Does God change His mind?

[smp501]

Hi! I’m currently in the process of coming into the Catholic Church from Presbyterianism. In my reading I came across this:

We know from Scripture that God does change His mind. God does suffer. God is influenced by prayer. God can be sorrowful and God does love. God changes His intended purpose as He chooses in response to the actions of man. Calvin’s doctrine of predestination strips God of His character and is proven to be false by Scriptures that show God changing His mind in response to mankind’s prayer or repentance.

Romans 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

2 kings 20:1 In those days Hezekiah was sick and near death. And Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, went to him and said to him, "Thus says the Lord: `Set your house in order, for you shall die, and not live.' " 2 Then he turned his face toward the wall, and prayed to the Lord, saying, 3 "Remember now, O Lord, I pray, how I have walked before You in truth and with a loyal heart, and have done [what] [was] good in Your sight." And Hezekiah wept bitterly. 4 And it happened, before Isaiah had gone out into the middle court, that the word of the Lord came to him, saying, 5 "Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, `Thus says the Lord, the God of David your father: "I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up to the house of the Lord. 6 "And I will add to your days fifteen years.

Genesis 6:5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every intent of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them."

Jonah 3:10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

The God of the Bible is certainly not the immutable, impassable God of Plato, Plotinus, Aristotle, Augustine and Calvin.
biblelife.org/calvinism.htm

Does the Church actually teach this? I’ve always understood that God planned everything out since before time, and that He does NOT change His mind (I guess that’s what 10 years of Presbyterian school will do to you). Could someone please clarify what this means and how this relates to the idea of sovereignty? Thank you!

 

[mathematoons]

These are all how humans understand what went on. God knew what He would do from the beginning. To humans, it only looks like He changed His mind.

If God changes His mind, then He does not exist outside of time, which means He did not create time, and hence He is not God.

 

[Anthony_V]

God’s nature is constant. It is the situation that changes. The instances you present are beyond me. I’m sure someone else on the forum has the answers. The Church would not have lasted 2000+ years thus far if such a critical point in the theology was missed. And if no one on the forums knows, perhaps you could ask an apologist or search to see if St. Thomas Aquinas has any answers. He knew just about everything, though he never would admit it

 

[CopticChristian]

Hi! I’m currently in the process of coming into the Catholic Church from Presbyterianism. In my reading I came across this:

Does the Church actually teach this? I’ve always understood that God planned everything out since before time, and that He does NOT change His mind (I guess that’s what 10 years of Presbyterian school will do to you). Could someone please clarify what this means and how this relates to the idea of sovereignty? Thank you!

For who has seen God? We anthopormphize God…we have a mind and we are called to change it…“repent”…Whatever we see in our understanding of the created mind is but a glimpse of the infinite mind…postulate all you want…I could not fathom understanding what created that which I think with…

 

[Rence]

Yes, he changes his mind. From Genesis 18:

but Abraham as yet stood before the Lord. [23] And drawing nigh he said: Wilt thou destroy the just with the wicked? [24] If there be fifty just men in the city, shall they perish withal? and wilt thou not spare that place for the sake of the fifty just, if they be therein? [25] Far be it from thee to do this thing, and to slay the just with the wicked, and for the just to be in like case as the wicked, this is not beseeming thee: thou who judgest all the earth, wilt not make this judgment.

[26] And the Lord said to him: If I find in Sodom fifty just within the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake. [27] And Abraham answered, and said: Seeing I have once begun, I will speak to my Lord, whereas I am dust and ashes. [28] What if there be five less than fifty just persons? wilt thou for five and forty destroy the whole city? And he said: I will not destroy it, if I find five and forty. [Genesis 18:28] [Latin] [29] And again he said to him: But if forty be found there, what wilt thou do? He said: I will not destroy it for the sake of forty. [30] Lord, saith he, be not angry, I beseech thee, if I speak: What if thirty shall be found there? He answered: I will not do it, if I find thirty there.

[31] Seeing, saith he, I have once begun, I will speak to my Lord. What if twenty be found there? He said: I will not destroy it for the sake of twenty. [32] I beseech thee, saith he, be not angry, Lord, if I speak yet once more: What if ten should be found there? And he said: I will not destroy it for the sake of ten. [33] And the Lord departed, after he had left speaking to Abraham: and Abraham returned to his place

 

[Armyvet007]

IOT to change one’s mind, one must first have decided on a different course of action in the past. Since God is not subject to time, I don’t think the question is valid.

