I have for
years tried to give adequate expression to the relationship and tension between
human autonomy and omnipotence- ever since that evening many years ago when I
lay on my bed struggling with the concepts of Luther
in his Bondage of the Will . How
do we reconcile the human will and the absolute sovereignty of God? Before
reading that book it wasn’t even an issue,
it was a notion completely foreign to my way of thinking, my experience of
reality. I sensed also in Luther his
struggle to elucidate, even though words and ways of expression were not at all
foreign to him. Writing and speaking was after all his bread and butter.
“Compulsion”, he said, as he grappled with the issue, “is altogether too strong a word to use in this context”.
I have an
illustration that I hope may be found useful. But first let me build some
background to the idea.
To Will is Properly Basic
As
individuals we have wills and
therefore are- in a proximate sense- the mover. It is understood that the will is an essential attribute of
personhood. This is our daily experience and it is universal, all humanity,
generally has this knowledge. Not only is it experiential, it is one of the first experiences of human life.
Right from
an early age when we first start to differentiate from our mother, learning our
individuality, we also become aware of our extension in space.
We move a
finger inadvertently and the movement catches our eye. Then we see- or perhaps
more properly, intuitively know- there is a connection between my finger, my
eye, and myself. In the next development we will
to move our finger- and behold it moves as we command! This must be how the
first sense of wonder strikes us, we hear a sound and our eyes follow, our head
moves. I have POWER! It is not long before the connection is more certain and
co-ordinated. As every mother knows it’s not long after that when the infant
starts to exert their individuality in other ways.
More POWER!
The reality of our will,
therefore is not a doctrine that needs teaching, not a truth that needs to be
hammered into our obtuse consciousness, but rather it is an everyday experience
that is concreted into the deepest sense of our identity; as deeply as we are
aware of our own self-consciousness, our own existence. It is indeed existentially properly basic to our understanding of ourselves- a basic presupposition.
Rene Descartes (1596 –1650), an important early philosopher, scientist and mathematician, wanted to find out how we arrive at certainty of knowledge. His idea entailed systematically doubting everything he thought he knew, drilling down as it were until he could arrive at a starting point for knowledge which he could not doubt.
Eventually he came up with this: cogito ergo sum, commonly known as "I think, therefore I am"
He realized that he could systematically doubt everything except his own existence. This, therefore became his starting point for philosophy. I venture to say that at this same very basic level of certainty our own will is also indubitable. Perhaps we could, along with Descartes say: "I think, therefore I will" or maybe- "I move, therefore I will".
Rene Descartes (1596 –1650), an important early philosopher, scientist and mathematician, wanted to find out how we arrive at certainty of knowledge. His idea entailed systematically doubting everything he thought he knew, drilling down as it were until he could arrive at a starting point for knowledge which he could not doubt.
Eventually he came up with this: cogito ergo sum, commonly known as "I think, therefore I am"
He realized that he could systematically doubt everything except his own existence. This, therefore became his starting point for philosophy. I venture to say that at this same very basic level of certainty our own will is also indubitable. Perhaps we could, along with Descartes say: "I think, therefore I will" or maybe- "I move, therefore I will".
The Connection Between Cause and Effect Not Obvious
We all know that as I will my finger to move-
it does infallibly move; (all things being equal and given there is no
physiological reason not to). There is in fact no sense of feeling or knowing
the connection. The neurological relationship between my brain and the muscles
of the finger are obviously real but not sensed, not available to sense
perception. We observe the finger move and are aware of the thought to move it
but there is no apparent connection between them, apart from the obvious
physical connection where I am able to trace with another finger an
uninterrupted line between the finger I move and the brain which moved it. I
intuitively understand the moving finger is an effect and my brain the cause. There
is no sense perception of a message between the two through connecting nerves. One could even say, that without the certitude brought about by medical science, the
argument for the effect (finger moving) and its cause (willing mind) from this perspective, is an inductive
one, and therefore not supported in an absolutely logically deductive sense.
“Hey- Index Finger Left Hand-Move!”
