Free Will & Determinism (v)

My Thesis

I believe that all has been determined by God and that nothing occurs apart from his will (which includes his permissive will). I also believe that angels and humans have limited free will. I also believe that divine determinism and human free will are compatible (though we may not know how to properly show it to be so). The great Charles Spurgeon said:

"Think, first of all, of the way of God in relation to predestination and free agency. Many have failed to understand how everything, from the smallest event to the greatest, can be ordained and fixed—and yet how it can be equally true that man is a responsible being and that he acts freely, choosing the evil and rejecting the good. Many have tried to reconcile these two things and various schemes of theology have been formulated with the objective of bringing them into harmony. I do not believe that they are two parallel lines which can never meet, but I do believe that for all practical purposes, they are so nearly parallel that we might regard them as being so. They do meet, but only in the Infinite mind of God is there a converging point where they melt into one! As a matter of practical, everyday experience with each one of us, they continually melt into one, but, as far as all finite understanding goes, I do not believe that any created intellect can find where they meet! Only the Uncreated as yet knows this." (From "The Way of Wisdom" sermon - see here)

From these words we see how Spurgeon may be designated as being a "Compatibilist," supporting what is called "Compatibilism."  That is defined by Britannica as - "Thesis that free will, in the sense required for moral responsibility, is consistent with universal causal determinism." What Spurgeon affirms is also what is expressed in the 1689 London Baptist Confession. 

All Things Are Of God

I dealt with this, along with showing weakness in the typical "free will defense" (FWD) in the context of debate about "the problem of evil" (theodicy) "Chapter 100 - Hardshells and Predestination III" (See here). That whole series of articles gives my views on the subject. In fact, I had forgotten how much I had already written on this subject through the years. My memory is not too sharp any more. I read things now that I wrote years ago and forgot I had ever written them. When you have written thousands of articles you forget much of what you have written. 

Any time I debate with those who take the Libertarian view of free will, which says that God does not cause nor determine angel or human choice, I simply point to the scriptures that say all things are of God, which says he is the cause of all things and is responsible for all things being as they are. I then ask the advocates of free will, and the deniers of God being in any sense a cause of evil, to explain those texts to me and how they harmonize with their proposition that says that some things are not "of God." In the above posting from that series I cited these texts which affirm that God is the cause of all things, and that this causality is in several respects. There are many kinds of causes, but for the purpose of this writing we will limit it to Aristotle's four main causes (pictured above). Here are those texts:

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose."  (Rom. 8: 28)

"For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen."  (Rom. 11: 36)

^"In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will."  (Eph. 1: 11)

"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."  (I Cor. 8: 6)

"For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God."  (I Cor. 11: 12)

"And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation."  (II Cor. 5: 18)

All these texts affirm that "all things" are "of God." If "all things" excludes nothing, then we must say that sin, or evil, is included in those "all things." But, if we do exclude it, where is the warrant to change "all things" to "some things"? Or to change "all things" to "all these things"? Does "all things" include every person's thoughts, choices, and actions? If so, how are they "of God"? Does "of God" mean all a person's thoughts, words, choices, and deeds are what God creates or causes to be? Does that not take away from angels and men any "free will," or "moral responsibility," and make them into robots? In addressing such questions, let me focus on the text in Romans 11: 36 and make some observations upon it. The text says:

"For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen." (Rom. 11: 36)

I see no reason why this text, or the others cited above, in speaking of "all things," should be limited so as to mean "some things." That "all things" does sometimes mean "all things in context" or "some things" I do not doubt. The question is, however, whether that is what it means in the above texts, as in Romans 11: 36. 

Those who deny God's having predetermined all things (without exception) will not have an easy time dealing with the above texts and their affirmation that all things, including evil, is "of God." When I have introduced these texts in debate with the advocates of Libertarian free will I have seen how they struggled to reconcile their beliefs about free will and divine determinism in lieu of these affirmations. 

