Moses and the Gods of Egypt: An Introduction to the Ten Plagues
Barry PendleyThe ten plagues is one of the most intriguing events of history. These events were so profound upon the nation of Israel, that the plagues are mentioned in many books of Scripture. This article is an introduction to the ten plagues of Egypt. For variety sake, we will not spend the next ten issues discussing the plagues. They will be treated over the next two years. In this article, we will devote our attention to the necessary background information, the nature of the plagues, and their purpose.
A Chronological Listing of the Plagues
- Plague of the Nile River turning into blood (7.14–24)
- Plague of frogs (7.25–8.15)
- Plague of lice or gnats (8.16–19)
- Plague of flies (8.20–32)
- Plague on the livestock (9.1–7)
- Plague of boils (9.8–12)
- Plague of hail (9.13–35)
- Plague of locusts (10.1–20)
- Plague of darkness (10.21–29)
- Plague on the firstborn (11.1–9)
The ten plagues were miraculous.
Liberals reject miracles and the supernatural. As a result, they reject that the ten plagues were actually miracles. Some go to great lengths to describe away the events as natural phenomena. For instance, some say that the Nile River has sediment and turns red. They would contend that annual flow of red sediment caused the river to become so polluted that it looked as if it were blood. As Bible-believers, we accept by faith that these were genuine miracles. Does that mean that there are no other reasons for believing that these were miracles? No. Commentators Davis and Huey supply the following reasons for substantiating the miraculous nature of these plagues.
They involved an accurate prediction of the timing.
The plagues happened exactly when Moses said they would. If the plagues were a product of chance, the timing would be impossible to determine without supernatural means.
When shall I intreat for thee, and for thy servants, and for thy people, to destroy the frogs from thee and thy houses, that they may remain in the river only? And he said, To morrow. And he said, Be it according to thy word: that thou mayest know that there is none like unto the LORD our God. . . . And the LORD did according to the word of Moses; and the frogs died out of the houses, out of the villages, and out of the fields. (Ex 8.9–10,13)
And the LORD appointed a set time, saying, To morrow the LORD shall do this thing in the land. And the LORD did that thing on the morrow, and all the cattle of Egypt died: but of the cattle of the children of Israel died not one. (Ex 9.5–6)
They involved a supernatural intensity.
Frogs, insects, and lightning were common things in Egypt, but not with this kind of intensity. Notice the supernatural description of the hail.
So there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very grievous, such as there was none like it in all the land of Egypt since it became a nation. And the hail smote throughout all the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and beast; and the hail smote every herb of the field, and brake every tree of the field. (Ex 9.24–25)
They involved a discrimination of location.
Certain plagues did not occur in the land of Goshen where the children of Israel lived. The land of Goshen was in the middle of the land of Egypt. It was as if God put an invisible shield around the Israelites.
And I will sever in that day the land of Goshen, in which my people dwell, that no swarms of flies shall be there; to the end thou mayest know that I am the LORD in the midst of the earth. (Ex 8.22)
And the LORD shall sever between the cattle of Israel and the cattle of Egypt: and there shall nothing die of all that is the children’s of Israel. (Ex 9.4)
They involved a distinctly stated moral purpose
These were not freaks of nature, but rather they were designed to bring repentance and judgment to Pharaoh.
Thus saith the LORD, In this thou shalt know that I am the LORD: behold, I will smite with the rod that is in mine hand upon the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned to blood. (7.17)
The plagues had a purpose.
Were the plagues indiscriminately directed at certain animals and forces of nature? Some have attempted to determine a purpose for the plagues. Below are the various opinions.
Some believe that the plagues were grouped according to common characteristics. They suggest that the first three (Nile to blood, frogs, and gnats) were loathsome. That is, they were morbid, grossly repelling plagues. They further suggest that the next three plagues (flies, livestock, and boils) were those that caused great physical pain. Finally, the last three were directed toward the forces of nature (locust, darkness, and firstborn).
The problem with this view is that these characteristics are not entirely convincing. How is it that boils and flies are not loathsome as the frogs? Why are the locust not included among the loathsome plagues? Furthermore, this suggested grouping fails to account for any purpose.
The plagues were given in progression of severity. Some believe that the purpose of the plagues was to force Pharaoh to give up or else he would experience worse. For instance, they reason that the bloodied Nile River (plague 1) was less severe than the death of the firstborn (plague 10). It seems to some that this proves a progression of intensity.
The problem with this view is that a progression cannot be definitively shown. For example, how is darkness (plague 9) more severe than boils (plague 6)?
Each plague was directed against an Egyptian deity (Pharaoh and their gods). This purpose best accords with the rest of Scripture. The Bible specifically states that this was the purpose of the plagues.
And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the LORD had done to Israel, whom he had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said, Blessed be the LORD, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I know that the LORD is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them. (Ex 18.9–11)
And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians. For the Egyptians buried all their firstborn, which the LORD had smitten among them: upon their gods also the LORD executed judgments. (Nu 33.3–4)
Most of the plagues corresponded with Egyptian gods and goddesses. Egypt had so many gods and religions that it is one of the most difficult Ancient Near Eastern cultures to analyze.
Among the Egyptian gods were the lion, the ox, the ram, the wolf, the dog, the cat, the ibis, the vulture, the falcon, the hippopotamus, the crocodile, the cobra, the dolphin, different varieties of fish, trees, small animals including the frog, scarab, locust, and other insects. There were gods of the rain, sun, moon, and sky. Pharaoh, himself, was considered a god. Notice that God states that the plague of the firstborn was specifically directed at the Egyptian gods.
On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn – both men and animals – and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD. (Ex 12.12)
The surrounding nations had human rulers. Yet Egypt was unique in that it considered its human ruler, Pharaoh, to be a god. Even the Pharaoh had been duped into believing that he was a god.
Pharaoh said, “Who is the LORD, that I should obey him and let Israel go? I do not know the LORD and I will not let Israel go.” (Ex 5.2)
Each Pharaoh had an earthly mother, but was told, and everyone believed, that he had been begotten by the god Amon-Re. As god on earth, he had complete rule over the people. In fact, if the Pharaoh suffered, the belief was that the people would suffer. If the Pharaoh did well, the people did well. The Egyptian thought was the prosperity of the people was connected to the prosperity of their Pharaoh.
The plagues were designed to show how powerless he really was. Notice how the people began to realize the impotence of their Pharaoh as a result of the plagues:
Pharaoh’s officials said to him, “How long will this man be a snare to us? Let the people go, so that they may worship the LORD their God. Do you not yet realize that Egypt is ruined?” (Ex 10.7)
Conclusion God is not a capricious deity who delights in making rivers of water into blood and sending frogs into the beds of his enemies. The purpose of the plagues is eminently more profound than that. The next time you read your child a bed-time story or view a movie about the plagues remind yourself of the purpose. What often gets lost in the drama of these unusual events is that God soundly defeated the Egyptian theological system. The Egyptians erected their own gods, refusing to acknowledge His Kingship not to mention His existence. Remind yourself, your children, and your children’s children, that God is in the business of sovereignly ruling the universe. Whenever we refuse to acknowledge His absolute sovereignty, we have reverted to the Egyptian mythology.
