Responsibility Amidst Sovereignty

A Look At Compatibalism

Within modern evangelicalism we often talk about a concept referred to as “free will.” Most presentations of the Gospel today are loaded with this notion of an autonomous human will. A will that is free to act and choose according to one’s own desires without any cause directing those choices. As a Calvinist, it is clear that every plot of history finds it origins in the Sovereign God. Yet, it is also equally clear that man is a responsible agent. The question is obvious. How does divine sovereignty work with human responsibility?

The term “free will” does exist within Calvinism, just not in the moral sense. We are totally depraved creatures and therefore do not possess a “free will” in the common/modern sense. Because of Adam’s transgressions, all men have inherited a sinful nature (Ro. 5:12). The corruption of the fall left man deep in his sin and separated from God. Not only is our standing before God effected, but our mind is also affected and is hostile to God (Ro. 8:7). Because of this hostility of our minds we cannot submit to God. This is what constitutes our complete inability as depraved creatures.

Although we do not have a moral free will, we are still responsible for our actions. Our responsibility is held alongside God’s sovereignty. Both are true. This idea is called Compatibalism because it says that God’s sovereignty is compatible with man’s responsibility. The other two philosophical views do not find the two to be compatible and instead emphasize one in contrast to the other. These two views are Libertarianism, which says that man is free to act and choose as he wills (this excludes any form of Sovereignty that denies free will, or denies humans the ability to be responsible), and the other view being Determinism, which says everything is pre-determined (this is so staunchly emphasized that responsibility and freedom do not exist). Compatibalism states that ultimately God is the absolute Sovereign being, yet this fact does not diminish that man makes choices and is responsible for those choices.

Biblical Evidence

Gen 5:20 "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives."

In this passage, Joseph had just been reunited with his brothers after a long and crazy series of events, which originated with his brothers selling him into slavery out of their hatred for him. The amazing thing about this verse is that it teaches both God’s sovereignty over the situation and man’s responsibility for their choices. His brother’s intentions were to harm. They meant to harm him. Their choice, or “will,” was to put him into slavery. However, all along the Sovereign God meant this event for good. This verse is not implying that God had fixed this horrific situation and turned it into a happy ending, but that he intended it for good all along. Both God and man had their intentions. Yet despite the intentions to harm, God ordained all the sufferings of Joseph through the means of the evil intent of his brothers, for the overall good of saving many lives.

Acts 2:23 "This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross."
Acts 4:27-28 "Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen."

Here is the linchpin of Compatibalism. This passage clearly teaches that God ordained the death of Christ. There is no dispute about this, but it goes further. Even the people who committed the act were predetermined to do it! The crucifixion is something that could not have NOT happened! It is the most important part of redemptive history. However, Herod and Pilate were raised up for this very event. They did “what [God’s] power and will decided beforehand should happen.” Now, are they not responsible for this action simply because God sovereignty ordained this event? Absolutely not! This was the most sinful act in human history. Killing the God of the universe is the most horrendous of sinful acts. They are most certainly responsible, even in light of God’s sovereignty.

Now, some might say, as Paul knew many would, “How does he still find fault, for who can resist his will?” (Ro 9:19). This obviously is the starting point of the whole election debate, but it goes deeper. Because the question here is whether or not we are responsible, despite our lack of a moral “free will.” Romans 9:17 says, “For the scripture says to Pharaoh: I raised you up for this reason, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Even though Pharaoh was wicked and did terrible things against Israel, God used it to proclaim his glory. In fact, God was the one who raised Pharaoh up in the first place! The sole purpose being the proclamation of his might and strength.

So then, how are we to truly understand divine providence and human freedom? The answer is that we will never fully understand how to the two work together. However, the Bible teaches both. The Bible teaches that God is absolutely sovereign, and that man is totally responsible for his actions. Therefore, since the Bible teaches both, both are true. Although the nuances will never be fully grasped, somehow God ordains the actions and choices of men in such a way that they willingly and actually choose to do those things, and remain entirely responsible for those choices.

As far as exercising “free will” in order to believe in God, we cannot change our depraved state unless God does something first. An analogy of how free will and God’s sovereignty work together in salvation would be if someone decided they were going to ride their bike to work one morning. Unless the conditions were altered, they would actualize their desire to ride their bike to work. But if it were raining outside, they would choose not to ride their bike but instead they would choose to drive their car. This person was not forced to drive their car, but chose to because of the added external factor. In this same way we are not forced into faith, but freely choose salvation because of the added factor of God’s drawing and the Spirit’s regeneration of our lives. The man who decides to ride his bike to work will willingly choose to ride his car when he realizes that it is raining. The realization that it is raining is analogous to realizing that we need a savior. Of course we will then freely choose God. However, we will not choose the contrary, just as the bike rider will not ride his bike to work when it is pouring rain outside. This is sometimes referred to as “effectual calling” in Calvinistic circles. It is a calling that breeds a saving response every time. This idea is obviously coupled with “Irresistible Grace.” Since salvation is from God, and is initiated by God, man cannot frustrate the work of God. John 6 is the best example of this. Through the drawing of the Father (John 6:44), we are awakened to the beauty of the Gospel and become able to receive it. This idea is seen clearly through Jesus’ words when he said that not only would all whom the Father gives to him come (indicating effectual grace), but that those who come would also never be driven out (John 6:37). Therefore God’s effectual calling cannot be resisted. This is not because God over powers us, but because when we are drawn by him (John 6:44), we are able to choose and will choose.