Through A Glass Darkly


My Calvinistic Mistake
September 26, 2008, 4:52 pm
Filed under: Ecclesiastical Controversy, Personal

My story is like many who were converted to Christianity in an “Arminian” setting.  In those days we were not self-consciously so, we just were because “that’s what the bible says.”  I became interested in theology and began reading those who differed with us on the issues of how grace works in the life of the believer.  I became a Calvinist…really a neo-baptistic-Calvinist (because I didn’t know anything of Calvin’s doctrine of covenant, sacrament or Church).  In this transition, the term sovereignty began to take on very important meanings, the central one being that God predetermined all that would happen.  That is what I believed the word sovereignty meant…and I suspect that is what the majority of those in my “Calvinistic” churches believed as well.  But that is really not at all what the word means.  We should not get our understanding of biblical concepts from modern English dictionaries, but I want to pose a challenge by way of a question using the definition of sovereignty from the American Heritage Dictionary.  Here are the four entries for the word sovereignty:

  1. Supremacy of authority or rule as exercised by a sovereign or sovereign state.
  2. Royal rank, authority, or power.
  3. Complete independence and self-government.
  4. A territory existing as an independent state.

It seems that this view of sovereignty has to do with ability not predetermination.  The question I want to pose is this, is the picture of God in the bible primarily one of a God who is sovereign in the sense that He will do what he wants to do when and how he wants to do it?  Or is it a picture of a God who predetermined every detail before it was to take place?

Think about it.


14 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Hi Chris,

I’m going with both. The picture of God in the bible is primarily one of a supremely good big guy who predetermines all details in accordance with that goodness. You can trust him — he’s got your back. He’s not playing by someone else’s rules because all rules are his and they ooze out of and are produced from his personality. We call his rules “good” not because they live up to some standard above himself, but because we recognize (by virtue of being chips off the old block ourselves) that they are reflections of his personality.

But wait, there’s more! If you call now, you don’t get just his glowing good nature to bask in and his resulting good rules to live by. You’ll also get the comfort that he’s got every hair on your head numbered, and that if a tower falls — it’s his doing, for good. He controls EVERYTHING for your good. Predetermination? Yes, but not in the human-robotic-machinistic cold sense. In the lively, wild and comforting Good Shephard sense.

Comment by St. Ampher

Thanks for the input, but I will have to disagree with the statement that the “primary” picture of God in the bible is one that shows him as the predetermining One. I agree that He is shown to be the “supremely good big guy”, but not the other. I can think of zero passages in all the old testament that point to His “predetermination from before the foundation of the world” of any event. This doctrine we receive as the “mystery” is made known through the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension. And then one has to ask if what is being revealed to us regarding predestination is the predestination of every single event, thought, word, etc. or something else. The doctrine of predestination as it is understood and discussed by most is a species of philosophy. That doesn’t make it wrong or bad, it just changes things a bit for me in how we ought to understand it as it comes to us in scripture.

Comment by chrisbollegar

Hi again my man,

When you say you can’t think of any OT passage pointing to His predetermining of any event, I’m sure you have me confused. Do you see Him predetermining His own actions anytime back then? How much of what He said He would do, did he determine ahead to do? “Let us make man.” Wammo. “His heel shall bruise his head.” Bang-biff-bam. Go into the Land and I shall surely give it unto you. Zap.

Then there’s the foreknowledge of other’s aspect that maybe you see has good guess work on His part: They shall flee before thee … This time next year thou shalt have a son.

Then there’s the “irresistable” grace/punishment parts: I shall harden Pharoah’s heart. I will give you a heart of flesh.

Hep us, pastor to see what we’re seeing into this now as his supremecy of rule / power / independence from yet self-government into and through our environment.

Comment by St. Ampher

I think there might be a bit of equivocation here in the term predetermine or predestination. Usually the term is used to describe the theological idea that God “from before the foundation of the world” predetermined every detail and event. I don’t disagree at all that God is shown in the OT as One who predetermines in the sense that He decides to do something and then does it. The point of my original question, was that I don’t see anything in the OT that describes God’s predetermining in the “theological” sense…as I said, this language is reserved for the NT. I totally agree with your illustrations above as wonderful demonstrations of God’s sovereignty (His ability to do what He wants, when He wants and how He wants), but all the “predetermining” pointed to in those texts takes place in history, and that is my point.
Hope that helps better explain what I was getting at.

Comment by chrisbollegar

Pastor B,

Ok then, if God decides to do stuff and is pretty good about following through, then we should then ask: “How much stuff does God do?” and “Is there stuff He does or did that He never really thought about beforehand — that just kinda happened before he had a chance to think it through?”

Are you worried that the predestinationistas want to say: “Well, He does A LOT of stuff. So much stuff does He do that, in fact, ain’t here no pie He don’t got His fingers in. He’s a regular busy body in our sitchyation down here.?” I’m guessing even that doesn’t worry you. In fact, that’s a comfort to you, yes?