“Yes Sir”
Interestingly
the early empiricists realized, that- just as there was no immediate perceptive sense
connection between my finger and my mind, this pattern, the lack of immediate
observable connection, between cause and effect is repeated throughout the
Universe. A generator spins, a light glows. There is no sensible, observable
change in the conductors between the two without special tools. The earth revolves around the sun, but again there is no immediately observable connection between the two, and so on. The effect is obvious- the cause is not.Trees bend but
have you seen the wind? Leaves rustle- but that is hearing the effect not actually perceiving the cause.
Imagine if you will, two men working at pumps on a stage. They stand opposing each other, legs slightly apart, braced and balanced. In front of each of them is a hand pump such as you might use if your car had a flat tyre. Now imagine if the hose from each of these pumps, instead of being attached to a tyre, were connected to each other.
The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. John 3:8The above is surely an argument for the sovereignty of God. One never knows where the Spirit will turn up, or where he will go next. But one certainly sees the effects- people get born again in his wake, lives are transformed.
Imagine if you will, two men working at pumps on a stage. They stand opposing each other, legs slightly apart, braced and balanced. In front of each of them is a hand pump such as you might use if your car had a flat tyre. Now imagine if the hose from each of these pumps, instead of being attached to a tyre, were connected to each other.
The man
on the right pumps downwards forcing
air through the hose; it now enters the pump on the left forcing the pump handle up. The man gripping the pump handles on that
side has his hands and arms forced up
by the inrush of air into his pump. Now this cycle is repeated often until the
action becomes a rhythm. One pump handle goes down; the other in reciprocal
motion goes up. But in each and every cycle it is only the man on the right making the effort whereas the other man is passive. Now it
would appear that whoever was bringing the pump-handle down at the time was the
one doing the work- and so the natural assumption is that both men are working. because that is the way we know these pumps operate. But
what if, as I said one man was passive the whole time? With a little practice it would be impossible to tell who was doing the work and who wasn't.
They could play this game all day in principle and no outsider could tell just who was exerting the power and who was showing the effect of that power. Visibly there is no change; the cause and the effect are apparently just the same. But in fact at any given moment the effect may actually be the cause and the cause may in fact be the effect. Only the two men would know who was doing the work and who wasn't. In the same way when observing two riders on a tandem bicycle it is not always discernible who is actually exerting effort on the pedals and who is simply along for the ride- since the pedals of both riders may keep turning irrespective of the individual effort involved. For that matter even the riders themselves may argue who is "pulling their weight"!
They could play this game all day in principle and no outsider could tell just who was exerting the power and who was showing the effect of that power. Visibly there is no change; the cause and the effect are apparently just the same. But in fact at any given moment the effect may actually be the cause and the cause may in fact be the effect. Only the two men would know who was doing the work and who wasn't. In the same way when observing two riders on a tandem bicycle it is not always discernible who is actually exerting effort on the pedals and who is simply along for the ride- since the pedals of both riders may keep turning irrespective of the individual effort involved. For that matter even the riders themselves may argue who is "pulling their weight"!
Now just
suppose you, as an individual, were like those two men, both rolled into one. You
are both the mover, and the moved, with the only difference being that you were in the same position as the audience. You knew your own movements and knew your own will was involved- but did not know when your will and your movement were inspired by another will.
We are aware, and have been for most of our lives that we are movers, we will- and it happens. We man the pump as it were, and we see the effects of our efforts. But what if we in turn are “the moved” by a greater will than ours? And what if we were moved certainly and infallibly and yet unconsciously, in such a way that our consciousness is only aware of our will and its effects?
Can the Human Will [And its Effect] Be the Effect of Another Will?
We are aware, and have been for most of our lives that we are movers, we will- and it happens. We man the pump as it were, and we see the effects of our efforts. But what if we in turn are “the moved” by a greater will than ours? And what if we were moved certainly and infallibly and yet unconsciously, in such a way that our consciousness is only aware of our will and its effects?
What if
someone said to you, after many aching hours on a water pump by which a sinking
ship was kept afloat- “Well the boat has been repaired but you know- we really
need to be thankful to that person that moved you to pump so hard?”
