The Christ Centred Cosmic Civilisation
Rod Dreher wrote “to order the world rightly as Christians requires regarding all things as pointing to Christ”
Christ is the One in Whom in all things consist and humanity is not the measure of all things. If a defining characteristic of the modern world is disorder then the most fundamental act of resistance is to discover and life according to the deep, divine order of the heavens and the earth.
In this series we want to look at the big model of the universe that the Bible and Christian history provides.
It is a mind and heart expanding vision of reality.
It is not confined to the limits of our bodily senses - but tries to embrace levels fo reality that are not normally accessible or tangible to our exiled life on earth.
We live on this side of the cosmic curtain - and therefore the highest and greatest dimensions of reality are hidden to us… yet these dimensions exist and are the most fundamental framework for the whole of the heavens and the earth.
Throughout this series we want to pick away at all the threads of reality to see how they all join together - how they all find common meaning and reason in the great divine logic - the One who is the Logos, the LORD Jesus Christ - the greatest that both heaven and earth has to offer.
Colossians 1:15-23
The Christ Centred Cosmic Civilisation
Episode 116 - The Trinity Through Time: Understanding How God Never Changes
The doctrine of divine immutability stands at the crossroads of biblical revelation, church history, and philosophical speculation. What does it truly mean when Scripture declares that God "does not change"?
This theological exploration takes us on a journey through the biblical foundations of God's unchanging nature, revealing how Scripture consistently emphasizes the trustworthy character of the Father, Son, and Spirit. Their promises remain unshakably reliable—a rock-solid foundation upon which we can plant our lives for both present existence and eternity.
As we delve into church history, we witness how early Christian leaders like Tertullian brilliantly defended the unchanging Trinity against heretics who claimed God was first Father, then Son, then Spirit. "With the Father were always present the Word and Wisdom," declared Irenaeus in the second century, affirming that the three divine persons have eternally existed together—never separated, never evolving from one to another.
The Nicene Creed's careful articulation of Christ as "eternally begotten" and "of one being with the Father" further cemented the church's stance against Arianism, which falsely claimed there was once a time when the Son did not exist. Throughout these historical battles, the church consistently rejected any notion that God undergoes structural change.
Yet beyond these biblical and creedal affirmations lies a realm of philosophical speculation about divine immutability. Some theologians argue that God cannot change because He is timeless, simple, or "perfect." These philosophical constructs—never included in the ecumenical creeds—raise profound questions about the foundation of our trust in God.
Is the reliability of God's promises grounded in His faithful character or in His metaphysical nature? Must we believe that God exists outside of time for His word to be trustworthy? Or can we simply trust His character as revealed throughout salvation history?
This thought-provoking examination challenges us to distinguish between clear biblical teaching and philosophical speculation, ultimately deepening our understanding of the God who remains the same yesterday, today, and forever.
The theme music is "Wager with Angels" by Nathan Moore
Okay, we're continuing to look at how is the living God immutable, or what does it mean when the scriptures tell us that the Lord does not change? So in our first two episodes looking at this, we were just examining all the scriptures on this topic. And now we'll move to the second heading, which is that, as the global church had to engage with heretics and heathens, god does not change. So remember the first category, which we thought seems to be all the way through the Bible. When the Bible is dealing with this, the emphasis is on the character of the Father, son and Spirit, that this living God is utterly trustworthy, reliable, faithful, makes promises that are always maintained, that the words that are spoken by the living God are unshakably reliable and that we, on this rock that is the word of God, or the words of God, we can plant our feet, even our lives. For this life and for eternity is this rock solid foundation. But now we're going to look at this other way, that it's kind of looking at a structure. In what sense is the living God doesn't change in a structural sense.
