Is God changing?

[_Amore]

Steelhead,
I agree that God and everything else is subjectively considered.
God particularly, is as Paul Tillech defined, "one's ultimate concern" - whatever one worships or prioritized whether they call it god or not.

I see God as love/ultimate ideal which we discover by trial and error.

Amore, I am something of a fan of Tillich. In my reading Tillich always connected the idea of ultimate concern with the idea that God is also the ground of our being, God is both. It is important because people can make distorted ideas which are not the ground of our actual being into images to worship.idols. These idols can actually be destructive because they corrupt our actual being. God is love would not seem to me to be an idol like that but asking what is our actual ground of being has potential to clarify the idea , "God is love". I agree with you that trial and error exploration is a positiver reality here.

Nice to see things similarly! :)
Tillech's idea of god being one's ultimate concern seems to suggest that time and effort be spent in figuring out which of all ultimate concerns is best - most ideal for all involved.
When you mentioned "ground of our actual being" what do you mean?
What is our actual being? Just physical, spiritual, social?

There is a tendency in me to still need authorities to tell me what to think, particularly about God.
Yet, I'm trying to express initiative in exploring what is inspiring to me - because nobody can really tell me that.
Not easy and sometimes I miss the power of unity and common connection, but it is also freeing!

[_Amore]

God is not just subjectively considered, he is subjectively constructed.

GOD always was and always will be. The Creator was never constructed. GOD maybe misunderstood by mortals, but He most certainly is not a whim of human invention.

It does make me wonder if God - as in ultimate truth ("prime mover") that got the universe ball rolling - is some type of eternal energy/existence that has always existed.
Another part of me wonders if God - even the same phenomena that began it all - is constantly evolving, as all creation seems to be.

[_Amore]

If God is as expansive as the Universe, then the change can be viewed as a constant based on the rate of expansion. If not, we could measure God on the scale of death and taxes. If not subject to the constants of death and taxes, then God must also be changing on this scale as well.

How do you define God, Moksha?
I see God as (ultimate) GOoD - good in the big picture.
I see God as a phenomena both inside and outside of me.

[_Amore]

God doesn't change, at least not to our specifications.

We do, however, constantly change and grow throughout life. The alternative is death or stagnation.

The Universe is expanding at ever increasing rates. Hypotheses now exist that postulate there are multiple Universes and we're acquainted with only one.

At the rate of expansion, it is credulous to believe that perhaps God does change, given his realm is far superior to ours, but we can't begin to comprehend or appreciate his majesty including dominion, over all of Creation.

I don't know whether there are multiple gods or not. I only worship one, and that is the God of the Bible. That being said, I believe that if God is real then he is a great delegator. How else could he run such a big Universe?

I also believe he's a scientist. Our bodies are finely tuned works of engineering. And so is the cosmos, and everything in between. Only a being with knowledge unknown to our minds, could be able to create such a wonderment that we can only barely begin to comprehend.

Interesting.
I agree that God (or whatever word one chooses to denote a higher power) is much more intelligent than us (spiritually and scientifically).
I can also see how God is a great delegator - that our hands are gods hands in many ways.

Life is ever-changing, and the Bible says, "God is god of the living, not of the dead."
What do you think that means?
Have you studied how the Bible cannon was written, translated edited and selected?
And do you take every word of it as if straight from God?

[_The CCC]

God doesn't change, at least not to our specifications.

We do, however, constantly change and grow throughout life. The alternative is death or stagnation.

The Universe is expanding at ever increasing rates. Hypotheses now exist that postulate there are multiple Universes and we're acquainted with only one.

At the rate of expansion, it is credulous to believe that perhaps God does change, given his realm is far superior to ours, but we can't begin to comprehend or appreciate his majesty including dominion, over all of Creation.

I don't know whether there are multiple gods or not. I only worship one, and that is the God of the Bible. That being said, I believe that if God is real then he is a great delegator. How else could he run such a big Universe?

I also believe he's a scientist. Our bodies are finely tuned works of engineering. And so is the cosmos, and everything in between. Only a being with knowledge unknown to our minds, could be able to create such a wonderment that we can only barely begin to comprehend.

Interesting.
I agree that God (or whatever word one chooses to denote a higher power) is much more intelligent than us (spiritually and scientifically).
I can also see how God is a great delegator - that our hands are gods hands in many ways.

Life is ever-changing, and the Bible says, "God is god of the living, not of the dead."
What do you think that means?
Have you studied how the Bible cannon was written, translated edited and selected?
And do you take every word of it as if straight from God?

I believe it is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

[_Amore]

Interesting.
I agree that God (or whatever word one chooses to denote a higher power) is much more intelligent than us (spiritually and scientifically).
I can also see how God is a great delegator - that our hands are gods hands in many ways.

Life is ever-changing, and the Bible says, "God is god of the living, not of the dead."
What do you think that means?
Have you studied how the Bible cannon was written, translated edited and selected?
And do you take every word of it as if straight from God?

