BIBLIOTHECA SACRA 152
(October-December 1995): 387-99
Copyright © 1995 by
DOES GOD
“CHANGE HIS MIND”?
Robert B. Chisholm Jr.
Most Christian theologians have
affirmed that God
is immutable. In support of this doctrine they
often have cited sev-
eral Old Testament passages,
including Numbers
not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man,
that He should re-
pent”), 1
change His mind; for He is not a man that He should
change His
mind”), and Psalm 110:4 (“The Lord has sworn and
will not
change His mind”). In all these cases “repent” or “change
His
mind” translates a Niphal
or Hithpael form of the verbal root MHn.
However,
many other Old Testament passages, using a Niphal
form of this same verb with the same semantic sense,
assert that
God
typically does change His mind (Jer. 18:5-10; Joel
4:2),
describe Him doing so (Exod. 32:14; Amos 7:3, 6; Jon.
or at least assume that He might (Jer. 26:3;
How
can one resolve this tension and apparent contradiction?
Some
dismiss these texts as “anthropomorphic,”1 but this is an
arbitrary and drastic solution that cuts rather
than unties the
theological knot. A more satisfying solution exists,
if the biblical
evidence is allowed to speak for itself.
The thesis of this article is that
the question, “Does God
change His mind?” must be answered, “It all depends.”
This
study begins with a lexical survey of the Niphal and Hithpael
stems of MHn. The article then
defines and illustrates the four
kinds of forward-looking divine statements in the Old
Testa-
ment: (a) marked or formal
decrees, (b) unmarked or informal
decrees, (c) marked or explicitly conditional
statements of inten-
Seminary,
1 See, for example,
tributes of God, 2 vols. (reprint,
of the history of interpretation on this subject,
see
and the Repentance of God,” Scottish Journal of Theology 22 (1969): 262-68.
388 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / October-December 1995
tion, (d) unmarked or
implicitly conditional statements of inten-
tion. The article then
argues that if God has issued a decree, He
will not change His mind or deviate from it.
However, the ma-
jority of God’s statements of
intention are not decrees. And God
can and often does deviate from such announcements.
In these
cases He “changes His mind” in the sense that He
decides, at
least for the time being, not to do what He had
planned or an-
nounced as His intention.
A SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF MHn 2
In the Niphal
and Hithpael stems MHn carries one of four se-
mantic senses.3 (1) In at least nine
passages the verb means “to
experience emotional pain or weakness” (Gen. 6:6-7;
Exod.
of these nine instances, yKi introduces the cause of the sorrow (cf.
Gen. 6:6-7; Judg.
21:15; 1 Sam. 15:11, 35). (2) In 13 verses the verb
carries the sense “to be comforted” or “to
comfort oneself” (some-
times by taking vengeance) (Gen. 24:67; 27:42; 37:35;
38:12; 2
Sam.
13:39; Pss. 77:3; 119:52; Isa.
1:24; Jer. 31:15; Ezek. 5:13;
word refers to God's “relenting” from or
“repudiating” a course of
action that is already underway (cf. Deut. 32:36 = Ps.
135:14;
Judg. 2:18; 2 Sam. 24:16 = 1 Chron.
8:6
[man as subject];
currences fall into a fourth
semantic category meaning “to re-
tract” a statement or “to relent or change one’s mind
concerning,
to deviate from” a stated course of action (Exod. 32:12, 14; Num.
26:3,
13, 19; Ezek. 24:14; Joel 2:13-14; Amos 7:3, 6; Jon. 3:9-10; 4:2;
Zech.
2 The following survey is indebted to the
work of H. Van Dyke Parunak, “A Se-
mantic Survey of NHM,”
Biblica 56
(1975): 512-32; and idem, “The Repentance of
God in the Old Testament” (Th.M.
thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1973). Paru-
nak’s six categories proposed
in Biblica
have been condensed here to four.
3 The Hithpael
is used only seven times in the Old Testament. There are no clear
examples of a Hithpael
use that falls into category one. Four examples fall into cat-
egory two (Gen. 27:42; 37:35;
Ps. 119:52; Ezek.
32:36
= Ps. 135:14) and one into category four (Num.
4 See Parunak, “A
Semantic Survey of NHM,” 519, for
semantic indicators of this
sense in the respective passages.
5 Parunak points
out semantic indicators of this sense in the respective passages
(ibid., 520). He also observes that this use reflects a
polarization of category one
(ibid., 526).
6 Some of these verses might fit under
category one.
7 Categories three and four derive
metonymically from category one.
Does God “Change His Mind”? 389
verb. Some texts (Num.
Ezek.
