And The Two Became One

God's Sovereignty is absolutely essential.  Man's responsibility is absolutely essential.  To deny or dilute either of these concepts is unbiblical and will result in greater confusion.  But how is it possible to combine two issues that are seemingly incompatible?  It is only possible to understand how these concepts work together when the whole picture is presented from start to finish.  Since God is one there can be no division or competition in Him.  Neither can there be any inconsistency in Him since He is perfect.  Because of the seeming inconsistencies that are presented it is important to attempt to unify these two concepts as biblically and logically as possible so that the character and actions of God may be vindicated.  Obviously this is not always possible because man's ability to understand an infinite God is limited by his finiteness, but even still there are some things that can be understood because God has revealed Himself to man through His Word.  That said, here is what I believe is a biblical model for salvation that explains how God works and man responds in the process of salvation.

(Before the foundation of the world - Sovereignty and Responsibility)

God foreknows all events including the choices and actions of man

God chooses a world (series of actions and reactions) out of all the possibilities

God predestines that world to occur, as well as those who are saved to be saved and those who are lost to be lost based upon His foreknowledge of all things

(At salvation - Sovereignty and Responsibility)

God draws man unto salvation through the Holy Spirit

Man responds in consistency with what God foreknew, but at the same time uncoerced

God seals those who respond with the Holy Spirit

Now, let me break each section down.  Before the foundation of the world God knows everything that will happen.  Obviously God could not choose something if He did not know what to choose, so everything begins with His foreknowledge.  He knows all events that will happen, and He also knows all events that could happen (this is called "Middle Knowledge").  In other words, God knows each of His possible actions, as well as each possible reaction from man and the world.  For instance, God knows that if He does A on a certain day that you will do B, while if He does C then you will do D, and so on an so forth.  Needless to say this knowledge creates an unfathomable amount of possibilities.  Each of these sets of possibilities is called a "book" or a "world".  Now understand that these are all only possibilities, not actuality.  Before the foundation of the world He knew each of these possible worlds (series of outcomes) and chose the one that was best (best is hard to define, but we know that God only creates the best things possible from Genesis 1, so we might define best as relating to the greatest number of disciples or some other criteria - how we define best is another discussion).  The world that was best was the one that He actualized and the one that we live in.  This world, all of its events, and those who would respond to Christ and choose to reject Him was then predestined to occur.  Based upon these things it is quite easy to say that God is sovereign.

At salvation God draws man unto Himself.  God always initiates salvation (Romans 3).  However, God does not force men to be saved or lost otherwise He would be unjust in rewarding them or punishing them for what He forced them to do.  The fact that they are predestined also does not force men to receive Christ or deny Him in the sense that they are unaware of God's plan.   So then, they make an uncoerced decision either to receive Christ or reject Him.  They will resond free, but at the same time they will respond consistently (unaware) with what God has foreknown, actualized and predestined.  After they choose to receive Him they are then sealed by the Holy Spirit so that they cannot be lost.  Now some might argue that those who are sealed are forced to be saved and cannot retract their decision, however Scripture is clear that those who do not desire to follow Christ to the end were never sealed to begin with (Revelation 3:5).  The Bible is also very clear that many will appear to be saved, but in the end will truly be revealed as lost (Matthew 7:21-23).  Based upon these things it is quite easy to say that man is responsible for his decision to receive Christ or reject Christ.

When these two concepts are presented together, in their biblical forms, it is quite possible (and even beneficial) to present a doctrine that does not divide.  So then, my plea to you would be to understand, as best as possible, how God has intricately woven the fabric of sovereignty and responsibility and look at the coin as heads and tails instead of heads or tails.  When this is done I think that the church will be much better suited to address more pressing issues such as the lostness of this world.

Why Responsibility Is Necessary

Moral responsibility, or free choice as it has been called (I prefer moral responsibility because it suggests that we have the right to choose actions that are either moral or immoral, whereas free choice assumes that we can make choices in regard to anything - clearly there are choices we cant make such as becoming invisible, flying, etc.), actually fits the character of God better than a world without any moral choice.  Most people look at moral responsibility as if it works against God.  They argue that God must be limited if He cannot control man's actions.  However, last time it was argued that things that go against the nature and character of God do not count against His sovereignty, otherwise there could not be such a thing as sovereignty (sovereignty is self-contradictory without some parameters).

