Greek Philosophy-The Foundation of Calvinism

Originally written by Craig Fisher and Robert Hill

Greek Philosophy,

The Foundation of Calvinism

Craig Fisher and Robert Hill

Immutable means not subject to change. This concept of immutability became the foundational doctrine of that pagan Greek philosopher of Athens, Plato (427-347 BC), concerning the attributes of God’s character. Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo (354-430), had been thoroughly educated in philosophy. Philosophers, including Augustine, believed that God could be understood by human reason alone. By Augustine’s time, Plato’s thought had permeated most philosophies. Augustine learned the doctrine of the Immutability of God from Greek philosophy. After his conversion, he incorporated this doctrine into his theology. Augustine’s theology influenced the Reformation through an Augustinian monk, Martin Luther. Luther and Augustine had a great influence on John Calvin. Aspects of Calvin’s theology have been foundational for most evangelical theologies since the Reformation. The doctrine of immutability, especially, has influenced the theology of the Christian world. Religious rationalism goes something like this:

Since we are created in the image of God, we possess innate knowledge that leads us to understand and even long for God. Further, since God reveals something about himself through his creation, man can have a reasonable understanding of God’s character and attributes.

However, since fallen man has had his reasoning impaired, he is unable to have a saving knowledge of God without the revelation of Scripture. Plato has been a major influence on philosophical thought for almost 2,400 years. Plato honored his mentor, Socrates, in his books by making him the leading character of his dialogues. It is through Plato that we have an idea of Socrates’ philosophy and thought, since no works of Socrates have been found. We can understand Plato’s rationalistic doctrine of the immutability of God easiest if we use a syllogism:

• God is perfect.
• The perfect does not change.
• God does not change.

Well-educated men of the ancient world, such as Augustine, understood Plato’s concept of God. The idea of immutability was found in almost every school of philosophy of that time. This view of God could be called static perfection. Plato himself explained it this way in “A dialogue between Socrates and Adeimantus.”

Is it not true, that to be altered and moved by something else happens least to things that are in the best condition … that the healthiest and strongest is least altered …. And is it not the soul that is bravest and most intelligent that would be least disturbed and altered by any external affection … that those which are well made and in good condition are least liable to be changed by time and other influences …. It is universally true then, that that which is in the best state by nature or art or both admits least alteration by something else… But God, surely, and everything that belongs to God is in every way in the best possible state …. Then does he (God) change himself for the better and to something fairer, or for the worse and to something uglier than himself?It must necessarily … be for the worse if he is changed...the gods themselves are incapable of change. . .Then God is altogether simple and true in deed and word, and neither changes himself nor deceives others.

In this dialogue between Socrates and Adeimantus, Plato presented his idea of God’s immutability. This rationalistic view of God was developed by Plato and later adopted by Augustine through the writings of Plato and the Neo-Platonists. I want to comment on the italicized phrases in this quotation. We can rationally see that those articles which change the least are the most perfect. For example, a person may purchase a pair of shoes that are comfortable and fit well. Over time, the shoes begin to show wear and tear (to be altered and moved by something else). The soles of the shoes get holes and no longer protect the feet. Eventually the shoes must be replaced. Those shoes that last the longest or stay in their original condition the longest are the best (those that are well made and in good condition are least likely to be changed by time and other influences). Rationalistically, we could think a perfect shoe would last forever without changing. Any change in a perfect shoe would make the shoe less perfect or worse than perfect (be for the worse if he is changed). To continue our ratiocination, since God is perfect, He is neither altered nor moved by anything else. Therefore, we conclude Platonically, the most basic attribute of God is immutability (the gods themselves are incapable of change … Then God . .. neither changes himself nor deceives others).

