Subject: Is God subject to change? |
Bible Note: Greetings John! A couple of small, quick corrections before I address Packer's quote. First of all, I never used the word 'contingency' plan. I used the word 'conditional'. There is a major difference. Secondly, I never denied God's foreknowledge. Having said that, I still don't agree with Packer on this one. For a very simply reason, it forces us to pick and choose which statements are true and which one's aren't. The same word is used in both Num. 23:19 and Ex. 32:14. Why does it 'really' mean what it says in Num. 23:19, but doesn't 'really' mean what it says in Ex. 32:14? There is a much easier answer than to deny that God actually meant what He said. I ran a word search. Every time God is said 'not to repent', the phrase is used in comination with the word 'lie'. Note: There are verses where He says that He 'will not repent' in a given instance. The verses used with lie are: Num. 23:19 and 1 Sam. 15:29. Both of these passages are in context where God is stating that He can be trusted to keep a promise. But, there are about 10 verses where God is said to have 'repented'. So, why are the two true, but the ten not? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |