Does God change?

[whatischarity]

I understand the importance of maintaining orthodoxy in belief and that the deposit of faith was completed almost 2000 years ago. I know some stress mightily how the faith must remain the same in the past, present, and future. This desire sometimes mainfests itself by insisting on older definitions and theological terminology and rituals instead of more current explanations and phraseology and rituals.

My question is this. Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God and the form of desired worship of God between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Doesn’t this set a precedent that understanding of god can be changed for the better by duly commisioned parties? Shouldn’t this give pause to those who overly stress the adherance to tradition and the letter of the law versus the spirit in so far as how the faith is expressed?

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

I don’t think Jesus necessarily radically changed how people perceived God, I’m not sure what you mean by form,both the OT and NT say God wants “mercy” not sacrifice. I don’t understand really what the last two questions are, please dumb them down for me

 

[StrawberryJam]

I understand the importance of maintaining orthodoxy in belief and that the deposit of faith was completed almost 2000 years ago. I know some stress mightily how the faith must remain the same in the past, present, and future. This desire sometimes mainfests itself by insisting on older definitions and theological terminology and rituals instead of more current explanations and phraseology and rituals.

My question is this. Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God and the form of desired worship of God between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Doesn’t this set a precedent that understanding of god can be changed for the better by duly commisioned parties? Shouldn’t this give pause to those who overly stress the adherance to tradition and the letter of the law versus the spirit in so far as how the faith is expressed?

Give me some examples of older definitions and theological terminology and rituals compared to more current explainations and phraseology and rituals.

Jesus did change how humans perceive God in that he incorporated himself into that understanding. If you think there is less or more to that, please explain.

Also, the worship would change given one believes Jesus is God. Many things would change.

Your entire last paragraph is not making any sense to me. God and man are not duly commisioned parties in the sense most people would use that terminology.

Nor does your conclusion make sense to me. I’m not seeing you connect the dots here.

 

[thistle]

I understand the importance of maintaining orthodoxy in belief and that the deposit of faith was completed almost 2000 years ago. I know some stress mightily how the faith must remain the same in the past, present, and future. This desire sometimes mainfests itself by insisting on older definitions and theological terminology and rituals instead of more current explanations and phraseology and rituals.

My question is this. Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God and the form of desired worship of God between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Doesn’t this set a precedent that understanding of god can be changed for the better by duly commisioned parties? Shouldn’t this give pause to those who overly stress the adherance to tradition and the letter of the law versus the spirit in so far as how the faith is expressed?

I’m not saying this applies to you but generally speaking such comments usually come from people who disagree with/refuse to accept some of the Church’s teachings and somehow try to justify that.

 

[whatischarity]

Let me try again. As I understand it, the Jewish religion had the Old Testament and from that they perceived God in a completely monotheistic sense and Judaism, along with Islam, continue to do that. Since we Christians accept the teaching of Jesus Christ, we now accept that God is One but we also have been enlightened to know that there are three distinct though equal Persons in the one God. Is that not a big theological change dealing with the nathure of God?

Another example would be in the Gospel where Jesus is talking about divorce. He states that the Mosaic Law allows divorce due to the hardness of the hearts of the Jewish people. Jesus went on to proclaim that what God has joined together let no man put asunder. Thus He made something that was allowable by God under the Old Testament something not allowed by God under the New Testament. Is that not a major moral change?

Other examples would be the Old Testament had certain foods that were unclean and this has been expurged in the New Testament. Circumcision was obliged under the Old Testament. Weren’t Gentiles excluded under the Old Testament?

Where I am coming with all this is that I have been around people who look poorly on the teachings of Vatican Council II and dislike many aspects such as the priest facing the people, receiving the Holy Eucharist in the hand, women not wearing veils, less reverence during the Holy Sacrifice, the Novus Ordo form as a whole. My perception is that these changes are very minor compared to the changes that Jesus made. Additionally, Jesus gave the apostles and their descendants certain perogatives to make changes. The bottom line is that, although God does not change, how humans perceive Him and our duty toward Him have changed radically as manifested by the New Testament. I am just using this fact as a precedent to demonstrate the reasonableness of Pope and the hierarchy in union with him, under the protection of the Holy Spirit, to make changes to the rites and rituals of the Roman Catholic Church.

I hope that helps. Thanks for helping me out here. I definitely am not attacking the Roman Catholic Church!

 

[StrawberryJam]

Let me try again. As I understand it, the Jewish religion had the Old Testament and from that they perceived God in a completely monotheistic sense and Judaism, along with Islam, continue to do that. Since we Christians accept the teaching of Jesus Christ, we now accept that God is One but we also have been enlightened to know that there are three distinct though equal Persons in the one God. Is that not a big theological change dealing with the nathure of God?

