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 Judges 9:23?
“…God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the lords of Schechem; and the lords of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech.” (cf. 1 Sam. 16:14; 1 Kings 22:19–23).
Some compatibilists cite this passage to support the view that evil spirits always carry out the Lord’s will (though they contend that God is good for willing it and the spirits are evil for carrying it out). I argue that this conception is unintelligible and the interpretation of this passage that supports it is unnecessary.
We should first note that this passage does not imply that evil spirits always carry out the Lord’s will. We must be careful not to read universal implications into specific historical narratives.
Second, the word “evil” in this passage (ra’) can simply mean “troubling” or “disastrous.” It does not have to be interpreted as referring to a morally evil spirit. Hence this passage may simply mean that as an act of judgment God sent a spirit whose job it was to trouble or bring disaster to Abimelech.
Third, even if we conclude that the spirit in this verse was morally evil, the verse may be interpreted as teaching that as an act of judgment God allowed the spirit to do what it wanted to do to Abimelech (see How do you respond to Exodus 21:12–13?). It doesn’t warrant the conclusion that evil spirits always carry out God’s sovereign plan.
If this were the case, we’d have to accept that God is in conflict with himself when Jesus rebukes demons. Jesus would be carrying out the Father’s will in casting out demons who are allegedly present in a person’s life because God willed it. Yet Jesus said that he couldn’t be casting out demons by Satan, the prince of demons, because a kingdom can’t be divided against itself (Matt. 12:25–38). The same logic forces the conclusion that Jesus couldn’t cast out demons by the power of God if the demons were themselves present by the will of God. God’s kingdom, like Satan’s kingdom, can’t be divided against itself.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Q&A, Responding to Calvinism
Topics: Defending the Open View, Interpreting Violent Pictures and Troubling Behaviors
Verse: Judges 9
Related Reading
How do you respond to Matthew 20:17–19?
“The Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death; then they will hand him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified, and on the third day he will be raised.” God knew perfectly the hearts of all the Jewish…
What is the significance of Jonah 1:2; 3:2, 4–10; 4:2?
God “changed his mind” (3:10) about the destruction he planned to carry out on Nineveh. If all events in history are eternally settled and known by God as such, his word to Jonah that he planned to destroy Nineveh in forty days was insincere as was his inspired testimony that he in fact changed his…
Seven Lies
hobvias sudoneighm via Compfight Stephen Mattson has contributed for Relevant Magazine, Sojourners (Sojo.net) Redletterchristians.org, and studied Youth Ministry at the Moody Bible Institute. He is now on staff at the University of Northwestern St. Paul, Minn. Follow him on Twitter @mikta. Stephen recently published an article in Sojourners titled Seven Lies About Christianity — Which Christians Believe that we really…
How do you respond to Ruth 1:13?
Because her husband and two sons had died, Naomi says to her two daughter-in-laws (Ruth and Orpah), “[I]t has been far more bitter for me than for you, because the hand of the Lord has turned against me” (1:13, cf. vs. 20). Some compatibilists cite this passage to support the conclusion that all misfortune is…
Do you believe God is pure actuality?
The basis of the classical view of God as pure actuality (actus purus) is the Aristotelian notion that potentiality is always potential for change and that something changes only because is lacks something else. So, a perfect being who lacks nothing must be devoid of potentiality, which means it must be pure actuality. I think…
In a democracy, don’t Christians have a responsibility to participate in politics?
Question: You’ve argued that Christians shouldn’t try to gain power in government on the grounds that Jesus didn’t try to gain power in the political system of his day. But his government didn’t allow for such power. Caesar and Pilate weren’t elected by anyone. Our government allows for this. So don’t we have a responsibility…