We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
How do you respond to 2 Samuel 17:14–15?
“Absalom and all the men of Israel said, ‘The counsel of Hushai the Archite is better than the counsel of Ahithophel.’ For the Lord had ordained to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, so that the Lord might bring ruin on Absalom.”
This passage is sometimes cited to support the view that God ordains all things, including how people respond to other people’s advice. I submit that this conclusion goes beyond what the passage warrants. In response to David’s prayer, and in line with his sovereign design to secure the throne of David, God had determined to “turn the counsel of Ahithophel into foolishness” (1 Sam. 15:31) and thereby bring judgment upon Absalom, King David’s wicked son.
The passage does not suggest that God had ordained Absalom’s foolishness from before creation. What God does in this passage he does in response to what humans do. Absalom’s wickedness was not part of God’s sovereign plan. This was entirely Absalom’s own doing. But because Absalom chooses this for himself, God is able to ensure that his wicked schemes have a disastrous outcome (2 Sam. 18:9–15, cf. Prov. 16:9).
Category: Q&A
Tags: Q&A, Responding to Calvinism
Topics: Providence, Predestination and Free Will
Verse: 2 Samuel 17
Related Reading
Is it true you’re an “Open Theist” and that you don’t think God knows the future perfectly?
I am an “Open Theist” – though I honestly don’t care for the label, because as I’ll show, the uniqueness of this view isn’t in what it says about God but in what it says about the nature of reality. (I think it would be better to call us something like “Open Futurists.”) In any…
How do you respond to Romans 11:36?
“For from him [God] and through him and to him are all things.” Calvinists sometimes cite this doxology as evidence that Paul believed that every single event in world history was from, through and for God. In light of the fact that the verses leading up to this doxology address God’s genuine frustration with Israel’s…
What is the significance of Numbers 16:20–35?
After Israel’s sin under the leadership of Korah, the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Separate yourselves from this congregation, so that I may consume them in a moment” (vs. 21). Moses and Aaron pleaded with the Lord to only judge those who were most guilty. In response, the Lord modifies his judgment and gives…
What do you think of the “Penal Substitution” view of the atonement?
If asked what Jesus came to do and how he did it, most contemporary western Christians would automatically say something like, “Jesus took the punishment from God that I deserved.” This is what’s usually called “Penal Substitution” view of the atonement, for it emphasizes that Jesus was punished by God in our place. His sacrifice…
What is the “classical view of God” and what about it do you find objectionable?
The “classical view of God” refers to the view of God that has dominated Christian theology since the earliest Church fathers. According to this theology, God is completely “immutable.” This means that God’s being and experience never change in any respect. God is therefore pure actuality (actus purus), having no potentiality whatsoever, for potentiality is…
When does salvation happen?
Question: I grew up in a strict, fundamentalist community and our whole goal in life was to get people to pray “the sinners prayer.” Once they prayed this prayer, we believed, they were “saved.” But the vast majority of these people went on living like nothing happened. I’m now questioning if this is the right…