The Absolute Sovereignty of God 1

Transcription

1 The Absolute Sovereignty of God I. Introduction This study tonight is primarily the contents of a pamphlet I wrote to acquaint individuals with one of the most critical yet misunderstood and maligned of all the doctrines of the scriptures--the sovereignty of God. Simply stated, the doctrine of the sovereignty of God is the teaching that God is in control of all that takes place, and that nothing takes place apart from His sovereign control. Today, if the question be asked, almost every professing Christian would say they believe in this doctrine, giving lip service to it in their speech and their prayer. However, when pressed to define what they mean and to defend this view, most of these will waiver and confess, "God is in control of the big things; the rest is left up to us." Or some may say, as one of my seminary professors once did, "God is only in control of the good; He does not control or work the bad." Still others will say that God is in control of the bad things, yet only permissively. "God allowed that to happen to you, for your own good." Are these, then, accurate depictions of this key and most vital doctrine of scripture? II. Sovereign Over Nature Most of these individuals would readily agree that God is sovereign over nature, and that God is sovereignly active in this realm. And this is the clear teaching of the scriptures. The LORD is the sovereign and all-powerful creator of all things (Ps ). God is seen as the one who causes the sun to rise and to set (Ps ). By the voice of the LORD does the deer have its young. (Ps. 29.9). He controls the clouds, the rain and the seasons (Ps , Ps. 104). Even the wind and the sea obeyed our Lord Jesus Christ (Mk ). With this assertion the Biblebelieving Christian would agree. III. Sovereign Over Man It is at this point that many professing Christians would begin to feel uneasy in their support of the doctrine of the sovereignty of God. Some would back away from this doctrine, claiming that "Yes, God is sovereign, but He doesn't make a man do anything. Again, the critical question at this point is, "What do the scriptures teach?" The scriptures are very clear on this point. God is sovereign over, in and through man. There is no aspect of man that is not intimately and actively controlled by God. The position that man has in life is determined by God (Prov ). The condition in which man exists is controlled 1 This lesson is a lesson that was delivered in June of 1998 to the Reformed Christian Fellowship, a small Reformed Baptist work in Waynesburg, OH. The lesson was delivered by Lee Carl Finley, the de-facto lay minister of the fellowship. 1

2 and determined by God (Ex. 4.11, Eccl ). Every thought of man is controlled by God (Prov. 16.1,9). Every deed man commits is controlled by God (Prov , Jer ). Even the very heart of man is in the hands of the LORD (Prov. 21.1), and He turns it wherever He wishes. He has the same control over man as over nature. He is the one who causes both the ravens and the widow to provide for Elijah in the time of drought (I Kings 17.4 & 9--same word used of both in the Hebrew). In Him, "we live and move" ("are moved," as the Greek can also be translated, in Acts 17.28). And finally, God is the one who actively and absolutely determines who He will save and who He will reprobate (Rom ). It is God, not man, that opens the heart (Acts 16.14). Belief and repentance are given by God, not works of men (Phil. 1.29, II Tim ). man. This is the biblical teaching concerning the sovereign control God has over, in and through IV. Sovereign Over Evil It is at this point that many of these same individuals, who earlier confessed belief in the sovereignty of God, want to stop the discussion. "I will readily admit that God is in control over nature, and I will agree (although I am not comfortable with it) that God has control over man. But God and evil, that's a mystery. And it is wrong to go beyond that which God has revealed about Himself." With this last statement I agree. The Christian is not to go beyond the word of God. However, those who state that the relationship between God and evil is a mystery act like the Bible has nothing to say concerning this topic. And this is simply not the case. Two passages are instructive at this point. They are Isa. 45.6b-7 and Lam Isa states: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. Upon examining this verse in your own Bible, you may notice that the word "evil" has been changed to calamity (or a similar term) in a newer translation. At this point, the newer translations have erred. Countless times this word (RA' in the Hebrew) is used to refer to evil, sin, etc. One such place (where the noun form is used) is Jer , where the Lord Himself declares: Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so I will bring upon them all the good that I have promised them. A cursory reading of the siege of Jerusalem in Kings or Chronicles will amply illustrate exactly what the LORD brought upon this people (see also the book of Lamentations). In this context the LORD brought evil (and not just "calamity") against sinful Israel (see also Amos 3.6,15). In the second place, if the Hebrew word RA' in Isa (RA'AH in Jer.32.42) denotes only calamity, and not evil, then the word peace (Heb-SHALOM) can only refer to natural good or prosperity. Hebrew poetry, instead of rhyming sounds, often has parallel or complementing thoughts (see Ps. 119 for a good example of this parallelism). And these two words, and thus their meanings are parallel in the flow of thought in the verse. Note also the parallelism in the 1st half of the verse between light and dark. Thus, just as the "good" here means more than 2