In the Platonic manner, Augustine held that pure reason, using only the intellect, was superior to the evidence of the senses. Augustine tried to leave the sensory world of the body and retreat into the inner world of contemplation and reason. This rationalistic methodology is similar to modern-day philosophical methods since revelation is subordinated to reason. Augustine struggled over the issue of reason versus authority. What came first, reason or authority? He thought that all faith presupposed reason. Only an irrational faith would be founded on an irrational authority. The authority must be judged rational first. Then man, because he is fallen and unable to reason perfectly, needs that rational revelation to understand God. However, we disagree with Plato and Augustine. God addressed this rationalism in

1Corinthians 1:19-21,

For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

Augustine brought in a number of presuppositions from Platonic reasoning, but the most basic was the doctrine of the immutability of God. Because of this Greek philosophical influence, Augustine thought the idea of a mutable God was an absurdity. Augustine was able to accept the Catholic faith only after Ambrose (340-397), Bishop of Milan, allegorized the Old Testament Scriptures which revealed a mutable God. Ambrose spiritualized the offending Scripture passages of the Old Testament in his sermons. When Augustine heard these sermons, he was able to accept the Christian God.  He wrote,

“For those absurdities which in those Scriptures were wont to offend me, after I had heard divers of them expounded properly, I referred now to the depth of the mystery: yea and the authority of that Book appeared so much the more venerable, and so much more worthy of our religious credit.”

Certain absurdities had hindered Augustine from believing in the Word of God. Augustine believed that God was immutable. To him it was absurd to believe in a God who could change his mind or be mutable. How did Augustine know that this was absurd? The force of his own reasoning concluded that it was absurd. But his reasoning was permeated by Platonic philosophy. After hearing Ambrose, Augustine was able to make the rationalistic judgment that the Bible was a rational authority. Augustine only turned to the Scriptures after the absurdities were “expounded properly.” Now he could rely on Scripture for the spiritual help he needed since his reason was not able to overcome his sexual desires. He concluded, “Seeing therefore mankind would prove too weak to find out the truth by the way of evident reason, and for this cause was there need of the authority of Holy Writ: “Although Augustine later developed a high regard for Scripture, first he used non-Scriptural rationalistic thinking to form his ideas about God’s attributes. Then, he attempted to find support for his ideas in the Scriptures (eisegesis). His primary presupposition was the immutability of God. But this doctrine of immutability influenced his doctrines of predestination, foreknowledge, and intemporality of God. Subsequently, Calvin assimilated these doctrines. This influence of Augustine over Calvin is attested by many writers. For example, Benjamin Warfield wrote, “The system of doctrine taught by Calvin is just the Augustinianism common to the whole body of the Reformers – for the Reformation was, as from the spiritual point of view, a great revival of Augustinianism. “Plato was a student of Socrates. Interestingly, Augustine discussed the source of Socrates’ inspiration: “what kind that deity was who attended on Socrates, a sort of familiar, by whom it is said he was admonished to desist from any action which would not turn out to his advantage”. Apparently, Socrates had a familiar spirit which encouraged him to teach philosophy.

Augustine argued with a writer named Apuleius about Socrates. Apuleius wrote a book called “Concerning the God of Socrates” where he sought to prove that this “god” was really a demon. What was Augustine’s argument in support of Socrates? Augustine contended that demons love the theater. This familiar spirit did not approve of the theater. Therefore, this familiar spirit was not a demon. Augustine’s conclusion was, “Apuleius is wrong, and Socrates’ familiar did not belong to this class of deities.”  We can see that Augustine’s proclivity for Platonic philosophy drove him to this conclusion. He believed that Socrates did have a familiar or spirit, but the spirit was not a demon. What would a spirit in an unregenerate man be: an angel, the Holy Spirit, or a demon? In light of Leviticus 19:31; 20:6,27, and Acts 16:16-22, would any Evangelical Christian accept Augustine’s explanation today?

Did Plato’s doctrine of Immutability of God originally come from Socrates? Plato’s discussion was a dialogue between Adeimantus and Socrates. It is probable that Plato heard this discussion while he listened to Socrates’ teaching. Although Plato may have entered some original material into these dialogues, Plato credits Socrates as the Greek developer of this doctrine.

Why did Augustine need to reconcile the Platonic doctrine of the immutability of God and the Bible before he could believe? This is important since this doctrine influenced Augustine in the development of other important doctrines concerning the attributes of God, including predestination, prescience, impassibility, and intemporality.

Although Augustine was raised by a Christian mother, he wandered from the Christian faith. He was impressed by a work of Cicero called Hortensius. This work influenced his love for philosophy. Although Augustine loved philosophy, he still superstitiously adhered to certain aspects of his mother’s faith. Augustine resisted becoming a disciple of Cicero’s philosophy because he did not find the name of the Catholic God in any of his works. However, Manichaeism combined the rationalism of the philosophers with the appropriate “Godnames,” the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. This persuaded him to become a follower of this sect. He was associated with the Manichaeans for nine years.

