May 5, 2013 | Jonah 3:1-10 - Some Things Never Change: Divine Stubbornness & Why Grace is Unconditional

Here is part four of five of our sermon series on the wonderful Book of Jonah.

Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the second time, saying, ² “Arise, go to Nineveh the great city and proclaim to it the proclamation which I am going to tell you.” ³ So Jonah arose and went to Nineveh according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceedingly great city, a three days’ walk. ⁴ Then Jonah began to go through the city one day’s walk; and he cried out and said, “Yet forty days and Nineveh will be overthrown.”
 
⁵ Then the people of Nineveh believed in God; and they called a fast and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least of them. ⁶ When the word reached the king of Nineveh, he arose from his throne, laid aside his robe from him, covered himself with sackcloth and sat on the ashes. ⁷ He issued a proclamation and it said, “In Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let man, beast, herd, or flock taste a thing. Do not let them eat or drink water. ⁸ But both man and beast must be covered with sackcloth; and let men call on God earnestly that each may turn from his wicked way and from the violence which is in his hands. ⁹ Who knows, God may turn and relent and withdraw His burning anger so that we will not perish.”

¹⁰ When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it.




Audio
Notes


April 7, 2013 | Jonah 1:1-3 - You Can Run But Not Hide: Why That is Really Good News
April 14, 2013 | Jonah 1:4-17 - Grace Goes Both Ways You Know: Why that is Really Really Good News
April 21, 2013 | Jonah 2:1-10 - Salvation is From the Lord: Why I Stand Amazed  & Not Condemned
May 5, 2013 | Jonah 3:1-10 - Some Things Never Change: Divine Stubbornness & Why Grace is Unconditional


For more:
How Are We to Understand Jonah: As Historical?
How Are We to Understand Jonah: As Midrash?
How Are We to Understand Jonah: As Allegorical?
Holman Dictionary on Jonah
Bibledex on Jonah
VeggieTales and Jonah 
Man Swallowed By Hippo & Lived to Tell About It

October 31, 2010 - God is Immutable

Here is the audio and notes from yesterday's message.  I believe the Doctrine of Divine Immutability is one of the most important, yet neglect, doctrines in the Church today.  As I have laid out in previous occasions, liberalism and most heresies essentially reject Immutability as movements like the Emergent Church show.  Nonetheless, as we discussed yesterday, if God is Immutable than we have assurance.  Let us live under the umbrella of that assurance.



Audio
Notes


For more:
Tozer on Immutability  
The Immutability of God Series 
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Practical Implications (Part 5) 
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Implications (Part 6)
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs 

Tozer on Immutability

This Sunday we will be discussing the Doctrine of Divine Immutability which says that God does not change.  I consider this to be a very important doctrine and is too often neglected by Christians.  I believe that liberalism, at its core, is a rejection of God's immutability.  If God changes, then so does doctrine, truth, and salvation itself.

Nonetheless, I want you to consider what A. W. Tozer had to say on the subject in his book The knowledge of the holy: The attributes of God: their meaning in the Christian life.  Tozer not only provides the Biblical basis for God's immutability but also shows how this doctrine applies to us today. 

First, the doctrine of immutability is centered on God's perfection.  If God is perfect, then He must be immutable.

To say that God is immutable is to say that He never differs from Himself . . . For a moral being to change it would be necessary that the change be in one of three directions.  He must go from better or worse or from worse to better; or, granted that the moral quality remain stable, he must change within himself, as from immature to mature or from one order of being to another.  It should be clear that God can move in none of these directions.  His perfections forever rule out any such possibility . . .  God cannot change for the better . . . Neither can God change for the worse. -55

Tozer is right and the connection cannot be missed.  To change implies either something is not perfect or that it is no longer perfect.  An undefeated, perfect team can only change for the worse.  A winless, imperfect team can only change for the better.  Either way, change implies imperfection.  Therefore, if God is perfect, then He must be immutable.  Perfect is itself immutable.

