God Does Not Change: A Response to a Doctrinal Absurdity

God Does Not Change: A Response to a Doctrinal Absurdity

“Change is the greatest indication of being a creation.”

–Al-Junayd Al-Baghdadi

“Change” means to “make or become different.” Change entails being in one condition and then transforming (or being transformed) into another condition. This means that one condition preceded the other. Anything which has a precedence could not be eternal (beginningless). The thing which has a precedence would START to exist AFTER the thing which preceded it. Anything that has a start must necessarily be originated.

“Tawheed [Islamic Monotheism] is science of distinguishing the Eternal [i.e., The Creator] from the originated [i.e., the creations].”

–Al-Junayd Al-Baghdadi

Among the attributes of the creations, as we mentioned, is change. Creations have a start and then they age (i.e., time lapses upon them, even if we don’t perceive any immediate alteration). The Creator has no start, and is not subject to age or any other change. The Eternal One is not like the originated.

Although a corrupt and unreliable text, the Bible in this case rightfully says: “I, the Lord, do not change.” (Malachi 3:6)

This Biblical verse testifies against the Christian doctrine. The Christian doctrine claims that God is Eternal but then transformed into a human. Such a claim is evidently absurd with no further consideration: that which is originated could not become beginningless (words have meanings, and a thing cannot be contrary to its definition). However, we can even show the internal contradiction (aside from Biblical contradiction) of claiming God changed (much less changed into an infant).

If one claims that God changed into flesh, then the person would be saying that God was Absolutely Perfect either prior to this change or after this change. If the person claims that God was Absolutely Perfect prior to this change, then this change would mean this [supposedly] new condition of God would be “less perfect” (or inferior) than God’s previous condition. And the thing that is “less perfect” does not deserve to be worshiped. [Keep in mind, that the Muslims do not say God is “in a condition, or state, or modality”—God, in truth, does not resemble the creations.]

Now, if the person claims that God became Absolutely Perfect AFTER transforming into an infant, then the person is claiming that before this change took place, God was deficient, imperfect, and inferior to God’s current (alleged) condition. The one who is deficient, imperfect, or inferior does not EVER deserve to be worshiped.

Furthermore, like we said, claiming that the originated (a child) became beginningless is itself an absurdity of the highest degree. Also, Muslims (and anyone who uses their natural intelligence) know that since the Creator existed before the creations, then the Creator is ABSOLUTELY Transcendent (i.e., Free-of-Need for the creations). Before there was space, distance, direction, or location, there was a Creator. Flesh, bodies, humans, objects, images, solid or ethereal beings, or any other spatial entities require a certain amount of area for existence. Area/space are not the Creator—they are created, and God existed before the creations. Unlike flesh, which requires space, the Creator does not need ANY of the creations. The Creator is Eternal and exists without being in space or in a place. The Creator ABSOLUTELY does not need or resemble the creations.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s