Kevin DeYoung Defends Divine Impassibility
“In simplest terms, divine impassibility means that God does not suffer…. God cannot be acted upon from without, neither can His inner state change for better or for worse.” - Kevin DeYoung
- 155 views
It takes even KD less than two minutes to start using paradoxical language on this topic. The problem is that we lack categories for what it is that God experiences and “feels.” We might be better off just leaving it an open question, though the venerable Westminster Confession does not.
Yes, I know… if we tune our language finely enough we can seem to eliminate paradox/contradiction from what we’re saying on this. (And KD succeeds in doing this for several minutes.) The problem is that the more microscopic we get, the less confident a lot of us are that we aren’t simply talking in circles and qualifying away everything we were trying to say. (And when KD gets to the end, it seems like we’re deep into paradox again.)
So… I’m skeptical that we can consistently make sense on this topic. We have to affirm what Scripture clearly reveals. And we can’t set aside necessary inferences either. But making those two things get along fully—I’m skeptical that it can be done. (But I don’t blame anyone for trying. Kudos for the courage!)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
But the common defense of Divine Impassibility is: God cannot change; therefore you can't have a situation that [I]makes[/I] Him sad, angry, happy, etc.
I think that's dumb because you can maintain God's unchanging nature without denying that He has different opinions and affections to different things.
There are things that the Lord hates. And there are things the Lord loves. That's clear in the Word. And in His perfection, He feels the appropriate one at each appropriate time.
Discussion