have Affections, And The Two Ways The Bible Talks About God

Introduction:

    For the last three posts, I've dwelled on the subject of God's constant emotional life, otherwise known as "the doctrine of Divine impassibility". In today's post, I want to further our discussion of Divine impassibility. First, we will look at an important distinction about God having affections and He being impassible. Then, we will revisit an area we've talked about before in this overall series, namely the two-fold way the Bible speaks of God, and how that can shed even more light on the doctrine of Divine impassibility. 

God's affections and impassibility

    How we understand the Bible's teaching on God's emotional expression is tied to how we understand His very nature. If God is immutable (i.e. unchangeable), and yet we posit that He can change His emotional response to somehow fit with circumstances, then we have an inherent contradition. Alternatively, if we propose that the Bible teaches God having some sort of change in His very being (whether limited omniscience, a limitation of power, or a limitation upon His presence), then by default we have to conclude God's emotions are as fickle as our own. 

    What I've noticed about objections to DDI is they assume Divine impassibility denies God any affections. I've read opposing viewpoints that think an impassible God is devoid of emotions, or that He is somehow detached from the plight of His creatures. As I've observed these discussions over the years, it has occurred to me (and no doubt others) that a distinction must be made between "affections" and "passions". As I'll explain below, classical, Trinitarian theism affirms God having affections, while denying Him having passions. 

What are affections? How do we distinguish "affections" from "passions"? Why can an impassible God have affections?

    As in any discussion, definitions are important. I get confirmation of this point from noting author James Dolezal's teachings on Divine impassibility. In his work, he gives a careful distinction between "passions" and "caring", noting that God can certainly care, even though He would not do so as a passible being. As a constantly caring God, Dolezal shows that Divine impassibility is what makes God's caring a constant reality.  

    At issue in this discussion is not about whether God has affections (which I'll define momentarily), but more to do with "how" those affections are expressed. 

    It is in terms "passibility" and "impassibility" that we talk about the manner in which God exercises His Divine affections (such as mercy, love, long-suffering, wrath, etc). So lets lay out some definitions.

    The first is what we call God's "affections". An affection is an older term that is synonymous with our term "emotion". An affection refers to how the deepest part of someone is stirred or inclined in preparation toward a specific act. 

    The second set of distinctions are words we ought to have become more familiar ("passiblility" and "impassibility"). These have to do with "how" or "in what way" the affections are stirred. For us creatures, our affections are activated when something happens to us is a "passive way" - i.e. "passible affections". 

    When I as a creature observe a moving scene in a film or hear a touching story from someone who is undergoing great difficulty, my affections are stirred to sorrow, get angry, or motivated to want to do something to allviate the pain. That describes human "passibility" and the accompanying affections. 

    God has given human beings passible affections that mimic His impassible affections. God constantly loves, shows mercy, is angry with sin, injustice, and unrighteousness. As God's image-bearers, we too express those affections, except in a passible way. We can get angry about injustice and show love and mercy when stirred to do so.  

    God's affections (such as mercy or justice) are constantly in motion as a result of His impassibility. In other words, God doesn't need to be moved to pity or mercy, since He is by nature always merciful. 

    God doesn't require an event or another creature to convince him or motivate him to anger over injustice, since He by nature is holy, and thus is always hating sin. Divine impassibility explains "how" God expresses the Divine affections which are His very nature (love, holiness, wrath, long-suffering, just, merciful, and so-forth). 

Keep in mind the two ways God is spoken of in the Bible

    Now that we have expounded a little on "affections" and the terms "passible" and "impassible", how can we understand the Bible's way of speaking of His emotions? 

    Let me remind the reader of the two ways the Bible speaks of God. He is spoken of "directly" in "being language" or what theologians refer to as God communicating Himself ontologically (the term "ontos" speaks of "being"). This first method used by the Bible means we will see God revealed "as He is". For example Malachi 3:6 "I the Lord do not change", or Hebrews 13:6 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever". 

    Then there is that second way Scripture speaks of God, namely in figurative or analogical language. Thus, God can be described as having arms, eyes, and feet, even though we know that He by nature is not some physical humanoid in the sky, but rather is non-physical or spirit by nature (see John 4:24). Instead, we understand such language is using human expressions (called  "anthropomorphisms") to convey how God is relating to His created world. 