Speaker 1:So, for example, there were some who denied the Trinity in the second century by saying that God was first the Father, the New Testament times, and now God has become the Spirit. So they were sort of saying that God is Father, then Son, then Spirit. But is not Father and Son and Spirit simultaneously, not father and son and spirit simultaneously? And this heresy was called well, it was kind of called monarchianism, the rule of one, because it was arguing there's only one divine ruler overall, not three. There is a way in which the father is the one source of divine rule, but it's really saying that there's just this one person. But Tertullian, the second century North African church leader and theologian. He showed from scripture that the Trinity really is the rule of one God, because the Father, son and Spirit are the one God. The Son is born from the Father and the Spirit proceeds from the Father, such that they all share the same life together. So here's a quotation from Tertullian against Praxius, chapter four. He says this as for me, who derived the son from no other source but from the substance of the father, and I represent him as doing nothing without the Father's will and as having received all power from the Father, how can I be destroying the monarchy from the faith when I preserve it in the Son just as it was committed to him by the Father. The same remark I wish also to be formally made by me with respect to the third degree in the Godhead, because I believe the spirit to proceed from no other source than from the father through the son. So you can see there that the heretics were saying that there's only one, there's one God who rules over all, and therefore it has to be the father, son and always breathes out the Spirit. And so the Father, son and Spirit are together, sharing the same life. They are one God, one God, and that the Father exercises his will through the Son in the power of the Spirit. The Father is the source of the Son and the Spirit, and so the three are together one God.
Speaker 1:Let's have another bit from Tertullian. This is Tertullian against Praxeas, chapter 9. Tertullian this is Tertullian against Praxius, chapter 9. He says this I testify that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are inseparable from each other. Now observe my assertion that the Father is one and the Son one and the Spirit one, son one and the Spirit one, and that they are distinct from each other.
Speaker 1:This statement is taken in a wrong sense by every uneducated as well as every perversely disposed person, as if it predicated a diversity in such a sense as to imply a separation among the Father and the Son and the Spirit. So what's so good there about how Tertullian describes that is he's saying the Father, son and Spirit are inseparable from each other and actually that everything they do, and actually that everything they do, they do in this inseparable way. And yet he says it's very important to say the Father is one, the Son is one, the Spirit is one and they are distinct from each other. There are three distinct persons and yet if a person says they are diverse, that is that they are kind of separate gods. That is perverse, that is uneducated, that is foolish. Can you see he's got this perfect balance that the Father, son and Spirit are inseparably the one, god always acting separately, and so on, so on. But they are absolutely distinct persons, but not so distinct that they are separate, separate gods kind of. So you see he's very careful in asserting how God is one and how God is three.
Speaker 1:And so the important point there is Tertullian is showing that that is how God always is and that when these heretics were saying God is first one thing, then something else, then something else, that is like having God having sort of serious structural change and that there is not always the Father and the Son and the Spirit, but that they are kind of consecutive and that there's a kind of biography of how the Father becomes the Son and the Son becomes the Spirit. But the three are never one together. So the Trinity doesn't change in any way. That's so important in Tertullian's argument. There there's this one God who is always Father and Son and Spirit, distinctly each, but not separated as each. So the living God is always and eternally God the Father, god the Son and God the Holy Spirit, everally. God the Father, god the Son and God the Holy Spirit, ever one God. And that comes out of course in Deuteronomy 6, 4 to 5.
Speaker 1:Hear O Israel, the Lord, our God. The Lord is a unity one. The Hebrew word ekad a composite one. The Lord is a composite one. Love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. So the doctrine of the to correctly understand the doctrine of the trinity, that the son is eternally begotten of the father and the spirit is eternally breathed out by the father through the son, if you wish to add that that is extremely important to establish this other sense in which God does not change.
Speaker 1:And this was also important in the conflict with the Arians who said that. So now we're moving forward to the fourth century, the Arians who said that there was a time when God, the Son, did not exist. So again, this was important to stand on this truth that the Trinity does not change. There never was a time when the sun or the spirit did not exist. The sun and the spirit have always existed. And so the kind of important question in that Arian controversy which led to the Nicene Creed, the important question was was there a time when the sun was not? Was there a time when the sun did not exist? The arian said, yeah, there was a time when the sun did not exist. And then the biblical orthodox people, who was just following the teaching of the bible, they would say no, the sun has always existed. So that again, the heretics are bringing in this concept of change right into the heart and structure the being of God, and that's completely blasphemous.