3 physical prosperity, so "evil" means more than just calamity. The second verse that is instructive is Lam. 3.38: Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not good and evil? Here we see that the origin of both the physical and moral good and evil is from the "mouth of the Most High"--that is, by His decree, which originates in His mouth. To change the meaning of one of these words (to suit one's theological position) and not change the other is dishonest at best. At this point, one may wish to say to me, "What you have said thus far is true. God does ordain evil. but you have missed the mark as to how--he does it permissively. He lets it happen--he is not actively involved these deeds." Is this a plausible answer to this question? Again, the critical question at this point is not what you or I think, but is, "What do the scriptures teach?" Again, I state that the scriptures are very clear on this point. God is seen as actively, not passively, involved in many instances where a person or person's sin is involved. Joseph recognized (correctly) that it was God who sent him to Egypt by means of his brothers' sin. (Gen [esp. v. 7-8], 50.20). Repeatedly in the book of Exodus God is seen hardening the heart of Pharoah. According to the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, literally, this word which is translated as "harden" means to make insensitive, hard, or dull. God actively made Pharoah insensitive to the the Israelites. God even declares that He is the One Who will do it (Ex. 4.21). Yes, it also states that Pharoah hardened his own heart. But one needs to remember that the chain of events is thus: First, God declares that He will harden Pharoah's heart (Ex. 4.21, 7.3) in order to magnify His signs in Egypt. Then, in v & 7.22, Pharoah's heart was growing hard. It is only in ch. 8 that we find that Pharoah "hardened his heart." Pharoah hardened his heart because God had hardened his heart. Also, this hardening cannot be explained by changing the meaning of the word. Some have done this by stating that all that God did was remove the benefits of "common grace" or by removing the influence of His Holy Spirit on Pharoah. This cannot be for the following reasons: --first, this effectively introduces two separate and distinct meanings of the word "harden" into the text. God's hardening is seen as passive, yet Pharoah's hardening is seen as active. Linguistically, there is no warrant for such deceitfulness in changing meanings to suit one's preconceived notions about God or Pharoah. --second, other passages which reflect upon this event clearly show God as active in these things. See Ps , Rom. 9.16ff. --hermenutically, the passage makes perfect sense with the ordinary meaning of the word. There is no lexical or grammatical reason to look for another meaning for the word "harden." 3

4 --both Ex and 10.1 use the Hiphil of the same verb to describe the activity of both God and Pharoah. Thus it does not make sense that this word would have different meanings in the same continuous narrative. --the Hebrew also uses other words to describe this activity of God upon Pharoah. Ex states that God will make strong or strengthen, that is, to make stubborn. Ex. 7.3 God says He will make Pharoah's heart stiff. These words point to an active activity of God, not a "hands off" activity. --other uses of these words in the scripture. These words are used elsewhere in the scripture to mean the same things. Why change their meanings here in Exodus? --to state anything other than that which the word of God declares is to be an unfaithful witness to the word of God. Numerous times God declares that something is going to happen because He is the One Who would do it, even though the act (sometimes sinful) is clearly carried out by man. See Numbers ; II Sam & ; I Kings , 31, 34-39; 12.15,24; II Kings 19.7; Isa ; ; ; , ; ; Jer ; ; 15.3; ; 32.42; 33.5; Ezek ; Hab ; Zech The scriptures declare that sinful acts happened because God caused them to happen (see also verses in previous paragraph). The sin that lead to the division of the kingdom was from God (I Kings 12.15,24). Ps states that God turned the hearts of Israel's enemies to hate His people. God was the One who moved David to number Israel (II Sam 24.1ff). Yes, Satan was involved, but God was the cause. This was also Job's outlook. Even though we know that God commanded Satan to afflict Job, Job recognized that this was directly from the hand of God. In v. 10 of ch. 2 Job rebukes his wife: "What? shall we receive good from the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? And note the next phrase: In all this did not Job sin with his lips. Job is declared sinless, even though he declares these things as coming from the hand of God. And Job was right. They did come from the hand of God. "But does not the narrative of Job give us a picture that God 'permitted' these things to be done to Job?" No. This heavenly picture does not address the issue of sovereignty. All this narrative gives us is a picture of the dealings that God had with His angelic beings and the means by which God afflicted Job. It does not speak to the sovereignty behind these events. Just as God used Joshua and the Israelites to conquer the land, so He used Satan to afflict Job. Satan was God's divinely ordained means for this purpose. Further, this heavenly image must be understood in the light of other scriptural texts which clearly state that God is actively working all things after the council of His will (Rom. 8.28, Eph. 1.11). Even though God used Satan to accomplish His purpose, Job still recognized (correctly) that these things were from the hand of God. All of these above verses declare one overriding truth: God is actively and intimately controlling and working all things to the end to which He has appointed them. To use the words to "permit" or "allow" to describe the activity of God displayed in these verses mentioned above (in which He Himself often claims to be the One doing these things) is, at best, 4

