double double, toil & trouble: appendix one - illustration of sovereignty and responsibility

7/31/2019 Double Double, Toil & Trouble: Appendix One - Illustration of Sovereignty and Responsibility

1/7

Appendix OneA Useful Illustration of Sovereignty and Responsibility

Over the years Ive kept an ear to the ground for useful andhelpful illustrations of how Gods sovereignty works together with mans

responsibility. It is a mystery, to be sure. But we should always beseeking to give an accurate apologetic for the truth that we do know. Iknow for sure that Gods Word teaches that God is sovereign free toact and move as He pleases and that man is responsible accountableto God alone for all his actions which he freely does. I also know thatthough they seem contradictory, they are not. They are notcontradictory, not because I can figure them out in my finite, humanbrain. They are not contradictory because Gods Word teaches both.And by virtue of the Scriptures teaching both, that means they are bothtrue, regardless of whether or not I can figure out how they worktogether.

Illustrations, however, are useful sometimes in attempting toexplain what we do not understand. Such attempts have been made forcenturies upon centuries with the trinity, for example, or the divinity andhumanity of the Son of God. Some of these are useful, and some aredownright pitiful. But they all come from human attempts to help fellowhumans understand what is divine. While we know that we will never beable to fully peer behind the curtain of mystery, we are certainly allowedour best guesses as to what is actually there, as long as those guessesprotect the truth and are guided by it.

Now with that in mind, Im going to offer a personal illustrationIve come up with as to how sovereignty and responsibility mightpossiblywork together. I put those two words in italics because I knowmy depravity and its consequent noetic effects upon my mind all toowell. This is a feeble, fallen effort at best to describe something trulyand mysteriously magnificent and majestic. It is much akin to theapostle Paul trying to draw a picture of what he saw on the Damascusroad that day, were he to have tried. Anything he drew could nevercome even remotely close enough to conveying all that was inherent inthat experience. And my illustration will fall just as short.

Before I give it to you, let me offer a suggestion about illustrationsfirst. They all fall short. Dont look for a point-to-point correspondencein everything you read. Thats not what illustrations are for. Actually, Iguess my illustration is better called an analogy. An analogy is intendedto point to similarities in something else using other words. Aristotlesusage, for example, along with the Greeks in general, pointed to thesimilar ways that two particular things functioned in their own contexts.He would have stated it like this: As A is to B, so C is to D.


2/7

Eventually this evolved to be understood in the middle ages as atool to argue from the greater to the lesser, or vice versa. This timeperiod produced the belief that the greater ordered universe in which welive provided a pattern for its smaller ordered parts. What this meant

for them is that the smaller parts could be used to describe theprinciples behind the greater universe. That is generally, in a veryoversimplified sense, the way in which analogy began to be used intheology, especially with men like Thomas Aquinas. Though he spentquite a bit of time considering analogical details of theology which wereof no real importance, in my opinion, he did hit the nail on the head inunderstanding that the explanation of divine things must always bedone in human words.

He also understood well, if I recall my seminary days accurately,that the only way we can understand the divine is to make comparisons

using human things. Yet these things cannot be used univocally, or in apoint-to-point comparison. To do that is to ignore the fundamentaldifference between finite and infinite. But neither can they be usedequivocally, or in very unconnected senses. To do that is saymeaningless things about Him. No, these human things which we use toillustrate and explain the divine must be used analogically. To do that isto say something meaningful about the divine while simultaneouslyrecognizing the distinctions between the divine and the created.1 Myanalogy will hopefully say something meaningful about the divine whilerecognizing that what I am saying is in no real way describing the truesubstance of the divine.

I believe that an orchestra best illustrates the way in which thesovereignty of God and responsibility of man work together. Consider itthoroughly and feel free to interact with me on it. Perhaps it reallystinks and I just dont know it! Perhaps it is a great illustration and youwant to tell me how it worked for you. Or perhaps it needs tweaking tobe more useful. Whatever the case, consider that an orchestra is madeup of several essential components. There are the musicians who play,the score they play from, and the conductor who leads them.

Many times the conductor who leads the orchestra is also the one

who composed the score. The composer produces what I will call themaster composition. That is the score of the entire composition with allits parts. You see, the composer writes the score for the brass section,the woodwinds, the strings, and the percussion. Many times, he evenwrites varying pieces for musicians in each section of the orchestra. Thepoint is that he is the one who writes every note of music that every

11 The Encyclopedia Britannica has a wonderful article on this topic, especially asit relates to analogy in theology. See Volume 1.


3/7

musician in his orchestra will play. And he has all of it in front of himwhile he conducts the group.

