I want to show in this posting the way the scriptures speak of how God does in fact "mess with free will" and credit his internal influence or working with causing people to make the choices he wants them to make. Also, I want it to be known that I believe in "free will," but not as it is often defined. When I came to Christ in evangelical conversion, I came in some ways with a sense of freeness, and in some ways I felt compelled. I was being drawn by the Father, by the power of the Gospel and Spirit of God, but I did not feel like I was being dragged but drawn like a magnet attracting metal. My conversion was the result of my having willingly chosen and received Christ but it was the Lord who made me willing by attracting me. (Psa. 110: 3; Phil. 2: 13)
God's Operation on The Will of Man
"And they came, every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing, and they brought the LORD'S offering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, and for all his service, and for the holy garments. And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto the LORD...And all the women whose heart stirred them up in wisdom spun goats' hair...The children of Israel brought a willing offering unto the LORD, every man and woman, whose heart made them willing to bring for all manner of work, which the LORD had commanded to be made by the hand of Moses." (Exo. 35: 21-22, 26, 29)
Notice first what the text says was the cause for the people described above (red letters) doing what they did (bringing offerings and gifts). It was because they had a "heart" that was "stirred up," a "willing heart," and a "spirit" that was "made willing." Second, notice that it says that "every one," "every man," who had such a willing heart and spirit did the giving. If responding to this inner influence depended upon the kind of free will that extremists define, then we would expect some to resist that influence. In other words, once a person got this heart and spirit, this willingness, he did not fail doing what he was being urged and desirous to do. Now, let us ask - "how did these people get this willing heart and spirit?" Who can deny that it was God who "made" them "willing"? That God makes his people willing is asserted in scripture. (Psa. 110: 3; Phil. 2: 13) Another text that shows that God creates the willing heart and spirit and it effectually brings about the behavior God desires, as in the above case, is the following, and it is good behavior that he produces by creating a right heart and spirit.
"And the LORD stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and the spirit of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people; and they came and did work in the house of the LORD of hosts, their God, In the four and twentieth day of the sixth month, in the second year of Darius the king." (Hag. 1: 14-15)
This is similar to the text of Moses in Exodus. Let us ask some questions pertaining to the text. Why did "all the remnant of the people," along with Zerubbabel and Joshua, "come and work" in the house of God? Answer: because the LORD "stirred up the spirit" of them all. How many who were stirred up by LORD God came to work? Answer: all of them. How many resisted the stirring of God and did not come? Answer: None. What are we to infer or deduce from that fact? Answer: that 1) God predetermined to do this stirring, and that 2) it was the effectual and irresistible cause of the good choices and behavior, and 3) the people acted with a feeling of freeness though the work of God in stirring predetermined their willing obedience.
Now let us notice these texts which show God bringing about the choices and behavior of the Egyptians towards the Hebrews.
"Speak now in the hearing of the people, and let every man ask from his neighbor and every woman from her neighbor, articles of silver and articles of gold.” And the Lord gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians. Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants and in the sight of the people." (Exo. 11: 2-3)
"The LORD had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people, and they gave them what they asked for; so they plundered the Egyptians." (Exo. 12: 36)
How did the Lord give the Hebrews "favor in the sight of the Egyptians" and make the Egyptians "favorably disposed toward" the Hebrew slaves? Did not that involve God messing with the free will of the Egyptians? Were the Egyptians robots as a result of God altering their attitudes and decisions? What resulted from God making the Egyptians desirous and willing to show favor to the Hebrews? They lent them the things mentioned in the text. That demonstrates that God does mess with free will and that he can turn one's heart and will in another direction any time he pleases. Note also how the Lord caused the Egyptians to lend valuables to the Hebrews so that they could "spoil" (or we might call rob or steal) those items borrowed from the Egyptians. Many would argue that God was supporting theft. But, it is really not so because everything already belongs to the Lord, including all the silver and gold. Further, it is not theft for a victorious army to take the "spoils of war" and it not be considered theft.