The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart
Barry PendleySinful human nature can be powerfully deluding. You may have met, or know of a person, who stubbornly refuses to do what is right. He arrogantly pursues his own interests to the detriment of others including himself. Maybe you have persistently counseled your friend to obey God’s commands only to find her reject your counsel and make a complete mess of her life. Maybe your colleague has turned his nose up at numerous reprimands and found himself on the unemployment line looking for work elsewhere. What about that teen who follows the wrong crowd, rejects his parents correction, and the prodigal life? These illustrations have many names and faces. They are all too common because sinful human nature has not changed in thousands of years.
When you read the account of the ten plagues, you may be struck with the stubborn arrogance of Pharaoh. Over 20 times, the topic of Pharaoh’s hardened heart appears throughout Exodus 4–14. Why would Pharaoh endure the cataclysmic plagues, refusing to let the Israelites leave? This issue is important to understand for at least two reasons. First, it provides a lesson on what happens when the sinful heart refuses to obey. Secondly, it reveals something of how God brings glory to Himself in a sinful world.
What was hardened? Pharaoh’s heart was hardened. What is meant by the word “heart?” It comes from the Hebrew word, lev (bl]). “Heart” refers to man’s personality or character. It includes man’s intellect, will, and emotions. It is the conscience. Probably the closest English equivalent to this Hebrew word is “mind.”
What was involved in the hardening? Three different Hebrew words are used to communicate the “hardening” of Pharaoh’s heart – qashak (jv’q;), kazaq (qz’j;), and cavod (db’k;). The first word, qashak, means “to make hard or make stubborn.” The next word, kazaq, means “to grow firm, stout, rigid, or hard.” The final word, cavod, means “to be heavy, weighty or burdensome.”
When Pharaoh stubbornly refused (qashak) to let us go, the LORD killed every firstborn in Egypt, both man and animal. (13.15)
Yet Pharaoh’s heart became hard (kazaq) and he would not listen to them, just as the LORD had said. (7.13)
And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened (cavod) his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him. (10.1)
These synonyms show Pharaoh’s stubborn, resolute refusal to listen to God. He was determined in his mind and will to do as he pleased, hardening his heart against God’s warnings.
Who caused the hardening? Logically, we can find only three options: 1) Pharaoh hardened himself; 2) God hardened Pharaoh; 3) God and Pharaoh were both involved in the hardening process. The chart on page 5 illustrates who did the hardening. Let’s look at the first two views:
View 1: Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Victor Hamilton writes, “What is noticeable is that there is no reference to God’s hardening the heart of Pharaoh until after the sixth plague is well under way . . . at least for a while Pharaoh had control over his own choice, but never did he exercise control over the consequences of his choice.”
The problem with this view (among others) is that in two places (4.21, 7.3), God specifically states that He is initiating the hardening process – “I will harden.” Before the plagues began, God said He will harden Pharaoh’s heart.
View 2: Only God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. David Gunn writes, “God was ultimately the only agent of heart-hardening. . . . Pharaoh is depicted as acting against his own better judgement, a mere puppet of Yahweh.”
This view ignores the fact that Pharaoh consciously and willfully determined not to let the people go (cf. 13.15). Pharaoh simply did not want the people to go. He was not a puppet without a mind of his own.
View 3: God was the ultimate cause of the hardening process while Pharaoh, of his own will, actively hardened his own heart.
This view is not an attempt to remain neutral on the subject. I am not suggesting that both equally hardened Pharaoh’s heart. We know that the Bible says that both were involved in the process (see illustration below). Yet, the narrative opens with God stating His intent – “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart.” Those events happened just as God had determined. God initiated the process, and Pharaoh followed suit. Does this view violate God’s justice and minimize Pharaoh’s culpability? No.
How does one reconcile God’s justice and Pharaoh’s responsibility? The answer comes by understanding two realities about life. First, the sinful human heart is already on a downward course to destruction (Ge 6.5, De 11.16; Ps 141.4). Pharaoh was not a neutral being. He was sinful, hostile to God, and desperately wicked. God did not have to invent evil in the heart of Pharaoh. It was already there.
Secondly, the sinful heart is restrained by common grace. Common grace is the blessing He gives to all people. God sends the rain on the evil men as well as the good men (Mt 5.44). God gives both the evil man and good man knowledge of Himself (Ro 1.21). It is common grace that restrains the evil heart (Ps 76.10).
Pharaoh was a depraved, sinful human being. He followed the destructive sinful desires of his own heart. As such, God removed a portion of common grace from him allowing him to plunge further into sin. It is as if God let out more rope for Pharaoh to hang himself. Does this violate Pharaoh’s freedom? Absolutely not. Pharaoh’s freedom was increased. He freely followed the course of his own sinful nature. He knew he was violating God’s command and was given ten specific warnings that he would suffer consequences (Ex 9.27; 10.16). Freedom in the hands of the wicked will ultimately lead to destruction.
Why was it hardened? The discussion of Pharaoh’s hardened heart usually ends in heated debate. This difficult doctrine has more to offer than debate fodder. There was a grand purpose behind Pharaoh’s hardening that demands our attention. God did not harden Pharaoh’s heart on a whim. He intentionally planned this situation to bring about some important lessons that must not be overlooked.
And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart . . . that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son’s son, what things I have wrought in Egypt. . . . I will get me honor upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen. And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I have gotten me honor upon Pharaoh, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen. (10.1–2; 13.14–16; 14.17–18)
God provided a memorial of mercy and love for the Israelites. In His mercy and love for the Israelites, God desired to leave a memorable story for the next generations. With any act of God’s mercy, future generations tend to minimize or even forget God’s grace in the lives of their forefathers. God’s purposes were fulfilled, for this incident is recalled throughout the rest of Scripture (Dt 6.22, 1Sa 6.6, 2Ki 17.7, Ne 9.10, Ps 136.15, Isa 19.11, Jer 46.25, Eze 30.21, Ro 9.17).
God glorified Himself by showing His faithfulness, mercy. In no uncertain terms, God showed Himself faithful. He was true to His covenant with His people. We see this truth in the use of the name “LORD.” This title was a special covenant title for the Israelites. For it was used when God wanted to remind the Israelites of His special relationship with them. While the focus of debate usually centers around Pharaoh, the narrative was written to indelibly etch on the minds of His people that He alone is merciful, faithful, and loving to His people.
God demonstrated His power and justice. Pharaoh believed he was one of the gods. Physically speaking, he was probably the most powerful individual of his time. Egypt was at its zenith militarily. The plagues were designed to bring Pharaoh and the rest of Egypt to their knees. God said, “I will get me honor.”
Conclusion Some ask “How can a loving and merciful God harden someone against righteousness and judge him for it?” Consider the Apostle Paul’s response to this very question.
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. . . . it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. (Ro 9.14–16)
- Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. God righteously dealt with Pharaoh. God did not attack a neutral man. Pharaoh was a sinner who was hostile toward God (Ro 8.7). He was also a wicked king who cruelly treated the Israelites. Pharaoh deserved his judgment.