Every musician has a part of the master composition in front ofthem while they play their instrument. They play what has been written

for them. They do not write their own music, for that would notharmonize with what the rest of the orchestra is playing. Nor does thecomposer work with them to write their own piece. Again, the composerwrites every single note that each musician will play for the course ofthat composition. But each musician is playing their own instrument.They are responsible for their own skill level as well as any mistakes thatthey make.

Now lets examine the analogy and the truth to which I hope itpoints. God is the composer of the universe. He has, before thefoundation of the world, already written the composition for His creation.

I love the words of Isaiah, the prophet who for me, more than any otherprophet, describes this amazing sovereignty of God.

Remember this and stand firm, recall it to mind, youtransgressors, remember the former things of old; for I amGod, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none likeme, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancienttimes things not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand,and I will accomplish all my purpose (46:10).

Who is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and

set it before me, since I appointed an ancient people. Letthem declare what is to come, and what will happen (44:7).

Consider also that the composition which He has written is set instone and cannot be altered. That master composition includes thescore which He has already written for every created thing. And thatscore includes every single note which every created thing will play asHe conducts it. No man, woman, child, animal, organism, molecule orany created thing will somehow white-out what He has planned fromancient times, nor will they ever be able to change something. Everycreated thing will perform the function for which it was created by the

Creator.

The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of hisheart to all generations (Psa. 33:11).

Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is thepurpose of the LORD that will stand (Prov. 19:21).


4/7

all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,and he does according to his will among the host of heavenand among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stayhis hand or say to him, "What have you done?" (Dan. 4:35).

There are some who think differently. David describes one particulargroup in his second Psalm.

Why do the nations rageand the peoples plot in vain? Thekings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers takecounsel together, against the LORD and against hisanointed, saying, Let us burst their bonds apart and castaway their cords from us. He who sits in the heavenslaughs; the LORD holds them in derision. Then he will speakto them in his wrath, and terrify them in his fury (2:1-5).

Consider Psalm 33:11 again with the previous verse this time.

The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to nothing; hefrustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of theLORD stands forever, the plans of his heart to allgenerations (33:10-11).

As I stated before, the composer does not take counsel with themusician about how to write the score. And neither does the Creator ofthe universe take counsel with any of His created beings to determinetheir course in life.

Who has measured the Spirit of the LORD, or what manshows him his counsel? Whom did he consult, and whomade him understand? Who taught him the path of justice,and taught him knowledge, and showed him the way ofunderstanding? Behold, the nations are like a drop from abucket, and are accounted as the dust on the scales;behold, he takes up the coastlands like fine dustAll thenations are as nothing before him, they are accounted byhim as less than nothing and emptinessDo you not know?Do you not hear? Has it not been told you from the

beginning? Have you not understood from the foundationsof the earth? It is he who sits above the circle of the earth,and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches outthe heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent todwell in; who brings princes to nothing, and makes therulers of the earth as emptiness. (Isa. 40:13-14, 15, 17, 21-23).


5/7

Where does mans responsibility fit into all of this? Very clearly, inall of the contexts of these texts, man is the one in the crosshairsbecause of his own freely-chosen sinfulness. Go back and examine thecontexts and you will find that man is the one spoken of negatively. Heis the one under Gods certain judgment in some texts, and in others his

puny, frail powers and abilities are not even microscopic in Gods sight.

I hope you are feeling the tension right about now. How can I saythat God is sovereign, that He has written every note of every score forevery created thing, and yet also say man is responsible for what hedoes, for the free choices he makes? Let me start my answer to thiswith our analogy. When each musician plays his or her score, they areplaying. They are playing their own score with their own instrumentsusing their own talents and skills. But when they play a note off key, orperhaps the wrong note altogether, they are responsible, not theconductor. No musician can stand up and yell, scream and shake their

fist at the conductor saying, You made me play that note wrong! No,the correct notes were written down for them, and they messed up allon their own.

Now it is at this very point that my analogy does what allanalogies eventually do they break down. The composer does notoutfit each musician with his or her skills and talents. The conductordoes not make the musician play the wrong note or play a note off key.But God does outfit each created being with the skills, talents,personality, and rationale to do what they do. And their sinful choicesand mistakes are in fact a part of His decreed plan. Once again, every

single choice word, thought and deed made by every singleindividual has already been decreed from ancient times.