We also see where Moses was in Egypt when he turned forty because God messed with his free will. Said Stephen in his marvelous dying sermon concerning Moses:
"And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel." (Acts 7: 23)
How came into his heart? By accident? By chance? Or, by divine purpose and work? The latter, no doubt. Further, it seems that every time in the scripture that God is said to put something into the heart or mind of a person, or to move them, they certainly were made to will and do something. Never do we read where God put something into the heart of persons, or "stirred" hearts to do something, and yet they did not do the thing God was influencing them to do. That is noteworthy and significant. It really is summed up well by Solomon who said by inspiration: "The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turns it wheresoever he will." (Prov. 21: 1) God's will is behind the turning of the will of his creatures. It is that simple. It may be hard to accept, but God does "mess with free will." Notice another text dealing with God "turning" the heart to choose and do what God purposes. "He turned their heart to hate his people, to deal subtilly with his servants." (Psa. 105: 25)
"And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." (I Chron. 21: 1)
So, who "moved" or "provoked" David to number Israel (a census for conscription)? In the text in Samuel it is the LORD who did the influencing; However, in the Chronicles passage it is Satan. Further, what David was doing was against the stated will of God who forbade it. Here is what one author wrote (originally posted in Table Talk Magazine and published by Ligonier here; emphasis mine):
"Joab warned David that such a census would be sinful, most likely because it reflected a reliance on human strength in the form of a large standing army. The text also tells us that Joab did not include Levi in the census, “for the king’s command was abhorrent to Joab” (21:6). The best explanation for this is that David asked Joab to include Levites in the army even though the law of God expressly ordered Israel to exclude Levites from a military census (Num. 1). So, it seems that David sinned because he was relying on military strength, not on the Lord, and was breaking God’s regulations for military eligibility."
Since it is clear that the census David ordered was an act of transgression, displeasing God and his godly military leader (Joab), we must consider the ramifications of the text affirming that God was the one who was a cause in David's becoming willing to do it. How do we then reconcile the text above which says LORD God "moved" David to number Israel with the words of James who says "God tempts (entices) no one"? Wrote the same author:
"Note also that the text tells us Satan “incited David to number Israel” (1 Chron. 21:1). Given that the devil is involved in at least some temptations to sin for believers (1 Cor. 7:5), this statement in 1 Chronicles 21:1 is not in itself surprising. However, the parallel account of the event in 2 Samuel 24:1 explains that God incited David to take the census. Here we must understand that both God and Satan were involved, though at different levels. Scripture is clear that God never Himself sins, nor is He ever morally responsible for sin (James 1:13). At the same time, Scripture plainly teaches us that nothing happens apart from God’s sovereign will (Eph. 1:11). So, putting this all together, God ordained this sin but He did so without committing sin Himself. Only David and Satan were blameworthy in the matter of the census."
I believe this is the best way to harmonize the texts. But, in doing so, we must also harmonize it with the words of James who said God "tempts" no man to sin. In the above texts it seems that God did "move" or "provoke" Israel and David to sin. It was because God was angry with "Israel," not David, that he operated within the psyche of David, on his heart and mind, and on his will, to decide to order the census in violation of the recorded oracle of Yahweh. It was the anger of the Lord that "moved" God to "move" David to order the numbering, and it was the sin of Israel that moved and provoked God to anger. We thus see a small chain of causes. Israel's sin produces divine anger which produces David's sin. Of course there are other causes on either side of this small chain, for there are causes to Israel's action which angered God, and there are effects of David's ordering the numbering of the people, including the Levites. So, we may say that the numbering was the will of God in one sense, but not the will of God in another sense. We may also say that the decision to number Israel was "of" God in one sense and not "of" God in another sense.
Let us see what some of the leading commentaries say about this difficult text. First, Ellicott's Commentary says (emphasis mine):
"The pronoun here stands for “the Lord,” yet in 1 Chronicles 21:1, the temptation is attributed to Satan, and Satan is clearly meant of the devil, and not simply of “an adversary.” This is a striking instance of attributing directly to God whatever comes about under His permission."