Speaker 1:So John 1, 1 to 3, in the beginning was the word. The word was with God, the word was God. He was with God, the father, in the beginning. Through him all things were made. Without him, nothing was made that has been made. So, in other words, god the Son cannot have been made because he is the creator that made everything that has ever been made, because he is the creator that made everything that has ever been made. That's what John's assertion is, and it became quite important in the arguments to say the father did not become the father at a time when the son began to exist. He is always being the father because he has always had his eternal son begotten, eternally begotten, and he has always had the spirit breathed out by the father. The father is always the father, the son is always the son.
Speaker 1:And so you'll remember, in the nicene creed this is important because they go we believe in one god, the father, the almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one lord, jesus christ, the only son of god, eternally begotten of the father, god from god, light from light, true god from true god, begotten, not made of one being with the father. Through him, all things were made. See, and that's so important. Again, he is the creator. The father creates all things through the son, and the son is not a creature but is eternally begotten of the father and shares the same, being the same life as the father. He is born of God, god from God. Everything that the father is is also in the son. So in this second sense, the unchanging nature of the Trinity focuses really on the definition of the Trinity, what God is as well as who God is.
Speaker 1:And the global church down through history around the world has always vigorously rejected any idea that the living God has structurally changed. I mean to even say it is like makes us feel uncomfortable, it's so obviously blasphemous. Rather, churches always confess the Bible, teaching the clear teaching of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, that the one God is and always has been Father, son and Holy Spirit. So even like the epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians, chapter 4, there is one unbegotten being, god, even the Father, and one only begotten Son, god, the word and man, one comforter, the spirit of truth, and also one preaching and one faith and one baptism. So there we can go right back to the earliest time of the post-apostolic time, after the apostles, and we can see that clear confession that there's this one God, father, son and spirit. Or Irenaeus in the second century against heresies, book four, chapter 20, for with him, with the father, was were always present the word and wisdom. So listen that carefully. This is Irenaeus in the second century. With the father were always present the word and wisdom, the son and the spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, he made all things, to whom also the Father speaks, saying Let us make humanity after our image and likeness. So hugely important right there in the second century, this strong assertion of the Bible's teaching that the Father has always had with him the Son and the Spirit.
Speaker 1:There are modern versions of this idea of the changingness of God. There have been those who've said things like involvement in history is so complete, so complete, and they kind of lose the transcendence of God and have it that God genuinely undergoes historical development. There are people who speak like that and that there's the living God kind of changes, structurally changes as as the universe evolves, is so complete that the history of the universe is a kind of history of the God of God also. And there have been heretics and pagans who assert such things. And again Christians stand over against that and say yes, the living God does have genuine relations in and with the universe and with humanity, but that there is this transcendent dimension in which the Father, son and Spirit are always the same and don't go through a kind of evolutionary improvements or upgrades.
Speaker 1:You get a little bit of that kind of thing with Irenaeus when he's opposing the Gnostics and the Gnostics kind of have this idea that there's this kind of original God and God improves himself by kind of creating angelic beings that might be like a God of, like a semi divine or divine creature that is wisdom and one that is truth and one that is power and one that is, and all these attributes of God kind of become embodied in these divine creatures. So it's as if God gets almost more, is upgraded by the creation of these angelic deities that have within them these qualities, and so you get that Then. That's the idea then, that God kind of becomes more powerful or more wise or more extensive by creating these upgrades. I guess we'd call them and again we'd go no, like the church has always rejected and Irenaeus is very careful to do that, and we might have time in a future episode to look at how Irenaeus does that, and does he do it in the best possible way? Perhaps we might have some questions in the way he does it. Does he sometimes fall too much into philosophy? Possibly, but Irenaeus, overall, is like coming straight out of the Bible to combat these heresies. So where have we got to?
