SO, WHAT S GOD DOING IN YOUR LIFE?

Transcription

1 SO, WHAT S GOD DOING IN YOUR LIFE? Or, God s Providence: Theological Contrasts and Practical Considerations Part 2: Divine Providence and Human Decision Making Kent Dresdow, Pastor of Adult Ministries August 17, 2008 Note: The following are the pastor s notes used in preaching this message. This is not a complete, word-for-word transcription of what was preached. These notes serve as a companion to the complete message, which is available by listening to the audio version. I. REVIEW (also see notes from August 10, 2008) A. Historical overview s: John Calvin (Switzerland) and Jacob Arminius (Holland) s: The Remonstrants and Synod of Dort (Holland) s: John Wesley (England) s: Charles Finney and D. L. Moody (USA) s: Pentecostalism, Methodism, and some Baptists (worldwide) : The Openness of God written B. Theological options 1a. The Classic Arminian Option 1b. The Open Theism Option 2. The Reformed option C. Practical Implications re: Providence 1. Decision-making 2. Evil and Suffering 3. Prayer II. DECISION-MAKING IN THE OPEN THEIST MODEL A. The will of God in the world: significant independence Though God is able to directly intervene in the created world, He almost always chooses not to. He usually limits His power to not cause things to happen in the world (not coercion). Clark Pinnock states that God s preferred modus operandi is persuasion (Pinnock, Most Moved Mover, 148). So when evil events happen in nature, God almost certainly did not control it. Remember, Open Theists believe that God does not know the future. So He might not have known it was even going to happen, because the laws of nature He set in motion are responsible. He is saddened by natural catastrophes, and sickened by evil in the world. Why then did He create such a world, with so much evil that potentially surprises and saddens Him? Why not just create a world without evil? Clark Pinnock asks this question and answers, One might ask if God was wise in creating humanity with all the trouble that has happened and still happens. Was it worth it? Why not be content with apes and porpoises? Why not be content with [robotic] human beings (who do only what God wants them to do)? I think it is because God is a serious lover who wants these relationships of love most deeply What a spectacle the world is! How can one not be impressed by what appears to be the self-expression of divine purpose, limited by certain constraints yet moving toward something marvelous a community of person living in a freely chosen relationship with God! (Pinnock, 140). B. The will of man: significant persuasion Though God can use coercive force in our lives, He lovingly chooses not to. Rather, He seeks to woo us, to love us, to persuade us that His way is the best way. He desperately wants relationship with us, and so pursues us but will not force us to pursue Him back. Thus, free will is very much like classic Arminianism, with a slightly greater emphasis perhaps on persuasion over permission. Permission is not often mentioned by open theists, probably because it sounds so cold and unfeeling. Permission smacks of authority, while persuasion seems more relational. And since God doesn t know the future because the future is open to Him (He doesn t have foreknowledge), His disposition has to be this way toward your life and decisions. 1

2 So, if you were an Open Theist, God s will and your will must work together. God doesn t know the future, and neither do you, so you must work together. 1. A Practical Consideration Listen to Greg Boyd, a very engaging Open Theist, Knowing that what transpires in the future is not a foregone conclusion but is significantly up to us to decide, we will be more inclined to assume responsibility for the future. We will be more inclined to pursue what could be rather than resign ourselves to what will be. Life is life indeed when there are possibilities rather than certainties (Greg Boyd, God of the Possible, 94). 2. A Biblical Consideration Friends, the Bible is filled with references to God knowing the future. Over one third of the Bible is prophecy about the future, with hundreds of prophetic predictions already having been fulfilled in the past. Do we really want to dismiss about one third of your Bible regarding prophecy and say that it is the result of God being the master prognosticator? That God does not know best, but that He guesses best? Is that how we are to read vast portions of Scripture? Not a chance. We will see how very detailed God s providential care is of His world and our lives. In short, God s providential work in the world and in our lives is massively detailed. III. DECISION-MAKING IN THE ARMINIAN MODEL A. The will of God in the world: relative independence God has created the world with natural laws, which entails that God wills to relinquish some control over a significant portion of what happens in the created world. This is summarized by Jack Cottrell, God s creatures are relatively independent in their actions but not in their being. In the very beginning God endowed His creatures with certain built-in laws or forces or (in the case of animals) instincts that enable them to function without His having to determine their every move ( God the Ruler, 106). William B. Pope, who wrote a classic Arminian systematic theology in 1874 called Compendium of Christian Theology, seems to be saying the same thing when he describes the world with imparted quasiimparted forces of nature (Comendium of Christian Theology, 1:439, quoted in Cottrell, God the Ruler, 106). In short, God s will has relinquished relative control of creation over to natural laws. This has fascinating implications. This, for example, can get God off the hook for Hurricane Fay. The hurricane was likely the result of natural law in action, not God. Thus, God is not the author, and thus not responsible for natural calamities. Since sin has affected natural law, then natural disasters may be attributable to sin or Satan, and are part and parcel of a fallen creation. In short, God is a gentleman, and He generally will not force His will on His creation. He has given it, relative independence. Well, that s God s will on display in the world. That s the natural order. But how about in our lives? What s God s will what job we accept, or what house we buy, or younger generation: what girl or guy you think is cute (or hot, as I like to say), or what college to go to? How could an Arminian think through this? Jack Cottrell says, We should not say of [a tragedy] that it was the Lord s will in any purposive sense. We can and must say that the Lord permitted it to happen Even a tragedy that occurs through the processes of nature must be regarded in the same way, since God has established a relative independence even in the natural realm. It is true that in his sovereign special providence God could prevent any event from occurring, including any disaster or tragedy. But we must also allow God to respect the integrity of the freedom He has granted to His world, and we must trust His wisdom in 2