The words highlighted above state a proposition that I have affirmed many times with those who deny that God is in any way a cause of evil or sin. I have argued that God's permissive will was still the will of God even though the adjective is given to it. (Note: when we say "permissive will" we imply that there is more than one kind of "will," yea, a will that is not permissive. So, those who decry the term "two kinds of will of God" must quit using the term "permissive will" for that implies more than one kind) I have also argued that to say that all comes to pass because God has permitted it is the same thing as saying it all comes to pass because God willed it. Don't you see? Ellicott, the Anglican bishop, was no Calvinist (as I remember) and promoted free will and decried determinism at times. Yet, he admits that God permitting a thing equates to God being the cause of that thing. Similar to this proposition is the one that says God's inaction, or his doing nothing in regard to something, or his removal of a moral restraint, are likewise causes of action on the part of his creatures, or has consequences.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges gives these comments:
"The subject of the verb is Jehovah. The nation had sinned and incurred His anger, and He instigated David to an act which brought down a sharp punishment on the nation. The statement that God incited David to do what was afterwards condemned and punished as a heinous sin cannot of course mean that He compelled David to sin, but that in order to test and prove his character He allowed the temptation to assault him. Thus while we read that “God himself tempteth no man” (James 1:13), we are taught to pray “Bring us not into temptation” (Matthew 6:13). In 1 Chronicles 21:1 we read “Satan stood up against Israel and moved David to number Israel.” The older record speaks only of God’s permissive action: the latter tells us of the malicious instrumentality of Satan. The case is like that of Job (Job 1:12; Job 2:10)."
Again, this commentary attempts to explain how God can be said to have caused David to sin by his moving, provoking, and stirring, and yet how it can also be said that God did not cause it. It also says that God moving David to number Israel meant only that he willed to suffer Satan to move David to do so. For my own self, I readily confess that the text shows that God can, when angered (anthropomorphically speaking), react in such a way that one of his creatures (in this case one who he dearly loved) will be successfully tempted of Satan to sin. This is similar to the hardening of the heart by God, wherein God's judicial hardening of the heart of the rebellious leads them to have less restraint on their sinful course and so they commit greater sins. I see the same thing at work in the texts above. God's anger at Israel led him to lesson his restraints upon the sinful activity of his people, including David, and this led him to have no sufficient means to resist doing what Satan was moving him to do. All must therefore admit that God caused the sin indirectly, by his permission, and by his removing of defenses, and for this reason, it is believed, he may be said to be not unjust. However, many would argue that this does not excuse God. They would say that if we acted in the same way towards others, then we would be judged as having acted wrongly. So, we have another conundrum, another paradox.
Barnes Notes and Commentary says:
"And he moved David - In 1 Chronicles 21:1 the statement is, "and an adversary" (not "Satan," as the King James Version, since there is no article prefixed, as in Job 1:6; Job 2:1, etc.) "stood up against Israel and moved David," just as 1 Kings 11:14, 1 Kings 11:23, 1 Kings 11:25 first Hadad, and then Rezon, is said to have been "an adversary" (Satan) to Solomon and to Israel. Hence, our text should be rendered, "For one moved David against them." We are not told whose advice it was, but some one, who proved himself an enemy to the best interests of David and Israel, urged the king to number the people."
It matters not, for the purpose of our study on determinism and free will, to discuss whether the words "and Satan stood up to provoke David to number Israel" are a reference to Satan the fallen angel or to an adversary of Israel, as Barnes and others suggest. Whether it be Satan or some other adversary, the point is still the same relative to God being able to mess with free will, to actually cause a person to choose to do a particular thing. In the text we see that David did what he did (numbering) because he chose to do so, and we are told that he chose to do so because both God and Satan incited him to do it. If this bothers us, and does not fit well with our paradigm about how God works, and about his responsibility in events and occurrences, and have cognitive dissonance therefrom, let us not twist the text, but let us rather say that we cannot comprehend this mystery.
Now, let me cite some other texts which show how God messes with free will and actually works internally in people to bring them to make the decisions he wants them to make, and to do what he wants them to do. I will offer little comment, since they are similar to the texts above, but are given simply as additional proof of our several theses.
"And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw Jehoshaphat, that they said, It is the king of Israel. Therefore they compassed about him to fight: but Jehoshaphat cried out, and the LORD helped him; and God moved them to depart from him." (II Chron. 18: 31)
"And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind." (Isa. 7: 2)
This verse seems to completely overthrow the common notion of free will. It says that the action of heart being "moved" (which we must assume was God's causing) was "as the trees are moved by the wind." That statement is not consistent with free will. It affirms that the will was determined, that the heart's movement (in choosing and in decision) was an effect of a irresistible cause. God messed with the heart and the will of the house of David.
