Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Is Yahweh Evolving?


Recommended Posts

The Bible tells us that "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever," Hebrews 13:8, and that "I the Lord do not change," Malachi 3:6.  But, assuming that Yahweh is real, how do we know that Yahweh is not evolving?   Maybe when he revealed the Bible, he was not aware that he is a changing being?  Maybe at that point in time he was changeless, but since that time he has had a metamorphosis?  How would he even know if he is changing or not changing if he does not have a point of reference that he respects?


Not that he is getting "better" or "worse," but that there is an element of randomness inside his own nature which he himself may not have been aware of, or may not have yet experienced.  Maybe even if Yahweh has been unchanging so far, he will change in the future?  Perhaps God developed a technique for re-engineering his own nature, and now he is in control of his nature whereas he may not have previously been in control of it?


Yeah, I know, it is typical sophomoric atheism to dream up a bunch of provocative "what if" questions, but this evening I just started thinking about how strange it would be if there was a God who indeed did not change.



  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is where the Christian promise of heaven falls flat.  God would just, eventually, change his mind, as he frequently does in the bible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses.  I've been thinking lately about the "Euthyphro Problem" and how Christians think that they have it solved -- by referring to the "Nature" of God.  Christians say that:  "It is God’s very nature and no arbitrary decision of his that constitutes the standard of morality."


But what about God's Nature makes it the reference point for the rest of the universe?  Why isn't it relevant that Satan has a Nature, and that a Human has a Nature?  I think, in the back of their minds, Christians suppose that the special thing about God's Nature is that it is an immutable nature, while other beings have mutable natures.  In that sense, only God has Being at all -- other persons do not have Being, they have "Changing."  And after Darwin, we know more than before that every living thing is dynamic and the whole universe is in flux;  as the Bible says:  "The wicked are like the tossing sea, which cannot rest, whose waves cast up mire and mud."  Isaiah 57:20-21.


I suppose this is a possible distinction, but then it would provoke the Socratic question, "Why standardize with immutability?"  Maybe standardization logically presupposes immutability -- because you can't talk about a standard that is a moving target.  How can changing people value immutability?  Why should they?  Why shouldn't dynamic beings like as value dynamism?  I'm not sure that we should be embarrassed that we "worship and serve created things rather than the Creator."  Romans 1:25.


Popeye 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Furball

According to archeology and history the answer is yes. The sumerians created a clay depicting the fertility god with giant testicles and a huge penis, one who brings rain and helps the crops. The deities name-jehovah. Later in history a deity showed up known as the mountain/war god. The deities name-jehovah. Further down the line an almighty, all knowing, and all powerful deity showed up and hasn't left since. The deities name-jehovah.


jehovah-fertility god with huge genitles-why the god of the bible is pro masculine-anti-female

jehovah-mountain/war god-story of moses finding god on a mountain-numerous wars ensue

jehovah-almighty, all knowing, all powerful-insanity of christianity is born

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely the conception of God is changing.  It appears that the conception of the God has arrived at a point where the referent of the concept is a God who does not change.  It seems to me like the meme really cannot evolve much more in Protestantism than its present shades:  Non-Denominationalism, Presbyterianism, Pentecostalism, etc.  The Catholic Church and the Mormon Church permit change because they are more "living" religions, with open canons, and assemblies of leaders.  But the Protestant "Sola Scriptura" doctrine stops the evolution of the religion.


Back when I was a Christian reading the "Dune" books, the idea of the "Orange Catholic Bible" which was an evolved form of the Christian scriptures was kind of startling for me, having been nursed on the truth that "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever."


For a fecund, changing species, it seems like a clay god with large genitals is a more natural religion  than Presbyterianism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.