Think about it real hard -- not that you haven't, but harder still, please. How is "happening" thought of without change? Isn't it that something "was"n't there and "now" it is, or it "was" this way and "now" it's that way.
I can't be absolutely certain of how it works, but I think of verses like this:
John 17:23 : 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.
When did the Father START loving the Son? No start time, right? That means that for eternity the Father has loved the Son, and the three Persons of the Trinity have loved for eternity. Is love static, or does it mean something is "happening"? I would say the latter. The love within the Trinity has never changed, but has always been "happening".
Jesus says "even as" which says to me He is making some kind of comparison about which we can have "some" understanding, though pitiably incomplete. For us, love is definitely not static, it is surely a "happening".
I wish you all would be less interesting (or find a way for me to get paid for the time I spend on line).
Here's my paradigm, sort of kind of.
Once we believe in the Trinity, we have to acknowledge that our idea about "one" was wrong in important respects.
We 'Have' to think of 'one' as not including 'many'. Or our brains explode.
Also, and extrapolating from the difference between chairs and justice to what we "have" to think about eternity ...
Chairs change. They wear out. They break -- as when the 250 lb farm manger (all muscle) of the place next door comes over to give us all the latest gossip, and I can almost hear my chair crying out in fear and pain.
Justice, though imperfectly enacted, is always what it is.
(We'll skip wondering if there is an unchanging "chairness" of which my chair is an imperfect 'enactment".)
So (work with me here) our thinking about eternity "has" to have changelessness included.
But the Revelation about "one" may provide us with kind of a clue, at which we can only marvel: that as oneness seems to have "room" for plurality, so changeless eternity may have room for something kinda sorta like Dynamism.
That's all I can do right now. (It's about all I can do ever on this subject, but I want to leave the impression that I could go on and on and have only spared you because ... etc.)
Kolo, please tell FK about the wind blowing ....