Without any moral responsibility it would be impossible to see God as truly holy.  The bane of absolute sovereignty is the question of the origin of sin.  If man is not responsible for making his own free choices in regard to morality then where did sin originate?  If man did not make the choice to sin then someone or something else made that choice for him.  Now, it can be argued, as many have attempted and failed, that Satan caused man to sin.  However, this is circular.  If Satan caused man to sin then who caused Satan to sin?  Even noted pastor and author R.C. Sproul has been forced to admit that without moral responsibility there is no answer to this question.  However, he is wrong.  There is a solution; it is just not one that opponents of moral responsibility want to take.  Apart from a concept such as moral responsibility, where free creatures make moral choices, the only other possible solution for the origination of sin is God.  However, Scripture is clear that this is impossible (James 1:13-18).  So then, the elimination of moral responsibility compromises a case for the holiness of God because He then becomes the originated, proprietor, and dispenser of sin.

It is clear throughout Scripture that God offers man the right and responsibility to choose moral actions (Joshua 24:15; Acts 7:51-53).  Conversely, when man does not choose moral actions he chooses immoral actions (amoral actions aside).  These moral choices are what justify and vindicate the character of God.  How can God righteously judge and sentence to Hell men who committed acts of immorality that they were forced to commit?  If God forced men either to be righteous or unrighteous, and such a person must argue if moral responsibility is eliminated, then how can God be considered just for sentencing sins that He forced His creatures to commit?  This does not meet any definition of justice known and is illogical.  However, if God gave men a choice, either to choose Him or to reject Him, and men chose to reject Him and do what was contradictory to His character and nature, then He would have no choice but to punish such men because God, being perfect, cannot tolerate anti-God (what is against Him).  Further, He would be just in His judgment because they chose their own actions and fate.

So then, moral responsibility defends the holiness of God, righteousness of His judgments, and necessity of punishment and Hell.  Any system that removes this concept will struggle seeing God as holy, just, and loving because the burden of sin must ultimately fall on Him.  Further, any doctrine that seeks to eliminate moral responsibility must be rejected because it calls into question the character of God.  There are only two options for sin: Either God forced it, or man chose it.  If God forced it then He is unjust and a liar (because of James 1:13).  If man chose it then He is just and men deserve the repercussions of their actions.  Next time we will conclude this discussion by bringing the concepts of sovereignty and responsibility together to form one cohesive picture.

Why Sovereignty Is Necessary

For most opponents of Calvinism the doctrine of God's sovereignty is a particularly frustrating doctrine primarily because it is seen in either of its two extremes.  That is to say, either God controls absolutely everything, and thus free choice is nullified, or God is not in control of everything, and thus Scripture is nullified.  However, this is a false dilemma (a logical fallacy where only two options are assumed possible when in reality there are other options).  When such limitations are placed upon the sovereignty of God it is no wonder that few want to discuss this doctrine.  The results of such discussion would be frustration and confusion, as well as a polarization of opposing sides and arguments.  However, I would argue that it is possible to choose both the sovereignty of God and the free responsibility of man.  Sadly many opponents of Calvinism seem to choose the latter of the two options simply because it is the opposite of the Calvinism argument and provides a better ground for free choice.  This is detrimental because Scripture is nullified when arguments attempt to deny or dilute the sovereignty of God.

God is sovereign, of this Scripture is clear.  He is before all things (Col. 1:17), above all things (Eph. 4:6), knows all things (Ps. 147:5), rules all things (1 Chron. 29:11-12), sustains all things (Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3) and controls all things (Job 42:2).  However, it is important to understand sovereignty as it is portrayed in Scripture.  Sovereignty does not biblically mean that God can do absolutely anything.  In fact, quite the contrary.  There are many things God cannot do that are listed in the Bible.  He cannot cease to exist (Rev. 22:13), cease to be God (Ps. 90:2), sin (1 John 1:5), or tempt (James 1:13) to name a few.  God cannot do any of these things because they contradict His nature.  However, it is important to note that none of these things count against the sovereignty of God because to do them would contradict Himself (i.e. sinning would contradict His holiness and make Him unholy).  He is able to do all things that are consistent with His character and nature.  This in no way is "limited" sovereignty because the ability to do absolutely everything is self-contradictory (a thing cannot be red and blue at the same time, a sum cannot be 2 and 5 at the same time, etc.)