Let me attempt to resolve the tension created by the analogy andits necessary break down in this way. In the theological realm, thechoices each individual makes, whether sinful or righteous, may notnecessarily be on key. Like the musician in the orchestra, it may beoff key or an entirely different key altogether. But in Gods ancientdecrees, every mistake or sin is somehow sovereignly and mysteriouslyincluded in the Conductors overall orchestration. God conducts eachpersons score of the master composition. But they are individually

responsible for how they play their part, that is, how they live their lives.

But even if their sinful choices are sovereignly made a part of themaster composition, they are still held responsible for what they do, andGod is responsible for orchestrating the master composition. Now hereshow I see it fitting together. The discordant notes of an mastercomposition played by an orchestra stand out and detract from theoverall performance. One note can cause the properly tuned ear to


6/7

wince and grimace the face. Undoubtedly the conductor may catchsome flack for not having practiced his group enough. But (and heresthe part of the analogy breakdown I love!) with God, the discordantnotes of sin, while certainly standing out, do not detract from the overallperformance. Rather, they have already been masterfully woven into

the performance so that His reputation, fame and glory are nottarnished.

Yes, He wrote the composition. Yes, they play it. Yes, they makemistakes when they play. But He does not put His hand on their handand actively cause the mistake. What He does do, however, is that Hesovereignly and mysteriously orchestrates their score in such a way thatindirectly He causes them to make that mistake so that for somehumanly strange yet divinely sovereign reason, that mistake (and all theother mistakes combined) seem to glorify Him in the end.

Surely you see the difficulty with my analogy. Perhaps you areready to burn my book too! When a person sins, was that sin writteninto their score? If so, then God wrote that sin into their score, whichmakes Him the author of sin. Thats one view of this analogy. Butanother view is that a persons sin is not written into his score by God.However, God conducts that individuals score in such a way that theyare led to do what they do. Thus, they are not made to sin by God, buttheir act of sin was orchestrated by Him.

Whats the difference? Not much, is probably what you aresaying. And the whole analogy, again, is frail at best. But while it is my

theory, my way of attempting to understand this problem, it is helpful intrying to explain how God can be active with regards to a persons sinand yet that person still be held responsible for their sin. You didnt doa very good job at all, Rob! is what I know some are saying. Im terriblysorry if this is true. But hey, at least I gave it a try!

The difference then between God writing a sin into a personsscore and orchestrating their life so that they would sin is the difference,in my mind, between entering their bodies and minds to make them sinand creating an environment around them so that they would make thechoice God wanted them to make, while that choice still belongs to

them. Now, use this statement I just made and compare it to theinspiration of the Scriptures. God wrote the Bible, yet man wrote it.God wrote it, but He did not write it in such a way as to overpower thewriters. That would mean something akin to mechanical dictation,bypassing their minds and using their bodies to write. And neither didmen write it independently of God. Rather, as Peter stated it.


7/7

For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, butmen spoke from God as they were carried along by the HolySpirit (2 Pet. 1:21).

Somehow, sovereignly and mysteriously, God orchestrated the

writing of the Scriptures in such a way that it was a product of both Heand the biblical writer. A specific biblical writer was writing to a specificgroup of people, at a specific point in time, to discuss a specific issue orissues, for specific reasons. God was behind the scenes orchestratingthe plan He had set into motion back in ancient times. And the way Heseemed to do that was creating an environment or atmosphere, if youwill, so that each person would live and move as He decreed, producingchoices that were made by individuals themselves, yet effects that weredecreed by God Himself.

So am I saying God wants a person to sin? The Bible says God

wants us to be perfect (Matt. 5:48). It nowhere teaches that God wantsanyone to sin. But it does clearly narrate time and time again of manycircumstances and situations in which the sin a person committed wasdefinitely orchestrated by God. Judas and Pharaoh are but twoexamples of this. How do we explain this? Thats where I end thisappendix as I did many chapters previously who can understand thisGod? Weve hit a brick wall and bumped into mystery. We cant go anyfurther than this. Consider Wayne Grudems thought in closing

We must note that while Scripture is willing to affirm Gods ultimatedestining of wrongful actionsthe blame for these actions is always

given to the moral creatures (men and angels) who willinglychoose todo wrong; the blame is never given to God. (cf.Jb. 1:22). If we ask howGod can destine that something happen through the willful choice ofhis creatures, yet himself remain free from blame (and not be theauthor of sin in the sense of actually doing wrong himself), then weapproach Pauls questions in Romans 9:19, Why does he still find fault?For who can resist his will? Yet here Scripture gives us no answerexcept to say, But who are you, a man, to answer back to God? (Rom.9:20).2

22 Grudem, First Peter, p. 110.

double double, toil & trouble: appendix one - illustration of sovereignty and responsibility

Documents