 

[corinne333]

yeah…i have a teacher that basically says the same thing. he use to be Catholic and was going to become a Jesuit priest…but then he became a messianic jew and thinks the Jesuits and the Catholic church is evil. (i mean, he practices everything jewish…he follows all the laws and celebrations, will celebrate jewish hoildays but not Christmas…) he says he does this because the GOD of the old testiment does not change. (does not believe in Commuinon because in the Torah, you can’t drink blood…thinks we messed up the 2nd commandment to worship stautes, ect.)

 

[CentralFLJames]

I understand the importance of maintaining orthodoxy in belief and that the deposit of faith was completed almost 2000 years ago. I know some stress mightily how the faith must remain the same in the past, present, and future. This desire sometimes mainfests itself by insisting on older definitions and theological terminology and rituals instead of more current explanations and phraseology and rituals.

My question is this. Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God and the form of desired worship of God between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Doesn’t this set a precedent that understanding of god can be changed for the better by duly commisioned parties? Shouldn’t this give pause to those who overly stress the adherance to tradition and the letter of the law versus the spirit in so far as how the faith is expressed?

Perceptions may change but God does not change.

Perceptions change even as a function of our age. A less experienced person, say a child, sees the sun come up in the east and set in the west. All he knows is that this is the way it is. An educated adult knows a greater dimension of “the way it is” and knows about the earth’s spin and orbit that gives rise to changes in season etc.

The Jews had an evolutionary revelation of God that was completed at the Resurrection. Perceptions caused some to convert to Catholicism and others to reject Catholicism and actually start persecuting the Church. God is still God - we just have a more enlightened insight into Him. If God were not unchanging then the principals of Justice would change from age to age. What changes is how people perceive and relate to God.

James

 

[PacoG]

I don’t think Jesus necessarily radically changed how people perceived God, I’m not sure what you mean by form,both the OT and NT say God wants “mercy” not sacrifice. I don’t understand really what the last two questions are, please dumb them down for me

I’m no theologian. But I looked up this quote because it explains how Jesus changed our preception of how we see God. This is from Pope Benedict XVI’s Christmas 2008 Homily (I am constantly amazed how profound he is and how he words things)…

The medieval theologian William of Saint Thierry once said that God – from the time of Adam – saw that his grandeur provoked resistance in man, that we felt limited in our own being and threatened in our freedom. Therefore God chose a new way. He became a child. He made himself dependent and weak, in need of our love. Now – this God who has become a child says to us – you can no longer fear me, you can only love me.

 

[CentralFLJames]

I’m no theologian. But I looked up this quote because it explains how Jesus changed our preception of how we see God. This is from Pope Benedict XVI’s Christmas 2008 Homily (I am constantly amazed how profound he is and how he words things)…

The medieval theologian William of Saint Thierry once said that God – from the time of Adam – saw that his grandeur provoked resistance in man, that we felt limited in our own being and threatened in our freedom. Therefore God chose a new way. He became a child. He made himself dependent and weak, in need of our love. Now – this God who has become a child says to us – you can no longer fear me, you can only love me.

Very good and how true. NO MAN can look into the innocent and defenseless eyes of a child and not love it and feel a need to cherish it and embrace it. If we all looked at God this way we would all be much more protective of our faith and our own innocence and CHANGE OUR HEARTS for God.

James

 

[whatischarity]

What changes is how people perceive and relate to God.

Yes that is what I think too. In my example of the Old versus the New testaments, it is God Himself, in the Person of Jesus, who does the teaching to change the perception and it is the hugest historical change known right?

Is it agreed that it is a huge cumulative change between the 2 testaments?
If so, would not the Jews have perhaps legitimately thought: “These are the revealed truths God gave to Moses. This is God’s teaching. He would not have allowed us to misunderstand them. This Jesus is teaching things that directly contradict what God gave Moses.”

Do I go too far in saying the teachings of Jesus contradict the teachings of Moses? Should it be phrased differently. Sure seems different to me in lots of significant ways way beyond changing a few jots and tittle as they used to say.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Yes that is what I think too. In my example of the Old versus the New testaments, it is God Himself, in the Person of Jesus, who does the teaching to change the perception and it is the hugest historical change known right?

Is it agreed that it is a huge cumulative change between the 2 testaments?
If so, would not the Jews have perhaps legitimately thought: “These are the revealed truths God gave to Moses. This is God’s teaching. He would not have allowed us to misunderstand them. This Jesus is teaching things that directly contradict what God gave Moses.”

Do I go too far in saying the teachings of Jesus contradict the teachings of Moses? Should it be phrased differently. Sure seems different to me in lots of significant ways way beyond changing a few jots and tittle as they used to say.

Some people thought the two were very different, and in fact 2 different gods. These people were condemned by the catholic church as heretics and that sums that up.

