:: Some thoughts... ::

:: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 ::

On Free Will and Predestination

Many commentators have discussed and argued over the concept of free-will. The inspiration for the outlet of my thinking is a book entitled, “Erasmus-Luther Discourse on Free Will.” Their arguments about free will run the gamut from grace versus works and the role of the spirit in the goodness of man, in addition there are several assumptions about the nature of man. I am not going to get into the other theological issues involved such as the trinity and what is necessary to be saved, but I would like to address the importance of understanding free will, the roles of grace and works, and lastly above all the nature of man, which by necessity encompasses a small discussion on the nature of good and evil.
To understand free will we must venture back to the beginning of recorded time, when the man, Adam took his first breath. The record in Genesis is quite clear that God made Adam as the keeper of His garden. Adam, convinced through love or whatever of his wife Eve took of the fruit that she had consumed thereby earning punishment and rejection by God. This initial story in the book of Genesis is full of many important lessons on the nature of evil, and the role of free will, and even the grace. It is from this story, from the very beginning that I shall outline my arguments and thereby in the process disagree with both Erasmus and Luther.
Fundamental to understanding Adam and therefore the whole Bible is to understand why taking of the fruit of the tree of good and evil was a sin. After all, it wasn’t accounted as a sin to Adam because of the knowledge gained from the fruit, it was because he specifically disobeyed the only commandment that God gave him. This was accounted to Adam as a sin. This is brought up by many of the gospel writers who compare the nature of Adam versus the nature of Christ, etc. This is instructive because Adam by sinning, by committing something “evil” helps us to define what constitutes evil. Plain and simply, evil can be defined as pursuit of the something in opposition to God’s command or will. God is ultimately the root of all good in this world, everything in opposition to God and His will cannot by definition be good. That is why Jesus says you are either for me or against me. There is not a middle ground between light and dark. There is not a relative middle ground where there are extenuating circumstances that can dilute or excuse the wrong done. This is important to understand because the relativist way of thinking permeates much of the world we live in. In the world of God, there are absolutes and rights and wrongs. To continue on the discussion of evil, after Adam the law was delivered to Moses. The law was perfect in that it defined what was good but as the holy scripture has demonstrated to us, none were able to fulfill the law save one. That one was Jesus who came as the fulfillment of the law, making a propitiation for all others who were not able to meet the requirements and statutes of the law of Moses. This was counted to Jesus for righteousness and hence goodness. Hence, by Jesus dying he overcame the original disobedience of Adam. In a sense making whole but what had been separated. The separation being man and God. That is why Jesus is called the intermediary between God and man. That is also why he is considered a high priest because through his sacrifice he bridged the gap between the imperfection of man, and the perfect goodness of God. As is now clearly demonstrated God is good, and all that goes against God is evil by definition. This begs the questions, is man good or evil?
The easy answer is neither. Man is both capable of good and evil. Man has the free will to achieve both. Again, let us go back to the Garden of Eden and the first man Adam. Adam had been instructed by God not to partake of the fruit of tree of good and evil. Adam ignored God and instead took of the fruit. This was the original sin. If man has no free will, he could not have sinned for why would God the God of love, mercy and longsuffering deliberately create evil in this world. It is quite clear that scripture tells us that man uses his will for both good and evil. This means he both follows his own way and the way of God. When Jesus talks about the nature of man being evil, he is simply stating that man is self interested and those interests are often in opposition to God’s way. Erasmus argues that man is partially good which is a most interesting but incredibly naïve argument. He does not pay attention closely to when Paul states that all men fall short of the glory of God. Alternatively Luther argues that it is this grace which is the only thing that brings good into this world, that all the thoughts and actions of man are evil. This has the advantage of being compatible with the idea that the nature of man is evil but simply ignores everything else in the Bible. As Erasmus points out this removes the responsibility from man if he has no free will. Erasmus takes this argument to far as he firmly believes that man can be justified or even be righteous by his deeds. Erasmus should reread the book of Job (if he could). Free will is essential otherwise there could be no action required on our part by to come to God because fundamentally it would be useless. In the same sense the Calvinists are wrong to believe in predestination. They misunderstand the concept of foreknowledge and predestination. Man makes his own choices, the outcome of those choices is known by God, but at no point does God take choice away from man. Jesus clearly paints the picture of two paths, one wide and the other narrow. The one path leads to righteousness and the other to destruction. If there is no free will, this parable has no meaning, and we know the scripture is given to us for instruction as Timothy says. If there is no instruction to be gained from this parable why is it recorded and why did Jesus say this. We are most definitely given a choice between life and death, and God desires that we choose life as it says in Deuteronomy. Life is only to be found in following the example of our Lord Jesus Christ.

