Monday, May 11, 2020

James White's Promotion of "Divine Deception" and God's "repenting" in Exodus 32-33 and similar texts


Commenting on Exo 32-33 where, after Moses’ intercession, God relents from His promise to destroy the children of Israel, James White, a Reformed Baptist, wrote:

Christian teachers have pointed out for two thousand years that the many passages that speak of God “repenting” or the like must be understood from our perspective as time-bound creatures, not from God’s perspective, as the Eternal One. The ongoing work of God in time does not change—but our experience of it does, and for this reason at times it seems God has “changed” in some way in His actions in the world. For example, when Moses is called to intercede as the leader of the people of Israel, and God relents of His stated intention to destroy the people, this does not present a contradiction in Scripture. Instead, God’s actions train and grow Moses as a leader, which was God’s intention all alone. Many other examples could be noted. For an exceptional discussion on this, see John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17. (James R. White, Is the Mormon My Brother? Discerning the Differences between Mormonism and Christianity [2d ed.; Birmingham, Ala.: Solid Ground Christian Books, 2008], 24-47 n. 29)

There are many problems with the above, not the least is that one would have to conclude that the biblical authors and God Himself who inspired them, are guilty of divine deception, speaking of God in a way which, after a prima facie, face-value, reading, would result in a theology which White et al would argue is blasphemous and heretical, instead of the “true” theology of God’s foreknowledge and relationship to time which is “Orthodox.” After all, note what White elsewhere says that God truly changes his mind in light of human free-will actions (e.g., Process and Open theologies):

I question the identification of someone as truly “evangelical” who would promote the idea that God is not immutable. I do not include such concepts as “process theology” in the realm of evangelical belief. (Ibid., 246 n. 28)

Furthermore, Exo 32-33 (and many other texts), when exegeted (and when one does not, via eisegesis, read White’s man-made traditions about the nature of God) results in a non-Reformed theology. For a fuller discussion, see my article:

An Examination and Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology

Further, White's comments would call into question the perspicuity of the Bible, an important element of the Reformed understanding of Sola Scriptura (see the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith, Chapter 1). For a thorough refutation of Sola Scriptura itself (the formal doctrine of the Reformation), see:

Not By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura

Blog Archive