Banner
The Liberty of God PDF Print E-mail
Expository - Themes In Proverbs
Written by Douglas Wilson   
Monday, 24 April 2006 10:31

There is certainly no biblical problem with preaching the doctrine of God's sovereignty. At the same time, there are other situations where it is wise to present the facts of the case as dispassionately as we are able to. God's saints must see this issue as it really is -- the clear, objective teaching of the Word of God, and not the result of theological speculations. This is no carnal add-on. "Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar" (Prov. 30:6).

That said, let us talk about the sovereignty as the liberty of God. Enough about whether man has free will. Does God have free will? In the book of Proverbs, how free is God?

First, consider God's liberty in knowing man's ways. "For the ways of man are before the eyes of the LORD, and He ponders all his paths" (Prov. 5:21). God watches everything that men do. "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good" (Prov. 15:3). Moreover, this last verse made clear that God watches the commission of wickedness. This is a very important point to master. If we are competent to judge God for perfect control of evil, then why do we stop there? Why not judge Him for His refusal to intervene? If man can indict God for sins of commission, then why shouldn't we be able to judge him for sins of ommision? If God were to be called "evil" because He ordained that some wicked act would take place, then why could we not call Him evil for letting it take place, with Him right there in the room? Why doesn't God call 9-11 more often than He does? Those within the evangelical camp need to come to grips with the fact that every objection they mount against "Calvinism" can be pressed with equal force against every form of Christian belief. Calvinism draws all the fire because Calvinists the ones who genuinely engage with the accusation.

Then there is God's liberty in knowing the heart of man. "Hell and Destruction are before the LORD; so how much more the hearts of the sons of men" (Prov. 15:11). "The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the LORD, but the words of the pure are pleasant" (Prov. 15:26). "Every way of a man is right in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the hearts" (Prov. 21:2).

God is not a mere spectator of the outside. His gaze doess not stop at the skin. He sees all the way in. And because sin is conceived in the mind, this brings us back to the point made in the previous section. Whenever sin and evil are conceived in the heart and mind of any given sinner, God is "present at the creation."

And God shows His liberty in His control of inanimate objects. "The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD" (Prov. 16:33). We must note that Solomon does not tell us what each decision means -- just that it is from the Lord. We must distinguish between the decretive will of God (heads or tails), and the preceptive will of God -- what He tells us to do in His Word. In other words, I cannot flip a coin without knowing that God decreed that it would come up however it comes up. What I can't know (apart from special revelation from Him) is whether heads really means that I should sell all my possessions and go prospecting for gold in the Yukon.

God also exercises His liberty in His perfect control of evil. "The LORD has made all for Himself, yes, even the wicked for the day of doom. Everyone proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD; though they join forces, none will go unpunished" Prov. 16:4-5). We see how the Word does not oppose God's exhaustive sovereignty and man's responsibility. We must not fall into the opposing errors of hyper-Calvinism or Arminianism. Let us say this again, and simply deal with what the Bible actually says. God has made the wicked for the day of doom.

And we can also see that God shows His powerful liberty in His control of free actions. "The preparations of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the LORD" (Prov. 16:1). God controls what we say. I am sitting at a keyboard right this minute, free as a bird, typing away. And God decreed, before the foundation of the world that right now I would type ldkjglsdfkgj and then italicize it. "A mans heart plans his way, but the LORD directs his steps" (Prov. 16:9). God controls where we step -- this includes the gas pedal, and this is why we pray for traveling mercies. This includes the gas and brake pedal within the car of a drunk driver. This is why we pray to God for traveling protections. If God does not do this, then why do virtually all Christians everywhere (of every doctrinal stripe) consistently ask Him to? And God's control of such things does not depend on a "yielded heart." "When a mans ways please the LORD, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him" (Prov. 16:7).

God also displays His liberty of control in the devisings of man's heart. "The kings heart is in the hand of the LORD, like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever He wishes" (Prov. 21:1). God's control is not limited to externals. He turns the heart of the king any direction, and there is no hint of any diminution of the king's responsibility. And the point of this proverb is to say that God does this, even with kings. The point is not to say that He does it with kings, but could care less about the peons. God holds the heart of every man in His hands.

Because of this, we would not be far off to infer that God controls all things. But we do not need to rely on an inference. "There is no wisdom or understanding or counsel against the LORD" (Prov. 21:30). God cannot be outsmarted; under no circumstances can His decretive will be thwarted -- and remember the distinction made above concerning His will. "There are many plans in a mans heart, nevertheless the LORDS counsel -- that will stand" (Prov. 19:21; cf. 21:31; 22:2; 26:10; 29:13). Man can devise and scheme away, however he pleases. But the Lord's counsel . . . that is what will happen.