- . . . but of God that sheweth mercy. God was merciful with Pharaoh and the Israelites. First, God could have killed Pharaoh and sent him to Hell. Instead, He gave Pharaoh plenty of opportunities to repent. Second, if God idly sat by and let Pharaoh continue his oppression on the Israelites without judgement, then God would have been unrighteous.
Unsaved men today have the same hostility and propensity to stubbornly resist God. The Apostle Paul calls them foolish men (Ro 1.21–22). May we understand that Pharaoh is not the only one to have had a hardening of heart. We ought always strive to maintain “hearts of flesh” and not have “hearts of stone” (Eze 36.26).
The Beauty of God and Music, Part 2
The voice of history and the reality of God’s beauty
Mike HardingMusic speaks to every culture. One need not speak the same language to enjoy the same piece of music, for music is a language in itself. Not only does music transcend every culture, but also time, for the same sonata, fugue, and concerto can be enjoyed by those who live well after it has been written. How did our ancestors view music? More particularly, how did they relate the beauty of God to their choices of music?
The Historical Recognition of God’s Beauty
Certainly one of the distinguishing marks of Jonathan Edwards’ theology in relation to the whole history of Christian thought is his radical elevation of beauty to preeminence among the divine perfections. Augustine, however, reflected on the nature of beauty centuries earlier.
Augustine. In his Confessions he said: “Too late I have loved you, O Beauty, so ancient and so new, too late have I loved you. Behold, you were within me, while I was outside: it was there that I sought you, and, as a deformed creature, rushed headlong upon these things of beauty which you have made. . . . They kept me far from you, those fair things which, if they were not in you, would not exist at all.”
Beauty is the perfection of God’s divine being. God alone is the essence of beauty in an original and exclusive sense.
Jonathan Edwards. For Edwards, beauty is not only that “wherein the truest idea of divinity does consist,” but also “it is first among the perfections of God; it constitutes in itself the perfection of all the other divine attributes” (Religious Affections, p 298).
He argued that the source of beauty is God Himself. God’s beauty is seen in His moral virtue and in the agreement (unity) of the Godhead. Edwards said these qualities transfer to inanimate things in a secondary beauty, consisting in “mutual consent and agreement of different things, in form, manner, quality, and visible end or design; called by the various names of regularity, order, uniformity, symmetry, proportion, harmony.” Examples of such are “the mutual agreement of the various sides of a square, the beautiful proportion of the various parts of the human body, and . . . the sweet mutual consent and agreement of the various notes in a melodious tune” (Essay Concerning the Nature of True Value, Chapter 3).
“It has pleased God to establish a law of nature by virtue of which the uniformity and mutual correspondence of a beautiful plant, the respect which the various parts of a regular building seem to have to one another, and their agreement and union, and the consent or concord of the various notes of a melodious tune, should appear beautiful because therein is some image of the consent of mind, the different members of a society or system of intelligent beings, sweetly united in a benevolent agreement of heart. . . . And here I should further observe . . . that God has so constituted nature, that the presenting of this inferior beauty, especially in those kinds of it which have the greatest resemblance of the primary beauty, as the harmony of sounds, and the beauties of nature, have a tendency to assist those whose hearts are under the influence of a truly virtuous temper, to dispose them to the exercises of divine love, and enliven in them a sense of spiritual beauty” (Ibid.).
Unregenerate people do not approve of beautiful objects because they perceive this analogy; rather, their appreciation of beauty is directly attributed to the common grace of God.
Beauty cannot originate from anyone other than God Himself, and it is a window into heaven for those who have ears to hear and eyes to see (regenerated hearts). God’s beauty is self-evident and speaks for itself through its intrinsic power of attraction to a mind not surrendered to the noetic effects of sin.
The Theological Reach of God’s Beauty:
God is beautiful in His person.
Integrity of His being. God’s self-revelation corresponds to what He actually is in word, deed, general revelation, and special revelation.
Tri-unity of God. The tri-unity of God culminates in absolute beauty. The Son is the perfect image of the Father, the “express image of His person” (Heb 1.3), the “image of the invisible God” (Col 1.15); and the Holy Spirit perfectly testifies of the Son (John 15.26).
Incarnation. The incarnation of the Son reveals the beauty of God in a special way and to a supreme degree through the personal (hypostatic) union of two such diverse natures as deity and humanity in one person. Here, we have perfect unity without monotony, diversity without chaos, with perfect proportion and splendor.
God is beautiful in His perfections.
God’s attributes unite in perfect harmony. There is no greater variety than God’s infinite perfections, nor a more intensive unity. Though holiness governs all of God’s attributes (Isa 6), the Bible does not exalt one attribute of God at the expense of the others. They form a glorious, harmonious whole without any inherent contradiction. The absence of chaos or monotony in His divine attributes amplifies His absolute beauty. They also mutually contribute to God’s purpose and performance manifesting the splendor to which man should respond.
God is beautiful in His purpose.
God has an eternal plan which embraces all that comes to pass (Ro 9.8–24; Eph 1.4–12; Jn 6.22–66). Based on His own holy and wise counsel, God governs, efficaciously or permissively, every detail of His universe in accordance with His perfect and unchanging plan. The chief aim of His purpose is to bring glory to Himself which is the aim of all beauty. Furthermore, there is perfect harmony between the purpose and performance of God.
God is beautiful in His performances.
Creation. Each person of the Godhead perfectly and harmoniously exercised His role in the Creation of the universe, earth, and man. The product, prior to the fall, was absolutely beautiful including a natural order which reflects the glory of God and culminating in man who was made in the image of God (Ge 1.31 “very good”).
The mistake many have made at this point is to seek the beauty of God’s creation and miss the beauty of the Creator [cf. Ro 1.18ff] (cf. Augustine’s quote).
Redemption. Salvation is beautiful in that it involves perfect and harmonious actions of the triune God. The product of salvation is beautiful in that it blots out the ugliness of sin and restores the believer in the image of God which was marred at the fall. The believer is a new man created by God in righteousness, holiness, and true knowledge. Finally, salvation culminates in the believer being conformed to the image of Christ through glorification (Ro 8.28–29).
The Practical Response to God’s Beauty
Let the beauty of the Lord our God be upon us. Ps 90.17
The objective view of beauty evaluates the arts on the basis of excellence of craft and the admirability of the object. The subjective view evaluates beauty on the basis of human response alone and experience.
Immanuel Kant, father of the Enlightenment, maintained that beauty was solely subjective and that art could be considered beautiful only if it produced desired feelings in the audience (Critique of Judgment). Kant’s ideas have deep roots in modern culture. Since Kant denied the reality of God, he also denied the reality of objective beauty. To Kant, God was whatever you “postulated” Him to be; likewise, beauty was whatever the individual wanted it to be. Kant exalted the idolatry of self.
Relativism encourages us to make choices based on what makes us feel good, rather than on the basis of excellence and admirability. We must learn to enjoy that which is admirable and excellent through study, discipline, proper exposure, and teaching.
C. S. Lewis wrote in An Experiment in Criticism, “the first demand art makes on us is to surrender.” Art is communication, and we must carefully analyze it to see to what we are surrendering. Unity (without monotony), Diversity (without chaos), Proportion (without distortion), and Splendor (the ability to manifest one’s perfections and attributes) describe the object, not the listener. They are qualities of the piece of music, and either they are there or not there. Just as a reader must have a good knowledge of language to appreciate fine books, so a listener must have a knowledge of music to appreciate fine compositions.