    The figure of speech that uses human emotional expressions to convey God's relating to His creatures is what we call "anthropapathism". By nature, God is impassible, constant in His emotional life. In His relating to us, the Bible uses anthropapathism to show the change brought about in the creature's experience of God. The experiences of God's people in regards to how they perceive His emotional expressions are legitimate situations, viewed from their vantage point. 

    If we keep in mind the two-ways the Bible speaks of God, we will avoid faulty interpretations of His emotional expressions, just as we saw in understanding how He shows forth His will, actions, and attributes to accomodate our understanding versus the kind of unchanging, impassible God He truly is.

Closing thoughts for today

    We've attempted to shed further light on the meaning of Divine impassibility by distinguishing "affections" from the terms "passibility" and "impassibility". We noted that God and humans have affections. God expresses His affections impassibily or constantly. Human beings demonstrate their affections passibly or as occassions come upon them. 

    We then reviewed how the Bible speaks of God in two ways - directly revealing God as He is in His being or "ontologically" and indirectly through figures of speech or "analogically" when describing people's experiences of Him. By observing the Bible's two ways of talking about God, we avoid the mistake of viewing God as passible in His emotional life, and thus running into the error of introducing some sort of change in God. In the next post, we will see how the discussion of Divine emotional impassibility and human emotional passibility is relevant to understanding Jesus Christ as God and man at the cross.

Post #30 The Doctrine of God P3 Divine Impassibility And The Question About Divine Suffering

Introduction:

    Does God ever suffer? As we further explore the Biblical doctrine of Divine impassibility in our current series "The Doctrine of God", we will endeavor to answer this most practical question. But first, review. 

    In the two prior posts, I've written on God's unchanging emotional life, otherwise known as "The Doctrine of Divine Impassibility" (DDI). Readers who want to review those posts may look here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/12/post-28-doctrine-of-god-gods-constant.html and here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/12/post-29-doctrine-of-god-p2-introduction.html. 

    Divine impassibility is closely related to the doctrine of God's unchangeability or "immutability". In an illuminating quote, the 19th century Baptist theologian J.P. Boice summarizes God's immutability (and its related doctrine Divine impassibility) in chapter seven of his work "Abstracts of Systematic Theology",

"It (Divine immutability) is expressly taught by the Scriptures in the following as well as in other particulars. A few passages out of many are referred to in support of each."

    Boice's entire section speaks in detail of God's unchangeable nature with respect to His Divine life, nature, and will (interested readers may read the endnote at the end of today's post that features Boice's entire discussion.)1 To keep on point, I'll cite what Boice states concerning Divine impassibility. Boice continues under "point '(d)'" of His discussion....

"(d) His character is also said to be immutable, as for example his justice: Gen. 18:25; Job 8:3; Rom. 2:2; his mercy: Ex. 34:7; Deut. 4:31; Ps. 107:1; Lam. 3:22, 23; Mal. 3:6; his truth: Num. 23:19; 1 Sam. 15:29; Mic. 7:20; Rom. 3:3; 11:2, 29; 2 Tim. 2:13; Titus 1:2; his holiness: Job 34:10; Hab. 1:13; James 1:13; and his knowledge: Isa. 40:13, 14, 27, 28."  

    The reader will note I underlined J.P. Boice's mention of God's mercy and justice as emotional, impassible attributes in his discussion of Divine immutability. For here we will focus mainly on God's mercy and justice (with passing comments about God's love) as we make our way to the question about God's suffering. 

The unchanging mercy, justice, and love of God.

    These two attributes, along with God's love, are found at the cross. They also involve God's divine work and action in how brought about creation and redemption through the Son. The issue of Divine impassibility, suffering, mercy, and justice attempt to deal with whether a Divinely passible deity or the impassible God of Scripture is superior. 

Why a Divinely impassible God is superior to a passible deity when it comes to mercy, justice, and love.

    Divine mercy and justice are but a sample of God's emotional perfections. With God's unchanging justice, we have the expression of Divine wrath. Put another way, God always hates sin. In His omniscience, God always knew the Fall of Adam and Eve would occur. God's eternal justice would demand the punishment of the sin brought forth in history by the Fall. God as Trinity had eternally preplanned the cross as a consequence of the love of the Father for the Son in giving to Him redeemed sinners from the mass of fallen humanity (Acts 2:23-24; 4:27-28; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2). The choice to send the Son to become incarnate was a consequence of the Father's unchanging, impassible mercy, shared with the Son and Spirit.