The Manichaeans stressed rational inquiry over authority. As we have seen, Augustine agreed with this method of ascertaining truth. The Manichaeans disliked the Old Testament because it portrayed an angry emotional God. They held the Platonic conception of an immutable God which was common in the philosophies of Augustine’s age: Eugene TeSelle states:

People acquainted with philosophical notions of God were uncomfortable with the anthropomorphisms of the Old Testament (not only with its descriptions of God but its suggestions that God has human emotions or changes his mind).

Augustine was torn between his mother’s religion and the rationalism of his day. He became a teacher in North Africa, then in Rome, and eventually he arrived in Milan. The Bishop of Milan, Saint Ambrose, offered a solution to Augustine’s dilemma: a reconciliation between philosophy and Catholicism.

In Augustine’s own words:

And for this I rejoiced also, for that the Old Scriptures of the Law and the prophets were laid before me now, to be perused, not with that eye to which they seemed most absurd before, when as I misliked thy holy ones for thinking so and so: but indeed they did not think so. And with joyful heart I heard Ambrose in his sermons to the people, most diligently oftentimes recommend this text for a rule unto them, The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life: whilst those things which taken according to the letter seemed to teach perverse doctrines, he spiritually laid open to us, having taken off the veil of the mystery; teaching nothing in it that offended me.

Then, Augustine explained the reasoning which allowed him to be converted to the Catholic faith:

For first of all the things began to appear unto me as possible to be defended: and the Catholic faith, in defense of which I thought nothing could be answered to the Manichees’ arguments, I now concluded with myself, might well be maintained without absurdity: especially after I had heard one or two hard places of the Old Testament resolved now and then; which when I understood literally, I was slain. Many places therefore of those books having been spiritually expounded.

What could Augustine not accept literally? One concept was the mutability. How could God change his will or character from one time to the next in order to adjust to a changeable mankind? In Confessions, Augustine explains which literal interpretations were unacceptable. Here is one of his statements:

And because God commanded them one thing then, and these another thing now for certain temporal respects … different things to be fit for different members, and one thing to be lawful now, which in an hour hence is not so; and something to be permitted or commanded in one corner, which is forbidden or punished in another. Is Justice thereupon various or mutable?

Platonic persuasion. According to Augustine, he found the unchangeable God in his mind by Platonic ratiocination.

I had by this time found the unchangeable and the true eternity of truth, residing above this changeable mind of mine. And thus by degrees passing from bodies to the soul, which makes use of the senses of the body to perceive by: and from thence to its inner faculties, unto which the sense of the body are represent their outward objects; and so forward, as far as the irrational creatures are able to go: and thence again I passed on to the reasoning faculties, unto whatever is received from the senses of the body is referred to be judged.

Did Augustine understand God as immutable from a study of the Scriptures? No! Under Platonic influence, Augustine engaged in introspective ratiocination and saw an immutable God in his mind. Although he received this concept of an unchangeable or immutable God from the Platonists, he incorporated it right into his Christian theology without change.

Augustine admired Neo-Platonic Philosophers because his Christian philosophy was influenced by these men. Augustine claimed Ambrose was so Platonic in his preaching that people were saying all the maxims of the Lord Jesus Christ were from the works of Plato. In defense of our Lord, Ambrose stated that Plato learned his maxims from Jeremiah.  Of course, this was nonsense. Augustine repudiated this later in life, but the incident demonstrates how thoroughly Platonic thinking had influenced Ambrose. However, Ambrose was a major influence in Augustine’s conversion. Augustine further encouraged the use of Platonic philosophy later:

if those who are called philosophers, especially the Platonists, have said things by chance that are truthful and conformable to our faith, we must … appropriate them for our own use.

Augustine explained that the Israelites left Egypt with the Egyptians’ gold. In the same manner, Christians should plunder the gold from the philosophers. Augustine praised the Platonic philosophers for having a doctrine, the Immutability of God, that was so close to the Christian conception of God. Read the following excerpts from his writings. “But, among the disciples of Socrates, Plato was the one who shone with a glory which far excelled that of all others, and who not unjustly eclipsed them all.” “For those who are praised as having most closely followed Plato, who is justly preferred to all the other philosophers of the Gentiles.”