I see Paul affirming how God is the cause of all things, without exception, and that this causality is in three areas. When Paul says that all things are "of" or "from God" his affirmation or proposition would fit the definition for God being both the "material" and the "formal" cause of all things as given by Aristotle. All things can be traced back to God and God is the reason for any and all things. Nothing would ever have come into existence unless God willed it. Nothing would ever occur without God making it possible. He is the source for all things, including all the evil in the world. God is the "material cause" of human beings. Man's body is made of the dust of the earth, but the earth is God's creation. Man's spirit is from the breath that God breathed into his physical form. Thus, both man's body and spirit are "of God." God is the material cause of all that is, and also "the first cause," as we have spoken about previously.

Who can deny that he is also the "formal cause" of all things? I think that when Paul says that all things are "of God" that he comprehends God being both the material and formal cause of all that is. Is this world not the design of God, at least in some sense? Though he does not will the existence of evil as an end in itself, or out of necessity (as Lewis affirmed), yet he designed a world where evil was possible and actually foreseen prior to God's creating it. So, we may say that God is also the formal cause of all things. He is the architect of the whole cosmos and governs every minute aspect of it. Notice this verse:

"For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God." (Heb. 11: 10)

The Greek word for "builder" is "technitēs" (from which we get our word "technician") and the Greek word for "maker" is "dēmiourgos," which identifies God as both architect and builder, the planner and the constructor. Two verses in the New Testament refer to God as a “builder.” In Hebrews 3:3-4, “the builder of all things is God,” the word for “builder” is kataskeuazo. This is a verb meaning “to prepare, establish, make ready, construct.” It reads literally “the one having built all things is God.” Notice also the reference again to "all things" in Paul's statement that God is the builder of "all things." Has God built evil buildings and things? There can be no question that these verses identify God as being the "formal cause" of all things. 

Paul's next proposition is that "all things" are "through him" (God) as well as "of" or "from" him. Here we see what is called the "efficient cause," and God is identified as being the efficient cause of the same "all things" of which he is the material and formal causes. This works out to mean such things as "in him we live and move and have our very being" (Acts 17: 28). Every movement of anything in God's universe, from the largest star to the smallest particle, is only possible because God wills it. Does that include the movement of our thoughts and emotions? The movement of our will? It also works out to mean that by Christ, or by God, "all things are held together" (or "consist" - Col. 1: 17). It is also why theologians like Thomas Aquinas referred to Deity as "the prime mover." 

Obviously, all things being of God, the material, formal, and first cause, does not mean that something cannot be "of God" in one sense and not "of God" in another sense (as we will shortly see). Further, all things being "through" God and Christ as "efficient causes" does not exclude or preclude other agencies, or "second causes," also being involved as "efficient " or "instrumental" causes. There is a sense in which God is the efficient cause of a man's sin, and a sense in which the man is the efficient cause of his sin. Did God no longer give life and breath, an evil man would do no more evil. Yet, as we will see, God does not entice or tempt a person to sin. He is not the direct efficient cause of any sin, though he be so indirectly. 

When the text says that "all things" are "unto him" we see God identified as the "final cause." This entails what we call "the finished product," or "the end design fulfilled," or "destination reached," etc. We know from numerous scriptures what that "end design" is, being God's manifested and revealed glory, for his praise and for his pleasure. It was also to reveal things about his nature and character, for each person in the holy Trinity to express love for each other in their unity of being. The Father created all things "for" Christ and "through" Christ. In bringing all things into existence, and in suffering sin to enter the world, a way was opened for God to manifest both his holiness and his goodness. In manifesting his holiness he shows his wrath against sin. In manifesting his mercy, grace, kindness, and benevolence he designed the scheme of redemption through the work of Christ and his sacrificial death. In sending transgressors to hell God manifests his righteous character. In saving undeserving sinners God manifests his grace. There are things about God that would not be known apart from his punishment of transgressors and of his salvation through the Son of God. Wrote Paul:

"For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist." (Col. 1: 16-17)

Here we have another reference to "all things" and are forced to discern whether "all things" includes evil, human choices and actions, and sin. Notice that Christ, as the Son of God, before his incarnation at the time of the creation, is identified as both the efficient cause and the final cause for all things being created. All things were created "by him," making him the efficient cause. All things were created "for him," making him the final cause, the reason for creation. 

It seems likely that by "all things" in the text are the things created in the six day creation narrative of Moses in Genesis' opening chapters. If this is so, then "all things" would not include the acts of creatures. Paul speaks in the past tense saying "who created," rather than "who has been creating," which it would say if God is still creating, i.e. creating the choices and acts of creatures. 