"And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day." (I Chron. 5: 26)
"Moreover the LORD stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the Philistines, and of the Arabians, that were near the Ethiopians: And they came up into Judah, and brake into it, and carried away all the substance that was found in the king's house, and his sons also, and his wives; so that there was never a son left him, save Jehoahaz, the youngest of his sons." (II Chron. 21: 161-7)
"Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the LORD spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath the LORD God of heaven given me; and he hath charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? The LORD his God be with him, and let him go up." (II Chron. 36: 22-23; Ezra 1: 1)
"And the LORD stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite: he was of the king's seed in Edom...And God stirred him up another adversary, Rezon the son of Eliadah" (I Kings 11: 14, 23)
This text is similar to the ones mentioned above about David numbering the people at the instigation of both LORD God and Satan.
“For God has put it into their hearts to fulfill His purpose, to be of one mind, and to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled." (Rev. 17: 17)
Here is another case where what results from God's "putting into hearts" to do something that "fulfills God's purpose" is something that is unrighteous. In this case the ten wicked confederate kings unite with Antichrist to set up his evil empire. Will we also explain this by saying "put into their hearts" means "he permitted" such and such? It seems God is doing more than just permitting behavior. Actually, the same words could have been used in regard to the people and groups who conspired together to have Christ murdered. (See Acts 2: 23; 4: 27-28) There is a sense in which God willed the murder of his Son Jesus Christ. There is also a sense in which he did not will it. It was against the will of God to murder the innocent. But, God chose to suffer it, and to bring infinite good from the murder.
What all this shows is that human choice and decision can be caused by things outside of a person and yet the person may be said to have acted freely and voluntarily, that is, without sensing that he was being compelled or effectually moved by those exterior causes operating upon the desire, mind, spirit, soul, and will of that person. Men often fail in their attempts to move the heart and will to do a thing, but God does not fail. Yet, someone may say, in kind response, "I have been urged by the Spirit to do many things and yet I rebelled and chose not to do as urged. So, how do you explain that in lieu of your view that the urging of the Lord is always successful or effectual? Do the scriptures not speak of people resisting the Spirit and grieving him?" Yes, that is true. But, do they not also say that men "could not resist the wisdom" by which the apostles and Stephen the martyr spake? (See Luke 21: 15; Acts 6: 10) My view, and that of many others, is that the difference lies in the amount of force or power exerted by God. When the power of X (lust, for instance) is greater than the power of Y (divine power or influence exerted against the power of X), then lust will successfully resist. However, when divine power is increased and become greater, lust will not be able to insure successful resistance in a man. Lust will then be overcome.
In the scriptures we read of a "willing heart" (Exo. 35: 35), and a "willing mind" (I Chron. 28: 9; II Cor. 8: 12), and about how "the spirit is willing" (Matt. 26: 41), and we are told to attribute the reason for such hearts and spirits to the working of God. So too when the apostle uses such language as 1) "as he purposes in his heart" (II Cor. 9: 7), and 2) "intents of the heart" (Heb. 4: 12) does he give God the credit for producing such hearts. So Paul says - "for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." (Phil. 2: 13)
Why do Christians pray for God to control their actions, as the words in the picture at the head of this posting affirm? I recall one hymn that says "Prince of peace, control my will." Here are two lines in particular:
Prince of peace, control my will;Bid this struggling heart be still:
Bid my fears and doubtings cease:
Hush my spirit into peace.
May Thy will, not mine be done;
May Thy will and mine be one;
Chase these doubtings from my heart,
Now Thy perfect peace impart.
Notice not only how the Christian prays for his will to become enslaved to God and righteousness (yet free from sin and lust), and also affirms that all God has to do is to "bid" my heart to feel or do for it to feel and do. All he has to do is "chase" doubtings away and they cannot remain or "hush" the spirit into peace.
I expect to finish this condensed series with one further post. This is not a subject that should be made into a hobby horse. I affirm both free will and predestination and divine causality. My efforts to show how they may be viewed as not inconsistent no doubt falls short, and in this I am not alone. We cannot fathom the deep things of God. One day we will understand it all better by and by.
No comments:
Post a Comment