 

[IrishRush]

but Abraham as yet stood before the Lord. [23] And drawing nigh he said: Wilt thou destroy the just with the wicked? [24] If there be fifty just men in the city, shall they perish withal? and wilt thou not spare that place for the sake of the fifty just, if they be therein? [25] Far be it from thee to do this thing, and to slay the just with the wicked, and for the just to be in like case as the wicked, this is not beseeming thee: thou who judgest all the earth, wilt not make this judgment.

[26] And the Lord said to him: If I find in Sodom fifty just within the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake. [27] And Abraham answered, and said: Seeing I have once begun, I will speak to my Lord, whereas I am dust and ashes. [28] What if there be five less than fifty just persons? wilt thou for five and forty destroy the whole city? And he said: I will not destroy it, if I find five and forty. [Genesis 18:28] [Latin] [29] And again he said to him: But if forty be found there, what wilt thou do? He said: I will not destroy it for the sake of forty. [30] Lord, saith he, be not angry, I beseech thee, if I speak: What if thirty shall be found there? He answered: I will not do it, if I find thirty there.

[31] Seeing, saith he, I have once begun, I will speak to my Lord. What if twenty be found there? He said: I will not destroy it for the sake of twenty. [32] I beseech thee, saith he, be not angry, Lord, if I speak yet once more: What if ten should be found there? And he said: I will not destroy it for the sake of ten. [33] And the Lord departed, after he had left speaking to Abraham: and Abraham returned to his place

This is one of my favorite exchanges in the bible. I think it shows us that God is reasonable, will not “throw out the baby with the bath water” so to speak, and it also kind of makes me laugh a little - I imagine God saying his replies with a bit of tone, especially the last. I don’t know, I find it very reassuring somehow.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes, he changes his mind. From Genesis 18:

Help me understand how you see God changing His mind?

 

[Rence]

Help me understand how you see God changing His mind?

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but I can’t help you understand what is written if you don’t already understand it.

 

[Rence]

This is one of my favorite exchanges in the bible. I think it shows us that God is reasonable, will not “throw out the baby with the bath water” so to speak, and it also kind of makes me laugh a little - I imagine God saying his replies with a bit of tone, especially the last. I don’t know, I find it very reassuring somehow.

It’s very reassuring to me. I have very good reason to believe that my mom was supposed to die when she had her stroke a few years ago. I prayed the paint off the walls of Heaven, and she came back. Further, upon waking she said she met God and was given a choice to either stay or come back. So I do believe that we can soften God with our prayers, and I don’t care an iota who doesn’t believe. It’s no skin off my nose. If somebody doesn’t believe they can aquire God’s mercy by asking, then that’s their unfortunate problem. All I know is that I asked (begged) and received and will never forget God’s Mercy and Love, because I know very well He could have said “no” instead of “yes”.

 

[CopticChristian]

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but I can’t help you understand what is written if you don’t already understand it.

This is not disrespectful. It indicates to me that you cannot explain what you see. I can understand that. Inability to explain something is not disrespect.

 

[Della]

God does not change his mind, but he uses such things as our prayers and “discussions” with him for our benefit–so we can see how he loves us and shows us his mercy. Prayers don’t change God’s mind, they show God we care and what we’d like to happen, but God always knew if our prayers would be answered according to our wishes. So, no man can say he made God do anything–God wanted the prayers to be said for our sake, not to get him to do what we want. God wanted Abraham to ask for the lives of the people of Sodom–for the sake of his faith and to stir up Abraham’s love for the people.

God desires to be merciful, as we see in the story of Jonah, who was decidedly unhappy that God didn’t destroy the city as Jonah had been preaching for 3 days. The people repented and God spared them, but a few years later, when they attacked Israel, they were destroyed. God knows what he is doing and why, it’s we who do not. God hears us, but he already knew what we were going to say and do. We must pray that we will faithful at all times and in all circumstances until the end of our days, and pray that everything we ask in petiionary prayer is according to God’s will.

 

[Cavaradossi]

I’m going to post perhaps a dissenting opinion here, since it seems that those who think any sort of human-like attributes we see of God in the bible are simply anthropomorphisms are in the majority here.

