Christians Struggle With the Dichotomy

¶ … Christians struggle with the dichotomy between free will and God's apparently overriding and predestined will. The Bible indicates that human beings have free will, as shown by Adam and Eve's choice to listen to the snake instead of to God. The Scripture however also indicates that anything that a human being can choose to do falls within God's predetermined plan. Academic critics such as John S.

Feinberg and Bruce Reichenbach have attempted to address this problem philosophically, as shown in their respective articles entitled "God Ordains all Things" and "God Limits his Power." These can be compared in terms of three paradigms: God's sovereignty, human freedom, and God's goodness. When these are considered in terms of the arguments put forward by the authors, I believe that Feinberg's writing most closely adheres to Biblical principles. In his work, John S. Feinberg addresses the issue of predetermination and free will from a deterministic viewpoint.

What is most striking about the article, is that Feinberg does not attempt to dispute the sovereignty of God. Indeed, he asserts that he has both theological and philosophical reasons for his position, but emphasizes that the theological holds precedence. As such, Feinberg uses several Bible passages to demonstrate his acceptance and belief in the fact that God is indeed sovereign and determines that everything works together with his will.

Feinberg cites Ephesians 1:11 in this regard (Feinberg 29): In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" This verse correlates well with others also addressing the sovereignty of God even over evil. One striking passage in this regard concerns the crucifixion of Christ. This was a crime from the perspective of good vs.

evil, but also provided God with an opportunity to demonstrate his power and save humanity: 23 Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it." (Acts 2: 23-24). According to these passages, it appears that God has predetermined the destiny of every person on earth.

Indeed, according to Proverbs 16:4, he has even created the wicked for the purpose of judging them at the end of time. The Christian is therefore left to wonder about free will. Do human beings even have free will under a God that predetermines everything? Certainly such predetermination transforms human life into nothing but an automatic existence according to a predetermined program. Feinberg refutes this, and bases his arguments upon the deterministic viewpoint without attempting to contradict the cited passages from Scripture.

Feinberg considers a number of biblical passages in terms of freedom and predetermination. He argues that, while God is indeed sovereign, human beings are provided with choices regarding their actions on earth. These choices are determined in a causal way: each choice determines a further choice, until everything culminates into the final outcome. In this way, God predetermines the outcomes of choices, but does not predetermine every choice made. He is therefore concerned with the larger view of time and its sequence in a deterministic way.

Every action is connected to every other action, and so Adam and Eve's original sins led to the fall of mankind, which led to evil. Evil led to the crucifixion and the opportunity for human beings to be saved if they choose, which ultimately leads to the fulfillment of God's predetermined plan for human beings. Human beings are therefore free to make their own choices. These choices have consequences and outcomes, and these outcomes are collectively predetermined to serve the honor and sovereignty of God.

God's goodness lies in the fact that he provides human beings with the paradigm of choice. Feinberg uses 2 Peter 1:21 to make a further point about freedom and God's will. According to the author, the passage indicates that the authors of the Bible wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but that they did not receive exact dictation from God.

They were inspired to write as they wished, but the outcome was still determined by God's ultimate will: "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:21). In the same way, the words of the prophets were their own, but the message behind these words was inspired by God. This is the nature of the interaction between God's will and human freedom in terms of the Bible.

In this way, Feinberg uses the Bible to substantiate everything he says about divine and human will, and I am therefore convinced that his arguments are superior to those of Reichenbach in terms from a biblical viewpoint. In contrast to Feinberg, Reichenbach approaches the topic from a philosophical rather than a biblical viewpoint. The central argument of his article is that, in order to allow choice and free will on earth, God is inclined to limit his power.

Reichenbach argues that causal elements are not sufficient to determine the actions of a person if such a person is indeed free to choose. He denies that any internal or external forces should have an impact on how a person acts. Only in such a case, according to Reichenbach, does human freedom exist.

This argument is based not upon biblical evidence, but rather upon an intuitional philosophy: Reichenbach holds that human beings "feel" that they have a choice to act, and that they have the ability to be either wrong or right in these choices (Reichenbach 104). This position creates a problematic dichotomy for Reichenbach: God's sovereignty is clearly implied in the Bible and indeed Reichenbach cites passages to this effect (Reichenbach 107). The way in which he handles this dichotomy is however decidedly unbiblical.

In order to provide human beings with the freedom that is clearly evident in the world around us, according to Reichenbach, God limits his sovereignty and his omnipotence. Human freedom, according to this view, cannot exist simultaneously with divine sovereignty and omnipotence. If this were the case, human.