3 knowing what good can be drawn from these tragic episodes that He permits to take place (Cottrell, God the Ruler, 317). B. The will of man: relative permission Everything is allowed or permitted by God, but not controlled. God s providence in an Arminian mindset is a very general (hands-off) providence. Roger Olson, an Arminian author, says, Therefore, much that happens in [human] history is contrary to the will of God. Arminians affirm that God is in charge of nature and history, but deny that God controls every event. The devil is not God s devil or even an instrument of God s providential self-glorification. The Fall was not foreordained by God...Whatever happens is at least allowed by God, but not everything that happens is positively willed or even rendered certain by God Sin especially is neither willed nor governed by God except in the sense that God allows it (Roger Olson, Arminian Theology, 38-39, italics mine). Man s will is libertarian free will. Free will is one of the core fundamental doctrines of Arminianism, and this affects decision-making in very practical ways. Here is a very helpful insight by a well-known Arminian about how Arminian human free will works with real life choices we all make: Arminians do not object to the idea that God directs human choices and actions. All Arminians object to is belief that God controls human choices especially evil and sinful ones! Arminians believe human choices and actions have no meaning if they are controlled by God s ordaining power. Arminianism does not object to the idea that God directs human choices and actions through the power of persuasion (Roger Olson, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities, 98). For if God foreknows all the choices that every person will make, he can make his own plans accordingly, fitting his purposes around these foreknown decisions and actions (Cottrell, God the Ruler, 208). The horns of the dilemma for the Arminian view of foreknowledge and providence than, are this: a. If God exerts real and active providential control, then the future is adjustable and hence he cannot have known it. b. For example, an Arminian will say that God possesses exhaustive foreknowledge of what you will eat for lunch. In eternity past, He looked down the corridors of time to this afternoon, and watched you go to lunch to see what you would eat, then made His plan after seeing your free-will decision. Yet by the time today actually arrives, are you actually free to choose where you want to go to lunch? No! Neither you nor God can change any single feature of lunch since he already knows precisely what every feature will be. This is where Open Theists and Reformed theologians see significant weakness in the Arminian position. How is man s free will free if God has already foreknown it in eternity past? God can t change the future He foreknows perfectly, thus neither can man. 1. A Biblical Consideration Perhaps the most astonishing aspect of this understanding of free will is how it is justified biblically. After delineating for pages what Arminian free will is theologically, one famous Arminian author offers the following as biblical data or proof for this understanding of man s free will: Arminians believe in free will because they see it everywhere assumed in the Bible (Olson, A.T., 98). Both critics and defenders of [Arminian] free will theism look in vain for proof texts for it; there is no chapter or verse that, taken alone, demonstrates conclusively that persons have libertarian free will Everywhere the Bible calls for spiritual or moral deliberation, decision, and action, it assumes free will. The rock of Arminian free-will theism does not need to be a Scripture passage or a string of Scripture passages; it is the revealed goodness of God throughout Scripture and especially in Jesus Christ. Where 3

