Hay-on-wye, Wales (photo from trekearth.com)
I was listening to a well-known Christian teacher on-line, that I respect and have learned from over the years. I reason this teacher is an incompatibilist, whereas I am a compatibilist, due to my research concerning the problem of evil.
Gregory A. Boyd explains that incompatibilism assumes since human beings are free, their wills and resulting actions are not, in any way, determined by any outside force. Boyd (2001: 52). John Sanders writes that in incompatibilism it is believed genetic or environmental factors are not ignored in the process of human actions, but it is thought that a human being could always have done otherwise in any given situation. Sanders (1998: 221).
Libertarian free will is often understood as a form of indeterminism. The concept is that a person is able to perform another action in the place of one that has been committed. This action cannot be predetermined by any circumstance or desire. Norman Geisler explains that indeterminism is defined as the idea that there are no antecedent (preceding conditions) or simultaneous (at the same time) causes of human actions. All human actions are free if a person could have done otherwise. Geisler (1996: 429). Indeterminism is also equated with incompatibilism which states that God, or any other being, cannot cause by force or coercion any human action, nor can any action be simultaneously willed by God or any other being, for the human action to remain significantly free.
Compatibilism, would agree with incompatibilism that God or any other being cannot cause by force or coercion any significantly free human action, but contrary to incompatibilism thinks that God or an outside force can simultaneously determine/will significantly free human actions. Feinberg (1994: 60).
This teacher uses Acts 17: 27 where Paul addresses the Athenians and states within the New American Standard Bible:
That they should seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find him, though He is not far from each of us.
The teacher implied that by God’s grace and with incompatibilist libertarian free will, the Athenians could have believed, or not, in the Biblical God and therefore Christ, without being simultaneously determined/influenced by God to do so. But, in contrast, I reason that due to Paul’s comments in Romans 3 that this would not work. Instead the Greeks could know about God through natural revelation, but could not believe in the Biblical God and Christ, in the sense of saving faith, unless regenerated by God’s choice alone through the use of compatibilism. God’s choice would lead to influence over persons to freely believe. Roman 3:10 states that none are righteous; in 3:11 none understand and seek God. In 3:12 all have turned aside, and no one does good. In 3:23 all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
I thought I would look at my Acts commentary by Calvin. He explains that it was the human duty to seek God, and that God will meet human beings and demonstrated clear signs of his existence in creation. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). Calvin states that those who do not exert themselves to seek after God are not worthy to live on this earth. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). Through the creation of the world God has shown his glory. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302).
Calvin raises the important issue if whether this knowledge concerning God from nature allows persons such as the Athenians to gain true and clear knowledge about God by this nature. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). Calvin explains that persons choose not to pay attention to God, but that true knowledge about God is a special gift, which comes by faith and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Calvin (1552)(1995: 302). This I reason requires compatibilism as God alone chooses to regenerate an individual and then influences, moulds and illuminates a person. Calvin writes that our own human minds cannot penetrate this far if guided by human nature alone, Calvin (1552)(1995: 302), and I reason that this eliminates libertarian, incompatibilist free will as an option.
Calvin notes that in this Acts passage, Paul is not dealing with the human ability to believe in saving faith, but is only showing that persons have no excuse when God is not perceived, and Calvin mentions Romans 1:20, which concerns God revealing himself in creation. (1552)(1995: 302-303). E.H. Trenchard notes that in Acts 17: 29-31, Paul is pointing out that a true knowledge of God would eliminate the need for man-made idols. Trenchard (1986: 1298).
I am therefore still convinced, as with my MPhil and PhD dissertations that Paul and Calvin both support concepts of compatibilist and not libertarian, incompatibilist free will in regard to human salvation. The teacher I listened to on-line, in my opinion is correct to assert that the Athenians had the option to seek God through natural revelation. This would point towards monotheism and not Greek gods, but in light of Paul’s teaching in Romans and overall New Testament teaching, it should not be assumed that the Athenians were not Christians based on the fact primarily that they did not choose to be. God still needed to regenerate them as their corrupt nature and resulting sinful choices would not allow these persons in themselves to know Christ by simply intellectually accepting the gospel they previously rejected. A human being will not believe in God and Christ simply by being given the intellectual option by God in grace, to do so.
BOYD, GREGORY A. (2001) Satan and the Problem of Evil, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books.
FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1996) ‘Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
SANDERS, JOHN (1998) The God Who Risks, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
TRENCHARD, E.H. (1986) ‘Genesis’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