5 a serious weakening of the truths being presented by these verses, and, at worst, a calculated denial of the sovereignty of God. John Calvin, a well-known Reformation theologian, stated a similar truth in his Institutes of the Christian Religion when he stated: In like manner, what is said of permission is too weak to stand. God is very often said to blind and harden the reprobate, to turn their hearts, to incline and impel them... The extent of this agency can never be explained by having recourse to prescience or permission. (Institutes of the Christian Religion, tr. by Henry Beveridge, Wm. B. Eardman Pub. Co., 1989, Book I, p. 267). Further, to understand all of these verses regarding the sovereignty of God in terms of "permission" is to change the meaning of countless verses to meet one's own theological position and to interject an idea into each text that is simply not found in that text. V. Conclusion It has not been my intention to make God seem cold and hard, or to charge God with evil, for the abundant testimony of scripture is that God is a holy, loving, merciful God. However, this being true does not give one the right to ignore the abundant witness of the scriptures to the fact that this holy, loving and merciful God is actively and intimately working all things after the counsel of His own will, even sin and wickedness, and is yet without sin (Ps ) in so doing. One needs to remember, the "mystery" is not, "How does God do these things and man remain free?" (for man is not free, in any sense of the word, from God), but the mystery is, "How does God actively do all these things (which He Himself states that He does) and is yet without sin?" To this the scripture does not give an answer. But to fail to assert this absolute sovereignty because we cannot state how He remains sinless in actively and intimately working all things (including evil) to their appointed end is to fail to declare the clear teaching of God Himself concerning His own actions. "And we know that God is causing all things to work together for the good (even sin and wickedness), to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." And this He does without sin. "Are you saying that man does not act? Do not vvs. like I Chron 18.6 show that God let David go wherever he wanted and that God just helped him wherever he went? Did not David take the initiative?" All these verses are is a statement of fact. Wherever David went God did help and bless him. These verses, however, do not address the issue of the sovereignty of God behind David's actions. "Are you saying that man does not sin? Did not David state that he sinned against God in the matter of numbering Israel?" (see I Chron ). No, I am not saying that David did not sin. David was the one who sinned. One also needs to note that this passage concerning David's confession says nothing of the sovereign and efficacious activity of God behind, over, in and through all of these events, thoughts, etc. It only gives to us David's confession of his sin. In addition, this activity of God is not to be thought of as a mere cooperation, where God is dependant upon man to accomplish His will in any given situation. God is dependant upon nothing 5

6 in order that His will be carried out (see Dan.4.35f, Job 42.1f, etc.). One may ask, at this point, "Why does God still find fault, for who resists His will?" Paul beautifully answers this objection in Rom 9 reminding them that they have no right to question the sovereign God's judgment at this point. The Divine Potter does have the right to do whatsoever He wishes with the clay. We, too, must learn the lesson that whatever my God ordains is right. VI. Practical Implications --Behold the utter fallacy of evolution. The main premise of evolution is that God (if He is even in the equation) took a "hands-off" approach to creation and providence. To continue to proclaim evolution in the face of the above verses is folly at best and blasphemy at worst. Theree is no place for evolution in the world view of the biblical Christian. --There is no "Mother Nature." --Each person that God desires to save, He will most efficaciously save (see Rom. 9-11; Jn. 6.37ff). --No matter what may befall the child of God, he can rest assured knowing that nothing will happen to him that is not perfectly given by his loving heavenly Father for his best and His Father's glory. (see I Pet. 2.17, ). --A proper understanding of the sovereignty of God will result in true praise to God for His sovereign grace. (see Rom ). --A biblical view of the sovereignty of God demands a re-working of most, if not all, "Evangelical" theology. I have spoken with many individuals who, when questioned, agree with the tenants presented above. But upon hearing them speak, one would never know that they believe anything close to this. This is wrong! Truth demands consistency. Thus, the truth of the sovereignty of God demands consistency in other areas of theology. Anthropology, Harmariology, Soteriology, Ecclesiology, Eschatalogy are all affected by this truth. God is one, and His truth is one. Thus, it will do no good to say one holds to this doctrine and then to turn around and preach and teach like an average "Evangelical" pastor in other areas, effectively undercutting the precious truths of the sovereignty of God thereby. --A denial of these truths is not a disagreement with me or some "theological position," but is a very clear denial of a host of scriptures that teach all that has been presented, and ultimately, it is an unfaithful witness to our Sovereign LORD. --One should not be surprised if the world of professing Christianity has no use for this doctrine. This doctrine is not comfortable. As has once been said, "To the believing heart no proof is necessary; to the unbelieving heart no proof is enough." No amount of scripture will make any difference as regards the warm reception of these truths. Only the true child of God, who has been born from above, who is taught of the Spirit, will gladly embrace this (and all) biblical truth. 6

7 VII. Two verses to remember But our God is in the heavens: He hath done whatsoever He hath pleased. The LORD is righteous in all His ways, and holy in all His works. --Ps Ps