We are not peering into deeps when we assert that God does all this. We would have a problem if we tried to explain how He does it. We would be filled with hubris if we attempted to show the math. How God does it is none of our business. That God does it is the concern of every pious soul. "A mans steps are of the LORD; how then can a man understand his own way?" (Prov. 20:24). God's sovereignty is the true school of humility.

Charles Spurgeon put it well. "There is no attribute of God more comforting to his children than the doctrine of divine sovereignty. On the other hand, there is no doctrine more hated by worldlings, no truth of which they have made such a football, as the great, stupendous, but yet most certain doctrine of the sovereignty of the infinite Jehovah."



Add this page to your favorite Social Networking websites
Digg! Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! MySpace! Yahoo! BlogRolling! Twitter! LinkedIn! TwitThis
Last Updated on Monday, 24 April 2006 10:31
 
Comments
Search
Only registered users can write comments!
Isaac Demme  Monday, April 24, 2006 4:53 pm
"Those within the evangelical camp need to come to grips with the fact that every objection they mount against "Calvinism" can be pressed with equal force against every form of Christian belief."


This point is an excellent one, and is among the chief reasons why I am not (although once in the providences of God I was) an Arminian.
It took me some time, but once I realized that no matter what I thought about God's sovereignty over Nazi Germany, I had to admit that in the Scriptures the rise of Assyria was by his decree, and that regardless of what I thought about murders in general, I still had to come to terms with the predetermined plan that brought about the murder of God's Son.
Isaac Demme  Monday, April 24, 2006 4:54 pm
(continuing that sentence fragment) the rest, as they say, is history.
Phil Walker  Monday, April 24, 2006 8:53 pm
"And God decreed, before the foundation of the world that right now I would type ldkjglsdfkgj and then italicize it."
And all the charismatics praised the LORD, for he had given unto Rev. Wilson the gift of tongues.
John Barry  Tuesday, April 25, 2006 5:59 am
Douglas, You refer again to God's perfect control of evil. What, exactly, do you mean by this? You also say, "But the Lord's counsel...*that* is what will happen." Is this true? Luke tells us (7:30) that the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the *counsel* of God for themselves not having been baptized by John. Do you then reply that God secretly didn't want them to receive John's baptism? What of Ahab (1 Kings 20:42) who let go the man God had appointed to destruction? Did God secretly want Ahab to let him go? If so, why is Ahab held responsible? What of the Lord Jesus, who longed to gather Israel as a hen gathers her chicks--but they would not? Did Jesus secretly not want to gather Israel? Your "two will model" of God's sovereignty may read well on paper (or a computer screen), but it is incoherent to me. I can make no sense of it. Can you?
John Barry  Tuesday, April 25, 2006 6:16 am
Douglas, You cite Proverbs 20:24 above: "A man’s steps are of the LORD; how then can a man understand his own way?" The words translated "man" in the first part of the verse and in the second part are different in the Hebrew--*geber* and *adam*. The verse could be translated something like, "A mighty man's steps are of the Lord; how then can a common man understand the mighty man's way?" In light of this, is your reliance on the verse here misplaced?
Gabriel Rench  Tuesday, April 25, 2006 9:58 am
John, I think your hang up on this issue is making biblical distinctions; human responsibility and God's sovereignty do not contradict. Man is responsible God is sovereign. I think a verse that makes this most apparent is Acts 2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death" God determined Christ's murder before there was time and God held the Jews responsible for it. Cheers! Gabe
John Barry  Tuesday, April 25, 2006 1:30 pm
Gabe, Thanks for your comment. I agree that human responsibility and God's sovereignty do not contradict. (I believe this, in part, because God's sovereignty in the Bible has primarily to do with having the authority to carry out justice rather than exercise meticulous control.) A problem arises, however, when "sovereignty" is defined in such a way that it is incompatible with man's responsibility. A *definitional* contradiction results. For example, did those who were involved in Jesus' death act necessarily? Were they in no sense at any time able to do other than they did? What was the nature of God's "control" of the sin of these men? (Just for the record, I don't believe the Scriptures say that God determined Christ's "murder" before there was time. The word translated "delivered" in the verse you cite, in the Greek, is *out-given*. I take this to mean that Jesus was "out-given" or given out *of heaven* by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God.) Rather than simply stating that human responsibility and God's sovereignty do not contradict, can you (or anyone else) *demonstrate* to me that this is so?
John Barry  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 12:09 am
Douglas, You say, "Let us say this again, and simply deal with what the Bible actually says. God has made the wicked for the day of doom." Should we not rather deal with what the Bible actually *means*? What does Prov 16:4 *mean*? Does it mean, that God, in His good pleasure, has created some wicked people for the express purpose of destroying them? "As I live, says the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live...." (Ezek 33:11) Or does it mean something else? Could its meaning be similar to that of the next verse?
Becky Rathbun  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:56 am
Thank you John. God does not sin and is not tainted by sin. Defining control as "the authority to execute justice" is more in keeping with biblical meaning than Doug's definition of control (authority to meticulously arrange every detail including details of evil and sin.) Also, regarding the example of Ezek 33:11: If we stick merely with the words "I have no pleasure..." and the *meticulous* definition of control, then we would woodenly think that God does things (particularly sinful things)to cause Himself displeasure. Such thinking seems incompatible with God's holiness.
Becky
Becky Rathbun  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:57 am
Sorry to ask this but how does one show a new paragraph in this venue?
Douglas Wilson  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:02 am
Becky, put a p in between two arrow brackets.
Douglas Wilson  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:04 am
And John, there is a less strained possibility. Perhaps Proverbs 16:4 means what it says. God has made all things for Himself, including the wicked for the day of evil. This has been my overriding point. Use reason to diagram the sentences, and not to arbitrarily decide what "definitionally" cannot be the case.
John Barry  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 6:52 am
Douglas, John writes, (1 John 3:9), "No one born of God commits sin; for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God." Don't strain yourself diagramming this sentence. (grin)
John Barry  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 7:42 am
Becky, It is actually *sovereignty* (rather than "control") that has to do primarily with the authority to carry out, and the actual carrying out of, justice. And I have yet to read or hear Douglas explain what he means by God perfectly controlling sin or evil. Cordially,
Becky Rathbun  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 9:49 am
John, thank you for that correction. So the question is whether God's word describes a meticulous sovereignty or a just sovereignty. If the former, then we have received no clear explanation as to what Doug means by God perfectly controlling sin or evil. Instead of exposition of complimentary verses (such as Ezek 33:11-12) we have received the repeated references to Prov 16:4 along with a plea to use reason to diagram the sentences.