I think we have to recognize that an unchanging, impersonal and infinitely simple God is the God of Plato and Plotinus, not the God of Christians. God is unchanging, in that He loves us unconditionally, and He is unchanging in his divinity, but this does not mean that God does not have changing personal relationships with people.

We have to approach this question from two different perspectives to get the best grasp on it. The guiding principle for any sort of thinking about God is the use of apophatic (negative) statements. In other words, it is impossible for us to conceive what God is, therefore, we should approach the idea of the being of God from the angle of what God is not. This protects the transcendence of God from the limitations of our minds. To answer the question apophatically, we would state that God does not experience anger, suffer or change his mind, but also that God does not not experience anger, suffer, or change his mind (ad infinitum). To restate the answer into more plain speech, we would say that God does not experience what we understand to be anger, but that He also does not experience not experiencing a state which we understand to be anger, because His being transcends the concept we have of anger.

The second approach that we should take is that rather than viewing verses in the Bible about God changing his mind as mere anthropomorphisms, we have to remember that while anthropomorphizing God is dangerous, at the same time, we are theomorphic (in the image of God). This school of thought is that, since we are in the image of God, and not only that, but our form was God’s chosen vessel for becoming incarnate, there is probably some similarity between us and God. Therefore, many of our impulses, like a desire for good, a desire for communion, a desire for justice, a desire for love, and our emotions like sadness, happiness, suffering, and of course love probably have some sort of divine equivalent which they mimic (being in the image of God).

So to answer the question, I, at the very least, would say that God cannot change his mind in the way that we conceive it, because the very ‘mind’ of God is beyond our knowing. However, since our human minds are likely modeled after some sort of divine ‘mind’ or consciousness, it is likely that God’s consciousness bears some similarity to (but also transcends) our own consciousness, and that He can perform an action similar to ‘changing His mind,’ but this can only be said with the qualification that this is speculation into something that we cannot possibly understand (of course, there seems to be plenty of scripture where God appears to ‘change His mind,’ so the idea is not completely without merit).

 

[jwright82]

I’m Presbyterian as well, though I have no intention of changing my mind on that (no pun intented). In the course of time Calvinism has been charecatured as being obsessed with predestination. It is thought this is the first and primary doctrine that we hold to but that is not true. Another and better name for Calvinism would be Covenant Theology. This is because it is the biblical idea of the covenant that is the warp and woof of Reformed theology.

In it we emphasis that God as he is in himself is incomprehensable to us unless he reveals himself to us. We cannot use reason to peel back heaven and decipher things about him that he has not revaled to us. But even in his revelation he condescends to our creaturly level in that he chooses apropriate human concepts and ideas that best describe as he is. This is analogical in nature, in fact God takes human analogies to reveal to us. We can also say that all revelation is anthropomorphic because God takes on human concepts and analogies to reveal himself to us.

This means that when that when he reveals himself as “changing his mind” it is not describing as he exactly as he is within himself but only the closest aproximate idea that we creatures can understand of him. This means that there is a lot of mystery involved but that is ok because we can’t know everything.

 

[wjp984]

God does not change his mind. People change their minds and actions and therefore affect the outcome of what God will do.

I suppose an example would be if a teacher tells a student that they will fail the class. But then the student works extremely hard to improve and ends up with a passing grade.

Did the teacher change his or her mind by passing the student.

God knows the future but for the vast majority does not reveal the future to us. Thus, God informed people on what will happen under the current circumstances. Then after God allowed the persons to bring up what if scenarios, God explained what would happen under the different set of circumstances (the Abraham story you quote)

Regarding the other story about God providing an extra 15 years of life, that was not God changing his mind either.

God informed the guy that he was going to die under the current circumstances. The guy prayed to God and cause and effect, God decided to merciful, something He already knew He was going to do, and provided an extra fifteen years of life.

 

[VivaCristoRey27]

The other posters have sufficiently answered the question, I just wanted to reiterate though.

God does not change, He is the same yesterday, today and forever. That means that He does not decide to do one thing and then change His mind and decide to do another thing. He does, however, make conditional statements – if you do X, then I will do Y. God also has ordained that certain events in our lives require a certain amount of prayer and fasting or other penance to be done before we can obtain what we desire. That is why we storm Heaven with prayers, not to convince God through the pressure of His subjects but rather to obtain that level of merit required in the eternal decrees of God.