Speaker 1:We spent our first episode looking at the scriptures. For this second part, we were only wanting to just immediately flag up that the global church down through history wants to assert the unchangeableness of God in the sense that there is always the Father and the Son and the Spirit, and that this Father, son and Spirit, this one God who is Father, son and Spirit, doesn't have a kind of evolutionary development or change in that way such that things that were once true of them are no longer true in that sense. So the creeds wish to assert so very strongly that there's this one eternal god father, son and spirit. But let's just open up this third category now of ways in which Christian and non-Christian philosophical thinkers have explored this concept of immutability. And this now gets into a much more speculative set of ideas, and some of these will not seem obvious at all from the scriptures. And some of these ideas have caused quite genuine concern for many Christians who feel that they're not compatible with Scripture, and many other Christians would say no. No, actually these philosophical ideas are either compatible with the Bible that's probably the largest group of people that these are philosophical ideas but they're compatible with the Bible, people that these are philosophical ideas but they're compatible with the Bible, or some would even say that these ideas are even implicitly taught in the Bible. So we'll need to examine those more carefully. So these more philosophical ideas and it's important to note these were not included in those great ecumenical creeds, not included in those great ecumenical creeds.
Speaker 1:And why that's important is so we refer to the Nicene Creed, and the Nicene Creed, really almost entirely, is using language that is very close to scriptural language. Only that one phrase when it says that the son is of one being with the father. That's a more philosophical, abstract phrase, the homoousion phrase. And of course, at the time of the Nicene Creed there were some of the global church leaders who weren't comfortable with even that word. Because we're very used to it now. We're very used to it now because it's been confessed in our creeds regularly for, you know, more than 1500 years, and many of us have learned it all off by heart and so on, and so we're very used to it and it almost, it's almost like biblical language to us to say that the son is of one being with the father. But it isn't actually language and at the time of the Nicene Creed some people were nervous of it, that and would have preferred more explicitly biblical language. But in the wisdom of those church leaders at that time, they it's a let's use this word because it's so effectively isolated the Aryans.
Speaker 1:But these more philosophical ideas that are about the immutability of God and the derivative ideas from that, they were never in these ancient creeds of the church. And that's hugely important for us to appreciate. Because nowadays there are people who assert these philosophical ideas as if they were creedal truths, were creedal truths, and they literally say that if, if a person doesn't accept these philosophical speculative ideas, that they've denied the universal faith or they've denied the creedal faith, um, now that that is. That is really unacceptable to talk like that. We might be very persuaded of these ideas. We might think, oh no, I think that is a legitimate implication of biblical teaching. Maybe, maybe, you know, we'll get into all that philosophical speculation a status that it never had in the original ecumenical councils of the church or anything like that. Because these philosophical ideas, some of which we might like, some of which we may not like, some of which you know, whatever, but they have not gained universal affirmation. Throughout global church history, there's never been a council where all the leaders of the church from all over the world, from every kind of church background, you know, like those great ecumenical councils that happened in those first hundreds of years of church history, there's never been such a gathering at which these more philosophical implications were accepted and enshrined in a creed. So although many Christians may like to affirm these thoughts about God, they do belong in a different category.
Speaker 1:So let's, here's the claim. Let's get to it. The claim is that the reason that God cannot change, or underlying the truth that God does not change, is the idea that God is a simple, the idea that God is a simple, timeless, perfect being. So the claim is let's just state it carefully again that if God is a simple, timeless, perfect being, then God cannot change. So there are three philosophical ideas here that are often connected to immutability. Let's just separate them out. The first is the claim that God is timeless and therefore cannot change. A second idea is God is simple, and we'll come to what that means later. So the second claim is God is simple and therefore cannot change. And thirdly, god is a quote perfect being and therefore cannot change. And so now we need to explore each of these to see what is being claimed and whether it is justified from the Bible.
