God’s Sovereignty & Man’s Responsibility
by Blake Sager
In Christian thought, two ideas seem commonly and intuitively held among believers: 1. That God is completely sovereign and 2. That man is only held morally responsible for that which he freely chooses to do. Like many commonly held doctrines, however, these two will clash if taken at face value. If God is causally behind everything, then how are we responsible for our actions?
There are two sides to this conflict, that of the theological and that of the philosophical. As we will see, aside from exegetical disagreements, there is little conflict within Scripture concerning the previously mentioned beliefs. Scripture simply states it as is, and thus it remains in the realm of philosophy to reconcile these truths with our intuitions.
Compatibilism, or soft determinism, is one such attempt to reconcile these two notions and it does so by maintaining that God’s sovereignty and man’s free will and moral culpability are co-existing or compatible. Before delving further, however, let us examine the quickly examine what Scripture has to say on the subject.
Theology
We see in Proverbs 16:33 that “every decision is from the LORD,” and in 19:21 that, though many plans are in the minds of men, “It is the purpose of the LORD that will stand.” Additionally, Psalm 115:3 tells us that “Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases.” Passages like Deuteronomy 24:16 lay out explicitly that all are “put to death for [their] own sin.”
The Bible then affirms our intuitions that God is absolutely sovereign but not to the extent that it reduces or eliminates man’s responsibility over his actions. Indeed, the Bible seems to hold these truths inseparably tied without ever addressing the correct tension.
Philosophy
It now remains for us to shape our views and definitions in such a way as to reflect what Scripture teaches. Seeing as God’s sovereignty appears to be a non-negotiable, our efforts then turn towards our understanding of free-will and culpability. It is the view of a Compatibilist that one acts freely when he or she chooses that which she desires without impediment. In other words, in as much as I choose to do what I want to do without coercion, I am acting freely.When viewed this way, it is no longer quite as difficult to see how one can act with free will, according to God’s sovereignty, and still be held morally responsible for his actions. If humans possess a sinful nature (Galatians 5:17, 19-21; Ephesians 2:3), which in turn corrupts our desires, we are going to choose sin because we desire it. Even if God blesses only some with salvation and regeneration, the rest of us are still acting willingly according to our desires, and thus are responsible for our actions.
Conclusion
Brothers and sisters, as you wrestle with these truths, consider the words of DA Carson:
“Christians who may deny compatibilism on front after front become compatibilists (knowing or otherwise) when they think about the cross. There is no alternative, except to deny the faith. And if we are prepared to be compatibilists when we think about the cross—that is, to accept both of the propositions I set out at the head of this chapter as true, as they are applied to the cross—it is only a very small step to understanding that compatibilism is taught or presupposed everywhere in the Bible.”