Sunday, September 11, 2011

God's Providence Sermon Notes 9/11/11

Sermon Title: Why Does God Permit What He Prohibits?
Sermon Text: Genesis 20:1-18
Scripture Reading: Confessions and Catechisms

Resources Mentioned in the Sermon:


The Belgic Confession

The oldest of the doctrinal standards of the Christian Reformed Church is the Confession of Faith, popularly known as the Belgic Confession, following the seventeenth-century Latin designation "Confessio Belgica." "Belgica" referred to the whole of the Netherlands, both north and south, which today is divided into the Netherlands and Belgium. The confession's chief author was Guido de Bräs, a preacher of the Reformed churches of the Netherlands, who died a martyr to the faith in the year 1567.

During the sixteenth century, the churches in this country were exposed to the most terrible persecution by the Roman Catholic government. To protest against this cruel oppression, and to prove to the persecutors that the adherents of the Reformed faith were not rebels, as was laid to their charge, but law-abiding citizens who professed the true Christian doctrine according to the Holy Scriptures, de Bräs prepared this confession in the year 1561. In the following year a copy was sent to King Philip II, together with an address in which the petitioners declared that they were ready to obey the government in all lawful things, but that they would "offer their backs to stripes, their tongues to knives, their mouths to gags, and their whole bodies to the fire," rather than deny the truth expressed in this confession. Although the immediate purpose of securing freedom from persecution was not attained, and de Bräs himself fell as one of the many thousands who sealed their faith with their lives, his work has endured and will continue to endure. In its composition the author availed himself to some extent of a confession of the Reformed churches in France, written chiefly by John Calvin, published two years earlier.

The work of de Bräs, however, is not a mere revision of Calvin's work, but an independent composition. In 1566 the text of this confession was revised at a synod held at Antwerp. In the Netherlands it was at once gladly received by the churches, and it was adopted by national synods held during the last three decades of the sixteenth century. The text, not the contents, was revised again at the Synod of Dort in 1618-19 and adopted as one of the doctrinal standards to which all office bearers in the Reformed churches were required to subscribe. The confession stands as one of the best symbolical statements of Reformed doctrine. The translation presented here is based on the French text of 1619.

Article 13: The Doctrine of God's Providence
We believe that this good God, after he created all things, did not abandon them to chance or fortune but leads and governs them according to his holy will, in such a way that nothing happens in this world without his orderly arrangement.
Yet God is not the author of, nor can he be charged with, the sin that occurs. For his power and goodness are so great and incomprehensible that he arranges and does his work very well and justly even when the devils and wicked men act unjustly.
We do not wish to inquire with undue curiosity into what he does that surpasses human understanding and is beyond our ability to comprehend. But in all humility and reverence we adore the just judgments of God, which are hidden from us, being content to be Christ's disciples, so as to learn only what he shows us in his Word, without going beyond those limits.
This doctrine gives us unspeakable comfort since it teaches us that nothing can happen to us by chance but only by the arrangement of our gracious heavenly Father. He watches over us with fatherly care, keeping all creatures under his control, so that not one of the hairs on our heads (for they are all numbered) nor even a little bird can fall to the ground without the will of our Father.
In this thought we rest, knowing that he holds in check the devils and all our enemies, who cannot hurt us without his permission and will.
For that reason we reject the damnable error of the Epicureans, who say that God involves himself in nothing and leaves everything to chance.
The Heidelberg Catechism

The Heidelberg Catechism is a Protestant confessional document taking the form of a series of questions and answers, for use in teaching Reformed Christian doctrine. One of the aims of the catechism was to counteract the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, and so it based each of its statements on the text of the Bible.
Question 27. What dost thou mean by the providence of God?
Answer. The almighty and everywhere present power of God; [a] whereby, as it were by his hand, he [b] upholds and governs heaven, earth, and all creatures; so that herbs and grass, rain [c] and drought, fruitful [d] and barren years, meat and drink, [e] health and sickness, [f] riches and poverty, yea, and all things [g] come, not by chance, but by his fatherly hand.
Question 28. What advantage is it to us to know that God has created, and by his providence doth still uphold all things?
Answer. That we may be patient in adversity [h]; thankful [i] in prosperity; and that in all things, which may hereafter befall us, we place our firm [j] trust in our faithful God and Father, that nothing shall [k] separate us from his love; since all creatures are so in his hand, that without his will they [l] cannot so much as move.

