PREDESTINATION - ITS EXTENT

PREDESTINATION - ITS EXTENT

Central to the historical question is the extent of predestination. Does it apply to all events and actions of all men, including sin and righteous acts? Or is it in some way limited by Scripture? It seems that Scripture clearly defines that God does not cause all actions of men and all events in human history. Jeremiah repeatedly reminds his readers that God didn’t command child sacrifice to pagan gods, "... neither did it enter my mind..."Jeremiah 19:5;Jeremiah 32:35. Paul {1 Corinthians 14:33} specifically rejects that God is the author of confusion. Sadly, most of us who have spent many years in ministry have spent our seasons in or serving churches where confusion existed-in some cases, prevailed. John {1 John 2:16} names three categories of human conduct, sin, that is not of the Father, but of the world. Therefore the question, "Does God cause all things?," seems necessarily to require a negative answer, for these passages all name certain things not caused of God. Inherent, both in Scripture and in historical confessions, is the foundational truth that God is not the author, or cause, of sin. Supralapsarian theologians will attempt to hold to their all-encompassing view of predestination and still deny this premise, but they are universally unconvincing in their efforts. I will offer two examples from Scripture in which our interpretation must respect this essential premise, or we endanger the holy character of God. In the case of Joseph’s life, particularly his comment to his brothers inGenesis 50:1-26that they meant "it" for evil, {Genesis 50:20} but God for good, many commentators will leave the question of "it" vague. Did God inject Himself into a godly family of brothers who loved each other and force, or otherwise cause, them to become jealous of Joseph? I answer no indeed. If we allow the Genesis narrative to guide us, we will discover that the brothers nursed a long-standing envy of their brother, a matter not helped by a doting father who showed partiality to Joseph. As the brothers saw Joseph approaching them, they immediately began plotting his death. Had they fulfilled their evil desires, never attributed to God in the passage, they would in fact have killed him on the spot. I suggest that God intervened so as to preserve Joseph’s life through Judah’s softening spirit toward his brother. The same principle, I believe, holds true with Potiphar’s wife, and with Joseph’s time in prison. In any one of these instances Joseph could well have been killed, but God intervened and saved him alive. Factually, the envious brothers would have gladly done far more than they did were it not for God’s intervening providence. We need not impose sin (causatively) onto God at any juncture in this lesson in order to honor the final assessment spoken by Joseph to his brothers. The other frequent Biblical example favoring universal predestination deals with the crucifixion of our Lord. First of all, we read more often in the Passion Week narrative than anywhere else in Scripture, that events occurred "that the Scripture might be fulfilled."Matthew 27:18makes a fascinating observation, that the Jews delivered Jesus up to crucifixion "for envy." A reasonable, not to mention consistent with God’s holy character, case can be made that throughout the events of Passion Week the Jewish leaders would have done far more to our Lord than they did had it not been for the restraining providence of God. The Greek word- SGreek: 4309. proorizo -translated in the various forms of "predestinate" in the NT is a compound word, pro-horizo; pro in advance, and horizo, the root for our English word "horizon." The basic meaning is to set the limit in advance. The above scenario comfortably fits within that definition and does not ever cross the line of compromising God’s holy character by making Him the cause of sin. Regardless of one’s theological position,Romans 8:28contains some form of limitation. I offer one simple example. Can we imply from the passage that all things work together for good to them that hate God, who are not called according to His purpose? Paul observes an interesting interplay with the term "all things" in this context. In some cases he specifically refers to "these things." In other cases he specifically refers to "all things." I suggest thatRomans 8:32also qualifies the "all things" of verse 28, limiting them to things given to us through the merit of Jesus’ atonement. Some (myself included at one time in the past) will attempt to limit the "all things" ofRomans 8:28to the five things that Paul mentions inRomans 8:29-30. I believe that this view excessively limits the language and will not stand under scrutiny, linguistic or theological. Jesus purchased and gives us many things not specifically or clearly named in these five things.[i] Again, my objective is to be sufficiently open to Biblical language, but not excessively open so as to cross the boundary and compromise God’s holiness. To make God, directly or logically and necessarily, cause sin by excessively enlarging predestination violates the passages with which I started this note, in addition to hopelessly and irredeemably compromising God’s holiness. I am not dogmatic on the details of predestination unless someone attributes sin causatively, directly or indirectly, to God.

[i] Compare2 Peter 1:3