However, I do not think that "all things" in the other texts at the head of this post are limited to what was created during the six days of God's work of creating the cosmos and man. When Paul makes his conclusion in Romans 11: 36 about "all things" being "of" God, and "through" God, and "to" God, the "all things" cannot be limited to what was created in the six days. The context of Romans eleven, and of the first eleven chapters, deals with matters of salvation, and these must be included in the "all things." The virgin birth of Christ is therefore included in the all things. Also, the work of Christ in atoning for sin is "of God," as is the work of justifying and sanctifying sinners. As stated, I do not see why "all things" cannot mean literally everything, including evil. God says he creates "evil" (Isa. 45: 7). Yes, I know how some will say "evil" does not mean sin but calamity. Yet, as they should know, the Hebrew word "ra" is often translated as wickedness in the Old Testament. Also, who can deny that the sin of Adam was a calamity? Also, the syntax of God's statement of "I create evil" implies that all evil is his creation. So we read where God, by Amos, asks "is there evil in the city and the Lord has not done it?" (3: 6) That says all the evil or calamity within the city was the result of God's working. Just saying "evil" means "calamity" to solve the cognitive dissonance really does not effect a solution. First, sin is a calamity. Second, a problem still remains by saying "ra" means calamity, for who wants to affirm that every calamity in a city is a result of God's doing? Every car wreck the result of God's doing? Every fall? Every loss? 

God did create evil when he chose to create a world of free choosing creatures who he knew would become evil and spread evil. We ought to at least be able to affirm such an obvious truth and say that in this sense God did create all the evil in the world. 

Another Problem

How do we reconcile Paul's several statements that "all things" are "of" God with verses that say something in particular is not "of" God? Let me give some examples.

"But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.” (Matt. 16: 23)

Here Jesus seems to say that some things are "of" men and not "of" God. But if all things are "of" God, it would not be correct to say of anything that it is not "of" God. We will need to affirm that the "all things" that are said to be "of God" in the above texts of scripture do not include some things, and must therefore mean "all things" in the context. Or, perhaps there is another way of harmonizing the texts. But more on that shortly. First, let us notice some additional texts that affirm that some things are not "of" God.

“He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.” (John 8: 47)

"And every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God." (I John 4: 3)

We could cite many other scriptures that say that something is "not of God." But, one more I will cite, especially since it is one that is often mentioned in the debate over whether God is in any sense a cause of sin.

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death." (James 1: 13-15)

First of all, there are temptations which God is the cause of. Let us make that clear. Notice these texts:

"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. Then He said, “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” (Gen. 22: 1-2)

Many who are strongly opposed to the idea that God could be any kind of a cause of sin, or one who could or would tempt creatures to sin, will say that the word in Hebrew means to "test" or to "try" and not to entice or allure (same in the NT Greek). I do agree that this is so. However, a "trial" or "proving" may indeed be an allurement to sin. Some of my worst trials have been battles with sin or some particular fault. I have often been tested when thus tempted. Further, though God does not directly entice anyone to sin, yet he does in his providence permit, for good predetermined reasons, his children to be tempted to sin. So we read in the gospel that "Jesus was led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil." (Matt. 4: 1) The Devil not only was testing Jesus, he was also enticing him to sin. The Father and the Spirit both wanted Christ to be tempted to sin so that Christ might be shown to be the sinless perfect man, the very Christ and Son of God. The Spirit did not do the tempting. Yet, it was God's will that Satan tempt Christ; And, of course, it was not that God wanted Satan to succeed! He wanted to demonstrate the holiness of Christ. 

Further, the testing or tempting of Abraham cannot be made to be such a test that did not involve a temptation to sin. Was it a sin for Abraham to kill his son and offer him as a sacrifice? All through the OT human sacrifice was denounced as being abominable to God. So, why does God tell him to do what is morally wrong? 

Further, who can deny that God's suffering of the Serpent (Satan) to be present in the Garden of Eden and his tempting of Eve to sin made God an indirect cause of the temptation? In the same way the Spirit was an indirect cause of Christ being tempted to sin by the Devil? We also see this same kind of divine testing described by God himself. Wrote Moses of this oracle:

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul." (Deut. 13: 1-2 ESV) 

Here God's testing of his people is seen by his willingly, knowingly, and purposefully suffering false prophets to have a presence among the people and to tempt them to sin. 