Concerning our text (Genesis 20) - A few questions about God’s sovereignty:
  • If God restrained Abimelek from sin, why doesn’t he always with all people?
  • If God could immediately open the womb of those in Abimelek’s house (16:2; 20:18) – why not sooner with Sarah?

Why do you ask? We must be able, as much as we are able, to intelligently answer hard questions about God and the Scriptures. Therefore, the questions from Genesis 20 are a sample of the many questions asked loudly and proudly by atheists, Eastern religions, postmodernists, skeptics, agnostics. I would submit that these questions are also asked and suppressed quietly by doubting, hurting, and suffering Christians.
You are on your campus, at your workplace, or family event suggesting that God is good, loving, and in control yet how do I reconcile that with world wars, 9/11, abortion, child abuse, natural disasters, suffering, mental and physical defects, etc.? Why doesn’t God save all people? Why is there a hell?

From the Tim Keller Interview referenced above:
  • If you assume the Gospel is true, than the answer to the question cannot be a lack of love or indifference (God suffered and died voluntarily).
  • If you assume the Gospel is not true, then how do you reconcile natural selection and your outrage against injustice and suffering?
  • Just because there is not a full answer doesn’t mean a full answer ceases to exist.

Illustrate with Keller’s “no see em”.

Historical examples – men lived in darkness for years because they didn’t have answers on how to create light. It would be ridiculous to conclude that the absence of the invention (light bulb) equaled the absence of the possibility.

Biblical examples – Noah; Abraham; God being Just and the Justifier

Personal examples – your parents might have gotten progressively wiser with age. Are they progressively getting wiser or is your perspective changing when you are presented with more experience and information??

My best attempt to answer this question: You will be faced with the choice to either reject this doctrine or plead the limitations of your mind and embrace the mystery (Piper).

The material below was partially taken from John Piper’s article: Are There Two Wills In God?

What seems to paradoxical passages is not a sign of divine schizophrenia or exegetical confusion. Therefore as a hearty believer in unconditional, individual election I rejoice to affirm that God does not delight in the perishing of the unrepentant, and that he has compassion on all people. My aim is to show that this is not double talk. The fact that God expresses His will in one way, yet sees to it another outcome comes to pass is inescapable in the Scriptures. Edwards: “Fact obliges us to get over it.” Theologians throughout the history of the Church have agreed that there is a mystery in examining what God would like to see happen and what he actually does will to happen.

Vital Preface

The first thing to affirm in view of all these texts is that God does not sin. "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of Hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory." (Isaiah 6:3). "God cannot be tempted by evil and he himself does not tempt anyone" (James 1:13). In ordering all things, including sinful acts, God is not sinning. As for instance, it might be an evil thing to crucify Christ, but yet it was a good thing that the crucifying of Christ came to pass."
Illustrations of Two Wills in God: Not mere permission, but Divine will

The Death of Christ

The most compelling example of God's willing for sin to come to pass while at the same time disapproving the sin is his willing the death of his perfect, divine Son. The betrayal of Jesus by Judas was a morally evil act inspired immediately by Satan (Luke 22:3). Yet in Acts 2:23 Luke says, "This Jesus [was] delivered up according to the definite plan (boule) and foreknowledge of God." The betrayal was sin, and it involved the instrumentality of Satan; but it was part of God's ordained plan. That is, there is a sense in which God willed the delivering up of his Son, even though the act was sin.

Moreover Herod's contempt for Jesus (Luke 23:11) and Pilate's spineless expediency (Luke 23:24) and the Jews' "Crucify! Crucify him!" (Luke 23:21) and the Gentile soldiers' mockery (Luke 23:36) were also sinful attitudes and deeds. Yet in Acts 4:27-28 Luke expresses his understanding of the sovereignty of God in these acts by recording the prayer of the Jerusalem saints: “Truly in this city there were gathered together against thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel to do whatever thy hand and thy plan (boule) had predestined to take place.”

