Reasons God Does Not Control Everything

Image by jbelluch via Flickr

Image by jbelluch via Flickr

First, the belief that God is all-powerful does not mean that God exercises all power. It only means that God is the ultimate source of all power. Fallen people may value the ability to control others and project this attribute onto God (Matthew 20:25-28). But the cross breaks all of our fallen assumptions about what God must be like. The cross reveals and the rest of Scripture teaches that God empowers others to act on their own, against his own wishes if they so choose. The cross reveals that God is so sovereign he doesn’t need to ensure he will always get his own way. There is, therefore, no reason to follow Augustine and others in maintaining that “the will of the omnipotent is always undefeated,” if this is taken to mean that each event in history reveals God’s omnipotent will. Earthly lords may aspire to an all-controlling form of lordship, but not the King of all kings and the Lord of all lords (1 Tim 6:15; Rev 17:14; Mk 10:42-45).

Second, there is no reason to accept the conclusion of certain Hellenistic philosophers, repeated in much of the church’s theological tradition, that a perfect being must be absolutely unchanging and impervious to outside influences. True, God is unchanging in terms of his perfect character (E.g. Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 1:13; James 1:17). But as the incarnation and crucifixion reveal, because God’s loving character is perfect, he can and does change in response to changing situations. Plato and many following him mistakenly thought that something can change only for the better or the worse. But in point of fact, people can change simply as an expression of who they are. Indeed, if their character is virtuous, they must be willing and able to change.

Possessing the ability to change is not a defect but a virtue. The inability to change is a defect. To illustrate, if a joyful person with a compassionate character enters a room in which a friend is grieving, he or she will immediately respond as a friend by adjusting his or her demeanor. People change in their response to others precisely because they are unchanging in their compassionate character. We would consider them cold or calloused if they didn’t. The change doesn’t make them better or worse. It just expresses the virtuous, unchanging character they possess.

A God who was never affected by anything outside of himself could not be perfectly loving and compassionate. If we believe God is unchanging in his perfect love, we must believe he perfectly changes in response to the changing situations of the people he loves. This is precisely what the incarnation and cross reveal about God. God is as perfect in his ability and willingness to change as he is in his unchanging character.

Similarly, there is no reason to conclude that a perfect being wouldn’t experience a “before” and “after.” There is nothing innately virtuous about being locked into an “eternal now.” To the contrary, it’s difficult to conceive of the personal, interacting, responsive God we find in the Bible limited in this fashion. And certainly, if all our thinking about God revolves around the person of Jesus Christ, the last thing we’d conclude about God is that he exists in an unchanging “eternal now.” Jesus Christ is God with us, a human in time who responds to our desperate fallen condition. As such, he incarnates God’s beautiful responsiveness and changeability we see throughout Scripture.

Adapted from Is God to Blame?, pages 5759

Category:
Tags: , , ,

Related Reading

How People Misunderstand Open Theism

Open theism holds that, because agents are free, the future includes possibilities (what agents may and may not choose to do). Since God’s knowledge is perfect, open theists hold that God knows the future partly as a realm of possibilities. This view contrasts with classical theism that has usually held that God knows the future exclusively as a domain…

How do you respond to Numbers 23:19?

The Lord tells Balak through Balaam “God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal, that he should change his mind.” This verse (as well as 1 Sam. 15:29, which quotes it) is often cited in refutation of the claim that God genuinely changes his mind. However, since Scripture explicitly states…

Reflections on the Influence, and Damage, of Plato’s Timaeus 28a

The Timaeus is Plato’s account of the creation of the world. Ancient philosophers were divided as to whether Plato meant the work to be taken literally or mythically, as are modern scholars. The work was arguably the single most cited work by early church fathers. And the text I want to reflect on (28a) is…

Topics:

Reflecting on Open2013

T. C. Moore has posted some of his reflections from the Open Theism conference. T. C. was one of several people who pulled this conference together and he did a great job. He’s also incredibly smart and very active in the open view community. Also, he’s a young church planter in Boston and I’m sure he’s…

Why a “Christocentric” View of God is Inadequate: God’s Self-Portrait, Part 5

I’m currently working through a series of blogs that will flesh out the theology of the ReKnew Manifesto, and I’m starting with our picture of God, since it is the foundation of everything else. So far I’ve established that Jesus is the one true portrait of God (See: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4).…

Is God Good?

Andrew Stawarz via Compfight This reflection by David D. Flowers seemed like a good addition to Greg’s recent blogs on free will. Here David talks about the problem of evil and how it is that we can call God “good” in light of a world full of evil. He even quotes Greg extensively. From the…