Carson on Compatibilism

If you read this blog you know that I have been spending some time recently reading D.A. Carson’s book entitled, “How Long O Lord – Reflections on Suffering and Evil”. If you have not read it, I would highly recommend it. As Dr. Carson says many times in this work, being prepared before your day of calamity is a prudent decision, for your day of calamity will certainly come in one way or another. I find his treatment of the issues to be extremely practical and pastoral without skirting or minimizing the tougher theological knots that can be associated with these issues.

I have found chapter 10, “The Mystery of Providence” to be most helpful in terms of my own thinking and want to share some highlights with you here.

He starts by saying,

The issues to be dealt with in this chapter are sufficiently difficult and contentious that Christians often disagree over them. You must make up your own mind. My only suggestion is that as you make up your mind, you try to distinguish the biblical “givens” from the arguments often used to filter them.

The basic framework of this chapter is built around what Dr. Carson calls, compatibilism which he defines as follows: 1) God is absolutely sovereign but not in such a way as to minimize human freedom, and 2) that humans are completely morally responsible but not in such a way as to make God contingent upon them.

He then makes this important disclaimer,

I hasten to insist that this is not an imposition of a certain philosophical grid onto biblical texts. That both of these propositions are true is based on an inductive reading of countless texts in the Bible itself, as we shall see.

He then goes on to comment briefly on numerous Biblical texts that show compatibilism. They are: Genesis 50:19-20, Lev. 20:7-8, I Kings 8:46, Isaiah 10:5, John 6:37-40, Acts 18: 9-10, Phil 2:12-13, and Acts 4:23-31. This final text in Acts speaks of compatibilism in relation to the cross of Jesus. Carson says:

It only takes a moments reflection to show that, if the Christian gospel is true, this tension could not have been otherwise. If the initiative had been entirely with the conspirators, and God simply came in at the last minute to wrest triumph from the jaws of impending defeat, then the cross was not his plan, his purpose, the very reason why he had sent his Son into the world-and that is unthinkable. If on the other hand God was so orchestrating events that all the human agents were nonresponsible puppets, then it is foolishness to talk of conspiracy, or even of sin-in which case there is no sin for Christ to remove by his death, so why should be have to die? God was sovereignly at work in the death of Jesus; humans beings were evil in putting Jesus to death, even as they accomplished the Father’s will; and God himself was entirely good.

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.

I find that in almost every sphere of human life, those are the most advanced are usually the ones who go about their craft the most humbly. Those who are the most insecure are usually those who are appear the most proud and sure of themselves. With that in mind it was refreshing to read Dr. Carson (who in my opinion is one of the most brilliant thinkers of our day) sum up like this,

So I am driven to see not only that compatibilsim is itself taught in the Bible, but that it is tied to the very nature of God; and on the other hand, I am driven to see that my ignorance about many aspects of God's nature is precisely that same ignorance that instructs me not to follow the whims of many contemporary philosophers and deny that compatibilism is possible. The mystery of providence is in the first instance not located in debates about decrees, free will, the place of Satan, and the like. It is located in the doctrine of God.