The appalling death of Christ was the will and work of God the Father. Isaiah wrote, "We esteemed him stricken, smitten by God . . . It was the will of the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief’(Isaiah 53). Sometimes God makes use of instruments for good to His people, who designed nothing but evil and mischief to them. Thus Joseph's brethren were instrumental to his advancement in that very thing in which they designed his ruin (Gen. 50:20). —John Flavel

The Hardening Work of God

Another evidence to demonstrate God's willing a state of affairs in one sense that he disapproves in another sense is the testimony of Scripture that God wills to harden some men's hearts so that they become obstinate in sinful behavior which God disapproves. The most well-known example is the hardening of Pharaoh's heart. In Exodus 8:1 the Lord says to Moses, "Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, 'Thus says the LORD, "Let my people go, that they may serve."'" In other words God's command, that is, his will, is that Pharaoh let the Israelites go. Nevertheless from the start he also willed that Pharaoh not let the Israelites go. In Exodus 4:21 God says to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in your hand; but I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go."

The good thing that God commands he prevents. And the thing he brings about involves sin. This illustrates why theologians talk about the "will of command" ("Let my people go!") and the "will of decree" ("God hardened Pharaoh's heart"). The Exodus is not a unique instance of God's acting in this way. When the people of Israel reached the land of Sihon the King of Heshbon, Moses sent messengers "with words of peace saying, Let me pass through your land; I will travel only on the highway" (Deuteronomy 2:26-27). Even though this request should have lead Sihon to treat the people of God with respect, as God willed for his people to be blessed rather than attacked, nevertheless "Sihon the King of Heshbon would not let us pass by him; for the LORD your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that he might give him into your hand, as at this day" (Deuteronomy 2:30).

God's Right to Restrain Evil and His Will Not To

Another line of Biblical evidence that God sometimes wills to bring about what he disapproves is His choosing to use or not to use his right to restrain evil in the human heart.Proverbs 21:1 says, "The king's heart is like channels of water in the hands of the Lord; he turns it wherever he wishes."

Contrast Genesis 20 with Romans 1:24-28. Three times in Romans 1:24-28 Paul says that God hands people over (paredoken) to sink further into corruption. Verse 24: "God handed them over to the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves." Verse 26: "God handed them over to dishonorable passions." Verse 28: "And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to a base mind and to improper conduct." God has the right and the power to restrain this evil the way he did for Abimelech. But he did not will to do that.

What is apparent here is that God has the right and the power to restrain the sins of secular rulers. When he does, it is his will to do it. And when he does not, it is his will not to. Which is to say that sometimes God wills that their sins be restrained and sometimes he wills that they increase more than if he restrained them.

Does God Delight in the Punishment of the Wicked?

We are faced with the inescapable biblical fact that in some sense God does not delight in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 18:23), and in some sense he does (Deuteronomy 28:63; 1 Samuel 2:25).

How Extensive Is the Sovereign Will of God?

There are passages that ascribe to God the final control over all calamities and disasters wrought by nature or by man. Amos 3:6, "Does evil befall a city, unless the LORD has done it? Isaiah 45:7, "I am the LORD, and there is no other. I form light and create darkness, I make peace and create woe, and I am the LORD, who does all these things." Lamentations 3:37-38, "Who has commanded and it came to pass, unless the Lord has ordained it? Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and evil come?" Noteworthy in these Texts is that the calamities in view involve human hostilities and cruelties that God would disapprove of even as he wills that they be.

On taking leave of the saints in Ephesus he said, "I will return to you if God wills," (Acts 18:21). To the Corinthians he wrote, "I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills" (1 Corinthians 4:19). And again, "I do not want to see you now just in passing; I hope to spend some time with you, if the Lord permits" (1 Corinthians 16:7).

This sense of living in the hands of God, right down to the details of life was not new for the early Christians. They knew it already from the whole history of Israel, but especially from their wisdom literature. "The plans of the mind belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the Lord" (Proverbs 16:1). "A man's mind plans his way, but the LORD directs his steps" (Proverbs 16:9). "Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the LORD that will be established" (Proverbs 19:21). "The lot is cast into the lap, but the decision is wholly from the LORD" (Proverbs 16:33). "I know, O LORD, that the way of man is not in himself, that it is not in man who walks to direct his steps" (Jeremiah 10:23). Jesus had no quarrel with this sense of living in the hand of God. If anything, he intensified the idea with words like Matthew 10:29, "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father."