Regarding the Doctrine of Divine Immutability's practical implications, Tozer wrote:





What peace it brings to the Christian’s heart to realize that our heavenly Father never differs from Himself.  In coming to Him at any time we need not wonder whether we shall find Him n a receptive mood.  He is always receptive to misery and need, as well as to love and faith.  He does not keep office hours nor set aside periods when He will see no one.  Neither does He change His mind about anything.  Today, this moment, He feels toward His creatures, toward babies, toward the sick, the fallen, the sinful, exactly as He did when He sent His only-begotten Son into the world to die for mankind.
 
God never changes moods or cools off in His affections or loses enthusiasm.  Is attitude toward sin is now the same as it was when He drove out the sinful man from the eastward garden, and His attitude toward the sinner the same as when He stretched forth His hands and cried, ‘Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.’
 
God will not compromise and He need not be coaxed.  He cannot be persuaded to alter His Word nor talked into answering selfish prayer.  In all our efforts to find God, to please Him, to commune with Him, we should remember that all change must be on our part.  ‘I am the Lord, I change not.’  We have but to meet His clearly stated terms, bring our lives into accord with His revealed will, and His infinite power will become instantly operative toward us in the manner set forth through the gospel in the Scriptures of truth. -59-60


For more:
The Immutability of God Series 
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Practical Implications (Part 5) 
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Implications (Part 6)
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs 

The Immutability of God Series

This Sunday we will be looking at the Doctrine of Divine Immutability which says that God does not change.  I have written a lot on the subject and want to pass along the links of some of what I have written in the past.  I have given a message on the subject and turned it into a series of posts.

Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Practical Implications (Part 5) 
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Implications (Part 6)


For more:
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs 

Repost: The Immutability of God: Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Applications

We have finally come to our final post and look at the theological subject of God's Immutability.  We've discussed its importance, its biblical foundation, biblical challenges, and various theological challenges, and now we must discuss its application.  Since all theology is practical, we have not done our job until we have applied our theology.  Theology was meant to be practiced and the doctrine of immutability applies directly to our lives.

This is a vital point that deserves much attention.  Many consider the study of theology to be a hobby for those who live in ivory towers or for geeks who have too much time on their hands.  I believe that part of the reason the Church is anemic is because we have failed to see the connection between theology and practice.  This is why we see many self-help and Christian living books at the local Christian book store while the theology books are somewhere in the back.  I want us to see that instead of simply looking to see what the Bible says about our sex lives or how to balance our checkbook, let us take the time to dig deeper into Scriptures theological truths and then see how they apply.

So in what ways is the doctrine of the Immutability of God applicable to me?  First, if God is immutable (and thus does not change), then His words, declarations, truths, and revelations are eternal.  This means that Scripture remains applicable for today.

In a world of news cycles, it is tempting to see God's Word revealed in Scripture to be only temporarily.  To do so turns the Bible into a fable or at the very least a document that is out of touch with our society.  Unfortanetly many (even among Christians) hold to this view.  For example, some would argue that due to recent scientific and historical evidences, portions of the Bible are outdated and irrelevant to today.  They knew nothing of microscopes, nuclear weapons, sexual orientation, or evolution.  To think that shepherds, farmers, ancient kings, desert prophets, fishermen, local-eating baptizers, or amateurish historians is relevent to today is simply foolish.

But if Scripture is God's Word and God Himself is immutable then the Bible is transcendent.  The message and meaning (not to mention application) of Scripture is not limited to age, time, or culture.  Since God does not change and does not contradict Himself, then what was morally wrong in the past remains so today.

What we really have here is a revelation of our true motivations.  The reason we wish to write the Bible off as out of touch is in order to justify our immorality and impurity.  Just as atheism is oftentimes a strong motive for vice, so too relegating the Bible to ancient literature and nothing more is a strong motive to ignore its moral implications.  If the Bible is not relevant, then neither is the gospel or the "thou shall nots."  But, as we have established, if God is immutable then we are accountable to what He has revealed.  Jesus was right when he said, "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.  For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed" (John 3:19-20). Our desire to remain in darkness (thus veiled) remains strong.

Secondly, if God is immutable then His promises are certain and we can have assurance of our salvation.  One of the unfortunate theological debates that Christians have had (and continue to have) throughout history is the debate over the assurance of salvation.  The question is this:  if a person gets "saved" and then lives in sin, can or do they lose their salvation?