"What did you say!!!"
"What did you say!!!"
Would it not
be understandable- given the fact of complete unawareness of anyone other than
yourself doing the pumping- if you felt a little resentful? Maybe utter indignation would be closer to the reality. Wouldn't it be
completely natural to say: “Hey- this was my
doing and no one else’s”?*
Is an Idea False Because We Are Not Aware of It?
If you had no
knowledge of this “primary movers” ability, this “pumper” who pumped you- it would naturally result in a denial of that fact- it is to be expected. What we therefore need, is an
authority, some objective non-partisan, external non-biased evaluation of
humanity that knows both what it is to move, and to be moved, one we can trust that
both knows us and knows the human frame better than we know ourselves.
If indeed we were not just movers but “the
moved” it would come somewhat as a surprise. If there really were no way we
could come to that understanding with our own resources, when all said and done
we do rely heavily on sense perception, our difficulty in acknowledging this
would hardly be surprising. Coming to know this would in fact be a matter of
faith. Faith involves living a life according not just to the dictates of sense
perception, but according to a view of reality which lies beyond ourselves and
yet is none the less real, perhaps even more real. At the realization we are the pumped- the one
that is moved, and yet, we (like the outsiders) have no sense of being moved, whatever
we do, whatever the effects we cause- we are told that we in turn are the
effect of a greater cause, this realization must be an article of faith. But
that is not to say that faith is devoid of evidence.
Now this does not nullify or diminish the essential nature of our will, being in a
finite sense (but none the less real) a
necessary part of the process. If our will was mere appearance with no substance we would be mere machines, automatons. But isn't it now closer to the truth and more
reasonable, more charitable and honorable towards God- to say that far from being the prime mover, we
are but a contingent cause? But it does also mean that that which moves us
insensibly and unbeknownst to us- is also greater than we ourselves.
Is There an Objective Authority?
There is an old saying: "A doctor who treats himself has a fool for a patient,"
Now this
may sound all rather arbitrary, philosophical bubble and squeak, do we have any
outside objective authority that can help us nail it, and give us confidence
that this view of humanity is indeed the reality? After all, just as a doctor is taught it is
highly unethical to diagnose his own malady,(not to mention risky) we too are attempting to examine
human nature while we ourselves are subject to that same nature.
An atheist cannot find God for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman” We are all human prior to being experts. Without
someone entering into our world but also transcending it we would never even
know to pose the question let alone find veracity and objective truth in the answer. In like manner
a fish has no possible concept of “dry” (or “wet” for that matter) unless there
is some transcendent authority by which to validate the phenomena. Unless
of course it becomes a “a fish out of
water” and then the pleasure of experiencing the distinction may be far
outweighed by the short lived passage of it!
Suppose one wanted to know objective truth about human nature and certain relations to that nature, how would anyone speak with authority on this subject? After all if you are conferring with an expert who is subject to that nature (and of course all humans are) then surely everyone is- appealing to a misleading and questionable authority- like the introsepective doctor who has a fool for a patient!
This is the inherent and unavoidable problem that is referred to here by Gary N Curtis. While it should be properly respected and noted as to its universal difficulty that is not to say that it is an intractable problem.
This is the inherent and unavoidable problem that is referred to here by Gary N Curtis. While it should be properly respected and noted as to its universal difficulty that is not to say that it is an intractable problem.
“The authority is an expert, but is not disinterested. That is, the expert is biased towards one side of the issue, and his opinion is thereby untrustworthy.” From "The Fallacy Files" by Gary N. Curtis who has a doctoral degree in philosophy from Indiana University in Bloomington, Illinois.
So if this scenario demonstrates the unreliable witness of all humanity about humanity and certain relations to that nature- while not proving a fallacy certainly it undermines human witness to any truth.
Perhaps we can see from this why the scripture says: “Let God be true but every man a liar”
Well it
just so happens we do have a great high priest who has gone beyond the veil and
entered the holiest of holies. Yes we have one who is intimately connected with
humanity but also stands beyond humanity and comments without bias or
subjectivity on our condition.