24:14; Zech.
did/does/will not retract a statement
or deviate from a stated
course of action, while others assert that He
does/will/might
change His mind. This fourth category is the focus of
this study.
Under
what conditions does God retract a statement or
ate from a course of action? Under what conditions
does He refuse
to do so?
TOWARD A SOLUTION: DECREES AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS
In the Old Testament not all
statements of intention are the
same. Some are decrees or oaths that are
unconditional and bind
the speaker to a stated course of action. Others, which
may be la-
beled announcements, retain a
conditional element and do not
necessarily bind the speaker to a stated course of
action.
Two passages in Genesis illustrate
this distinction at a secu-
lar (nontheological)
level. In Genesis 25:32-33 conniving Jacob,
desirous of
hausted brother’s
vulnerability, made
than relying on his brother’s rhetorical question.
The rhetorical
question is equivalent to an announcement. It
indicates
intention to trade his birthright for some stew,
but it might be re-
tracted later if he or someone
else argued that the deal was made
under duress. Jacob wanted the transferral
to be unconditional
and binding, so he made
Jacob,
on his deathbed in
buried in
out his father’s wishes (“I will do as you have
said,” v. 30),
forced him to swear an oath, formally ratifying and
guarantee-
ing the fulfillment of the
promise (v. 31; cf. 50:5-6).
One can discern this distinction
between a decree and an
announcement at the divine
(theological) level. A divine decree
(or oath) is an unconditional declaration. Because it is
certain to
come to pass, the response of the recipient cannot
alter it, though,
as will be seen, the exact timing of its
fulfillment can be condi-
tional. An announcement is a
conditional statement of divine
intention which may or may not be realized,
depending on the re-
sponse of the recipient or
someone else whose interests it affects.
Divine decrees are usually clearly marked as
such. Some-
thing in the statement itself or in the immediate
context indicates
its unconditional status. For example in Genesis
22:16-18 God
swore by His own being that He would bless
erences to this promise call it
an “oath” and regard it as an un-
390 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / October-December 1995
conditional gift (Gen. 26:3; Ps. 105:9-10). In
Genesis 15:18-21 God
guaranteed Abram and his descendants future
possession of the
nying ritual (vv. 9-17), in
which the use of the qatal
form yTitanA (v.
18)
rather than the yiqtol NTex, (12:7; cf.
that the deed to the land was actually being
transferred to
Abram.8
God’s promise to
characterized as eternal and
unalterable (Ps. 89:3-4, 33-37).
Conditional statements of divine
intention are often clearly
marked as well. For example in Jeremiah 26:4-6 the
Lord an-
nounced, “If [Mxi] you will not listen to
Me ... then I will make this
house like
of the earth.” Sometimes an announcement completes
an indirect
volitive sequence, implying that
it will be fulfilled if the accom-
panying command is observed.9
For example Genesis 12:1-2
should be translated as follows: “Go [imperative] from
your land
...
in order that I might make you [waw
+ cohortative] a great na-
tion, bless you [waw + cohortative], and make your
name great
[waw + cohortative],
and so that you in turn might be [waw + im-
perative] a blessing.” The
blessing is clearly contingent on
Abram’s
leaving his native land. Similarly Genesis 17:1-2
should be translated: “Walk [imperative] before Me and
be [waw
+
imperative] blameless in order that I might ratify [waw + cohor-
tative] My covenant between Me
and you and greatly multiply
[waw + cohortative] your numbers.” Again the blessing is contin-
gent on Abram's obedience to the divine imperatives.
10
Most divine statements of intention
are unmarked. In these
cases one cannot be sure from the form of the
statement whether it
is conditional or unconditional. For this reason
the recipient of
such a message sometimes does what is appropriate,
declaring,
“Who
knows? The Lord may be gracious/turn/relent” (cf. 2
12:22;
Joel 2:14; Jon. 3:9).
These ambiguous statements of divine
intention sometimes
prove to be decrees. For example, when Nathan
declared that the
son conceived from
8 For a fuller discussion of Genesis 15,
see
from Genesis,” in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, ed.
9 Following an imperative the cohortative expresses purpose or result. See E.
Kautzsch and
Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 577-78, para. 34.6.
10 For an attempt to harmonize the
conditional and unconditional promises of
Genesis
12-22, see
Does God “Change His Mind”? 391
would die (2 Sam.
unconditional. He prayed and fasted
until the child died, hoping
that God might take pity on him and spare the child’s
life (v. 22).
God’s
refusal to respond to
speech against
24).
In response to the proclamation,
God to postpone the fall of the dynasty until
after
27-29).