Does It Make Sense? This cannot be a Calvinistic thought…

Regarding Salvation: In other words both Calvinists and Arminians affirm two wills in God when they ponder deeply over 1 Timothy 2:4. Both can say that God wills for all to be saved. All are not saved. But then when queried why all are not saved both Calvinist and Arminian answer that God is committed to something even more valuable than saving all.

The difference between Calvinists and Arminians lies not in whether there are two wills in God, but in what they say this higher commitment is. What does God will more than saving all? The answer given by Arminians is that human self-determination or free will and the possible resulting love relationship with God are more valuable than saving all people by sovereign, efficacious grace. The answer given by Calvinists is that the greater value is the manifestation of the full range of God's glory in wrath and mercy (Romans 9:22-23) and the humbling of man so that he enjoys giving all credit to God for his salvation (1 Corinthians 1:29).

The Narrow and Wide Lenses

EDWARDS: So God, though he hates a thing as it is simply, may incline to it with reference to the universality of things. Though he hates sin in itself, yet he may will to permit it, for the greater promotion of holiness in this universality, including all things, and at all times. So, though he has no inclination to a creature's misery, considered absolutely, yet he may will it, for the greater promotion of happiness in this universality (Edwards).

PIPER: Putting it in my own words (John Piper), Edwards said that the infinite complexity of the divine mind is such that God has the capacity to look at the world through two lenses. He can look through a narrow lens or through a wide-angle lens. When God looks at a painful or wicked event through his narrow lens, he sees the tragedy or the sin for what it is in itself and he is angered and grieved. "I do not delight in the death of anyone, says the Lord God" (Ezekiel 18:32). But when God looks at a painful or wicked event through his wide-angle lens, he sees the tragedy or the sin in relation to everything leading up to it and everything flowing out from it. He sees it in all the connections and effects that form a pattern or mosaic stretching into eternity. This mosaic, with all its (good and evil) parts he does delight in (Psalm 115:3).

ME: ILLUSTRATION - I can say to Hannah “I desire that you never feel pain by my hand” and sincerely will that and mean that. Then, a moment later, I must discipline her. In her tears she reminds me of my word. Because she lives life with one “Lens” she cannot understand how I can will two things. She does not understand how I can delight in discipline and how I can grieve over discipline. I view her through both lenses; she views me through one. My emotions and thoughts are far too complex for her. My wisdom far exceeds hers. All I can do is ask her to trust me.

God's emotional life is infinitely complex beyond our ability to fully comprehend. For example, who can comprehend that the Lord hears in one moment of time the prayers of ten million Christians around the world, and sympathizes with each one personally and individually like a caring Father (as Hebrews 4:15 says he will), even though among those ten million prayers some are broken-hearted and some are bursting with joy? How can God weep with those who weep and rejoice with those who rejoice when they are both coming to him at the same time—in fact are always coming to him with no break at all?

Or who can comprehend that God is angry at the sin of the world every day (Psalm 7:11), and yet every day, every moment, he is rejoicing with tremendous joy because somewhere in the world a sinner is repenting (Luke 15:7,10,23)? Who can comprehend that God continually burns with hot anger at the rebellion of the wicked, grieves over the unholy speech of his people (Ephesians 4:29-30), yet takes pleasure in them daily (Psalm 149:4), and ceaselessly makes merry over penitent prodigals who come home?

Who of us could say what complex of emotions is not possible for God? All we have to go on here is what he has chosen to tell us in the Bible. And what he has told us is that there is a sense in which he does not experience pleasure in the judgment of the wicked, and there is a sense in which he does. In his great and mysterious heart there are kinds of longings and desires that are real— they tell us something true about His character. Yet not all of these longings govern God's actions (I desire that no man should perish). He is governed by the depth of his wisdom expressed through a plan that no ordinary human deliberation would ever conceive (Romans 11:33-36; 1 Corinthians 2:9).

How can we hate what is evil if God has ordained it to happen?

You hate what God wills to happen if He wills that you hate what He wills to happen. I hate that September 11 happened. God allowed September 11. I hate it, give God credit for it, and don’t hate God because God commands me to and because I trust God. It might help to put these categories in place. I operate—because the Bible leads me to—with two understandings of the will of God: 1) the moral will of God, which is revealed in Scripture, and 2) the sovereign will of God, which is everything that comes to pass.