“It is evident that none come nearer to us than the Platonists.”

These philosophers, then, whom we see not undeservedly exalted above the rest in fame and glory, have seen that no material body is God, and therefore they have transcended all bodies in seeking for God. They have seen that whatever is changeable is not the highest God, and therefore they have transcended every soul and all changeable spirits in seeking the supreme ….He who is clever judges better than he who is slow, he who is skilled than he who is unskillful, he who is practiced than he who is unpracticed; and the same person judges better after he has gained experience than he did before. But that which is capable of more and less is mutable; whence able men, who have thought deeply on these things, have gathered that the first form is not to be found in those things whose form is changeable.”

Whether these philosophers may be more suitably called Platonists . . . we prefer these to all other philosophers and confess that they approach nearest to us.”

Then, as to Plato’s saying that the philosopher is a lover of God, nothing shines forth more conspicuously in those sacred writings. But the most striking thing in this connection, and that which most of all inclines me almost to assent to the opinion that Plato was not ignorant of those writings, is the answer which was given to the question elicited from the holy Moses when the words of God were conveyed to him by the angel; for, when he asked what was the name of that God who was commanding him to go and deliver the Hebrew people out of Egypt, this answer was given: “I am who am; and thou shalt say to the children of Israel, He who is sent me unto you;” as though compared with Him that truly is, because He is unchangeable, those things which have been created mutable are not – a truth which Plato vehemently held, and most diligently commended. And I know not whether this sentiment is anywhere to be found in the books of those who were before Plato, unless in that book where it is said, “I am who am; and thou shalt say to the children of Israel, He who is sent me unto you.

Augustine freely admitted that the concept of Immutability was a Platonic idea. As we can see, when he referred to “these philosophers,” he meant the Platonic philosophers, and he mentioned Plato.

What is the biblical evidence? Augustine cited Exodus 3: 14: And God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.”‘ The exact meaning of God’s name is not certain. However, there is certainly no reference to immutability. The meaning probably is a reference to the eternal existence of God. Citing verses with obscure meanings is hardly proof of a major doctrinal concept. Notice also that Augustine used philosophical rationalism as proof of his doctrine of Immutability. In the realm of theology, reasoning is a dependable tool only when biblical material is the basis to form all conclusions. It is true that Augustine utilized Scripture in his defense of the immutability of God, but Scripture was a secondary proof.

Those things which our faith holds and which reason in whatever way has traced out, are fortified by the testimonies of the divine Scriptures, so that those who by reason of feebler intellect are not able to

comprehend these things, may believe the divine authority, and so may deserve to know …. Accordingly, that God is unchangeable.

Notice! Augustine maintained that reason traced out the doctrine of immutability.

Aristotle (384-322 BC) was a disciple of Plato. In his Metaphysics, we find the concept of the Immovable God, the Prime Mover. Aristotle’s Immovable God moves all things or causes all things to happen, but he himself is not moved by anything. Aristotle confirmed the Platonic doctrine of an

Immutable God. The following passages are illustrative:

The first principle and primary reality is immovable, both essentially and accidentally, but it excites the primary form of motion, which is one and eternal. Now since that which is moved must be moved by something, and the prime mover must be essentially immovable …. Therefore, the prime mover which is immovable, is one both in formula and number …. Clearly, then it thinks that which is most divine and estimable and does not change; for the change would be for the worse.

Augustine also mentioned this idea of immovable.

Once hath He spoken, is to be understood as meaning immovably, that is unchangeably, all things which shall be, and all things which He will do …. though there is for God a certain order for all causes … in that order of causes which is certain to God and is embraced by His foreknowledge.

Augustine said all things which happen are caused by the immovable God. This immovable God must be Aristotle’s Prime Mover, since all things are caused by it. After perusing the Bible, we can confidently declare that it does not speak of an immovable God. In fact, the opposite is true. The God of the Bible, our God, is moved by our prayers, our suffering, and our actions.