 

[ConallCernach]

Some people thought the two were very different, and in fact 2 different gods. These people were condemned by the catholic church as heretics and that sums that up.

If you do sincerely read through the OT and the NT, it is rather difficult to say that they are two different entities. The OT God professes to be a God of love, just as Jesus professes His Father to be. Jesus talks about His Father as being the God of the Israelites during their troubles etc.

So, a person who denounces the God of the OT as an evil god and professes to being a Catholic is a heretic.

Pax

 

[whatischarity]

Wow, I never heard of anyone who thought they were 2 different gods.

So do you believe there is not very much difference between the Mosaic Law and the New Testament? If so, do you think that point of view is widespread among Roman Catholics?

 

[StrawberryJam]

Wow, I never heard of anyone who thought they were 2 different gods.

So do you believe there is not very much difference between the Mosaic Law and the New Testament? If so, do you think that point of view is widespread among Roman Catholics?

There are many beliefs about God that have been declared heretical. That was just one example. There are other examples, some in varying degrees based upon that thought of 2 seperate gods, one in the OT and another in the NT, but that is quite beside the point.

I was merely commenting on the posts you have made using the OT and NT as a basis for this topic. I represent neither position, clearly.

Continue in a moment-

 

[PJM]

=whatischarity; I understand the importance of maintaining orthodoxy in belief and that the deposit of faith was completed almost 2000 years ago. I know some stress mightily how the faith must remain the same in the past, present, and future. This desire sometimes mainfests itself by insisting on older definitions and theological terminology and rituals instead of more current explanations and phraseology and rituals.

My question is this. Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God and the form of desired worship of God between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Doesn’t this set a precedent that understanding of god can be changed for the better by duly commisioned parties? Shouldn’t this give pause to those who overly stress the adherance to tradition and the letter of the law versus the spirit in so far as how the faith is expressed?

**
Very profound questions.**

***The reply to your OPQ…

God is, was and always will be the same. Perfect in every good thing and completely unchangeable.

This being fact, one must take literally that God is perfectly Good, perfectly understanding, perfectly and all-wise, and cannot be in error. Simply impossible, or God could not, would not be God.

From this perspective one MUST undestand that what God mandates take furture, present and past into consideration. Time simply does not exist for God.

So in setting the structure of His single Church, Christ proves He knew what and how to do it ***

John 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd. [Christ also knew there would be those who would choose as you suggest, there own way, and seperate from His One Flock. One Church, One Faith and ONLY His Entire Bible.

**Acts.20:28 “Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church [SINGULAR] of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son. “

**Mt. 16: 15 **He [Jesus] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I [singular] tell you, you are Peter, [singular] and on this rock [singular] I will build my [singular] church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. [singular] 19 I [God singular] will give you [singular] the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you [singular] bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

**Eph. 2:19 19 **So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [singular] **built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, ** in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

This Church Founded by Christ has survived and grown to be the largest Christian Church in the world, BY NOT adapting to secular demands, fads, others ideas of improvemnt; but rather by purdently and Obediently, staying the course. Despite the political climate world-wide, She still exerts more positive influence than all other religions combined. Why is this?

***Because the Catholic Church holds the KEY’s Th the Kinhdom of heaven. Each and every TRUTH on matters of Faith and Morals, rest in Her care and custody. That was, That is and that always shall be the TRUTH:yup:

Your idea is NOT new, not unique, and has been [actually IS BEING tried] with desastorous results for souls.***

***The PEW Report of 2008 in comparing 1970 Catholic practice and results to those of today

1970 about 75% of self professed Catholics [SPC’s] attended Sunday and HD Mass; that numer has now DROPPED to to 23%

Those same SPC’s had about 65% who went to the Sacrament of Confession at least once a year; that number is now reported at 10%.

So other, newer, “better” ways have and are tried, and look at the results. This is what happens for improvising, not following our Pope and Magistrium, for allowing some who claimed to know MORE and know Better, to lead the sheep, there way

So thanks, BUT no thanks! Been there, done that, wish we hadn’t.*

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[whatischarity]

I understand Jesus founded one church to lead men to salvation through the merits He earned on the cross when He redeemed us. What strikes me is the difference between the Mosaic Law and the New testament. God decreed so many things to be done in a certain way in the Mosaic Law. Didn’t Jesus remove a lot of those rituals and in their place move the stress to doing things for love of God and neighbor? So if you were a Jew during the time of Jesus well versed in the Mosaic Law, would not Jesus’ teachings be radical?

I think the difference is radical and I am wondering why God would have instituted the 2 different testaments. Why have such an imperfect Old Testament in which the mystery of the Trinity was hidden from view for instance? And then why change how You want man to worship you?

