Confusion, Contradiction, and Compatibilism

I received an email today from a woman who has at least seen my blog. The email contained a few questions/accusations, and I’ve decided to answer  them in a blog post because the criticisms are ones that are frequently made against compatibalism. (The email has a bit of a canned objection feel to it, so if you’re a compatibalist blogger, it may be that you have received a similar one.)

Here goes.

I’m always amused with the Calvinists determination to stay confused instead of trying to discover what makes their teachings contradictory. Compatibilism is just another way of saying….we’re still confused.

What you see as “determination to stay confused” is, for the compatibilist, a determination to not speculate about things that are not revealed in scripture. The compatibilist sees both the sovereignty of God over human choices and the responsibility of human beings for the choices they make taught in scripture. It’s because they see them both revealed to us by God that the compatibilist embraces the two.

The compatibilist, of course, does not believe that these two things are contradictory, because they are both taught to us by the God of truth—the God who never contradicts himself. The compatibilist does not, however, think that creatures will necessarily be able to explain everything about how their Creator works, because in comparison to the infinite wisdom of God, humans have pea brains.

I’ve challenged those who believe that God’s sovereignty over human choices and responsible human choice are contradictory concepts to explain how the two are contradictory—how it is impossible for both be true—and no one’s ever taken me up on that challenge. A simple intuition that they are contradictory won’t do, because our intuitions come from minds that are both created finite and distorted by the fall.

So here’s the challenge for you: If you think compatibilist are confused, then show me. Formulate things to show exactly why God’s sovereignty over human choices is incompatible with responsible human choice. Why are the statements “God is sovereign over human choices” and “human beings are responsible for their choices” actually contradictory and not just something that is intuitively contradictory to you?

As you know, the Calvinist has never been able to reconcile his definition of the ‘Sovereignty of God’ with the ‘Freedom and Responsibility of man’, where salvation and condemnation are concerned. Happiness with leaving those ideas in contradiction, paradox, confusion, and mystery is not good enough for men or a God who commands ‘full proof’ of one’s ministry. (2 Tim 4:5)

I’m not sure what 2 Timothy 4:5, has to do with it, but the full proof of the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man is that the text of scripture. God reveals there that He is sovereign over human choices and human beings are responsible for them. See, for instance, Isaiah 10, where God chooses to send the  nation of Assyria against the Israelites and then punish them for their actions. Do you not think what is taught in scripture is enough proof to be “full proof”?

I’d like to know your opinion about the most important question one could ask a Calvinist, which is this: Does God give a reason (‘show cause’) to man in the Scriptures for what Calvinists say was his prior determination of some to salvation and the rest to condemnation? Or did God simply decree the eternal fate of all either to salvation or condemnation without judgment or any standard of judgment?

The reason for judgment is human sin. Those who are condemned are condemned because they “fall short of the glory of God.” The reason for any sinner’s salvation is God’s grace—God’s choice to spare some already condemned sinners from the judgment they deserve on the grounds of their sin.

Comments

[MzEllen]

almost as if an Arminian doesn't have a contradiction is believing in free will, while asking God to change a person's heart.

[Jane]

Thoughtful work, Rebecca.