We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
How do you respond to Numbers 23:19?
The Lord tells Balak through Balaam “God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal, that he should change his mind.”
This verse (as well as 1 Sam. 15:29, which quotes it) is often cited in refutation of the claim that God genuinely changes his mind. However, since Scripture explicitly states in dozens of contexts that the Lord does change his mind (twice in 1 Samuel 15!) the text cannot justifiably be used in this fashion. There is a straightforward explanation of this text that is perfectly consistent with texts that teach that the Lord does sometimes change his mind.
In this passage Balak attempted to get Balaam (a “prophet-for-hire”) to prophesy what he wanted to hear (cf. 22:38–23:17). The Lord informed Balak that he, the true God, is not like a human being who can lie when it’s profitable or a mortal who will change his mind for the sake of convenience. This was a common practice for false prophets who speak on behalf of false gods. But for the first time in his life Balak (and Balaam!) confronted the real God. This God is not like a mortal who would change his mind for the reasons Balak gave him to do so.
The conclusion that the whole council of Scripture should lead us to is that God changes when it is virtuous to change, but is completely unchanging when it is virtuous not to change.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A
Topics: Open Theism, Responding to Objections
Verse: Numbers 23
Related Reading
Does the Bible teach total non-violence?
I wouldn’t say the whole Bible teaches non-violence, for you find Yahweh engaging in quite a bit of violence in the Old Testament. But I would say that the whole Bible clearly presents non-violence as God’s dream for humanity, and I would most certainly say this dream is realized in Jesus Christ and the Kingdom…
Do you believe God is pure actuality?
The basis of the classical view of God as pure actuality (actus purus) is the Aristotelian notion that potentiality is always potential for change and that something changes only because is lacks something else. So, a perfect being who lacks nothing must be devoid of potentiality, which means it must be pure actuality. I think…
Shouldn’t preachers rally Christians to fight political injustice?
Question: My pastor has publicly supported your book The Myth of a Christian Nation. But he’s recently called on the church to take a stand against the injustice of our local government cutting funding for inner city recreational facilities. This seems right to me, since we’re suppose to defend the cause of the poor and…
Free Will: Is it a coherent concept?
Greg is going to be spending the next several blogs talking about the idea of free will. In this first reflection, he discusses whether it is coherent to speak of a decision that is not determined or exhaustively caused.
Is the open view the only view that is compatible with the Incarnation?
Question: You have said that the Open view of God is the only view that squares with the Incarnation and the only view that truly exalts God’s greatness. On what basis do you say this? Answer: The revelation of God in the Incarnation is the ultimate expression of God’s willingness and ability to change that…
Video Q&A: Do you think Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are saved?
Does Greg believe that everyone goes to Heaven regardless of their beliefs? Find out here.