This point is crucial to understand because it reveals how sovereignty and free choice are not mutually exclusive but rather completely compatible.  Since God cannot do what contradicts His character or nature then He cannot override a free and moral choice made by one of His free creatures, and yet is still completely sovereign.  Because God has made man free, to override his freedom (either by force or coercion) would contradict His creative nature.  God only creates things that are perfect.  If He were to override what He had created perfect then that would imply that there is an inconsistency or imperfection in the creative nature of God.  If God would need to override a free creature then why was He made free in the beginning?  This kind of reasoning would suggest that God made a mistake and is rectifying His error, which is impossible because God cannot make mistakes.  So then, moral freedom in human beings is consistent with the sovereignty of God.  He maintains absolute sovereignty, while at the same time human beings maintain moral responsibility and freedom of choice.

However, please do not think that God's sovereignty is limited to man's free choice.  Indeed, He has many things that He can do to woo, persuade, convince, and convict men in regard to their choice.  It would also be wrong to say that God is not sovereign over the events of this world, the actions of men, or the combination of these things.  This will be revealed in more detail when we conclude by drawing sovereignty and responsibility together.  Next time we will examine why moral responsibility, or free choice as it has been called, is absolutely necessary. 

Calvinism And Misunderstandings

I was unable to find an article to comment on this month and so I have decided to divert my attention to a doctrine that I have noticed is particularly divisive.  This doctrine seems to divide more churches, turn more friends into enemies, and splinter and fracture the unity of Scripture (not that Scripture is not unified in it's message, but that it is portrayed in one-sided arguments) than perhaps any other doctrine.  The doctrine that I speak of is Calvinism.  For those of you unfamiliar with this discussion allow me a minute to set the stage.  Essentially, the major questions revolve around God's sovereignty and man's responsibility.  If God is completely sovereign then how can man make free choices?  Conversely, if man does not have the ability to choose to sin then how can he be held accountable for his actions?  These questions, and more, are common questions that believers are wrestling with as they study the Scriptures.

Calvinism, unfortunately, is being heatedly debated by many believers who are not biblically, spiritually, or intellectually ready to tackle such issues.  As a result, when unable to present reasonable points, summations, and responses many believers become angry and as a result heatedly defend a "position" rather than making sound arguments.  This results in seeing the position as more important than the other person.  Eventually, it is only a matter of time until attacks against an individual's "position" are taken personally and a great divide is formed between two Christians who once were good friends.  However, I would like to personally point out that Calvinism is not a deal breaker, it is not a hill to die on, and it is not a discussion that should be divisive (unless it is taken in either of its more radical forms - Armenianism, where a person can lose salvation and works to keep it; or Hyper-Calvinism, where free choice is completely eliminated and thus everything is predetermined and forced by God).  I have many good friends who stand on the other side of the fence in regard to this discussion, and I respect their opinions, study of Scripture, and search for the truth in God's Word.  We understand that ultimately, even knowing Greek, Hebrew, and Philosophy, will still not prepare us to completely understand these things because it is impossible for a finite being to understand the mind and workings of an infinite God.

However, that does not mean that we cannot understand the biblical picture of sovereignty and responsibility, or that we should not attempt to understand these things.  God has revealed to us many things about these issues in His Word and desires that we study these things so that we may gain a better understanding of Him and of ourselves.  That said, let me present the direction I am going to take in addressing this issue throughout the next month.  I believe, and will show, that God's sovereignty is 100% necessary and that man's responsibility is 100% necessary.  Any position that tries to deny or dilute either of these essentials is unbiblical.  My hope is to post 3 more times on this issue.  First, I would like to show the necessity of God's sovereignty in light of what Scripture teaches.  Second, I would like to show how man's responsibility results in accountability for good and evil, and how this ultimately serves as the justification for God's judgments.  Finally, I would like to tie these two principles together and spend a little time bridging the gap between these two camps so that believers may be unified in Christ as He intended (Eph. 4).  It is my hope that you will listen, think, and question your own view.  After all, an unexamined view is not worth having.  These postings are not mean to be a forum for divisiveness, but rather a balm of healing for both sides to understand, appreciate, and love one another and see that there is more common ground than unfriendly territory because we all serve the same God.