Mucky Declarations

(modified from a post of mine on TheologyWeb some months ago)

The Open View Theist would wish to draw out a conclusion as follows:

That which is perfect cannot change, for if it does, it either changes for the better (thus making it imperfect to begin with) or for the worse (removing itself from its former place of perfection). From this, it is proposed that either A) God is unchanging in any way (i.e., inactive, uninvolved, and unemotional), or B) immutability is false, and that perfection and change are not inextricably bound together. This second option leads perfectly to 'the god who risks.'

The flaw with this argument is that the OVTist fails to recognize the senses in which orthodoxy (and scripture) claims God is immutable. We see a God throughout scripture that lives, moves, and interacts with his creation, one that humbled himself in taking on human form (certainly a change of sorts), as well as one that rejoices and grieves. What are we to make of these things in light of a doctrine of immutability?

First and foremost, we must recognize that God is the very definition of perfection. He is the I AM, and is subject to no supra-divine moral code. To speak of a greater or lesser perfection is simply nonsensical; for it is only by him any perfection may be measured.

The key to the discussion of impassibility and immutability is a precise definition of the sense in which these attributes exist in the divine realm. How is God immutable? We see from scripture that God is unchanging in his being, his glory, his blessedness, his purposes and counsels, and his covenant and love towards his people. All of these particulars are elaborated upon in Robert Shaw's exposition of the Westminster Confession of Faith. His elaboration on immutability is finished by saying “When, therefore, we read in Scripture of God's repenting, we must understand such language of an alteration of the outward dispensations of his providence. We are by no means to attribute to him any change of mind; for, in this respect, it is impossible for God to change. "He is in one mind, and who can turn him?"–Job xxiii. 13.”

With respect to God’s constancy of nature, we should indeed even expect God to act and react in certain ways. God clearly is always pleased by and rewards righteousness, and is displeased by and punishes sinfulness. We can see then, that God will have reactions towards the actions of his creation. How does this play in with the doctrine of divine impassibility? If we consider in conjunction with this the doctrine of predestination, as reformed theology does, we know that all events throughout history were ordained by God to happen. He has written the end from the beginning. So, in contrast to human emotions which are variable based on dozens of external stimuli, we see that God’s reactions to his creation are indeed initiated by himself through his creative decree. Any emotional response that we would attribute to God is one that he himself divinely initiated and subjected himself to. In a particular instance, God foreordained Christ’s sacrifice (the lamb slain from the foundation of the world), knowing that this event would be grevious to him. He did, however, have a plan behind this event, namely the salvation of his people. The same concept can be shown of any event in human history that scripture shows God taking pleasure or greiving over.

We should not then think that God must be devoid of any emotion, but simply that he is not subject to the manipulation of his creation. By necessary consequence of his immutable nature and eternal decree, we can know that God does indeed have affections towards these creation, but we must not be deceived into thinking that these affections are not in fact chosen by the creator himself. In the same way that a father teaches a child a lesson through some sort of discomfort, knowing that he will be grieved by the discomfort of the child, but that the end result will be a greater good, so does God subject himself to grief and pleasure over his creation. For a good reformed treatment of divine impassibility, see The God Without Mood Swings (Copyright © 2000 by Phillip R. Johnson. All rights reserved. This article is excerpted from Bound only Once, edited by Douglas Wilson, published by Canon Press.).

Monergism, which has long been known as a treasury of reformed scholarship, has an entire page dedicated to God’s attributes. Additional articles can be found elsewhere elucidating the reformed position on these matters.

# posted by Sir Omer : 11/12/2006 09:54:00 AM