The question really misses the point of salvation.  For one, salvation is by grace through faith alone apart from our works.  Therefore, if works had nothing to do with our salvation in the first place then how can it rob us of our salvation after we've been redeemed?  This is no excuse for immorality (as many claim).  Instead, those who do fall away clearly never understood the gospel in the first place.  The problem here isn't assurance, then problem is with cheap grace.

But apply immutability to this issue.  If God had declared one justified will He then change His mind?  To suggest that one can lose their salvation either suggests that they gained in the first place (which is blasphemy) or that God changes His mind with the wind (which is theologically unfounded and contradictory of Scripture).  The argument in favor of assurance begins and (should) ends with God's immutability.  When God declares something He does not go back on His Word.  If Scripture is eternal, then so is our salvation.  Since it is God who declares us righteous, then only God can declare otherwise after the fact and since God does not change, neither will our standing before Him.

This means that we can have full assurance that though we make mistakes we are still in the arms of God.  Again, this is no license to sin and we must always be asking ourselves if we are truly redeemed and checking to see if we bear the fruits of redemption.  But for those who are justified by God will always be justified by God.

Thirdly, and very importantly, if God is immutable then the gospel is transcendent.  Virtually every major liberal attack on orthodox doctrine is a fundamental attack on the immutability of God and the transcendence of the gospel.  If God is immutable then His gospel has to be transcendent and not limited or redefined because of changes in culture, language, nations, or technology.  The same message that saved the sinners at Pentecost continues to save us today.  The cross and resurrection of Christ remains the fundamental message of Christianity and the gospel itself today.  For more on this subject, read my previous article and/or listen to a sermon I gave on the subject.

Any attempt to change the gospel or to update it for the 21st Century (which seems to be the goal of any and every heresy these days) is at its core a fundamental attack on the immutability of God. 

Finally, if God is immutable then the future is certain and we have no reason to fear.  Here we see God's Immutability connected with His Sovereignty and Providence.  Since God has already written the future, then we can be certain that His glorious plan will be fulfilled.  We will be redeemed.  Sin will be judged.  Righteousness will be rewarded.  We will be resurrected.  Justice will reign forth.  Since and injustice will end.  The effects of the Fall will be conquered and be no more.  Violence will cease.  The promises made to Israel will be fulfilled.  Satan will finally and forever overthrown.  And we will dwell in the house of the Lord forever (Psalm 23:6).

This means that when I turn on the news, though I might be disheartened, I need not be afraid.  I know how the story ends. I need not be surprised by the events around me.  I need not fear that all is lost and there is no hope.  I am confident that God is still in control and knows what He is doing.  Whether it be the smallest of concerns to the greatest of unforeseen tragedies, we can have confidence that God is in control and we can rest at night.  God's soveriegnty and providence can only be possible if He is immutable.  God wins.

These are only just a few (and a drop in a bucket) of applications one can make from this wonderful doctrine.  I believe it is time for Christians to take it more seriously.  If God is Immutable then when have real hope, real joy, real contentment, real peace.  If Christians would become more willing to think through these issues and study the attribute of God we will be much better off than we are today.

In conclusion, I am reminded of a brief conversation Carl FH Henry had with Karl Barth.  The story goes that Henry was being introduced at an event for Barth as the editor of Christianity Today.  At that announcement Barth declared, "You mean, Christianity Yesterday!"  Without hesitation or thought Henry replied, "Christianity, Yesterday, Today, and Forever!"

Let us have confidence and let us boldly proclaim not just the Christianity of yesterday, today, and forever, but also the God and His Son Jesus Christ yesterday, today, and forever.



For more:
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Practical Implications (Part 5) 
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs 

Repost - The Immutability of god: Its Truth and Relevancy - The Challenge of McLaren and Process Theology

In recent weeks, we have discussed in some detail the important (and often ignored) doctrine of God's Immutability.  We have established its importance, its Biblical foundation, a number of Scriptural challenges, a recent rejection (in Tony Jones, but more could be give), and now we turn to perhaps the most prominent theological movement that stands in contrast to this wonderful doctrine, namely Process Theology and Open Theism.