 

[davidv]

I understand Jesus founded one church to lead men to salvation through the merits He earned on the cross when He redeemed us. What strikes me is the difference between the Mosaic Law and the New testament. God decreed so many things to be done in a certain way in the Mosaic Law. Didn’t Jesus remove a lot of those rituals and in their place move the stress to doing things for love of God and neighbor? So if you were a Jew during the time of Jesus well versed in the Mosaic Law, would not Jesus’ teachings be radical?

I think the difference is radical and I am wondering why God would have instituted the 2 different testaments. Why have such an imperfect Old Testament in which the mystery of the Trinity was hidden from view for instance? And then why change how You want man to worship you?

Why are the rules that parents set for their grade school children so greatly different from those set for their adult children?

God’s people grew from spiritual infants (Adam and Eve) to spiritual adults (New Covenant). The rules had to be different.

 

[PJM]

=whatischarity;6170148]I understand Jesus founded one church to lead men to salvation through the merits He earned on the cross when He redeemed us. What strikes me is the difference between the Mosaic Law and the New testament. God decreed so many things to be done in a certain way in the Mosaic Law. Didn’t Jesus remove a lot of those rituals and in their place move the stress to doing things for love of God and neighbor? So if you were a Jew during the time of Jesus well versed in the Mosaic Law, would not Jesus’ teachings be radical?

I think the difference is radical and I am wondering why God would have instituted the 2 different testaments. Why have such an imperfect Old Testament in which the mystery of the Trinity was hidden from view for instance? And then why change how You want man to worship you?

*** Understanding God is for most of us like trying to understand Greek. It may be beautiful; but it is definitely difficult to comprehend.

In reading between the historical lines in the OT and NT, one discovers, thanks largely to Greek and Roman influence, a far greater level of education in the “mass” of the populace existed in the NT times of Christ, than in the periods prior to the Incarnation. Luke and Matthew, as well as Paul and Mary the Mother of Jesus were all well educated and informed.

This FACT plays into the scheme of God’s [perfect] planning and ties the introduction of the Blessed Trinity [a concept that even today ones struggles to explain and comprehend] with The Birth and life of God on earth, in order for God Himself to make evident this mystery, and be available to explain God’s eternal plan for humanities personal salvation and redemption.

Such wondrous Works require explanation, and who better to do that, than God Himself, in the Person of Jesus Christ? Thant explains the reason for the timing.

God’s OT view of Himself is wrought with terror, vengeance, swift justice, because that was the clime of the time. God “spoke” and acted in a manner consistent with the normal way of life. And eye for an eye was only the beginning, they also took a tooth.

Look even today at the action and reaction of Israel and her neighbors. It is still, “I’ll do you a “one better mentality,” which is the base for no lasting peace.

One must be aware and careful of the “pride issue“ creeping into our seeking understanding. God is PERFECT, can‘t be wrong and can‘t be in error. PERIOD! So if we are trying to simply understand why God choose such and such; fine! But one should stop short of questioning God‘s REASONS and logic, which cannot be in error.

Your final question dealing with worship, misses the mark. God has always wanted to be Worshiped. Read for example Exodus chapters 26-28 on the Ark Of the Covenant. Indeed, God’s swift justice was precipited by the Jews being told Specifically time and time again just HOW to Worship God, and then fail to do so. [It’s not a whole lot different today.
**

Psalm 50: 1“The Mighty One, God the LORD, speaks and summons the earth from the rising of the sun to its setting.”

Rom.14: 11 " for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
and every tongue shall give praise to God.”

Isiah 43: 7 “every one who is called by my name,whom I created for my glory,
whom I formed and made.”

Isiah 43:21 “the people whom I formed for myself that they might declare my praise.”

See, the mandate is the same.

Love and prayers,
Pat

Love and prayers,**

 

[grannymh]

I understand the importance of maintaining orthodoxy in belief and that the deposit of faith was completed almost 2000 years ago. I know some stress mightily how the faith must remain the same in the past, present, and future. This desire sometimes mainfests itself by insisting on older definitions and theological terminology and rituals instead of more current explanations and phraseology and rituals.

My question is this. Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God and the form of desired worship of God between the Old Testament and the New Testament? Doesn’t this set a precedent that understanding of god can be changed for the better by duly commisioned parties? Shouldn’t this give pause to those who overly stress the adherance to tradition and the letter of the law versus the spirit in so far as how the faith is expressed?

May I respectfully point out that the OP referred to humans in the sentence beginning: Did not Jesus radically change how humans perceive God…" How we change in the ways we perceive God does not imply that God changes. Humans did change in a very good way which is part of our growth in understanding God Who does not change.

Since I am not sure what would be meant by tradition, my only comment is that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a re-presentation of Christ’s Sacrifice and there are no duly commissioned parties who can override God.

Blessings,
granny

Please share these websites with family and friends.