Our culture is so steeped in pop music that requires nothing of us that we may soon forget there is anything else to be known other than the trite and profane. If we understand, for instance, that it takes a musician 15 to 20 years to learn to play the cello well, shouldn’t we be willing to work a bit and learn to listen well? With an objective, God-centered view of beauty vis av vis a subjective, man-centered view, we will see what is good even when it doesn’t please us, giving great works the chance to speak to us over time.
The objective view of beauty also protects our sensibilities from lethargy and carnality. It takes little patience or work to enjoy the things on which Americans spend most of their time. Television, pop music, movies, fast food, advertising, etc. are all designed to be easily digested by a dumbed-down general public. They require little if anything of us. As a result, we become lethargic, and our attention span decreases, losing the ability to see as God sees, hear as God hears, and perceive as God perceives.
A theocentric (God-centered) view of beauty also develops a sense of “taste.” Some think taste simply means “personal preference,” but the Miriam-Webster Dictionary defines taste as “the power or practice of discerning or enjoying whatever constitutes excellence, especially in the fine arts.” As such, taste is a facet of wisdom, the skillful application of God’s truth, and the ability to distinguish what has value from what does not. Learning to enjoy what is admirable is to improve our tastes and a sure way of glorifying God for the gifts He has given our artists. Animals do not possess “taste” and appreciate beauty, either their own, or anyone else’s; it is a gift to men alone made in His image (Gen 1.27–29).
Some mistakenly equate subjective enjoyment with objective excellence. There is such a thing as a counterfeit aesthetic experience, that is, the feeling that you have experienced something profound when all you have really experienced is a fake. Whether it is a telephone commercial on TV that brings a tear to the eye or a pop song that manipulates our emotions, entertainers have learned how to get a cheap response from their audience when nothing admirable or excellent has been offered. Like a cheat, some offer an emotional experience; and the naive mistake it for a spiritual experience. This is the artistic equivalent of fast food – all the fun of real food with none of the nutrition.
Pop culture, unfortunately, is determining the worship in many “evangelical” churches. The result is that we are increasingly offering cheap, sensational, and superficial Christian music which at best is smarmy and “feel good.” There is a creeping banality in our musical choices. The main requirement is popularity without admirability. If the most important thing in music is that we “feel good,” what is to stop us from following our appetites for their own sake in other areas. When left to ourselves, our sensibilities always tend toward the low, debased, superficial, trendy, and eventually the depraved (Rom 1.18–31).
Conclusion Kant articulated the modernists’ position: There are no absolutes; therefore, we can know beauty only by our subjective feelings. Edwards, who has all but been forgotten in our modern age, reflected the Biblical view declaring that the source of beauty is the nature of God. Christians hold to absolutes. Why not here?
The way to live faithfully in our world and not be of our world is to lead the way regarding the nature of beauty. Why should we design another shapeless building in which to proclaim the eternal truths of God? Lewis said we will not read nothing. If we do not read good books, we will read bad books. If we do not delight in refined things, we will delight in debased ones. The same is true of music.
Man must submit his intellect to the truth of God, his emotions to the love of God, his will to the holiness of God, and his aesthetic values to the beauty of God. Since Christ is the apex of the beauty of God, conformity to the image of Christ is the ultimate and chief result of man’s response to the beauty of God. John said, “We shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” (1Jn 3.2) Isaiah foretold of that day when we shall see the returning Christ: “Thine eyes shall see the King in His beauty.” (Isa 33.17)
The Beauty of God and Music, Part 1
Mike HardingA Rembrandt who creates a work of art deserves to hear the response from the person who gazes upon it, “That is beautiful!” The eternal God who is infinite in all His perfections deserves to hear the response from the believer who contemplates Him, “God is beautiful!” If God is invisible, how then can He be considered beautiful? Have you ever heard a beautiful symphony? Beauty does not always refer simply to the physical, but also to that which is audible.
Beauty also transcends that which is visible and audible. Miquel Najdorf, the Polish chess grand master, received a brilliancy prize for a chess victory which has come to be known as the ‘Polish immortal.’ A relatively short game (22 moves), containing diverse combinations of play with seven sacrifices by Najdorf leading through a series of forced moves on his opponent’s part, culminated in a crushing checkmate. This particular chess game is truly beautiful – beautiful not because of the shape or color of the pieces used, but because of the logical coherence and variety in the combination of force, time, and space within the principles of the game of chess.
This leads to the question, What is the essence of beauty? Relativism is the general malaise of our time. An increasing percentage of the so-called intelligentsia holds that there are no absolutes. Churches have also been seduced by the same unbiblical thinking. They have accepted the modernist position that beauty is purely a matter of preference. They maintain that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder;” this is the emotional or psychological theory which locates beauty in the response of the perceiver. Beauty, however, is a force with which to be reckoned. Even the unbelieving opera lover may unconsciously know something of the profundity of God’s beauty through common grace that the professing Christian remains ignorant of: namely, that beauty is
a significant element of God’s nature and creation, and that beauty is a reflection of the character and ways of God which can be objectively evaluated. As such, a God-centered view of beauty locates beauty in certain qualities inherent in realities.
In a Christian view of aesthetics, three qualities are usually identified: (1) unity or integrity – a well-knit internal unity, completeness, or whole; (2) proportion or harmony – an orderly, harmonious relation and arrangement of the parts; (3) splendor – a definite capacity for manifesting its pattern. These three qualities result in unity without monotony and variety without chaos.
God, in His person, perfections, purpose, and performance, exemplifies the qualities of unity, proportion, and splendor. The triune God is indeed the supreme example of unity without monotony and variety without chaos.
This article (one of two) will examine the reality of God’s beauty from a biblical perspective as it pertains to our music choices. The next article will examine this issue from a historical and theological perspective.
The Word of God uses a rich variety of words to express the concept of the beauty of God: beauty, excellency, glory, honor, and majesty.
Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him? Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty. (Job 40.9–10)
O LORD, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! (Ps 8.9)
Thou art fairer than the children of men: grace is poured into thy lips therefore God hath blessed thee for ever. Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty. And in thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness and righteousness; and thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things. (Ps 45.2–4)
I will speak of the glorious honor of thy majesty, and of thy wondrous works. All thy works shall praise thee, O LORD; and thy saints shall bless thee. They shall speak of the glory of thy kingdom, and talk of thy power; To make known to the sons of men his mighty acts, and the glorious majesty of his kingdom. (Ps 145.5, 10–12)
They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD, they shall cry aloud from the sea. (Isa 24.14)
Let favor be showed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness: in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the LORD. (Isa 26.10)
It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God. (Isa 35.2)
And the LORD their God shall save them in that day as the flock of his people: for they shall be as the stones of a crown, lifted up as an ensign upon his land. For how great is his goodness, and how great is his beauty! (Zec 9.16–17)
The word of God contains certain principles which guide our music choices. Our choices must be framed by the implications of Scripture rather than the standards of the world.
