Jeff Carter
This past month we just completed a short course here at HaDavar entitled, “Making Sense of Suffering.” I invite you to visit our online class page and check it out. This is truly one of the most vexing of all problems in Christian thought today; and is one that is posed to Christians regularly in the world.
In this brief course we discussed the concept of how we can make sense of a world where evil can co-exist with a good God. We offered up the idea that it would be a logical contradiction for God to force morally free creatures always choose not to do evil. And since being truly human somehow entails having free will, for God to be able to include humans in His world, it is not possible for Him to have created a world without the possibility of evil in it. This problem of evil intersects with the concept of free will at many levels, and so I thought it might be good to discuss the idea of free will and perhaps attempt to redirect some faulty ideas we have been exposed to by some in the church.
Because of the seemingly irreconcilable nature of the apparent paradox the sovereignty/free will debate presents, some have described free will and sovereignty as twin rails of a train track—that, by all accounts are parallel (both equally true), but as they head towards the horizon appear to grow closer and closer. We are assured that these two seemingly contradictory ideas will be reconciled somewhere off in eternity. But I would propose the idea that Christians can somehow hold contradictory ideas in their minds simultaneously as true, belies the coherence of a logical, rational and consistent mind in God. This is made obvious by the faulty analogy of train tracks that somehow eventually come together. This would clearly eventuate in a train wreck—an apt analogy for this kind of thinking.
Two mutually exclusive ideas cannot both be true. That contradicts one of the most basic laws of logic, the law of non-contradiction. And to “punt to mystery” when something does not make sense to us is intellectually lazy. Our God is rational. So how should Christians approach this challenging topic? I believe we will find the answer in the precision with which we approach defining these terms.
The question of how the doctrine of the sovereignty of God can be reconciled with the desire of man to see himself as free to make decisions for himself is a complex and multi-faceted question. It first involves defining what is meant by the statement that God is sovereign. Does the term “sovereign” refer to “the position and prerogatives of the one who is reigning over all” or perhaps does it go so far as to mean “controlling in detail everything that is or comes to pass”?
Then, what is meant by “free will” must be explored. What is a will? What does freedom mean? How is it fallen man can be seen as truly free? When adequate definitions are reached, the question of how these two seemingly contradictory propositions might possibly be reconciled can then be tackled. Since both of these ideas seem to be taught in Scripture, there must be a way to reconcile the two concepts without compromising the core essence of either side.
The question of the sovereignty of God seems to be the more foundational of the two concepts, so it is here that we shall begin. The witness of Scripture is that God is clearly the ruler, sovereign, and Lord of all. He is the creator and sustainer of life. He is the king to whom all allegiance is due. But the way in which God relates to and with that creation goes even further than merely the picture of a sovereign monarch over his kingdom. The term “sovereignty” implies much more than regal authority. It also denotes exhaustive management and control.
In Ephesians 1:11 it says that God brings about all things according to the counsel of His will. The picture here is that of God guiding and directing all circumstances according to His purposes and for His glory. The witness of scripture is abundantly clear how God works and arranges all aspects of the flow of history according to His plan (Ps. 103:19). This is sometimes referred to as God’s government.
So here we see the idea of sovereignty is that God is in control of whatever happens and, in fact, whatever happens is according to His permissive will. One way this guiding and directing manifests itself is in how God works and moves in and through our individual lives and the choices we make. This is the aspect of sovereignty that directly touches on the debate concerning free will. This aspect of God’s providential guiding is sometimes referred to as “concurrence.” Concurrence deals with how God works with and through individuals to bring about His intended purpose. According to systematic theologian Erickson, the free actions of human beings exercising their wills are also a part of God’s governmental working. So, in regards to this debate, the term “sovereignty” refers to how God is able to bring about His own ends, while still allowing mankind to exercise its own will and make free choices.
What then is “free will”? If God does indeed exercise control over everything, including the individual decisions of His creatures, then how is it possible that we are in any sense free to make our own choices? There is so much confusion regarding this phrase “free will” that many have refrained from using it altogether, substituting, rather, other terms like “capacity to choose” and “true freedom” as well as many others.
First of all, this is more than a debate about whether or not man has the freedom or ability to choose between two options—or the ability to simply make a choice. The ability to make choices is an essential element of man being made in the image of God. This debate, rather, revolves around whether or not man is constrained in his choices; whether his decisions are influenced or even coerced; and specifically whether man has all the options at his disposal that he thinks he does. What exactly is meant by the term “free will” is precisely the heart of the debate.
There must be distinctions made between what will be termed here being “totally free”, “truly free”, and “genuinely free”. Despite the objections of some to whom freedom is the ultimate good, it is neither possible nor is it anywhere in Scripture suggested that man is totally free. For, to be totally free would suggest that one is outside the influence of everything, including God’s control. One who is “totally free” would be able to make decisions that are not caused by or influenced by any outside pressure or constraint.
Taken to the logical conclusion, someone in this state would be “free” to exist or not exist; to continue existing as a human, or at some point decide to be a poached egg. One would, in a sense, be equal to God—or, rather, greater than God. For God is also subject to constraints. He is not able to do anything that is contrary to His nature, or anything that is inherently impossible (e.g. God cannot lie; He cannot exist and not exist at the same time and in the same way; or He cannot make a square circle, etc.). So this distinction limits what is meant by free will. Man is not “totally free”.
The next question is whether man is “truly free”. This is the question of whether man is able to truly choose between the two options of doing what is pleasing to God and doing what is not; of choosing between good and evil. For in a very real sense, if one has at one’s disposal only the one option of opposing God, then one is not truly free to do what man was created to do—to accomplish the purpose for which he was made. If one is not able to choose the good, then one is only able to choose the evil—and even though a myriad of choices exists among evil options, one is not truly free.
In our fallen state, I would submit that mankind lost the ability to choose the good. This is one of the consequences of “total depravity”— which is the biblical truth that every aspect of our being has been affected by the fall. While we may be able to choose things which, on the surface, may appear to be good; that we all are affected by evil, selfish motives. And thus the Bible can clearly say, “…there is no one who does good, no not one” (Romans 3:10-12). (To be clear, this pertains to the pre-regenerate state of fallen mankind—this will be discussed more fully.)
But it appears again that we must take two newsletters to complete this discussion. Tune in next month as we finish out this idea and explore an important distinction between “true freedom” and “genuine freedom.” And then perhaps see how we can see both free will and sovereignty as compatible.
-Jeff