Nature of God

Aseity

Read 2216 times

campuspreacher

  • **
  • 64 Posts
    • View Profile
God's immutability
« on: March 11, 2014, 06:05:20 pm »
I am curious about the qualities of an infinite being versus a contingent being; I have understood that mutability is a hallmark quality of a contingent being and immutability is a hallmark quality of the essence of God's Aseity. But if Christ is God and He took on flesh and then died and now lives forever in a glorified body; wouldn't this imply that God is not immutable?

Thanks,

John

1

Vimbiso

  • **
  • 357 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: God's immutability
« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2014, 07:53:45 am »
I am curious about the qualities of an infinite being versus a contingent being; I have understood that mutability is a hallmark quality of a contingent being and immutability is a hallmark quality of the essence of God's Aseity. But if Christ is God and He took on flesh and then died and now lives forever in a glorified body; wouldn't this imply that God is not immutable?

Thanks,

John

God is essentially onmipotent, omniscient and morally perfect and if you view God's immutability as the immutability of these 3 qualities, then Jesus taking on a human nature is not tantamount to God changing. The human nature that Christ took on was flawless and untainted with sin which shows us that true human nature as God intended is sinless. This way, God in the flesh does not violate His omnipotence, omniscience and moral perfection. Since these three properties remain intact after the incarnation, we can reasonably conclude that God remained essentially the same.
Pro Nostrum Invisitatus Redemptor

2

campuspreacher

  • **
  • 64 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: God's immutability
« Reply #2 on: April 04, 2014, 08:54:18 pm »
Thank you for this answer

3

jayceeii

  • **
  • 81 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: God's immutability
« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2018, 07:30:46 am »
From body-identification, humans have been unable to attempt to conceptualize mechanisms for God’s Incarnation. That is to say, unable to conceptualize themselves as separate from their human bodies, their minds have not been moved to wonder how God achieved Incarnation in a human body. So you don’t find committees of Christians sitting around wondering, “How did He do it?” If you start to wonder that (if anyone starts to wonder that, which to me would be a wonder), it becomes obvious Incarnation is likely a stable function of the Invisible God. Furthermore, if it is something God has proven He can do once, He not only could do it again, but would also be highly motivated to do so, to keep a hand in creation, as it were. Then you might take a look at Ramakrishna. The similarities include a similar group of highly qualified disciples, and continued divine creativity in parables not seen in other teachers. Christians say God can only be born once, but that’s sacrilege against the living God. They don’t really want to see Him again, by any means.