Implication 1: Anything not like God is ungodly! Contrary to what the world would have us believe, music is not immune from the effects of sin. Music is not simply neutral as some suggest.
Harold M. Best, the Dean of Music at Wheaton College opines in his book, Music Through The Eyes of Faith: “There is nothing un-Christian or anti-Christian about any kind of music.” (p 52); “The Christian is free of the moral nothingness of music. . . .” (p 59)
How does this square with God’s Word? Throughout Scripture, we find that music is intrinsically moral. Good music is that which displays the beauty of God. We are to sing unto the Lord in the beauty of holiness.
And when he had consulted with the people, he appointed singers unto the LORD, and that should praise the beauty of holiness. (2Ch 20.21)
I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD most high. (Ps 7.17)
Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come before him: worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness. (1Ch 16.29)
Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness. (Ps 29.2)
In that day shall the LORD of hosts be for a crown of glory, and for a diadem of beauty, unto the residue of his people. (Isa 28.5)
The word “holiness” comes from the Hebrew word qadesh (vd’q;) which literally means “to cut, to separate, distinct apartness, set apart as sacred by God’s presence.” First, qadesh refers to the majestic transcendence of God emphasizing the Creator/creature distinction. Second, it means that God is separate in His being from all that is evil, impure, and defiled. His own being defines purity with no trace of darkness in it. Holiness is God’s self-affirming purity. Nothing outside of God, Himself, can define it. In the sheer weight (glory) of God’s almighty presence, men must worship God in the majestic beauty of holiness. Beauty is defined by God’s being, not by men’s subjective opinions. Beauty is not in the mind of the beholder. It exists first and foremost in the mind of God. Man, who is created in the image of God, reflects beauty in holiness, righteousness, wisdom (the skilled application of God’s truth), and knowledge. Beauty must be defined by the objective character of God and not by the subjective impulses of unregenerate men.
Our music should not blur the Creator/creature distinction by communicating undue familiarity with God in the lyrical text or an irreverent demeanor, mood, atmosphere, or disposition in the musical composition and performance style. Further, our music should be free from all aspects of impurity and evil in its cultural associations.
Righteousness relates to God’s holiness by corresponding to that which is right. Righteousness entails rectitude of action and disposition according to the perfect standard of Holiness. Righteous music operates according to the standard of holiness – God’s self-affirming purity which sets Him above His creation and separates Him from anything that defiles. There must be righteousness in musical text, composition, and performance style which operates according to the perfect standard of God’s being and the objective, timeless principles of God’s Word which are rooted in the unchanging, absolute character of God. Man cannot unilaterally operate on his own self-autonomy. To do so is sheer, unmitigated idolatry. True beauty, which is the basis for all the arts, exists originally and eternally in the mind and nature of God. Our concept of beauty must correspond to God’s mind which we can know only through Scripture, and which we can see remnants of (His beauty) in a sin-cursed creation. God commands us to mirror His holiness and perfection. To abandon that standard invites the severest judgment and displeasure of God. Holiness is the standard for sacred music. Righteousness is the corresponding action which must conform to the standard.
We are natural musicians because of the special nature of the human brain . . . . Our responsiveness to music, however, like our responsiveness to language (is) . . . unique in the animal kingdom” (Tone Deaf and All Thumbs? by Frank R. Wilson, Neurologist: p. 2, 68).
Implication 2: God is our new song.
The LORD is my strength and song, and is become my salvation. (Ps 118.14)
Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation. (Isa 12.2)
The unsaved, natural man, appreciates music for various self-serving purposes. The music we listen to, the music which we perform, the music we entertain ourselves with each one is a uniquely different purpose – to bring glory to God. When we sing and play our instruments for the Lord, we are to image, mirror, and reflect to our listeners who God is and what He is like. In that way, God is our new song!
Conclusion God is worthy of receiving our praise and adoration through the medium of music. He has ordained that music be employed in the worship of His majesty. Therefore, it is incumbent upon his worshipers to approach Him in a godly fashion and with a godly purpose.
The Greatness of God: His Self-Existence
John MooreOn January 7, 1855, C. H. Spurgeon opened his morning sermon with these words:
“It has been said by someone that ‘the proper study of mankind is man.’ I will not oppose the idea, but I believe it is equally true that the proper study of God’s elect is God; the proper study of the Christian is the Godhead. The highest science, the loftiest speculation, the mightiest philosophy which can ever engage the attention of a child of God is the name, the nature, the person, the work, the doings and the existence of the great God whom he calls his Father. There is something exceedingly improving to the mind in a contemplation of the Divinity.”
Spurgeon’s words are astoundingly appropriate for believers even today. We live in an age in which the attention, the focus, the interest, the concern of many Christians is upon Christians and not necessarily upon the wonders of the Christian’s God. Believers often study the Scriptures not to know God but to know what God can do for them. Where does a “contemplation of the Divinity” fit into the busy schedule of “Joe Believer” who just wants to know how he can solve his most urgent problem and how he can somehow fit a little bit of God and His program into his already crammed week? As we seem to fly through this life at an ever-increasing pace, it is good for us to step back and contemplate our God that we might know Him better. One area of the contemplation of God that is especially profitable to ponder is those aspects of His nature and character that reflect His greatness. One aspect of God’s greatness that is especially challenging to consider is His self-existence.
God exists in and of Himself. When God confronted Moses on Mount Horeb in Exodus 3, spoke to him in the burning bush and enlisted Moses to go back to Egypt as His spokesman, Moses requested what name for God he should use to tell the people of Israel who sent him. God referred to Himself in v 14 as, “I AM WHO I AM” (NASB). Moses was to tell the people of Israel that “I AM” had sent him back to Egypt. This name of God in the Hebrew text is from the verb that means “to be.” The Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the OT, renders this whole phrase, “I am the one who is.” A good English translation would be something like, “I am He who is.”
Was God simply telling Moses that He existed and that He is real? No. God’s revelation of His name to Moses tells us much more. It reflects the fact that it is God’s nature to exist and that He continually exists in and of Himself. God is self-existent. His existence is rooted in Himself alone and in nothing else and in no one else. He is because He is! Why does He exist? Because of Himself! How does He exist? Because of Himself! The ground and source of God’s existence rests solely in His own
being. It is His nature to exist. While this concept may be somewhat hard to grasp, it helps to consider what God’s self-
existence means and what its implications it have for us.
God’s self-existence means He is uncaused. Jesus declared in John 5.26 that “the Father has life in Himself.” (NASB) There is nothing that gives life to God. There was nothing that caused God to come into being. He has life in Himself! He exists because of the necessity of His own being. He did not cause Himself to be. He simply and eternally and profoundly IS the one and only true and living God. It is revealing that God’s Word never argues for His existence. Scripture never tries to explain how He came to be, where He came from, or why He exists. The fundamental assumption is that God is! The Scriptures simply testify to who He is and what He has done.