Process Theology argues that God is always changing, or progressing.  Open Theism is primarily concerned with getting God off the hook over theodicy (or the problem of evil).  If God is good then why is there so much evil, suffering, war, injustice, poverty, and death in the world?  Both beliefs argue that since the world is always changing (and evolving), then so does God.  God is always changing, adapting, and progressing.  He is not yet what He will one day be.  The God of yesterday is not the same God of today.

Another common thread that is important here regards human free will.  It is believed (similarly to Pelagianism) that God does not mess with human free will.  Such a belief ultimately challenges God's sovereignty (and even His personal relationship with His creation).  If God is Sovereign, then He is intimate, personal, and in control.  If humans are completely free (especially in the Pelagian school of thought), then God is more distant and sort of spectator watching (and progressing with us) His creation.

As one can see, such a theology flies in the face of God's Immutability and the clear teaching of Scripture.  To adopt progressive theology and/or open theism is to reject the immutability of God.  One cannot hold to either of these theologies and still affirm that God does not change.

But instead of tracing the thought out more, I want to focus on a particular theologian whose recent writings sound eerily similar to Process Theology and Open Theism.  That man is Brian McLaren who has become one of the main faces of the Emergent Church Movement.  Though McLaren, as far as I have been able to tell, has never defended either of these theologies outright or spoken of God as evolving, He has comes close.

In his latest book, A New Kind of Christianity Brian McLaren  suggests that the Bible itself tells of an evolution.  What we are witnessing in the Bible is a conversation among characters and writers on their undestanding of God.  In the Old Testament, God is possessive, nationalistic, and even angry, but in the New Testament God is less racial and more loving.  It isn't necessarily that God has changed, but the conversation about God has changed.

In his book McLaren writes that our ancestor’s images and understanding of God continually changed, evolved, and matured over the centuries. God, it seemed, kept initiating this evolution (99).  McLaren is not directly implying that God evolves with history and human culture, but that instead of God directly revealing Himself to the Biblical authors, the authors are actually conversing among themselves. Therefore, in the Bible, the image we get of God is always evolving.

The problem with this view should immediately be apparent.  What do you do with a book like Job in which God is a major narrative-bending character in the story.  In response, McLaren suggests that God in the Bible is not the real God, but another character.  To understand Him as the real God is to lean towards the abuse of interpreting the Bible literally.  God doesn't order entire nations to be wiped out.  God doesn't favor one race or people over others.  God doesn't murder rebellious children and husbands who sleep with their wives while on their menstrual period. Therefore, when such atrocities are committed, it isn't that God Himself commands such things to happen (because God is not violent), rather during the evolution of ancient man's understanding of God they wrote a character named God and put Him into the story.

How convienant!

So in the case of Job, God is only a character reflecting the authors understanding of God.  But that understanding of God has evolved over time. 

If one were to read the Bible all the way through, McLaren would argue, the character, will, and actions of God evolve.  For example, the image of God moves from violent, retaliatory, given to favoritism, and careless of human life in the OT to loving justice, kindness, reconciliation, and peace in the NT.  He goes on to say that over time, the image of God that predominates is gentle rather than cruel, compassionate rather than violent, fair to all rather than biased toward some, forgiving rather than retaliatory.

So what do you do with Jesus?  McLaren argues that Jesus isn’t God per se, but only like God bringing us to a new evolutionary level in our understanding of God (114).  He adds:

The historic Christian doctrine of the divinity of Christ does not simply mean that Jesus is like God. It is far more radical than that. It means that God is like Jesus . . . [this insight] is an unspeakably precious gift that can be offered to people of all faiths. The character of Jesus…provides humanity with a unique and indispensable guide for tracing the development of maturing images and concepts of God across human history and culture. [The character of Jesus] is the North Star…to all people, whatever their religious background. The images of God that most resemble Jesus, whether they originate in the Bible or elsewhere, are the more mature and complete images. -114

In other words, Jesus is just another part (though the climax) of man's evolutionary understanding of God.  Jesus is like God, but not (in the literal sense) God.  God is a character in the Bible and Jesus wears the costume the best.  McLaren sees in Jesus the ultimate and closest thing to the character of God being lived out in this world.  If one wants to be like God, then we ought to look at the example of Christ.