I’m guessing further that what you really are uncomfortable with is the idea that with all God’s pervasive intrusions, though meant for good for those that love Him, He might be overstepping the bounds of respect for our independent personalities and FORCING us against a choice we would otherwise make to either love Him or reject Him. And that should be up to us, since that’s how it feels He set up the game in the first place.

I know I’m making it sound like a wimpy rehash of the old argument, but am I close to your real objection? For my part, that would be my objection to “modern” predestinarian lingo. And I have a real good answer, though it sounds like a nonanswer, but it works for me.

Comment by St. Ampher

I don’t have any uncomfortability. As I said I have been happy on both sides of the fence. What I was seeking to demonstrate by this post was the sense that the scriptures don’t ask the questions that our theologians do…like the ones you bring up in your post [predestination of all events, the place of free will, etc.]. I just find that interesting that God is able to communicate his sovereign [as understood in my post] prerogative in history without resorting to our models of “solving” the problem of predestination. Does that make sense?

Comment by chrisbollegar

I here you saying God doesn’t in Scripture (OT, anyway) present Himself as predetermining every detail of history before it happens — an idea about which philosophers and theologians show a lot of interest. And I’m responding that a person might indeed get the sense from the OT that He does indeed craft every nook and crany of historical narrative. That the OT presents this without “asking the questions” of predestination could be the result of not being a question or troublesome issue in the first place. As a pastor, incidentally, I bet you take the same tack in counseling the broken — the Lord is working His purpose out, all the hairs are numbered, trust and obey as His strong arm will guide and protect you, nothing escapes His loving control, …

Comment by St. Ampher

I would be interested in hearing what passages you would use to support that God “crafts every nook and crany of the historical narrative.” And as far as counseling, I don’t think that is the way I would counsel someone who was “broken” or experiencing “evil”, if you are suggesting that the counsel is something along the lines of “God is sovereign and has purposed this event that is causing so much trouble in your life, so don’t worry, He has a plan.” I could never picture myself saying that to a spouse who has experienced the betrayal of adultery. I couldn’t say that God purposed the adultery. I could say that He is trustworthy and you should rely upon His compassion, justice, mercy and providence to work out of this situation good. Whether or not God “purposed” it, I cannot tell. I do believe God “purposes” evil for His purpose at times, but I don’t reason from that that all evil is therefore “purposed” by Him. I choose to leave that a mystery.

Comment by chrisbollegar

On counseling, I’m saying not that God proposed the adultery, as though He endorsed it, but rather along the lines “He knows … He knows. He was right there and felt the pain and betrayal before you knew it was happening. He’ll carry you through it.

On which passages support crafting all the events — you’d probably want me to start at the beginning. “What was He thinking!! Didn’t He know what would happen, what with all this pain and death — even His own Son eventually got caught up in this mess. I bet He wouldn’t do that again!”

Comment by St. Ampher

And now you are at the crux of the issue [as it pertains to the philosophical doctrine of God's predetermining actions], the knowledge of God. This is a very important issue, but we were talking about sovereignty, i.e. what God does, now we have moved to what God knows. The two are related to be sure, but not identical. My point in the post was regarding the activity of God in predetermination specifically, not His knowledge.

Comment by chrisbollegar

So again, I’m going with both. I see this here Book as the story told by the Sovereign we both agree is doing what He wants when He wants. But seems to me He also portrays Himself as not only knowing in advance how the story is going to unfold, but also as constructing the individual characters and national movements and even natural phenomena along the way to get to the happy ending He has in mind. “I will raise up so-and-so” and I will harden that dude’s heart” etc.

He predicts/foretells/predestines/makes happen tons of stuff, to the extent that I take it that He is running the whole show and making sure it all goes down as planned.

But what He DOESN’T reveal in this story is YOUR (or my) place in it — on the good side or bad? The book is constructed for the whole purpose of making the reader/listener ask this question. If you have ears to hear, you’ll go: “Wo — Oh … My … God … This thing’s real. Oh Jesus, I’m in a world a hurt. Please make it be that You have chosen me. I’m sincerely begging You.” And asking this is, of course, a pretty good indication itself that you are hidden in the story with the guys in white hats.

But this is the hear of your, preacher. Follow the Word. Don’t show God as “sovereign” but without the all encompassing plan AND activity to get us there; but to ask your hearers if they are on the right side of His plan and actions. “Has He given you faith? You have been given this moment to desparately beg Him for it. And if indeed you do, you will by that very participation with Him have evidence and know that you are His. If you will or can not, I pray God helps you soon. Because there will be no greater tragedy/hell/misery than what is about to unfold for you.

Comment by St. Ampher

Sorry it has been so long in answering. It seems that you are simply arguing from specifics (i.e. certain statements about very specific events in which God acts sovereignly) to a universal. In some instances this may be a valid as a way of stating a hypothesis to be tested by later data observed, but I am not convinced that it is the right move here. Again, I come back to the simple fact that we are not told that God predestined all things before time began. To reason from God’s actions in history to very historical circumstances back to a pre-creation decree that encompasses all things seems a stretch.

Comment by chrisbollegar

Stretchin keeps ya limber.

Comment by St. Ampher

True, but you can also pull something.

Comment by chrisbollegar




Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>