    Like mercy, God's justice has forever operated unvarying. God has always hated sin, since He knew it would begin in our world, and since it is opposite of His holy character. If God were passible, He would require provocation from something outside of Himself to act just. Also too, He would require something outside of Himself to convince Him to act mercifully. Consequently, the ground of redemption would no longer be the Triune Creator, but the creation (see Ephesians 1:11). This would result in a passible deity needing a "plan B" as a panic response to the Fall. As Adrian Rogers once preached, "The Trinity never has to hold an emergency session".  

    If Divine impassibility is denied, then God's justice and mercy would become potential emotions added to and subtracted from God. It would mean that at some point in eternity, God may not have had the level of opposition to sin He has now. If we deny God's Divine impassibility, and rather affirm God as "passible", then we have a God who is not constantly, immutably just, which is contrary to the Biblical revelation of the always just God (See Genesis 18:25; Psalm 89:14; Romans 3:26).

    The same problems plague a passible view of God's mercy. In Scripture, God's mercy is what issues from His very nature. We've argued in a prior post of God being by nature eternally merciful here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/12/post-27-doctrine-of-god-p2-gods.html. 

    God's mercy is extended to whomever He pleases (Romans 9:14-15). How does affirming Divine impassibility reveal that God's mercy is superior to us who are passible creatures? If God were a passible God, He would only show His mercy when moved upon by His creatures or their dire need. Whereas a constantly merciful God is always ready to show mercy upon those who undergo moral and spiritual humility as a consequence of contact and response to His Divine activity in their lives.

A God that could suffer by nature ends up being far less emotionally connected to our sufferings.

    To deny Divine impassibility makes for a deity that may had been indifferent to the plight of creatures whom He knew about in His natural knowledge of all possible histories, as well as our actual world known from His decree to create it. This surprising observation shows that contrary to those opposing Divine impassibility, it is the denial of the doctrine that makes for a lesser, emotionally connected God!

    When we look at what it means to suffer, the term "suffer" derives from the Latin verb "patior", whence our words "patient" and "passion". To suffer involves something happening to me for which I did not anticipate, have control, nor the emotional resources to react. 

    As passible creatures, we in this world undergo various forms of suffering (emotional, psychological, spiritual, and physical). This is why we can have "bad days". Bad days happen to passible, emotionally unprepared, and varying creatures such as ourselves.

    The Divinely impassible God of the Bible, on the otherhand, is always merciful, since mercy flows from the kind of God that He is (see Exodus 34:6; Lamentations 3:23-27; Romans 5:6; Titus 3:5-6). 

    Contrary to what many claim, the doctrine of Divine impassibility (DDI) does not weaken, but instead strengthens one's understanding of God's revelation of attributes such as mercy. For God, there is never such thing as a "bad day", since He is ever involved and ever knowing, always expressing the whole range of Divine emotions. 

    This is why God always has the appropriate emotion on hand to befit people and their situations. God is always "in-tune" with my sorrows, pain, and despair, since His eternal, emotional attributes are included in His omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence (see Psalm 139). 

Closing thought for today

    Divine impassibility affirms emotional excellence in God, meaning God doesn't just have mercy and justice, He is such by nature (See for instance Exodus 34:6; Psalm 136; 1 John 4:8,16). To say "God does not suffer" means His mercy, justice, love, and other emotions are not "put upon" or "made to respond", but instead are constant, always ongoing expressions. God's emotions flow from the kind of God He is. I close with a quote from author Barry Cooper commenting on Divine impassibility from a Ligonier podcast here https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts/simply-put/impassibility#:~:text=Impassibility%20is%20the%20notion%20that%20God%20does%20not,inevitably%20from%20the%20fact%20that%20God%20is%20unchangeable.

"the fact that God cannot suffer or be swept away by changing passions means that He is able to rescue us."

    In the next post of this series, I'll deal with how Divine impassibility (Divinely constant emotions) and human passibility (human varying emotions) operated in the two natures of the incarnate Son of God when He went to the cross. 

Endnote:

1. "(a) They declare him to be unchangeable in duration and life: Gen. 21:33; Deut. 32:39, 40; Ps. 9:7; 55:19; 90:2; 102:12; Hab. 1:12; Rom. 16:26; 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:16.

(b) They affirm the unchangeableness of his nature: Ps. 104:31; Mal. 3:6; Rom. 1:23; James 1:17.

(c) They also assert that his will is without change: Job 23:13; Ps. 33:11; Prov. 19:21."