God is uncaused. In contrast, every other thing that exists, living and non-living, exists because of something other than itself. The cars we drive, the clothes we wear, the homes we live in, the food we eat, all of it exists because of someone or something else. God is the only One who is uncaused. He is the only Being whose existence rests in Himself. Everything else that exists is derived from something or someone else, and the ultimate source of everything else that exists is God! God is uncreated and self-existent. Everything else has been created by Him and is sustained by Him. (cf. Ps 24.1; 50.10–12; 89.11–12; Ge 1.1) Every rock, every molecule, and every single speck of dust that exists in this universe from one end to the other exists because of God. Every living thing that crawls, flies, swims, or walks, everything that has life, including man, has life because of God. We exist because of God.
There are some powerful implications to the fact that God is uncaused while He causes everything and everyone else to exist. First, God is not answerable to anyone, but everyone and everything are answerable to Him. Nobody caused God to exist and therefore nobody has a claim on Him. He does not need to defend Himself to anyone or to anything. He does not need to explain His actions to anyone. When Job wanted a hearing with God to lay out his complaint, God asked, “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?” (Job 38.4) Nobody is going to call God “on the carpet” in heaven for treating them in a way not to their liking. Nobody is going to call Him to the witness stand and demand Him to defend His actions. But, every single person who has ever lived will have to give an account to God. Secondly, God is not at the disposal of anyone but everyone and everything that exists is at His disposal. Man does not tell God what to do. God doesn’t exist to do our bidding. We exist to do His. God does not exist to glorify us. We exist to glorify Him. We owe our existence to Him. He is free (within the confines of His own character, nature, and purposes) to do with us as He wishes and to direct the paths of our life the way He desires. The amazing thing is that the One to Whom we are answerable and at Whose disposal we are, He knows us and we can know Him personally through Jesus Christ; He is our heavenly Father, and He does everything for our ultimate good and His greatest glory!
God’s self-existence means He is independent. God is not only uncaused but also He is independent in His being. He is not dependent on anyone or anything outside of Himself. When the apostle Paul confronted the philosophers in Athens, he declared to them that God was not “served by human hands, as though He needed anything.” (Ac 17.25a) God does not need anything. He doesn’t need anything from His creation to exist. He especially doesn’t need anything from man. He is absolutely independent from His creation. The truth is that everything is dependent upon Him: “Since He Himself gives to all life and breath and all things.” (Ac 17.25b)
Psalm 104 tells us that God provides for the animal world. He sends rain for the grass to grow. He has set the order and working of the moon and the sun. He provides for man. He sustains everything that exists by His power. He makes provision for all that He has created. Everything that exists depends upon Him, BUT God depends on nothing! He is independent in His will, His purposes, His power, His decrees, and His actions!
God’s independence means that He is sufficient unto Himself. The bottom line is that He does not need us. Over the years, there has been some questionable theology floating around that somehow makes man and creation necessary for God: “God needs us; that is why He created us. He was lonely, and so He created man to keep him company. He had no one to love, therefore He created man to have someone to love. He lacked glory, therefore He made man to supply His glory. He needed worshipers, so He created man to worship Him.”
God is not lonely. He does not need someone to love. (God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, the three persons of the Triune God have existed in a loving relationship from all eternity.) God does not need us to glorify Him. He does not need us as worshipers. He can make stones to worship Him. He doesn’t need us to accomplish His purposes. However, God has CHOSEN to create us. He has chosen to love us. He has chosen to allow us to glorify Him. He has chosen to use us as the means by which His message and work would go forth. It is an astounding, incomprehensible privilege that God has chosen by His good pleasure to even include us as a part of His plan and purposes. He could have bypassed us. He could accomplish, if He had so ordained, His purposes just as well without us. It is our gain that He has given man the opportunity to know and serve Him. It is our loss if we reject Him and fail to worship, glorify, and serve Him!
When we, as believers, fully grasp that God exists in and of Himself and Himself alone and that He is utterly independent and has no need whatsoever of us, it makes His mercy, grace, and love toward sinful, rebellious creatures such as ourselves all the more amazing and incredible. It is astounding that He would create us, love us, provide for us, and sacrifice His only Son to redeem us that we could have the unmerited honor of loving Him and praising Him forever. God is great because He exists in and of Himself. He is great because He is uncaused. He is great because He is independent. May God’s people by God’s grace understand more fully the greatness of His self-existence. May our contemplation of this profound attribute of our great God move us to praise and worship Him all the more fully!
God, Independent and Omnipotent
Scott WilliquetteThere is a movement swelling in evangelical circles that teaches a position called “The Openness of God” or “the Open View of God.” The leaders of this movement believe that God is not omnipotent or completely sovereign, but omnicompetent. In other words, God is not all-knowing, all-powerful and all-sovereign. He is all-competent, that is, He is able to cope with or handle whatever happens in His universe. According to these men, God is not all-knowing, rather God learns from us. According to these men, God is not independent from His creatures, rather God is dependent on us. Note the following quotations from the book The Openness of God, published by InterVarsity Press. “God works with human decisions, adapting his own plans to fit the changing situation. God does not control everything that happens. Rather, he is open to receiving input from his creatures.”(p 7) “Instead of perceiving the entire course of human existence in one timeless moment, God comes to know events as they take place. He learns something from what transpires. We call this position the ‘open view of God’ because it regards God as open to new experiences and as flexible . . . as dependent on the world in certain respects.”(Richard Rice, p 16) “God willingly surrenders power and makes possible a partnership with the creature.” God is “an ‘ad hoc’ God, one who responds and adapts to surprises and to the unexpected.”(Clark Pinnock, p 113) While we may be tempted to think that these heretical ideas are being championed by “outsiders” and that our fundamental Baptist churches will never be affected by them, that simply is not true. Professors at some leading evangelical colleges and seminaries, as well as a number of influential evangelical publishing houses are promoting these views. If we are not careful, it will not be long before these heresies percolate down into our pews and our pulpits. This article will provide a quick review of what the Bible actually teaches about God and His control over creation. The Creator God controls all things. He is not dependent on us for anything. He is not powerless to accomplish His plan. He is not at our beck and call.
God controls all things and leaves nothing to chance. The closing half of Ephesians 1.11 reads, “who [God] works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will.” Nothing is left to chance, and nothing is left to a joint divine/human decision. God has a plan, and He will “work out” everything in that plan. These words “work out” come from the Greek word ejnergevw, from which we get our word “energy.” It means “to energetically accomplish something,” “to carry something out,” or “to work and bring something to pass.” God does not simply plan and then watch and hope. In eternity past God planned, and now in time He energetically works such that that plan actually comes to pass. God insures the accomplishment of His eternal plan, by bringing it to pass Himself. Paul could not be any clearer here. God has an eternal plan that includes everything that occurs in His creation, both great and small (from the buying and wearing of a pair of shoes, to the birth of a child; from the construction of a bologna sandwich, to the construction of a church building). God’s will is all-encompassing. It includes everything that will ever come to pass. Not only is God’s will and plan all-encompassing, it is also certain to come to pass. Why? Because God Himself is energetically accomplishing it. God has planned everything, and everything that He has planned will certainly come to pass.
The fact that God controls all things is also clear from individual examples stated in Scripture: God planned the maintenance of the universe (Ps 119.89–91); God planned the life span and living place of every human being (Job 14.5; Ac 17.26); God planned the rise and fall of every earthly ruler (Ro 13.1); God planned the circumstances of every person’s life (Jas 4.13–15); God planned the actions of every human being (both good and wicked) (Eph 2.10; Ge 50.20; Ac 2.23); God planned the most trivial of circumstances (Job 36.22–33); and God planned the certainty of prophetic events (Isa 14.24,27).