So what McLaren offers isn't process theology or open theology in the strictest sense, but he certainly raises an interpretation similar to that and is equally dangerous.  The theological challenges this brings forth are numerous.  To begin, if the Bible is nothing more than a conversation about God rather than direct revelation from God, then we still do not know who God is or what He expects of us. In other words, everything we know about God is an educated guess.

This is postmodernism at its best.  Turning the Bible into a conversation allows me, based on my experience and preconceived adulterated assumptions, to pick and choose the aspects I want to believe and to fashion God in any image I want.  If I want God to be love, then I will find such a God in the biblical conversation.  Or if I want to turn God into a postmodern, enlightened deity, then I will see the Bible as an ancient book in where religious people from all walks of life tried their best to understand God but fell far too short as all of us do.  At this point I am free to emphasize God's unworkability without any effort on my part to try to understand Him in any way.

This means that if we don’t know who God is, then we do not know what He demands.  And if we do not know what He commands of us, then we are not responsible for actions.  This is the wholesale rejection of God's holiness, righteousness, jealousy, and wrath.  After all, such concepts in the Bible were just part of a conversation, not real revelation about who God really is. Likewise, if the Bible is simply a conversation then we do not know the gospel by which we can be saved.  Therefore, what is our message?  Finally, all Biblical doctrines are abstract truths that we cannot be certain making the church a collection of seekers of mystery instead of a place for those seeking the truth since the truth cannot be known.

 Though McLaren would likely reject some of these points, it is the logical conclusion of his theology.  McLaren wants his readers to follow the example of Christ, but why bother since even Christ (though came close) was nothing more than an imposter.  If Christ is not God, then how does one live in the manner of God?

This theology fundamentally undermines the biblical doctrine of sin.  In this understanding of Scripture, sin is not necessary sin because God never directly revealed what is sin and what isn’t. Since God is only a character in the biblical narrative, then we can never take that characters word for truth.  Just because that manifestation of the character of God condemned adultery, homosexuality, murder, and violence does not necessarily mean that they are actually sins.  Again, McLaren would reject such an understanding (though he is OK with homosexuality, but not with injustice and violence), but apart from personal beliefs, where in the Bible can we turn to for truths if it is only a conversation instead of direct and divine revelation?  How do I know what is right and wrong unless I turn to some relativistic, experiential, un-transcendent message.  In other words, truth and morality is the by-product of human imagination instead of revelation if the Bible is nothing more than a conversation.

McLaren and others in the Emergent conversation would add that moral truths (and even theological truths) are determined through community and conversation among equals that unite racial, gender, national, and age boundaries.  Until we hear from every walk of life, we cannot have any certainty, but since truth is never anchored, what is true today will not necessarily be true tomorrow.  This means that by their acts McLaren clearly rejects God's immutability (and he has said so elsewhere).  If God is immutable, then His Word and its message is immutable, and any communities' conclusion about truth or morality is irrelevant because God has spoken.




Clearly modern theologian are assaulting this fundamental truth of Scripture.  God is immutable and has declared so in His Word.  Though we may jump through hoops, we cannot miss the reality that God does not change and we are thus accountable for His standards and definitions of truth and morality.  By fundamentally rejecting the immutability of God, theologians like McLaren have rejected the gospel of Jesus Christ. 


Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs
Theology - A Fad Within a Movement:   What is the Emerging Church and Where is it Going?
Reviews - "A New Kind of Christianity"  

Repost: The Immutability of God: Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundations

What is the biblical foundation in favor of the Immutability of God?  Study any sound theological book and you will find catalogs of texts that point us to this wonderful doctrine.  As always, anytime we are doing theology, we must watch out for many pitfalls.  One of those pitfalls is to isolate texts out of context.  In order to avoid doing that, each of the following verses will have the context explained in order to bring to light its implications and why the author found it necessary to discuss God's Immutability.

Numbers 23:19-21 – God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it. Behold, I received a command to bless: he has blessed, and I cannot revoke it.  He has not beheld misfortune in Jacob, nor has he seen trouble in Israel. The LORD their God is with them, and the shout of a king is among them.