    

Post #29 The Doctrine of God - P2 An Introduction To Divine Impassibility (God's Constant, Unchanging Emotional Life): How Divine Impassibility Is Related To His Immutability

 

Introduction:

    In our last post for this series we introduced readers to the doctrine of Divine impassibility (DDI) here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/12/post-28-doctrine-of-god-gods-constant.html. When we talk of this attribute, theologian J.I. Packer helps us out,

"What was it supposed to mean? The historical answer is: Not impassivity, unconcern, and impersonal detachment in the face of the creation. Not inability or unwillingness to empathize with human pain and grief, either. It means simply that God’s experiences do not come upon him as ours come upon us." 

Packer then writes,

"His are foreknown, willed, and chosen by himself, and are not involuntary surprises forced on him from outside, apart from his own decision, in the way that ours regularly are."

    The reader will note that J.I.Packer alludes to the relationship between DDI (Doctrine of Divine Impassibility) and the question of whether or not God suffers along with us. I'll touch upon that particular issue in the next post. 

    What we will note from Packer's observations is how God is "not surprised" nor "caught off guard". In the previous post of this series, we noted how human beings as "passive" agents in the emotional sense have the potential to be affected and changed emotionally from the outside. 

    To put it colloquially, we are an "up-and-down" folk. God, on the other hand, is constant in His emotional life. For God, there is no such thing as a "bad day", since within His own being and eternal blessed existence, He knows all things that happen because of His decree. In such a decree, God's intuitive awareness of all there is and all there will be includes a constant, steady, appropriate emotional state. By not having "ups and downs" and not being "affected", this makes God's Divine impassibility a superior emotional-life, since we can trust that whatever happens in our world, our God always knows the appropriate response - since such emotional expressions are rooted in His goodness, Sovereignty, and wisdom. 

    In today's post, we want to understand how DDI is closely related to another doctrine which I've written about in this series - Divine immutability here http://www.growingchristianresources.com/2023/08/post-10-doctrine-of-god-gods-attribute.html.  

God's unchangeability and His emotional impassibility

    God is unchanging in His being and attributes, which means He can never get better nor get worse. The Westminster Confession of Faith in its Article 2: "Of God and the Holy Trinity", paragraph 1, gives a summary definition of God with a list of attributes. The reader can note how God's Divine impassibility is listed next to Divine immutability,

"There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute, working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will, for his own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him; and withal most just and terrible in his judgments; hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty."

    Scriptures such as Malachi 3:6 and Hebrews 1:8-11 talk about Divine unchangeableness or immutability. It would seem that in the Malachi 3:6 passage, God's impassible or eternal love for His chosen people (Deuteronomy 7:7-8), Israel, whom He foreknew (Amos 3:3-4), was why He never "consumed them" as an outworking of His unchangeable character. Since it is the case that God does not change His nature and attributes, it follows that He would not vary when it comes to His emotional life. 

    Author Barry Cooper in the December 2021 issue of Ligonier "Tabletalk Magazine" notes on this very point,

"If you think about it, God’s impassibility flows inevitably from the fact that God is unchangeable. An unchanging God cannot, by definition, have passions, which in the technical language of theology are emotional states that can be affected or changed by external forces."

    We dealt in the last post with a few Scriptures that affirm the Biblical reality of Divine impassibility. It is important to bring out this point further, Why? Two reasons. 

    First, if it can be shown that God internally changes when acted upon by His creation, then DDI would lose its claim as a Biblical doctrine. 

    Secondly, we must understand how the Bible talks about God to see how the doctrines of Divine immutability and impassibility accurately express the Biblical doctrine of God. 

Clarifying the Biblical language of God changing His emotions

 

   Some people will claim that God changes His being and His emotions by noting the passages that describe God as "relenting" or "changing His mind". The conclusion typically drawn is that such a God does change. As the argument goes, since God changes, then He alters His emotions too. Consequently, as the argument would follow, DDI is an unbiblical doctrine. 

    My response to this is to note that often, such objections to DDI stem from unclear definitions of DDI (which I have attempted to clarify in the last post and at the beginning of this one). 

    Secondly, DDI has ample proof from Scripture when we note how the Bible uses two ways of talking about God. It is to this point I'll turn our attention.

So what does the Bible mean when it says "God changed His mind", even though it elsewhere describes God as unchanging?

1. Scripture does present God as unchanging in terms of His being while using figurative language when expressing His "changing His mind".