God does whatever He desires with His creation and with human beings. The Bible makes no bones about the fact that God is in absolute control of every molecule of creation including man.
Psalm 115.3 reads, “Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him.”
Psalm 135.5–6 reads, “I know that the LORD is great, that our Lord is greater than all gods. The LORD does whatever pleases him, in the heavens and on the earth, in the seas and all their depths.”
Daniel 4.35 reads, “All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: “What have you done?”
Isaiah 46.9–11 reads, ‘I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please. From the east I summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose. What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do.”
Is God dependent upon man? Does God need man’s help when it comes to running the universe? Does the Bible teach that God is a dependent or independent being? Does the Bible teach that God is an omnicompetent or omnipotent being? There is no question as to what the Bible teaches. God is dependent upon man for nothing. It is man who is utterly dependent upon God. God is independent and omnipotent. He has need of no one and no thing. He is in absolute sovereign control of all things, and possesses all power.
Why is it important that we understand and champion the doctrines of God’s independence and sovereign omnipotence? There are certain selfish reasons. It’s comforting to know that an all-knowing and all-wise being is in control. It is comforting to know that everything you go through is planned by a being who is infinite in wisdom. It is comforting to know that the plan of salvation and the security connected with that plan can never be thwarted because God’s plans always come to pass. There are two more important reasons why we must understand and champion these doctrines. First, if we follow the lead of those who deny God’s independence and sovereign omnipotence we are exchanging the truth for a lie. Second, the more we grasp of the greatness of God the more loving and adoring will be our worship.
Does God Repent or Change His Mind?
Scott WilliquettePrayer changes things!” “When I pray God listens and answers.” “God has a perfect plan for your life, but if you rebel against it, He permits you to go your own way.” Are these statements true? The first two may be, depending on your perspective. Indeed God uses our prayers. “The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective” (Jas 5:16). So yes, prayer changes things and God does listen and answer our prayers. But when some make these statements they actually mean: “Prayer informs God and thus changes His mind;” “When I pray God listens, learns, and answers accordingly.” These are heretical ideas. The third statement is not true because it implies that God has a plan and that man by his actions can thwart that plan. This too is heretical. Statements like these are common place in both fundamental Baptist circles and in evangelical Christianity in general. The underlying assumption of those who hold to these heretical views is that God sometimes changes His mind as He deals with His creation. They assume that God is influenced by prayer and that He is capable of repenting, and of changing His plan from one thing to another. This theological perspective is present in both church pews and the classrooms of evangelical colleges and seminaries. I personally have caught wind of it in more than one of our fundamental Baptist colleges. This article will list the biblical texts which teach with absolute clarity that God never changes His mind. Whether we are considering God’s relationship to prayer or His relationship to the daily decisions made by the peoples of the earth, God never changes His mind or His plan in any way.
The Bible clearly teaches that God never changes His mind. Individuals change their mind in instances when they acquire information that they previously did not possess or when they realize that their logic was in some way faulty. God never takes in new information, and God never possesses faulty logic. God’s knowledge is perfect and complete in every respect.
Because God’s knowledge is complete He never has reason to change His mind. God’s knowledge is without error (Job 37.16). The Hebrew adjective translated “perfect” (µT;) in Job 37.16 is from a word that means “completeness” or “integrity” (the noun µTo). It refers to the fact that God’s knowledge is sound and without error. God knows of errors, but He has no errors in His thinking. God’s knowledge is without oversight and without flaw. He understands everything with perfect clarity. God thinks with perfect logic.
God’s knowledge is complete and all-inclusive (1Jo 3.20; Heb 4.13; Mt 11.21,23). There is nothing that God does not know. God does not take in information, simply because from eternity past He knew all things from start to finish. Not only does God know everything that will happen, He also knows everything that could happen (Mt 11.21, 23 – God knew all the contingencies related to Chorazin and Bethsaida). God possesses knowledge of everything that will take place and everything that possibly could take place.
God’s knowledge is eternal (Ac 15.18). God always has, does now, and always will, know all things. According to Acts 15.18, God has known what He will do from ages past. God’s knowledge then is eternal. In the words of the NIV God has known what will transpire “for ages.” Notice the following examples of God’s perfect, complete, and eternal knowledge regarding His creation:
Psalm 147.4 states, “He (God) determines the number of stars and calls them each by name.”
Matthew 10.29–30 states, “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the hairs of your head are all numbered.”
Job 26.6 states, “Death [Sheol] is naked before God.” God knows everything that happens in the place of the dead.
Psalm 139.1–4 states, “O Lord, you have searched me and you know me. You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. You know my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O Lord.”
God’s knowledge has no limitations. God’s knowledge is such that He is incapable of learning anything. The fact that God’s knowledge is complete, means that God knows everything and is not lacking one bit of information. Since, in the words of John the Apostle, “God knows everything” (1Jn 3.20), He is incapable of learning. There is no information that He does not possess. Also the fact that God’s knowledge is eternal, means that His knowledge is intuitive. You and I come to know something as we take in information, but God knows everything as part of His infinite being. He knows everything intuitively. He has always known all things. There was never a time when God did not know all things. You and I are more knowledgeable today than we were last year because we take in information. God knows no more today than He knew a million years ago because a million years ago He knew everything. (God of course is not in time as we are.) It is impossible and completely unbiblical then to say that God learns. God is not like impotent human beings. He is not limited in knowledge and wisdom as we are.
Because God’s plan is perfect in every respect, He has no reason to change His mind. God never changes (Mal 3.6; Heb 13.8; Jas 1.17). The theological term for God’s unchangeableness is “immutability.” When we say that God is immutable or unchanging, we mean that He is changeless in His being and purposes and is incapable of growth or decay in any way. God has never grown or diminished. He has never learned or forgotten anything. He is not something today that He was not yesterday. He is neither more nor less holy, loving, or merciful than He ever was. Some evangelicals today claim that “instead of perceiving the entire course of human existence in one timeless moment, God comes to know events as they take place. He learns something from what transpires.” (Richard Rice, “Biblical Support for a New Perspective” in The Openness of God, InterVarsity Press, p. 16). Clearly when one learns he changes. Who do I believe, those who say that God learns and changes, or God Himself, who says of Himself that He does not? God’s Plan Never Changes (1Sa 15.29; Nu 23.19; Ps 33.11). In Psalm 33.11 the psalmist uses synonymous parallelism to make one clear point – that God’s plan never changes. The NIV translates this verse, “The plans of the Lord stand firm forever, the purposes of his heart through all generations.” The Hebrew word translated “stand forever” (dm[;) means “to stand fast” or “to continue and abide.” The words “counsel” (hx[e) and “thoughts” (hb;v;j}m) both refer to God’s plan for the future. God’s plan is forever established and sure. It will never change. God’s plan is not subject to change. It is not evolving as time goes on.