Speaker 1:But by way of introduction, I want to say this that the reason I became engaged with this is going back about 32 years or something like that, and I remember speaking with a famous, prominent Christian religious philosopher and he made the argument. He said made the argument. He said how can we know that god won't change his mind about things that he has promised? That was the discussion. How can we know for sure, how can we be absolutely certain that God, the Father, son and Spirit, that this God will not change his mind about what he has promised and that the gospel promises are eternally secure? And in my mind I was not used to any of these discussions really like this kind of more philosophical speculation, but in my mind that was a strange question because, anyway, how can we be sure that God will keep his promises? How can we be sure that Jesus is trustworthy? Well, in a way, that is the nature of trusting him. We look at him, we look what he's done, what he said, we read the eyewitness accounts about him, we read the Bible and we have to say is this God trustworthy?
Speaker 1:Saying, is this God trustworthy? Has he got a track record of keeping his promises? Is it legitimate for me to put my trust in such a person as Jesus Christ? Or can I trust the father? Has he ever failed in his promises? Has his word turned out to be unreliable at any point of the Father and the character of the Son and the character of the Spirit is extremely trustworthy, such that when the Father will hold true even beyond the lifetime of the universe. I can't verify that in a sense like say, well, I'm going to find out if that's true, because how can I like I I could wait until the universe has come to an end in its present form and find out if he's still holding true to his promises and we'll. We will see that eventually, but right here and now I can't, like experimentally verify that, but on the basis of the record of this living god who's created the universe and given us in scripture this history of the father's dealings with the world, world through the sun, in the power of the spirit, and has recorded that from the creation through the fall ab, abraham, moses, history of Israel, the exodus, the wilderness, wanderings, the time of the judges, the time of the kings, exile, all of it, all through the prophets, the birth of Jesus, the life of Jesus, his death, his resurrection, his ascension, then the Acts of the Apostles as church goes out to the entire world, all of that leads me to say his word is absolutely trustworthy. And when the prophets and Jesus himself says that his word is absolutely trustworthy even beyond the lifetime of the universe, is absolutely trustworthy, even beyond the lifetime of the universe, I completely believe that I absolutely trust the trustworthiness of the word of God, the promises of God, the gospel of God.
Speaker 1:Now then go back to that philosopher I was talking with, and there was a discussion, and there was a discussion. The philosopher said this religious philosopher said that isn't good enough. Know that he will not change his mind, because what, what, if certain things happen such that he is that he decides to change his mind and not honor his promises. So how can we know with a mathematical certainty that the word of God, the gospel of God, is trustworthy? And he said, it cannot rest on that mere trustworthiness of the character of God. It has to be that God is timeless, that the living God has no consecutive moments and therefore whatever he says is timelessly true and that within God there is no past, present or future and therefore, logically speaking, whatever he says is timelessly true. Therefore we can believe it when he says my words are reliable and true and so on, and I remember being like almost, it was almost like a physical blow to me. I can remember it vividly, feeling like, oh, like almost if I'd been punched in the stomach. It was so horrific.
Speaker 1:The idea that we would move the faithfulness of God, the reason to trust him is not the quality of his character, but the metaphysical character, the metaphysical nature of his existence. So, in other words, to remove, to take something that has always struck me as being an intensely personal thing, like about the personal quality of the character of the father and of the Son and of the Spirit, and that they are trustworthy in character, and then to say no, that is not ultimately a strong enough reason to believe them. But the reason to believe in God or to trust God is the metaphysical ontology of God. That is the real basis of the reliability of his word, because it is logically impossible for it to change, not that it is backed up by his character, but that it is logical, logically impossible to change because there is no time, no consecutive moments within God. And I was shocked by that.
Speaker 1:I don't know what you make of it, as you're listening to me describe it, but to me that was shocking. You make of it as you're listening to me describe it, but to me that was shocking and that made me think, wow, this is a very different going to try to look at for the next few episodes, the idea that let me just outline them again as we come to the end of this. There are three philosophical speculations that are often connected to immutability. The first is God is timeless and therefore cannot change. Secondly, God is simple and therefore cannot change. And thirdly, god is a quote perfect being and therefore cannot change.