4 is God ultimately and perfectly (if not completely) revealed? Where else but in the character of Jesus Christ? (Olson, Perspective on the Doctrine of God: 4 Views, , 61). When it comes to God s election and the atonement, Arminian theologians have Scriptures that they debate and bring to the table. But we are not talking about God s salvation in this series. That has been, I think, excellently treated by Pastor Jon on several occasions. But as it pertains to a scriptural example of an Arminian understanding of God s general/macro-managerial providence and man s free will in the world, there are some out there, but I kept coming up blank. It is just everywhere assumed in the Bible that Arminian free will is true within the work of God s providence. Friends, if it is true, then should we not be able to see it explained somewhere? One author said that it is implicit all over the Bible like the Trinity is. But the Trinity is taught in specific Scriptures, not implied. I m not saying that passages may not be there, but not one of the about ten Arminian authors that I studied supplied working biblical passages or examples of free will in providence, (not salvation!). In short, the biblical data for Arminian free will in providence is simply not discussed. Philosophically, yes. Theologically, yes. But biblically and exegetically? Not that I ve seen at any depth. One has to wonder why. 2. A Practical Consideration If there is much that happens, as Olson states, that is out of God s will because it is evil, then where does this stop? How much of the world is evil outside of Christ? All of it! There is none that is good, no not one! So everywhere that evil exists, which is everywhere; there God s will is being thwarted. This means that God s will is being done in very few places. Not all Arminians think this way, but they talk about God not willing evil to happen. If that is true, then think about how much of the world every day lies outside of God s will! IV. DECISION-MAKING IN THE REFORMED MODEL A. The will of God: absolute control 1. In the world God has created a world over which God exercises complete regulative control of all things, including all events of nature. Different than the general oversight of the Arminian view of God s providence, Wayne Grudem says that God is continually involved with all created things cooperating with them in every action, directing their distinctive properties to cause them to act the way they do (Grudem, Systematic Theology, ). How much is God in control of creation? I love this. Turn to Job Look at what God controls. Does any of this sound general, or does it sound very specific and meticulous? a. Inanimate objects Snow Showers and rain Ice Frozen bodies of water Clouds path Lightning (all from Job ) Grass and vegetation (Ps ) Stars/constellations movements (Job 38.32) b. Random events: dice, coin flip, lot, etc. (Prov 16.33) c. Nations He brings nations down (Job 12.23) He rules the nations (Ps 22.28) He determines nations borders (Acts 17.26) 4

5 B. The will of man: compatible free will The Reformed model of man s free will in our decision-making is that it is perfectly compatible with God s will. God s pervasive sovereignty meshes with man s free will. This kind of free will is different than Arminian free will, which stands relatively independent of God s will. Definition: We have free will if we are unconstrained and uncoerced so that we choose according to our strongest inclination, our highest desire, or simply what we most want. 1. God s control of our lives: Scripture texts God s control of our lives is staggering. Consider that He grants you: Every meal of your life (Matt 6.11) Every day of your life (Ps ) Every month of your life (Job 14.5) Every movement of your life (Acts 17.28) Every step of your life (Jer 10.23; Prov 20.24) Every plan of your life (Prov 16.1) Every success and failure of your life (Ps ; Lk 1.52) Every child of your life (Ps 127.3) Every talent and ability of your life (1 Cor 4.7) Every authority in your life (Prov 21.1; Ezra 6.22) Every person in your life (Ps ) Every thought and inclination of your life (Phil 2.13) Is there a working example of the Reformed model of God s sovereign providence that is compatible with man s free will? The life of Joseph provides a strong example of compatible free will. 2. Man s compatible free will within God s control: a Scripture example (Genesis 45:4-8) It looks like, prior to this in the narrative, that God was not in this. However, Joseph now puts the two together as acting in coordination (45.4-5). Which party is the fundamental party? God is, as is stated by the grammar (notice the causal for or because in verse 5). By verse 7, however, the brothers drop off as agents in his life, and by verse 8, God is said to be the One who did the sending of Joseph. So who is responsible of the evil done? Genesis 50.20: you meant it for evil, but God meant it for good. What makes the brothers action evil? They have no rights/authority over their brother. God s action is not evil because he owned Joseph. As God, He has absolute rights over Joseph. Beyond the motive ( for good or for evil ) or purpose, God has absolute rights over His creation. In the very same action, God is morally praiseworthy, while men are morally culpable. Friends, God does not control all things generally. He does not provide broad oversight. He providentially rules over all the affairs of creation. This has implications for next week s topic of tragedy and suffering, but for today, let s be comforted by the fact that God is not just in broad control, but complete control of all things. 5