The implications of the biblical material If God changes His mind, it implies that His knowledge may contain errors. Changing your mind implies you made a mistake in your original plan. If God changes His mind, it implies that His knowledge is not complete. Changing your mind implies that you did not originally have all the facts and now that you do, you will make a change. If God changes His mind, it implies that His knowledge is not eternal. If God changes His mind, it implies that He is in the process of learning. If God changes His mind, it implies that His original plan was flawed, erroneous and/or incomplete. This would imply two things about God. First, it would imply that God Himself is limited and flawed and that He is capable of making mistakes. Second, it would imply that God and His Word are not trustworthy. If God learns and changes His mind, you would have every reason to assume that God’s plan would consistently change as He found His own errors. Thus the plan He has outlined in the Bible would be utterly worthless, because that plan would probably have to be changed multiple times. Every promise and doctrine found in Scripture would be open to question.
What about those confusing passages? You may ask, “What about those passages that seem to teach that God repents or changes His mind?” (Ge 6.6–8; Ex 32.8–14; 1Sa 15.10–11; Ps 106.40–45; Je 26.13,19; Jnh 3.1–2,5,10, etc.) Is that what they are teaching? Is the Bible contradicting itself? As we have seen, the clear teaching of Scripture is that God’s knowledge is so perfect and complete and His person and plans so unchangeable that it would be impossible for God to change His mind or repent of an action. What about these verses? The answer lies in one of two places:
Some of these references are the expression of God’s emotions, not the changing of His mind. The Hebrew term µjn;, sometimes translated “repent,” can mean “to have sorrow, to suffer grief, to have compassion.” (For examples of this see the NIV of Genesis 6.6 and 1 Samuel 15.10–11.) This is probably how Exodus 32.14 should be taken. It could be translated, “Then the Lord was moved with compassion and did not bring on His people the disaster He had threatened.” The judgment of Israel apparently was not part of God’s eternal plan, but Moses’ prayer for Israel was. God planned and used Moses’ prayer, and God in His compassion did not judge Israel.
Some of these references refer to God being changeless when dealing with changing beings. The change in these contexts is not in God or His purposes but in His dealings and relationships with changing people. God remains changeless in His being, attitudes and purposes. However, when people change their relationship with God, He changes His relationship with them in order to remain changeless. One example of this is Jonah 3.9–10. Do these verses teach or imply that God changes His mind? No, they do not. Consider what is going on in the book of Jonah. In this book we find God giving the Ninevites an opportunity to avoid punishment. He sends a reluctant servant to tell them that they are going to be destroyed because of their wickedness. The question is, “What was God’s intent in sending Jonah to them?” Apparently it was God’s intent to spare the Ninevites. Did God change His mind? No! He intended all along to spare the Ninevites, that is why He sent Jonah to them in the first place. God planned all along to withhold judgment from them, and He used Jonah as a tool to help bring it to pass. Once the Ninevites changed their ways, as God had always planned for them to do, God changed how He treated them in conformity to His own standards. (Obedience brings blessing; disobedience brings punishment.) When the Ninevites changed their lives in conformity to Jonah’s preaching, God held off His judgment as He had always planned.
Conclusion Prayer does not change God’s mind. God does not plan one thing for my life and then adjust that plan based upon whether or not I follow it. The infinite, omniscient, omnisapient, and absolutely sovereign God has a perfect plan for every molecule of creation, and that plan is never thwarted or affected by anything outside of God Himself. Prayer is used by God as a tool for the accomplishment of His eternal plan. God plans and uses prayer in the same way He plans and uses every other type of ministry. As for God repenting and changing His mind, in reality it never happens. Everything that happens in creation, even God’s “adjustments” to mankind, are part of God’s eternal plan. What looks like the changing of God’s mind to us, is actually God moving mankind in conformity to His eternal plan.
What is a Fundamentalist?
Gerald L. Priest. Ph.D.The term Fundamentalist has undergone many changes of meaning since it was first coined by Baptist editor Curtis Lee Laws in 1920. He identified a Fundamentalist as one who held to the great fundamental doctrines of the Bible and was willing to do “battle royal” to defend them. He was writing in the context of the historic Modernist-Fundamentalist Controversy when conservatives were battling liberals for Northern (now American) Baptist denominational control. The complaint of the Fundamentalists was that liberals were interlopers against whom Paul warned in Acts 20: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (v 28). These were apostates, who knew the truth but rejected it (2Ti 3.5, 13); false prophets and teachers who had brought in damnable heresies (2Pe 2.2). Faithful Christians were to reject them and their teachings (2Ti 3.5; Ro 16.17; 2Co 6.17). Fundamentalists denounced the liberals as not only being unbelievers but also having a religion vastly different from the revelation of an inspired Bible – a rationalistic man-centered religion in place of a supernaturalistic God-centered faith. If Fundamentalist leaders appeared blunt, one must realize the reason: they were uncompromisingly defending eternal verities (Jude 3) and the integrity of the God who had declared them. Divine truth which requires firm belief for everlasting life also demands a bold, plain expression of its content.
Unfortunately, the popular media use the term Fundamentalist either in a pejorative sense to reflect on someone who is outspoken against ungodliness; or to mark a political extremist advocating a strict but unpopular, even radical, behavior. Some use it in an inclusive sense, to identify nearly all televangelists, charismatics, and even New Evangelicals, with whom historic Fundamentalists would never affiliate. While biblical Fundamentalists may appear extreme to the world because their beliefs are at odds with its humanistic philosophy and secular lifestyle, in reality Fundamentalists are quite simply obedient Christians trying to please a holy God while defending orthodoxy.
Although the term is of recent origin, it reflects a resolute mentality and a set of irreducible beliefs as old as the Bible. A Fundamentalist is one who earnestly believes in an inspired, inerrant Scripture, including biblical miracles; an actual Trinity; the deity, virgin birth, vicarious atonement, bodily resurrection and second coming of Christ; the utter sinfulness of man; creation by God; and a literal heaven and hell. What is distinctive about all these beliefs is a hermeneutic of literalness: accept what the Bible says at face value in its particular context. In addition to these beliefs are certain marks or characteristics of the historic Fundamentalist. (1) He not only believes these doctrines, but he also militantly affirms them in the face of opposition. (2) He is fervently evangelistic in light of the biblical reality of sin, the saving grace of God through the blood of Christ, and the imminent premillennial return of the Savior. (3) And he practices the doctrine of separation as a part of sanctification.
Separation from all forms of ungodliness is really the hallmark of Fundamentalism. It is what distinguishes the Fundamentalist from other conservatives who may believe in the fundamentals of Scripture but who are disobedient in their relationships. Separation should be motivated by a desire to please God by keeping one’s self from whatever would tarnish his testimony and diminish God’s glory (Jas 1.27). This means separation from worldly activity (personal separation, 1Jo 2.15–17); from churches which do not take a stand for the fundamentals (ecclesiastical separation, 2Jn 9–11); and from other Christians who refuse to obey the clear teachings of Scripture (separation from the disobedient brother, 2Th 3.6, 14–15). In all relationships the Fundamentalist will consider first his loyalty to Christ and God’s infallible Word. He realizes that separation is not only from the world but also to Christ (1Th 1.9). “Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2Co 7.1).
Website designed, hosted, and maintained by WebRight Design