I believe it is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

So, you believe that countless (mostly unknown) people over centuries who had a hand in writing or editing the Bible (assuming translations are correct) are speaking as if they are God?
Is that having other gods before God?

[_jo1952]

Ok, so you believe that God is unchanging, right?
Yet, you specified that it's God's ideals (not our ideals) that are unchanging.
I accept that there are some objective (unchanging) truths, yet I also acknowledge that this universe is perspective-based.
God is "I AM ThAT I AM" - which Leibniz also theorized such a universe based on consciousness.

I used to read "I AM that I AM" much like it was heard by Charleton Heston in the movie, The Ten Commandments. In other words, when the words came from the burning bush, they were said mystically, and with the emphasis on the first "AM". A few years ago my perspective changed, and I began to see those words with the emphasis on the word "that". Thus, I now see that phrase as Christ telling us WHICH "I AM" that He is. That was the beginning of a shift in how I saw everything inside of scripture and inside of religion.

Now, whereas my perspective changed, we can see evidence inside of mortality where people do change. I now believe that it is "God" outside of mortality who is unchanging. It is only with the god of this world that change occurs. Things outside of mortality are what is described by true messengers as having no beginning and no end....that things have always been the same, yesterday, today and tomorrow. As such, it is only within mortality that things change. But this world is not what we think it is; it is not our true reality.

True messengers, including Christ, will teach people according to their already established beliefs. They will use the same terminology as those to whom they give their message. Since they are speaking and teaching their message to people of religion, they will thus use religious words. That does not mean that the religious words that they need to use make the religious concepts behind those words correct. In order to not interfere with free will, true messengers allow people to continue to believe in their religious traditions. They WILL speak the words of religion; but they do it within the confines of parables. So, only those with eyes to see and ears to hear, will understand the real meaning of the words; and this, only if it is their desire. Before they can understand the message, they need to give up the world; In other words, they need to let go of what the world has taught them. As the parable of not putting wine into an old wine skin, the mind needs to be opened to be able to see and hear. Religion closes the minds of followers; leaving no room for new concepts and thoughts to be thought.

So, if we cannot help but perceive God through our subjectively limited perspectives, maybe it is our consciousness that changes, not the objective truth (God) that is being considered from different perspectives.
What do you think? :)

We can't help but perceive all things in this world according to what we are taught by the world. The traditions of our fathers includes all types of thought---be they religious, scientific, philosophical, political, etc. Yet, in so doing, these things distract us from looking inward to try to find real truth according to a clean slate (so to speak). Only when we give up what we have been taught will we be able to understand what true messengers (including Christ) have been trying to teach us.

[_Franktalk]

God is not capable of change. It is a direct consequence of being eternal. Every question has been asked of God hundreds of billions of times. The cause and effect relationship for all experience has been lived by God an infinite number of times. There is nothing new under the sun for God. Being eternal means that you know everything there is to know. You can do everything that can be done.

For the following I will use the term greater self to refer to an eternal creature. It may seem that eternity is a trap and boredom would rule. But the greater self has figured out a way to artificially create newness. The greater self makes a realm using eternal matter, this realm consist of planets and suns. Then a planet is terraformed over billions of years to set the stage for human mortals. Then a day comes in which humans are seeded onto the planet. Each human brain contains a portal which connects to one greater self mind. But the portal is designed in such a way that only part of the greater self can reside in the mind of the mortal human. The brain is also designed so that the mind of the greater self is only loosely in control. The human mind is only a limited mind and limited memory. Ruled over by chemicals and ignorance the mortal human makes mistakes in all aspects of life. But the greater self while in the mind can experience newness again. If only in a simulation.

Now can this simulated newness be considered change or do we look at the big picture and say that God can not change because of the qualities of an eternal being? I would answer that saying God can not change. Worlds without end and mortal experience for eternity.

This view is not orthodox but does answer the question.

[_Tobin]

Frank,

I've often thought that if God is incapable of learning and change, then he must be suicidal and bored. When someone like you claims "Every question has been asked of God hundreds of billions of times", I think they should watch the Star Trek Voyager episode called "Death Wish". The Q finds existence so tedious that he wants to kill himself. Everything has been learned. Everything has been said. Every question has been answered. There is nothing new. There is nothing to learn. What an awful tedious existence!!!

[_Franktalk]

Frank,

I've often thought that if God is incapable of learning and change, then he must be suicidal and bored. When someone like you claims "Every question has been asked of God hundreds of billions of times", I think they should watch the Star Trek Voyager episode called "Death Wish". The Q finds existence so tedious that he wants to kill himself. Everything has been learned. Everything has been said. Every question has been answered. There is nothing new. There is nothing to learn. What an awful tedious existence!!!

But knowing everything means you are able to at least simulate newness. Yes this view of reality is very odd but it is a natural fallout of pondering the nature of eternity. And if we can't enter eternity then we are already in it. That means we are currently in a cycle. Just a mind experiment. But sometimes a mind experiment gives man a leap of understanding.