The context here is Balaam and the crazy story that surrounds him.  At this point, God has commanded Balaam to deliver a message to Balak and this is the message.  What a fascinating way to begin.  God essentially defines Himself in this direct revelation.  The first thing that God tells Balak:  I am immutable and I do not change.  That should get our attention!  This means that what God says, He does.  God cannot and does not lie and therefore no matter how hard we might try, we cannot and will not change God.  The LORD is the God of Israel and this will not change.


Psalm 102:25-27 – of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away, but you are the same, and your years have no end.

In this Psalm, the writer is pouring heart out to God like so many of the other Psalms.  He is leaning on God's Sovereignty and Justice.  Near the end of this Psalm, the writer writes these words boldly proclaiming the immutability of God.  Or maybe that's not the best way of putting it.  Instead of simply laying out a dry fact about God, the writer is leaning on this doctrine.  This is what makes this passage so fascinating and why the poetry is so powerful.

What the Psalmist is doing is trying to find a rock in which to stand on.  Did you notice the language?  A rock in which to stand on.  Even today we use language of nature to speak of foundations that cannot be shaken or changed but the Psalmist disagrees.  In his pursuit of certainty and hope he points out that though we oftentimes see the earth itself as unchanging, it is in fact not.  The earth moves, changes, and goes through seasons.  The writer is not looking for something like this.  Such "rocks" are not what he is looking for.

This is fascinating.  The Psalmists sets us up for the great reveal; the great Hope.  We think the things of this earth are permanent, but they aren't.  They are just one more thing to add to the list of disappointment and uncertainty.  What is unshakable, unmoving, and unchanging?  God.  God remains.  God doesn't change and though the world may pass away, the Lord will remain the same.  A powerful message in the midst of sorrow.


Malachi 3:6-7a – Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner and do not fear me says the LORD of hosts. For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed. From the days of your fathers you have turned aside from my statutes and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you, says the LORD of hosts.

The context?  Judgment.  Mercy.  Is this not the message of the Bible?  God judges what is contrary to His holiness and yet at the same time offers mercy to those who repent.  This is an important passage as we'll see in future posts.  Because God is immutable, He has and will always judge sin and grant grace to the repentant.  The God that offered this message in the times of the Bible is the same God today.  If we repent, we will be given grace.  But if we remember in our sins, God's judgment remains.  And who can stand the judgment of God?

Romans 11:28-36 – As regards the gospel, they are enemies of God for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy b/c of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! ‘For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has
been his counselor?’ “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?’ For from him and through him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

What can you add to the book of Romans?  Much has been written on this book, but perhaps we would benefit greatly if we just let it speak.  The phrase that is most important here is that God's call is irrevocable.  Here we have the apostle Paul dealing with the difficult issues of Gentile and Jewish relations and ends with an amazing passage extolling the grace and mystery of God.  In the midst of that, Paul reminds us that God's calling and gifts are irrevocable.  No one can rob God.  God will not take back what He has declared.

Hebrews 13:8 – Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

The context is hard to find here outside of the purpose of the entire book.  Chapter 13 of Hebrews is a collection of applications in light of the theology laid out in the book.  Briefly, the book of Hebrews is a letter of encouragement primarily to Jewish Christians who are facing persecution due to their faith who are tempted to return to the legalistic religion of Judaism.  The writer of Hebrews seeks to prevent that.  Those this is only one verse in all 13 chapters, this verse speaks volumes and is one of the more famous verses in this book.  Here we see that Jesus Himself is immutable, not just God the Father.  This should be encouraging.  If Christ is immutable then so is the gospel.  Praise God!

James 1:17 – Ever good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.

 The context is wonderful.  James begins his letter rather strange by jumping right into the midst of the recipients troubles.  The people are suffering for the cause of Christ and are tempted to say that God is tempting them.  James is quick to warn that God doesn't tempt, rather everything that is good comes from God in whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.  Why does James point us to the immutability of God?  Because it seals up what he has just said about God.  If God does not tempt, He will never tempt.  Get that?  So whenever we read of a definitive nature of God or know about something He does or does not do, it will always be that way.  Therefore, if God grants mercy to the truly repentant, He will always do that.