In Saint Augustine’s Confessions, we find that Augustine saw many similarities between Catholicism and Platonism: “whereas in the Platonists, God and his word are everywhere implied. “

Historians believe that the book which Augustine read was most likely the Enneads of Plotinus. Augustine mentioned Plotinus twice in his work, The City of God. 27 Other references to the Platonists seem to include Plotinus since Augustine had such a high opinion of him: “Plotinus, whose memory is quite recent, enjoys the reputation of having understood Plato better than any other of his disciples.

Plotinus (about 205-269) was a Neo-Platonic philosopher with whom Augustine was well acquainted. The concept of atemporality, God being in the state of Eternal Now, was reinforced by Plotinus. We see that in Augustine’s exposition of the Eternal Now. Let us examine the parallel thoughts of Plotinus and Augustine.

The concept that there is no past or future, only present

Plotinus:

seeing all this one see eternity in seeing a life that abides in the same, and always has the all present to it, not now this, and then again that, but all things at once, and not now some things, and then again others, but a partless completion …. Necessarily there will no “was” about it, for what is there that was for it and has passed away? Nor any “will be,” for what will be for it? So there remains for it only to be in its being just what it is. That, then, which was not, and will not be, but is only, which has being which is static by not changing to the “will be,” nor ever having changed, this is eternity _

Augustine:

so that of those things which emerge in time, the future indeed, are not yet, and the present are now, and the past no longer are; but all of these are by Him comprehended in His stable and eternal presence …but beholds all things with absolute unchangeableness.

Plotinus said the eternal does not have a “was” (past) or a “will be” (future) but only an “is” (present). Since God exists in an eternal state, according to Plotinus, the past, present, and future should be viewed as existing in that present state at the same time as the present. Augustine concurred; he said that God exists in an eternal present in which the future and the past are comprehended as existing now.

The concept that in the Eternal Now there is no change

Plotinus: “which is static by not changing to the ‘will be,’ nor ever having changed”;

Augustine: “but beholds all things with absolute unchangeableness.”

The concept of immutability again played a crucial role in the development of the doctrine of atemporality. For God to be immutable, the future can add no knowledge to what he already knows. For Plotinus and Augustine, this unchangeableness is present in the eternal.

The concept of having no transition of thought

Plotinus:

“The life, then, which belongs to that which exists and is in being, all together and full, completely without extension or interval, is that which we are looking for, eternity.”

Augustine:

For he does not pass from this to that by transition of thought but beholds all things with absolute unchangeableness.”

Since both Plotinus and Augustine believed no new knowledge could be possible for God, He could have no transition of thought. Again, Plotinus believed that there is no extension or interval of thought in eternity. These concepts were clearly developed by the Platonists before Augustine.

All future events which happen are determined by necessity

Plotinus: “But when all the causes are included, everything happens with complete necessity.”

Chance circumstances are not responsible for the good life, but they, too, follow harmoniously on the causes before them, and proceed woven into the chain of causation by so following. The ruling principle weaves all things together, while individual things cooperate on one side or the other according to their nature, as in military commands the general gives the lead and his subordinates work in unity with him … everything which results from their interweaving is foreseen, in order that this result may have room to be well placed, and all things come in a well-planned way from the general-though what his enemies planned to do is out of his control. But if it was possible for him to command the enemy force as well, if he was really “the great leader” to whom all things are subject, what would be unordered, what would not be fitted into his plan.

Augustine:

But, as to those who call by the name of fate …. the whole connection and train of causes which makes everything become what it does become, there is no need that I should labor and strive with them in a merely verbal controversy, since they attribute the so-called order and connection of causes to the will and power of God most high, who is rightly and most truly believed to know all things before they come to pass and to leave nothing unordained …. But an order of causes in which the highest efficiency is attributed to the will of God, we neither deny nor do we designate it by the name of fate … there is for God a certain order of all causes.

Plotinus, the pagan philosopher, and Augustine, the Catholic theologian, agreed that all events which ever happen have been determined. Plotinus said there is a chain of causation that cooperates with God, or the ruling principle, to determine future events. Augustine would agree that there is a whole connection and train of causes or order of causes that makes everything happen. According to them, everything that will happen has been predestined and will happen by necessity. Since the future is determined, it can also be foreseen. Plotinus said the diviners or astrologers could foretell the future.

Augustine agreed that the future is foreseen, but he left foreknowledge to God. If the future were not determined from the beginning, then foreknowledge would be impossible.

