If your definition of static in this case includes unchanging, changeless, that's exactly what it means. I think you are confusing this with the immaterial energies of the Holy Trinity or Godhead.
He can have the capacity to love and hate and still be unchanging. God can walk and chew gum and the same time
God is changelessly experiencing the emotions of love and hate? This is internally inconsistent.
Immutable carries with it the idea of consistency.
It carries with it the idea of not changing!
So, if one thing made God angry today, but the same thing did not tomorrow, then that would violate immutability.
If God hates something today and loves something tomorrow it violates immutability, so you postulate an unchanging infinite immaterial ball of conflicting emotions. Turn the microscope around.
You seem to be stretching here, FK, think about it: You have God experiencing simultaneous unchanging opposing emotions. It's a demi-human God that fails the further you take it.
Well, for example on the one hand there is a grounded, sobering love, and on the other is a self-destructive, obsessive "love".
This isn't love or isn't a fault of loving. We confuse many things for love. God's love through us is not an emotion; but this is another topic...
There is anger that causes rash and unwise, impulsive decisions, and there is righteous anger.
"Anyone who is angry with his brother.."
I just meant that with all the emotions, God always correctly shows them.
Perfect anger, lust, pride, envy... :)
We humans misuse our emotions all the time.
We misuse our God-given instincts. Emotions are instinctual states. Applying animal instincts to God leads us to strange theology.
Thanks for your reply as always, FK...
FK to DF: We believe that God is immutable and unchanging. But that does not mean God must be a static being.
DF to FK: I think you are confusing this with the immaterial energies of the Holy Trinity or Godhead.
We are dealing with concepts that boggle the mind. The mystery of God reveals that He is unaffected by time, and time is needed for change, ergo He is changeless. Gospels tell us that God is love. How does love, which doesn't change, become hate without ceasing to be love unless it is in the eyes of the beholder? It is our disposition towards God that determines if we experience His love as love or as hate.
If your definition of static in this case includes unchanging, changeless, that's exactly what it means. I think you are confusing this with the immaterial energies of the Holy Trinity or Godhead.
Perhaps I chose the wrong word. What I meant was mono-dimensional, mono-faceted, "simple" vs. complex, etc. IOW, if God can fully encompass being fully man and fully God at the same time, then why can't He be fully love, fully just, and fully wrathful at the same time? If I am understanding the Apostolic position correctly then if God is only love then He CANNOT also (ever) be angry or wrathful. Why is this? I do not see how the ABILITY to have righteous anger and wrath is inconsistent with the ABILITY to love. They are not inconsistent, God is a complete being and is multifaceted.
God is changelessly experiencing the emotions of love and hate? This is internally inconsistent.
Why? Can you love your wife and at the same time have righteous anger toward any unworthy clergyman? Did you change something if you felt both at the same time? I don't think so. Since righteous anger is no sin, why can't God do that too?
If God hates something today and loves something tomorrow it violates immutability, so you postulate an unchanging infinite immaterial ball of conflicting emotions. Turn the microscope around.
No, this isn't what I said. :) I said if God hates thing "A" today, but then loves thing "A" tomorrow THEN it violates immutability. It has to be the same thing. That God ALWAYS loves good work "B" and ALWAYS hates sin "C" does NOT violate immutability. No conflicting emotions here. He is consistent.
FK: "Well, for example on the one hand there is a grounded, sobering love, and on the other is a self-destructive, obsessive "love"."
This isn't love or isn't a fault of loving. We confuse many things for love. God's love through us is not an emotion; but this is another topic...
I agree with the first part. But also, God doesn't have human emotional failings; however, how can it be said that He does not have emotions? Did God create us in His image with something (a good something) He Himself does not possess? Godly human love is an emotion, and He says He wants it from us. Surely this cannot be out of envy? :)
FK: "There is anger that causes rash and unwise, impulsive decisions, and there is righteous anger."
"Anyone who is angry with his brother.."
Is this a denial of righteous anger? Consider these:
Mark 3:4-5 : 4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent. 5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.
Titus 1:7 : 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; ... KJV [This allows for righteous anger, or the "soon" would have been unnecessary and misleading.]
Eph 4:25-27 : 25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. 26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: 27 Neither give place to the devil. KJV
Paul explains nicely exactly what Jesus did. He was angry but did not sin. If that is possible, then righteous anger must exist.
FK: "I just meant that with all the emotions, God always correctly shows them."
Perfect anger, lust, pride, envy... :)
In a sense, "Yes". :) Now, I think it is correct that all core emotions can be used by humans for evil, but can all also be used for good? I think so. But here there is a problem. How many separate emotions are there and what are their names? I sure don't know. Are lust, sinful pride and envy really separate emotions or are they all simply bastardizations of the core emotion love? I think more likely the latter, as God does not show these. But anger God DOES show, so I consider that a separate emotion.
I honestly can't think of Biblical uses of lust or envy in a good way, but of course there is plenty on pride:
2 Cor 5:12 : 12 We are not trying to commend ourselves to you again, but are giving you an opportunity to take pride in us, so that you can answer those who take pride in what is seen rather than in what is in the heart.
2 Cor 7:4 : I have great confidence in you; I take great pride in you. I am greatly encouraged; in all our troubles my joy knows no bounds.
2 Cor 8:24 : Therefore show these men the proof of your love and the reason for our pride in you, so that the churches can see it.
I "think" that pride, lust, and envy are all included with the "7 deadly sins", but obviously it cannot be in all cases, if Paul's inspired word is correct. Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for loopholes or anything. :) I'm just saying that human failings in the emotional realm cannot be projected onto God, such that it is therefore impossible for Him to have emotions.
FK: "We humans misuse our emotions all the time."
We misuse our God-given instincts. Emotions are instinctual states. Applying animal instincts to God leads us to strange theology.
I'm not sure what this means? Does it mean that emotions themselves do not really exist for anyone because they are instinctual states? I haven't heard this contrast before. Doesn't instinct just mean to follow one's nature? If so, doesn't God have a nature?
Thank you also for your replies. I enjoy our discussions.