So, it is simply a way to avoid the issue, the cognitive dissonance, that many bible believers have with the fact that God does will for us to be tempted, for them to say that the word "tempt" means to "test" or to "try" in a non sin enticing way. It was, however, that very exact way with Eve's temptation, with Abraham's temptation, with Christ's temptation, with the covenant people's temptation in the above text, yea, with many others, including ourselves as ordinary believers. All our temptations to sin are tests and trials.  

So, we should not view the words of James as meaning that God is in no ways a cause of temptation. So, what then does James mean when he says God "tempts no one"? 

The Greek word for "tempted" in the text is "peirazō" and may mean to test or to try but it may also mean to entice to sin. 

It is interesting that the same Greek word is used not only to denote enticement to sin, as in the James passage, and when Satan is called the "Tempter" (Matt. 4: 3) and when his enticements for Christ to sin are so called, but also to denote mere trials of adversity. Such a fact destroys attempts to say that the Greek word only means trials which are unconnected with temptations to sin. Actually, there are several passages in the new testament where the Greek word refers to a test resulting from some enticement or allurement, in addition to the ones already mentioned.  

So, there are two things that I am emphasizing. First, God does not directly tempt anyone, though indirectly he wills that we be not free from temptations to sin but that we prove ourselves by them. It is by resisting allurements to sin that we prove our metal. The same is true of trials which are not temptations to sin, such as adversities, losses, disappointments, etc. They try and prove us also. So we may say that the Spirit led Jesus to Satan to be tempted and tried and yet it would not be correct to say that the Spirit tempted Christ. Satan did the tempting, yet it was the will of the Father and Spirit, and Christ too. So, we could say also, using the language of James, that the temptation of Christ was not "of" God directly, but only indirectly was "of" God by his suffering it to occur. 

Further, since "all things" are "of" God, how can James be correct to say temptations to sin are not "of" God? Do we make "all things" to exclude the temptation of the James passage? Or, do we see a way in which the temptations to sin by Satan (or other agents such as our own fleshly carnal nature) are both "of" God and "of" something else all at the same time, in different senses? 

"For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God." ( Cor. 11: 12) 

Here we see a case where "the woman" is both "of the man" (Adam) and also "of God" because 1) she is of Adam immediately and directly, and 2) she is of God indirectly and mediately through Adam, and because "all things are of God."  We see the same thing in this text:

“Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.” (Luke 3: 38)

All through this genealogy of Christ in Luke chapter three, the words "the son" are in italics because they are supplied by the translators to bring out the meaning of the Greek. Literally it is simply "X was of Y." I am focusing again on the preposition "of" in the text. Thus we may say that Seth was "of" Adam directly and "of" God indirectly.

So, my whole point is that the passage in James is not denying that our enticements are "of God" in some sense, yea, in the sense I have explained. 

It is often a difference between God, the first cause of all causes and effects, and of what are called "second causes." 

God is the material cause of all things. The bible says this. In fact, that is part of what is meant when many passages of scripture say "all things are of God." Philosophy also acknowledges a "first cause" and often identifies it with Deity. God is the source of all things. He is also the formal cause of all things, being the result of the way he ordered the worlds he made, the result of his design as architect and builder. He is also the efficient cause of all things, though it is in this aspect of causality where the actions of God's creatures becoming secondary and efficient causes in executing the formal design of God. God is also the final cause of all things. All things are "to him." They exist or occur because God has a purpose to glorify himself and to make known himself more fully to his creatures who have his likeness and image. The final cause, or the end purpose, is not my eternal delight, but the glory of God revealed in saving me from sin and to such a destiny. 

So, I can keep saying of certain immoral behavior "that is not of God," or "that is of flesh," or "that is of the world," etc. The apostle John used the same language, writing: 

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." (I John 2: 16)

We just need to remember that we are talking about how "all things" can be "of God" and yet certain things said to be "not of God." 

Every man can look for the immediate cause of his sin in his own heart, and can see its source in what James called inward "lust" or depravity. Jesus taught the same, saying:

"For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies." (Matt. 15: 19 nkjv)