How the free will of man works with destiny

Augustine:

But it does not follow that, though there is for God a certain order of all causes, there must therefore be nothing depending on the free exercise of our own wills, for our wills themselves are included in that order of causes which is certain to God, and is embraced by His foreknowledge, for human wills are also causes of human actions; and He who foreknew all causes of things would certainly among those causes not have been ignorant of our will….Therefore we are by no means compelled, either, retaining the presence of God, to take away the freedom of the will, or, retaining the freedom of the will, to deny that He is prescient of future things, which is impious. But we embrace both. We faithfully and sincerely confess both.

Plotinus:

So evil deeds are consequences but follow from necessity; they come from us (i.e. we cause them), and we are not compelled by providence, but we connect them, of our own accord, with the works of providence or works derived from providence. The universe is ordered by the generalship of providence … everything which results from their interweaving is foreseen … But the things you will choose are included in the universal order, because your part is not a mere casual interlude in the All, but you are counted in as just the person you are. But for what reason is a man the sort of person he is? … There are two questions which the argument seeks to settle here, one, whether the blame should rest on the maker, if there is one, who determined the moral character of the individual, or on the being which has come into existence itself: … For if it is because he (man) was able to be something nobler than he is, if he was able to add something to make himself better, he is responsible to himself for not doing it; … so that it seems likely that blame should fall upon the men who have come into being, and that what belongs to providence is on a higher level.

Plotinus said that these determined events are the result of the interweaving of free will and Providence. These free wills are interwoven into the will of providence to produce everything that will happen. Augustine said that God foresees our free will and includes this in his predestination. He does not explain how this thought, which contradicts his necessity statement, is resolved. Somehow, the free-will decisions of man fit into this predestination. But, again, he does not explain how this happens. However, what is evident to us is this: Augustine read Plotinus and used his ideas in formulating his Christian theology.

How did Augustine instruct Christians to find this doctrine of the immutability of God? Through the Platonic method of rational contemplation, of course! St. Augustine wrote Christian Instruction to explain the norms for expounding Scripture. These principles reveal Augustine’s own understanding of the Christian faith. In this book, Augustine explained that teaching is concerned with either things or signs. God is a thing, and the Scriptures are signs because they signify God. To Augustine, it was possible to know certain attributes of God without the knowledge of Scripture. One of these attributes is the immutability of God. Augustine explained how all men conceive of God:

When the one God of gods is thought of, even by those who believe in, invoke, and worship other gods ‘whether in heaven or earth,’ He is considered in such a way that the very thought tries to conceive a nature which is more excellent and more sublime than all others.

What is the more excellent thought? Augustine continued to reflect on the attributes of God without the benefit of Scripture.

He wrote,

When they have seen that even this life is still changeable, they are compelled to prefer something unchangeable to it, that very Life, in fact, which is not sometimes foolish and at other times wise, but is rather Wisdom itself. For a wise mind, that is, one that has attained wisdom, was not wise before it attained it; but Wisdom Itself was never unwise, nor can It ever be. If men did not perceive this, they would not, with the utmost trust, esteem an unchangeable wise life above a changeable one. Indeed, they see that the very rule of truth, according to which they claim the unchangeable life is better, is itself unchangeable. They do not perceive this rule anywhere except beyond their own nature, since they perceive that they are changeable beings.

Then he wrote,

No one is so shamelessly foolish as to say: “How do you know that an unchangeably wise life should be preferred to a changeable one?” For, the very point that he is inquiring about – how I know – is universally and unchangeably evident for all to see.

Notice what Augustine said about his method of finding the truth about immutability. He said that men know that God is unchangeable (immutable) because it is universally evident. In

addition the unchangeable is better because it is a rule of truth that they perceive in their own nature. Augustine believed that all men, without the benefit of the Scriptures or the revelation of God, understand that God is immutable. Augustine was simply conforming to the Neo-Platonic thought of his age. These are certainly not universal truths evident today. Augustine was revealing his own epistemology. Augustine first believed in God as immutable. He obtained this concept from

Platonic and Neo-Platonic philosophy. Then he transferred this belief into his Christian faith. In contrast, when we look to the Scriptures first, we see a God of passion and suffering who is influenced by man’s actions and prayers.