However, the prophecy still came to pass, for it was a di-
vine decree that could not be altered (2 Kings
9-10). The prophecy
was unconditional, but the exact timing of its
fulfillment re-
mained negotiable from God’s perspective.
Many other ambiguous statements of
divine intention prove
to be conditional.11 Micah announced
that
come a heap of rubble (Mic.
Jeremiah
26:17-19 that this judgment was averted by repentant
Jonah’s
seemingly uncompromising declaration (“Yet forty days
and
when the people of that pagan city repented. The
divine promise
delivered in Joel 2:26-27 (“My people will never
be put to shame”)
proved to be conditional. After
prophecy was clearly directed,
people were put to shame on many occasions because of
their
failure to remain true to the covenant.
To summarize, divine statements of
intention can be grouped
into two categories: decrees and announcements.
Decrees can be
formal (marked as such) or informal (unmarked).
Announce-
ments can be explicitly or implicitly
conditional. On the one
hand those verses that declare that God does or will
not change
His
mind pertain to decrees. In fact the declaration
formally
marks the divine statement of intention as a decree
or oath. On
the other hand those passages indicating that God
does/will/
might change His mind pertain to announcements.
PASSAGES IN WHICH DECREES ARE IN
VIEW
NUMBERS
Much
to the Moabite king Balak’s chagrin, God would not
al-
low Balaam to curse
prophet to bless His covenant people. Balaam
prefaced the second
things remaining the same” (The Only Wise God [Grand Rapids, Baker, 1987], 41).
392 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / October-December 1995
of his oracles with these words: “God is not a
man, that He should
lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent; has
He said, and will
He
not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it
good? Be-
hold, I have received a command to bless; when He
has blessed,
then I cannot revoke it” (Num.
speaks of God's presence with His people (v. 21) and
their invin-
cibility through His power (vv.
22-24). Several factors point to the
unconditional nature of this oracle.
The oracle is designated a
divine blessing and cannot be altered.12 Balaam
recognized the
blessing’s unalterable character and acknowledged
his inability
to thwart it through sorcery or divination. This
blessing, a predic-
tion of
tional promise to give
ing quality of that
promise. (God’s oath to
“blessing” in Gen. 28:4.) The introduction, in which Balaam af-
firmed that God would not change His mind or lie,
formally
marks the blessing as a decree. Both MHn and the parallel verb bz.eKi
“to lie,” here mean “to retract” (an unconditional promise).
The
verb bz.eKi has this same sense in
Psalm 89:35, where God decreed,
“Once
I have sworn by My holiness; I will not lie to
While
the verbs refer to how God typically acts when He has made
a decree, the principle here applies to the
specific blessing to fol-
low.13
1 SAMUEL
15:29
When
him for his rebellion and declared that the Lord
had rejected him
as king (1 Sam.
peated the Lord’s decision
(vv. 24-26). Samuel then added these
words: “The Lord has torn the
and has given it to your neighbor who is better
than you. And also
the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind;
for He is not a
man that He should change His mind” (vv. 28-29).
This was not the first time
prophet
wait for
12 See Genesis 27:33, 37.
similar lines, pointing out that rB,Di, in Numbers 23:19 refers to an oath. See their ex-
cursus “When God Repents,” in Amos, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday,
1989),
669-70.
13 For discussion of this point see
Books
of
168,
Does God “Change His
Mind”? 393
disobedience and told him he had
forfeited a golden opportunity.
commandment of the Lord your God, which He commanded
you,
for now the Lord would have established your
kingdom over Is-
rael forever. But now your
kingdom shall not endure. The Lord
has sought out for Himself a man after His own
heart, and the
Lord
has appointed him as ruler over His people, because you have
not kept what the Lord commanded you” (1 Sam.
This rebuke sounds quite final and
unconditional, but, as al-
ready suggested, the tone of a statement can
sometimes be mis-
leading. Perhaps
bring
God
had not yet revealed who the new appointee was, let alone for-
mally anointed him. As Samuel
departed from Gilgal (v. 15), it
is not certain if his words constituted a decree
or an implicitly
conditional announcement. Was the fate of Saul (or
his dynasty)
sealed, or was there still a chance God might relent?