 

[VivaCristoRey27]

Additionally, I should note that predestination is not peculiar to Calvinism. It is peculiar because Calvin took it to an extreme and even said that some people are predestined to go to Hell and that people can’t change whether they are going to be saved or damned. The Catholic Church rejects this view, sometimes called “predestinarianism” (Calvin did not invent it either).

The totally opposite error is that of Pelagianism – the idea that we can attain Heaven by our own actions, without the need for God’s grace and mercy. Semipelagianism teaches that we cannot attain Heaven without God’s grace but that we can at least turn to God without grace. Both are condemned by the Catholic Church. We cannot even turn towards God without Him giving us the grace to do so.

Between these two extremes of Calvinism and Pelagianism, there are two orthodox schools of thought on the subject of predestination. The first is that of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, which may be termed the “strong” view of predestination. We still have free will (Catholics reject the Calvinist doctrine of “Irresistible Grace”) and God desires all men to be saved (Catholics reject the Calvinist doctrines of “Limited Atonement” and “Double Predestination”) but God gives different amounts of graces to different people. Some people seem to live a spiritually charmed life because of all the graces given to them even from birth, the Mother of God being the most extreme example but also St. John the Baptist and some post-Biblical saints as well.

God created the angels perfectly ordered – from the least to the greatest (Lucifer). When some of the angels fell, God created man to fill in the gaps in the hierarchy of grace. St. Augustine puts it this way:
St. Augustine:

And so it pleased God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, that, since the whole body of the angels had not fallen into rebellion, the part of them which had fallen should remain in perdition eternally, and that the other part, which had in the rebellion remained steadfastly loyal, should rejoice in the sure and certain knowledge of their eternal happiness; but that, on the other hand, mankind, who constituted the remainder of the intelligent creation, having perished without exception under sin, both original and actual, and the consequent punishments, should be in part restored, and should fill up the gap which the rebellion and fall of the devils had left in the company of the angels. For this is the promise to the saints, that at the resurrection they shall be equal to the angels of God. And thus the Jerusalem which is above, which is the mother of us all, the city of God, shall not be spoiled of any of the number of her citizens, shall perhaps reign over even a more abundant population. We do not know the number either of the saints or of the devils; but we know that the children of the holy mother who was called barren on earth shall succeed to the place of the fallen angels, and shall dwell for ever in that peaceful abode from which they fell. But the number of the citizens, whether as it now is or as it shall be, is present to the thoughts of the great Creator, who calls those things which are not as though they were, and orders all things in measure, and number, and weight.

In modern times, the greatest proponent of this school of thought and the greatest Thomist theologian of the 20th c. is Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange. His 400 page tome on predestination is dense but theologically precise (in true Thomist form). If you want to know what the Catholic Church teaches on predestination, this is the book to get. It’s published by TAN and you can find it on Amazon for $20.

The alternative school of thought, which is still considered orthodox by the Catholic Church is called “Molinism” after the 16th c. Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina. If Thomism is comparable to Calvinism (though without the extremes), Molinism is comparable to Arminianism (a “weak” predestination). Molinism teaches that God knows what hypothetical people would do in every given situation and so He creates them and their situations according to what they would choose to do – as the best of all possible worlds.

The various orthodox schools of thought in the Catholic Church are part of how the Church teaches. The Catholic Faith is less like a series of propositions and more like a playing field. There are some who go “out of bounds” into heresy but there are still various positions on the field one may stand in.

Pope Benedict XIV puts it this way,
Pope Benedict XIV:

You know there are manifold opinions in the schools on the famous questions about predestination and grace, and on the manner of reconciling human liberty with the omnipotence of God. The Thomists are said to be destroyers of human liberty and followers not only of Jansenism but of Calvinism. However, since they meet the charges with eminent satisfaction, and since their opinion has never been condemned by the Holy See, the Thomists carry on without hindrance in this matter, and it is not right for any ecclesiastical superior in the present state of affairs to force them to change their opinion.

The Augustinians are reported as the followers of du Bay and of Jansenism. They represent themselves as defenders of human liberty, and strenuously answer their critics. Since their opinion, too, has not been condemned by the Holy See, no effort should therefore be made to compel them to give up their theory.

The followers of Molina and Suarez are condemned by their adversaries as Semi-Pelagians. But the Roman Pontiffs have not passed judgment on the Molinist system, which they presently defend and may continue to do so.

So we may argue between the different schools of thought on this and other issues but they are all acceptable.