     Scripture says that on several occasions (for instance in the book of Jonah), that Jonah is talking to God in chapter three of His prophecy. Jonah said something to the effect: "I knew that you were a God who would change your mind".  Jonah had been told by God to proclaim throughout the city of Nineveh in three days God was going to judge them. Then, the King of Nineveh decreed a time of repentance where everyone was to dress in sackcloth and sit on ashes (a customary ancient form of mourning) and cry out to God for repentance. 

    Jonah notes in Jonah 4:1-2 that God changed His mind.  So, some people have asked: "well, how can that be the case?" We read, for instance, in Numbers 23:19 

"God is not a man that he should change his mind nor son of man that he should repent". 

      Yet, there in the book of Jonah, we see God changing his mind.  Although God is by nature unchanging, we see instances in scripture where we see him described as changing his mind that is referring to God from the standpoint of the creatures. What is going on then? 

2. God, in Scripture, uses two different methods of expressing His nature and identity.

      Scripture talks of God in two ways. There are those verses that speaks of God as He is in and of Himself - namely, He's unchanging. Then, there are those verses in which God adapts the revelation of Himself in forms of figurative language to bridge understanding to His people (older writers liken this to a parent speaking baby-talk to their child).

      As to the first sort of way scripture refers to God, we turn to James 1:17, which says - 

"every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father of heavenly lights with whom there is no variation nor shifting of shadow." 

      So, with respect to God from God's perspective, there is no change within Him. His emotions are constant. They are "always-on", so-to-speak. God's emotional life is unvarying. Romans 2:4 says this: 

"do you think lightly of the riches of his kindness and tolerance and patience, knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance". 

      So, we understand that it is God's intention to change people and to change their lives. So whenever we read in scripture those places where God is described as "changing his mind", that is, figurative language used in scripture to ascribe changeable human-like emotions to God (called "anthropopathism", or "human-like emotions"). God does this in revealing Himself  by adapting the revelation of Himself to people so that they can relate to Him. 

       The author A.W. Tozer puts it this way, more-or-less:

"that whenever we read of God changing his mind that means there's been a change in the moral situation of the person. So, for example, a person who perhaps all their lives was in rebellion against God and opposition against God hears the Gospel. The Spirit of God does His work in them and now they're responding by faith to Jesus Christ. What has taken place? Has there been a change in God? No. God's always angry at sin and He hates it. God is always gracious and merciful towards those who repent. So what's changed? It's not God. Instead, its the person that's changed." 

3. God has an emotional-life without the frailties and sin we typically have because of what kind of God He is by nature. 

     Sometimes I have been asked: how is it that God can have an emotional life and yet we have emotions? First of all, we've been made in the image of God.  We read in Genesis 1:26 where God says: "Let Us make man in our image in our likeness." 

    And so when God made human beings, He included in His design of human beings that they were to have emotions. Moreover, they were to have a creaturely emotions that were expressive of their Creator.  Of course, when man fell into sin, that meant that the entire nature of man's being (emotionally, psychologically, intellectually) was affected by sin. 

    We as human beings have "passible" emotions, subject to change. As sinful creatures, those changeable emotions are tainted by sin. Although God has communicated emotions to us, His image bearers, the one feature He did not communicate is that trait of "impassibility". 

    Thus, God's emotional life derives from within Himself. He as a Holy God cannot sin, nor can He even look at it (Habakkuk 1:13). Therefore, God's impassible emotional life means He is always joyful about what is good, since He is good. He always approves what is holy, since He is holy. He always hates what is sinful, since He is not sinful. God's emotions flow from the kind of God He is, unchanging, constant, without beginning and without end. This gets us to the heart of what we are talking about in regards to the doctrine of Divine impassibility (DDI). 

Closing thoughts

        So, emotions in of themselves are not sinful.  Rather, they are expressed in connection with the nature of the one that expresses them. For God, God has emotions that are expressed without sin because He is God, that by nature, cannot sin (see Habakkuk 1:13; Titus 1:2; James 1:17; 1 John 1:5-7).  

    We express emotions and they are subject to change. We respond to the changes of circumstances.  Just because God has emotions, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are sinful. As a final thought, Scripture certainly bears out that God has an emotional life, even though it is different from our own."

    

    In our next post we will deal with the question of whether God suffers, and how Christ in His two natures can aid us in seeing the importance of affirming the doctrine of Divine impassibility.