No matter how one initially answers
that question,
subsequent behavior, as recorded in 1
clear that he was on thin ice. He did nothing that
would motivate
Yahweh
to change His mind about the earlier prophecy; in fact his
folly and disobedience cause one to anticipate the
worst. When
Samuel
went to confront him at Gilgal a second time, any
earlier
ambiguity was removed.
forgiveness shows that this second rebuke is in fact
a decree, as
does the temporal marker MOy.ha, “today” (1 Sam.
cluding words, emphasizing that
the Lord will not lie or change
His
mind (v. 29),14 formally mark
conditional. Both MHn and the parallel verb rq.ewi, “to lie,” here mean
“to retract.”15 The Lord had decreed
could alter His decision.16
14 Perhaps the verse should be translated
as follows: “He who is the Glory of Is-
rael will not (in this
particular situation) lie or change His mind; for He is not a
man, that He should change His mind.” In this case
the two yiqtol
verb forms have a
specific future, not habitual, nuance.
15 rq.ewi is used in a similar
way in Psalm 89:33, where God declared to David that
He
will not “betray” His faithfulness by violating His decree.
16 See
van, 1986), 146.
ring specifically to God’s election of
Foreknowledge,
Divine Constancy, and the Rejection of Saul’s Kingship,” Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 47 [1985]: 597-98). The
election of
here, as Abner’s words in
2
more also, if as the Lord has sworn to
transfer the kingdom from the house of
394 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / October-December 1995
What is the relationship between the pronouncement recorded
in 1
possible. First, perhaps the prophecy in chapter
13 concerns only
mean his dynasty; cf. the use of the term in 2 Sam.
chapter 15 refers specifically to
(“He
has rejected you as king” in vv. 23 and 26).17 In
this case the
earlier prophecy does not necessarily become
unconditional here.
The
“neighbor” mentioned in verse 28 could be one of
(cf.
the use of the term fare, in 2 Sam. 12:11, where it refers to
David's
son Absalom), but developments in 1 Samuel 16 quickly
eliminate this prospect.
Second, it is possible that both 1
pertain to
informal decree with the second speech simply
clarifying the ear-
lier ambiguity. However, if
both speeches refer to Saul, it is more
likely that the first declaration was an implicitly
conditional
announcement and that
ond speech.18 Several
factors support this. (1) As noted earlier,
David,
Saul's replacement, was not actually revealed and
anointed until after the second speech (cf. 1
Sam. 16). (2) Also the
Lord’s
declaration in 1
carried out My commands”) and
that the earlier warning to
over
17 See
velopment of I
18 See
JSOT,
1991),103-4.
19 The statement in verse 11 (also v. 35),
does not contradict verse 29, for the verb
MHn is used in different
semantic senses with different referents in this chapter. In
verses 11, 35 it means “to experience emotional pain”
and refers to God’s response
to
the word is negated and used in the sense of “to
retract.” Here it refers to God’s de-
cree that
tion (God’s making
(the rejection of
The Reign and Rejection
of
this semantic variation makes redactional
critical suggestions like that of
McCarter
unnecessary (1
19801, 268).
reflects
point expressed in vv. 11 and 35), also fails to take
adequate account of the polyse-
mantic character of the word in this chapter (“‘The
Glory of Israel Does Not
Deceive
or Change His Mind’: On the Reliability of Narrator and Speakers in Bib-
lical Narrative, Prooftexts 12
[19921: 201-12).
Does God “Change His Mind”? 395
doom had already been decreed, why would the prophet
experience
such grief and spend the whole night crying out to
God? (3) The
presence of MOyoha, “today,” in Samuel’s
second speech indicates that
God’s
decision was finalized at that point, not earlier. (4) The
switch from TAr;mawA
xlo (“you have not kept,” 13:13) to TAs;xamA (“you
have
rejected,”
was the basis for the judgment pronounced in
chapter 15, or at
least the “straw that broke the camel’s back.”
PSALM
110:4
In this passage Yahweh swore an oath
that the Davidic king
would occupy a special royal-priestly status, much
like that of
God
will not change His mind, or retract His statement, clearly
pertains to the specific pronouncement that
follows and, together
with the reference to an oath, marks the statement
as a decree.
Jeremiah and Ezekiel attach to a
judgment speech a state-
ment about God’s refusal to
change, thus marking the prophecy as
an unalterable decree. In Jeremiah 4:28 the words hn.Am,.mi
bUwxA-xlov;,
“nor will I turn from it,” accompany yTim;Hani xlov;,
“and I will not
change My mind” (regarding what I have spoken). The
former
statement is used of God’s oath to
Lord
has sworn to David, a truth from which He will not turn
back.”20 In Ezekiel 24:14 the Lord
declared that He was no longer
open for negotiation; the announced judgment would
then come to
pass (ytiyWifav;
hxABA). Zechariah 8:14, which recalls that God judged
the preexilic generation
just as He had planned without retract-
ing His decision (yTim;HAni xlov;
alludes back to the divine decision
recorded in Jeremiah 4:28 and Ezekiel 24:14.