Doug, thank you for the paragraph info. Does your request regarding the diagramming Prov 16:4 imply that doing so will somehow elucidate meaning that will override the plain meaning of Ezek 33:11-12?

Douglas Wilson  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 10:12 am
Becky, I am not interested in any one passage "overriding" any other passage. It is true that God has made the wicked for the day of doom, and that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. It is true that no one born of God commits sin and that the one who claims to be without sin is a liar (grin backatcha, John). If two passages say things that appear contradictory to earthbound beetlewits like ourselves, then (having done exegetical due diligence) we should just accept them both. Let God sort it out.
John Barry  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 11:31 am
Good point, Douglas, about we beetlewits, and letting God sort it out. But I have this peculiar drive to reconcile apparent contradictions and make sense out of them. I am able to reconcile the apparent contradictions in your post above with only moderate gymnastics. You, on the other hand, as you have represented to me in one or more past discussions, revel in the "glorious nonsense" in the Scriptures. I make a distinction between *nonsense*, which, using reason, can be positively shown to be such, and *mystery* which is simply outside the scope of reason. I believe that there are mysteries in Scripture, but no nonsense. Your belief that God's written revelation to us includes nonsense gives rise to the challenge of sorting out the nonsense from the sense. What standard or tool do you use to do this? It is like believing that some of Scripture is inspired and some isn't. How do you tell which is which? Also, nonsense, by definition, has no meaning. Why would God communicate meaninglessness to us?
Becky Rathbun  Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:11 pm
I agree, Doug. I am a beetlewit. While crawling around in your essay, I note that you stated, "God's saints must see this issue as it really is -- the clear, objective teaching of the Word of God, and not the result of theological speculations." Yet later we find that the so-called clear, objective teaching of the Word of God seems to contain contradictions and "we should just accept them both. Let God sort it out."

These are oxymoronic statements unless you want us to embrace a sort of Augustinian mysticism. Mystical objectivity...Leapin Lizards! Poor Beetlewit Bereans 'bandoned to the meaningless cold for being so reasonably inclined.