This brings us to the notion of faith and works. Erasmus argues that man must have free-will otherwise how could he enter into eternal life? His argument centers around the concept of man being able to do righteous works and achieve righteousness. Luther is right to argue (as there is sufficient scriptural basis) that man is not capable of being judged righteous as God would judge a man. If man was able to attain righteousness on his own, this obviates the need for an intermediary or intercessor. If there is no need for an intercessor it was not necessary for Jesus to die. Yet the apostle Paul makes it plainly clear that without Jesus being resurrected from the dead our hope has no basis and it is in vain. Clearly works will not bring righteousness, and only God can make on righteous. Hence from this we can draw the important conclusion that we need the grace of God. This is aptly demonstrated in Job. Satan questions God and argues that Job is only good to God because God is good to him. The entire book of Job is a refutation of this notion. The initial arguments of Job’s friends are ones condemnation. They essentially tell Job that he has done some wrong and this is his punishment. We know that the rain comes on both the just and the unjust. Believing in God is not a contract for riches or great things, but a matter of love and of faith. As we attain knowledge of God, we understand who He is and see the rightness of His ways. It is our free-will to choose those ways. Therefore because we love the ways of God (see their rightness) we love God who has set them forth. In part, like a valued friend we have faith in God because we love and trust him. From this faith we derive hope. As the apostle Paul says abide in faith, hope and love and the greatest of these is love. This is certainly so, because the other two are derived from it. This helps us to understand what James is speaking about when comments on faith and works. Faith cannot operate by itself as neither can works. For faith is an outworking of love and therefore works must be a manifestation of that love, not a requirement to attain a prize but a true intention to do good (the will of God). It comes from a deep seated desire to do this will. This helps to explain what Jesus means when he says he will say to some on the judgment day that he does not know them.

In summary, free will is essential to understanding good and evil, the nature of man, and the outworking of grace. Free will is not constrained it is unconstrained for both good and evil. Jesus demonstrates the constancy of man, when he declares that evil proceeds out of his heart. This is not to say man is entirely evil because certainly he is capable of some good, as Jesus demonstrates. Man is entirely self-interested though, and this has not changed. Therefore the nature of man is one of self interest which is largely in opposition to the interest and will of God, meaning that it is indeed evil. Free will is also essential to understand the nature of grace. If man has no free will as Luther states then grace is the only actor that moves man toward good. The story of Adam along with numerous other passages refutes this. It is instructive to realize that Luther does have a point but exaggerates it greatly. Man is in need of grace because he falls short of the glory of God as Paul states. Man cannot earn righteousness as the story of Job so aptly illustrates. If he could, there would be no need for a covering of sins, and the law of Moses would be the only applicable law. In that case, the law of grace is useless along with the entire New Testament. At that point, Christianity becomes pointless. The over reliance on works misunderstands their nature and purpose. The nature of works is one of benevolent action on the part of man rooted in his love of God and God’s ways. Man in seeking to follow the example of Christ does these good works. It is not to “earn” a place or “garner” his reward but it is simply a natural outflow of the nature God is inscribing on his heart. Its purpose is entirely selfless as opposed to a work that was motivated on a desire to earn a “reward.” Free will is the underpinning of all these principles. To misunderstand free will carries dire consequences as it perverts one’s understanding of the scripture. In fact, not understanding the nature of free will leads one to logical consequences which will lead to direct contradiction of other scripture. In the end, I am sorry to say, both Erasmus and Luther were wrong.

:: Nathan 9:32 PM [+] ::
...