No Disputing the Reality of Human Will- But Are We Free in the "Libertarian" Sense?
Remembering
that the claim to have “free” will is not
just a claim to have the faculty by which choices are made. This trait is
common to both God and man as a distinguishing feature of person-hood. However this claim is made and understood by both secular and
Evangelicals alike to be a will beyond the influence of God. (Libertarian free
will)
Listen again
to some of Jesus’ statements:
·
Jesus
as the second Adam gives evidence of his own will. Not being subject to the fall like the first Adam- we see in Christ true free will.
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
John 10:17-18
·
Jesus
gives evidence of the finite limitation of the will of mankind from Gods' perspective. Being subject to the fall, and by that a depraved nature- hunankind is no longer free in the original way Adam was pre-fall.
Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.John 19:10-11
·
Further
evidence that, though finite and fallen, it was through willing human wills bound by sin that God worked out the predetermined
plan of atonement and redemption and yet those same people (like us) are not absolved
from blameworthiness.This profound depravity did not thwart the will of God.
Him, [Jesus] being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Acts 2:23
(Emphasis in above verses mine)
Why Salvation Is By Faith and It Must Be Our Faith
We have it on the authority of scripture that without faith it is impossible to please God. The word faith in the Hebrew context is better translated faithful or faithfulness, which gives much more of a sense of a principle of living and doing. In Hebrews 11 we are reminded that all these examples, Noah Moses Abraham Isaac Joseph Jacob and the like lived by faith. Faith is indeed a principle of action, not just belief apart from works. Faith is not merely intellectual assent, but is characterized by a life lived in obedience to that which is believed. By faith they did this, by faith they did that:
And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. Hebrews 11:32-40
Why Salvation Is A Work We Must Do- But Is Properly A Work God Does In Us
That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
(Ephesians 2:7-10)
In the Bible we are told:
"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."Philippians 2:13
Why We Cannot Boast Or Claim It is a Salvation of Our Works
Faith is not just that by which
God’s people do all this good stuff; no, it is more properly that by which God does through us all this good stuff! And by this masterful stroke all
grounds for boasting is at once destroyed. Faith, that is the gift, not only of knowing and believing the Gospel but it is the outworking of faithfulness by the grace which God gives
his people- it is the faculty by which we see the unseen, hear the unheard and
achieve the otherwise impossible task.
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.Ephesians 2:10
And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.Romans 11:6
Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.Romans 4:4This is why our works of righteousness that are a result of faith do not add up to a righteousness of works. Otherwise if they were properly works of our own will in the libertarian sense, God would be in our debt. See here how steering a proper course between a righteousness of works and a faith without works we arrive at the proper understanding of a faith which works by love.
When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware of this… One week-night, ... the thought struck me, "How did you come to be a Christian?" I sought the Lord. "But how did you come to seek the Lord?" The truth flashed across my mind in a moment – I should not have sought Him unless there had been some previous influence in my mind to make me seek Him. I prayed, thought I, but then I asked myself, How came I to pray? I was induced to pray by reading the Scriptures. How came I to read the Scriptures? I did read them, but what led me to do so? Then, in a moment, I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, and from that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make this my constant confession, "I ascribe my change wholly to God" C.H. SpurgeonJim Ellif (Slave of Truth) rightly points out that though we don't make a case out of believing what others do merely because of the sheer weight of numbers who believe the same thing, it at least ought to caution us not to take lightly what those in past generations saw as a correct interpretation of the scriputre- we should at least give serious consideration to their views:
Now do not think that the belief of others in history establishes any doctrine… But it does help to say that we are not alone in our interpretation of Scripture, the Scripture being of “no private interpretation.” This is not a new doctrine – forgotten, yes – but not new. So I will start the list with Christ and Paul, Peter, John, and the others, and continue with these: Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Ussher, Lightfoot, virtually all the King James Version translators, Beza, Brainard, Edwards, Whitefield, Carey, Fuller, Livingstone, Hudson Taylor, Adoniram Judson, Luther Rice, and China Inland Mission missionaries. Matthew Henry, Martin Luther, John Brown, Joseph Caryl, Thomas Chalmers, Alexander Maclaren, John Gill, Bishop Hall, Charles Hodge, Bishop Leighton, Thomas Manton, Thomas Goodwin, John Owen, G. Campbell Morgan, Matthew Poole, Bishop Reynolds, William Gurnall, J.C. Ryle, John Trapp, Robert Haldane, C.H. Spurgeon and Thomas Scott. We could add a host many others, including George Mueller, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and several prominent authors and preachers of today, such as R. C. Sproul, John MacArthur, J. I. Packer, John Piper, Joni Eareckson Tada, etc. All of this listing is again just to say that a person who genuinely interprets Scripture as giving God supreme sovereignty over who is and who is not saved does not mean that he or she is in a freakish minority of irrelevant theologs. Jim EllifTruth is not arrived at by democratic vote, as the history of the scripture show throughout, the majority have often believed what proved to be erroneous. (Perhaps this should serve as reason enough to question the status quo today?) Nevertheless, as a footnote to the above from Elif, where he mentions nearly all of the King James Bible translators as espousing the same views as the others- listen to what Alexander McClure (1858) said of them as he researched the often forgotten questions "Who were the KJV translators and were they well qualified for their task?"
"...the translators commissioned by James Stuart were ripe and critical scholars, profoundly versed in all the learning required; and that, in these particulars, there has never yet been a time when a better qualified company could have been collected for the purpose.
Of the forty-seven, who acted under King James's commission, some are almost unknown at this day, though of high repute in their own time. A few have left us but little more than their names, worthy of immortal remembrance, were it only for their connection with this noble monument of learning and piety. But their being associated with so many other scholars and divines of the greatest eminence, is proof that they were deemed to be fit companions for the brightest lights of the land. Alexander McClure- "The Translators Revived"The absurdity of saying God chose us when he looked ahead and saw we would belive in him:
The pre-sight view of election makes God seem absurd in His language if not somewhat dishonest. You see, God has gone to great lengths to say that some are elected, chosen, foreordained, predestined as part of His eternal purpose. For God to say that He saw those that would choose Him and then He calls them elect (select from a number) is linguistic trickery. It is like the Queen decreeing that the sun will rise in the morning, [and who would be fooled by that!] as others have said. God’s words about His action toward man would mean nothing but could only be construed as a way of presenting an authoritative front that God is in charge, whereas the decisions of eternal life and death are really within man alone. Apply this to prophecy. Much of prophecy is presented to us as that which God determines to do in the future. Is this the truth of it? Did God prophesy that John the Baptist would be the forerunner of the Messiah (Isa. 40:3-5; Luke 3:3-6) on the basis of pre-sight, and then declare that it would happen? Doesn’t language lose all meaning to say that? Does it not make sense of the language to say that the action predicted was based on God’s determined plan and not just what He saw happening? Jim EllifCharles Spurgeon reportedly said something like this:
As you approach the Pearly Gates to enter, written above the gates we see the words- "Whosoever will, let him come..." and as you pass through those wondrous gates looking back you see the words- "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world"
This Then is Why Christ Tells The Truth When He Said That We Did Not Choose Him:
*Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you. John 15:16 (my emphasis)Our willingness to choose Christ, in the final analysis was a result of Christ working and willing within us.
Does This Reality Change Anything?
Well, whether you believe what I have been trying to express is true or not, what would change as a result? In a sense what one believes about reality changes nothing about reality does it? I mean if you have an "absolutely free will" in the sense that is commonly believed, then you will continue to do what you've always done. And God will continue to do what he has always done. After all it's not like Steve Turners great line from “Creed":
We believe that each man must find the truth that is right for him.
Reality will adapt accordingly.
Nothing will change externally, if I am right- then having saved you- irrespective of your knowledge of how God did this- it will not change the reality of God saving you. But how it does make all the difference is your attitude towards God.
For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.Romans 5:6