CONCLUSION

Perhaps we can best summarize all of this by discussing God's perfection.  Is it to elementary to say that God is perfect?  I hope not.  I am going to assume that most readers agree that God is perfect.  Perhaps we can use language like Holy, Light, Beautiful, etc.  Either way, God is perfect.

Now if anything that is perfect changes, how does it change?  For example, if a team has a perfect record and that record changes, what does that mean?  They lost.  When something that is perfect changes, it can only change in the negative sense.  If water is perfectly pure and it changes what happened?  Its no longer perfect.  Likewise, if a perfect God changes, then how does He change?  To imperfection.

A changing God, therefore, is an imperfect God.  At the end of the day whenever we argue that God changes, evolves, or whatever, what we are really saying is that God is not perfect.  Likewise, whenever we suggest that God evolves with human culture what we are doing is lifting us up and pulling God down.  If God changes with history and culture, then we become gods or at the very least make God in our own image.  If God changes then He is not perfect.

Furthermore, if God can get better (through evolution of His character or whatever) then He is not perfect now and will likely not be perfect once He changes.  This, too, raises serious problems.

To many, an imperfect God is something that we may want.  An imperfect God can perhaps relate to us in our imperfect.  But does this really offer the hope we really want?  I want a God who is greater than I can fathom who transcends time, culture, race, epoch, and language.  I don't want a God like me.  Rather, I want to be more like God.  But if we undermine God's immutability out of convenience, then we are offering a world a God that does not offer them the help they need.  God is omnipotent and He always will be.  God is sovereign and He always will be.  God is loving and He always will be.  God is omnipresent and He always will be.  God does not change.  God is immutable.  The same God that saved Israel is still in the saving business.  The God who raised Christ will raise for Himself a Bride resurrected without any impurity to dwell in His Holy presence!


For more:
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs
Theology - A Fad Within a Movement:   What is the Emerging Church and Where is it Going? 
Theology - SBTS and McLaren:  A Response to SBTS Panel Discussion
Reviews - "Manifold Witness" by John Franke

This originally appeared on my Theology Blog.

Repost: The Immutability of God: Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction

All theology is practical.  Everyone is a theologian.  Therefore, right theology becomes the basis for right living making theology the most important topic to discuss.  Contrary to what many postmoderns want us to believe, orthodox theology is not out of date and irrelevant.

Brian McLaren has frequently referred to theology (especially systematic theology) as "freeze-dried."  He believes that theology as we know it is the remnant of modernism.  Through his protaganist Neo, McLaren describes theology as “shrunken and freeze-dried by modernity.”  Christianity, as a result is “diced through the modern Veg-o-matic.”*  Such theology is theology that has everything figured out.  Systematic Theology is particularly distasteful to the Emerging Church because it suggests that Scripture can be fully understood and put in a formula and systematized with the apparent assumption that the theologian can know God almost exhaustively.  McLaren writes:

This rebuke to arrogant intellectualizing is especially apt for modern Christians . . . These . . . [are] known popularly as systematic theologies . . . At the heart of the theological project in the late modern world was the assumption that one could and should reduce all revealed truth into propositions and organized those propositions into an outline that exhaustively contains and serves as the best vehicle for truth . . . In Christian theology, this anti-emergent thinking is expressed in systematic theologies that claim . . .  to have final orthodoxy nailed down, freeze-dried, and shrink wrapped forever.**

Instead of a freeze-dried theology that claims to have access to the complete truth, McLaren and others in the Emerging Church push for mystery, conversation, and community.  He writes:

[In the postmodern world] “Our words will seek to be servants of mystery, not removers of it as they were in the old world.  They will convey a message that is clear yet mysterious, simple yet mysterious, substantial yet mysterious.  My faith developed in the old world of many words, in a naive confidence in the power of many words, as if the mysteries of faith could be captured like fine-print conditions in a legal document and reduced to safe equations.  Mysteries, however, can not be captured so precisely.  Freeze-dried coffee, butterflies on pins, and frogs in formaldehyde all lose something in our attempts at capturing, defining, preserving, and rendering them less jumpy, flighty, or fluid.  In the new world, we will understand this a little better.”***

To McLaren, “freeze-dried” answers to life’s most difficult questions is inadequate in the “new world.”  What postmoderns need most, and what the Church must provide, are not answers to such questions as Why am I here?  Where does life come from?  Where am I going?  What is my purpose? How might I be made right with God? but rather encourage exploration without boundaries or limits.  The Church must aid the community to think and live in a world of fluid liquid, rather than formaldehyde.

