Unlike the gods of surrounding nations, Yahweh does not appear mainly to create a sacred place, a cultic center, where human culture is protected by becoming close to
unchanging divine reality.
Not exact matches
The central allegation of paradox seems to me to run roughly as follows: a nontemporal
divine experience would include in itself all events in time (cf. CSPM 105); but to experience all temporal events simultaneously would dissolve any real distinction between past and future (cf. CSPM 66); so there could be no temporal transition, no change, no contingency, and no freedom (cf. CSPM 137); and since nothing could become, there could be no real permanent and
unchanging reality either, «for then the contrast between the terms, and therewith their meaning, must vanish» (CSPM 166).
Beyond all human laws, customs, and opinions there is one
divine Law which remains absolute and
unchanging.
For there is an inconsistency only if we introduce the philosopher's assumption that God has an
unchanging nature, such that the way we now experience
divine activity must also characterize God's activity in the past.
His ways are inscrutable, and man has no control over the workings of his
divine plan, because he is both
unchanging and unchangeable.
While modern society has drastically changed in recent centuries, fundamental human nature and
divine revelation are
unchanging and never obsolete in anytime or culture.
So, she does not have the model of a growing
divine satisfaction which «changes» in respect to its content, but she has the model of an
unchanging primordial satisfaction followed by the concrescence of God's consequent nature?