Find comfort in perspective: There is a great difference between lying on the ground with your face in the sand, walking along the beach, hang gliding, being in an airplane, and standing on the moon. 

When you were 15, you remember things being irreparable, tragic, unable to recover from, earth shattering - but now you look back on those things and laugh at it.

If God would have come to Job and said...in 1000's of year from now you will be famous...everybody will talk about your story!!! Job would have calculated that the beauty of his suffering was worth it economically. However, Satan's charge was "this man only serves you because you cater to him." Job hung on for dear life with what he knew in spite of what he didn't know.
If I had the power of God, I would change many things. If I had the wisdom of God, I would not change a thing (John Sale).
Providence is often confusing because men fail to realize it was meant to be read backwards. – Puritan John Flavel.
How then shall we live?

How Do I Live? Pastor Brian’s Illustration of Application: What should our response be? Give examples of a football team or a baseball team – there is so much going on that we cannot control, yet we have an assignment – to do the revealed will of God. What if the right guard doesn’t block? What if the referee manning the clock messes up? What if we run out of time-outs? What if the referee or umpire makes a bad call? When you are ready to throw you are not thinking “what if the catcher misses the tag?” What if I trip? What if the quarterbacks timing is off? What if there is a gust of wind? What if the pitcher cheats and rubs oil on the ball? What if the bat is corked? What if a bird flies across the field and hits the ball? We know the rules and we know the play that has been called; we know our assignment – do what you know and stop worrying about the rest. Deuteronomy 29:29

How Do I Think?

Martyn Lloyd-Jones: 'Take no thought for the morrow,' means 'Do not be guilty of anxious thoughts about the morrow'. It does not mean that you do not take any thought at all, otherwise the farmer would not plow and harrow and sow. He is looking to the future, but he does not spend the whole of his time wondering and worrying about the end results of his work. No, he takes reasonable thought and then he leaves it.

Here again the whole question is where to draw the line. Thinking is right up to a point, but if you go beyond that point it becomes worry and anxiety and it paralyzes and cripples. In other words, although it is very right to think about the future, it is very wrong to be controlled by it. 

The difficulty with people who are prey to these fears is that they are controlled by the future or the past, they are dominated by thoughts of it, and there they are wringing their hands, doing nothing, depressed by fears about it. In fact, they are completely governed and mastered by the unknown future or unresolved past, and that is always wrong. To take thought is right, but to be controlled by the future is all wrong. –italics are my additions to the quote (Brian Shepherd)

How to I talk?

We should eliminate: luck, thank goodness, chance, fortunate, and fate from our vocabularies.

Do I Pray?
Providence so orders the case, that faith and prayer come between our wants and supplies, and the goodness of God may be the more magnified in our eyes thereby.—John Flavel
Closing

Where is the bottom line? God is sovereign. I am responsible and accountable. Trust and obey, for there is no other way to be happy in Jesus than to trust and obey. So, it is that through Abraham’s life we see both realities - that God can and will and does step in to insure that his purposes and promises are fulfilled in and through and among his people. At the same time, we see the undeniable fact that God’s people are not protected from the consequences of their actions - even when they are hard, and even when they endure for a considerable amount of time.
God moves in a mysterious way
 His wonders to perform;
He plants His footsteps in the sea
 And rides upon the storm.
Deep in unfathomable mines
 Of never failing skill

He treasures up His bright designs 
And works His sovereign will.
Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take;
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy and shall break 
In blessings on your head.
Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,
But trust Him for His grace;

Behind a frowning providence 
He hides a smiling face.
His purposes will ripen fast,
Unfolding every hour;

The bud may have a bitter taste,
But sweet will be the flower.
Blind unbelief is sure to err
 And scan His work in vain;

God is His own interpreter,
And He will make it plain.
by William Cowper

“Almighty God, who seest that we have no power of ourselves to help ourselves. Keep us both outwardly in our bodies, and inwardly in our souls, that we may be defended from all adversities which may happen to the body, and from all evil thoughts which may assault and hurt the soul, through Jesus Christ our Lord” (sixth-century prayer of saint Gregory “The Book of Common Prayer”).
Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)