So is McLaren right?  Should we characterize theology in this manner?  Certainly in a postmodern age there seems to be little tolerance for deep truths that seem to divide.  The problem however is that McLaren and those in the Emergent Church who try to embrace mystery are revealing their own theology.  Postmoderns may want mystery, but want mystery in a dogmatic way.  Anyone who refuses to speak of theology as a mystery are suddenly labeled old-fashioned, out-of-touch, and irrelevant.

I am starting a new series on the Immutability of God.  The reason?  Its practical and it is needed.  I have said much about the transcendence of the gospel (which theological liberalism must reject) in recent months, but in order to believe in the gospel's transcendence God must be immutable (or unchanging).

What theological liberalism attacks isn't the doctrine of Scripture, the Virgin Birth, the historicity of the resurrection, or return of Christ, what they attack is God's immutability.  They want to argue that God changes and is always changing (or evolving).  As culture changes, so does God.  God adapts to the changing times.  But this is not how Scripture defines God.  Scripture is clear:  God is immutable and is not subject to the fickle winds of humans or society.

I believe that there is no more important doctrine for the church today than this.  If we understand this doctrine correctly, we will avoid many traps in the church, and have full confidence in our faith, in our salvation, and in the God that directs the heavens and the earth.


For more:
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs
Theology - A Fad Within a Movement:   What is the Emerging Church and Where is it Going? 
Theology - SBTS and McLaren:  A Response to SBTS Panel Discussion
Reviews - "Manifold Witness" by John Franke

_______________________________________________________________
*  Brian McLaren, A New Kind of Christian: A Tale of Two Friends on a Spiritual Journey.  A New Kind of Christian Trilogy, vol. 3, (San Francisco, CA: Joseey Bass, 2001), 130.  The context of these words regard what conservative/modernistic Christians refer to as “personal salvation.”  Neo complains that such language is exclusive and suggests that “we invite by inclusion saying, ‘God loves you.  God accepts you.  Are you ready to accept your acceptance and live in reconciliation with God?’”

**  Brian McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I Am a Missional + Evangelical + Post/Protestant +Liberal/Conservative + Mystical/Poetic + Biblical + Charismatic/Contemplative + Fundamentalist/Calvinist + Anabaptist/Anglican + Methodist + Catholic +Green +Incarnational + Depressed Yet-Hopeful +Emergent + Unfinished Christian,  (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2004), 168, 325.

***  McLaren, Church on the Other Side, 89.  McLaren elsewhere argues, “faith has too often become for us a set of easy answers and cardboard explanations instead of a window into unfathomable mystery and a pathway into an awesome adventure” in McLaren, More Ready Than You Realize, 42.


This originally appeared on my Theology blog available here.

April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God

Though I was not at Goshen this past Sunday, I did speak at other churches.  Sunday night I had the opportunity to speak at the church where I served as youth pastor for 5 years.  There we discussed the Immutability of God; that is that God does not change.  Though too often we consider doctrine and deep theology to be boring and irrelevant, we must realize that the opposite is true.  All doctrine is practical and everything we do reflects our theology.  The doctrine of God's Immutability is extremely practical and I encourage you guys to download and study the notes.  I was not able to record the message and so only have the notes available.  Maybe someday I will be able to deliver it again and record it then.

Here's the description:

All doctrine is practical.  That means that if we want to see real change in our lives or if we really want to live as Christ commands, then what we need is to rightly understand doctrine.  Right doctrine leads to right living.  The immutability of God (His unchangeableness) is a wonderful doctrine full of practical implications.  Without it we have no hope, no assurance, and no where to stand.

Notes


For more:
November 29, 2009 - The Transcedence of the Gospel