Making Jehovah into a Lovesick Girl

I say this is a great post that drags into view an aspect of Arminianism that is rarely talked about. Nice job!

It’s so ridiculous I have to laugh. I remember when I was first being converted, I read a tract that said something along the lines of your Arminianism scenario.

Sadly, this seems to be a standard view. God is sitting up in heaven, crying, with His Hands tied behind His back, just waiting and desperately hoping we’d give Him attention!

So much for sovereignty and omnipotence.

“It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name” Ezekial 36:22

Well, let me stick up for the Arminian position here. What I find funny about your post is that God describes himself in almost the same terms you use in your parody. Think Ezekiel 16. How exactly do you view this allegory from a Calvinist perspective?

The other immediate text that comes to my mind is Matthew 23:37 -

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!”

Obviously, God chooses us first, as the text indicates. But you have to admit this sounds a lot like “tender-hearted [lover and/or parent] hoping and praying that some will come to repentance, that some will come to know Him.” No?

Good point, Jamie. Think also of Ezekiel 23′s angry rant at the “wife” turned “prostitute” for that matter. (Though it IS rated R because of verse 20.

To be honest, I think Spurgeon’s take on it makes the most sense for me in all of this:

When a Calvinist says that all things happen according to the predestination of God, he speaks the truth, and I am willing to be called a Calvinist. But when an Arminian says that when a man sins, the sin is his own, and that if he continues in sin, and perishes, his eternal damnation will lie entirely at his own door, I believe that he speaks the truth, though I am not willing to be called an Arminian.

As so often, it’s a paradox and tension which needs to be upheld in order to not fall into reductionism.

Jamie said: What I find funny about your post is that God describes himself in almost the same terms you use in your parody. Think Ezekiel 16.

And that’s exactly my point. The verses that you mention were in fact in my mind as I wrote this post. The difference between a Calvinist and an Arminian is that is that a Calvinist does not take these verses by themselves, but balances them with the rest of Scripture and God’s clear statements about his sovereignty. It is when they are taken by themselves that you get this wishy washy image of a God that is so prevalent today.

Obviously, God chooses us first, as the text indicates. But you have to admit this sounds a lot like “tender-hearted [lover and/or parent] hoping and praying that some will come to repentance, that some will come to know Him.” No?

Agreed, it sounds quite a lot like it. It is the image that I object to, the implications of the thought, if you will. And I get what you are driving at as well. God is the only reason we know the concept of tender-hearted in the first place.

Ariel
Thanks for the read and the link. Conversational parodies are getting to be a feature here and I’m not sure whether that’s good or bad.

Anyway, again, thanks.

Samantha,
Thanks for the read and comments.

Sadly, this seems to be a standard view. God is sitting up in heaven, crying, with His Hands tied behind His back, just waiting and desperately hoping we’d give Him attention!

Exactly! It’s so disturbing and goes so much against Scripture for me to think of God in this way that I have trouble when I run into people who seriously believe in this type of God (god?).

Anyway, thanks again for stopping by!

I need to flesh my thoughts out on this issue, but I enjoyed the post.

I think one of the problems is our inability to distinguish among the persons of the Trinity. I agree with you regarding the sovereignity of God and that he knows the outcome of all things. I also think He, through Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection “chose” all of us. It is his Holy Spirit which prompts each of us to answer the question, “Whom will I follow?” Just because God the father may know how we’ll answer, doesn’t make the question itself superfluous.

Cheers.

one small correction in the last sentence:

It is an appropriate role for the evangelist to beg people to come to Christ, like a fireman begging someone to jump from a window – because their life depends on it and God’s glory deserves their eternal worship. We don’t know from our side of things who has been chosen and who hasn’t been chosen. How will the elect believe if no one goes forth and tells them as missionaries and evangelists?

I do NOT think that God is waiting by the phone. He’s waiting by the door.

“I stand at the door and knock”
Jesus Rev 3:20

And that’s exactly my point. The verses that you mention were in fact in my mind as I wrote this post. The difference between a Calvinist and an Arminian is that is that a Calvinist does not take these verses by themselves, but balances them with the rest of Scripture and God’s clear statements about his sovereignty.

So then…exactly how do you read Ezekiel 16, Matthew 23:37, and other such texts, if not to say that God courts us but does not compel us?

I’m curious about why it is so absurd that God might simply woo us, as He suggests in the above texts. Call it “tying his hands,” if you wish, but God compares himself to a lover, and that’s what lovers do…

Jamie said: “I’m curious about why it is so absurd that God might simply woo us, as He suggests in the above texts. Call it “tying his hands,” if you wish, but God compares himself to a lover, and that’s what lovers do…”

Yes, lovers do woo.

Something that bothers me though, is that we make God human. He’s not. He’s perfect. Before the foundation of the world, God was perfectly happy. He did not create the world out of loneliness or need…God does not “need” anything. I’m sure we can agree on that, can’t we?

So making God into this image of desperate man who has no control over whether or not HIS creatures will come to Him seems absurd. It demotes Him. It makes God look like a sappy, lovesick fool who cries and cries when we just won’t “pick up the phone.”

Like my favorite Pastor says (Paul Washer) (forgive me, this is a paraphrase) “Jesus Christ owns the door, if He wants to open it, He will!”

Sorry, if I had more time I’d address the scriptures you referenced.

Jamie,
Two things:
1. The context with which God speaks to us is not always fully explained each time he speaks. Think about Genesis 2:17 where God says But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. But when Adam and Eve eat the fruit, they do not physically die that day. And so when I read the Scripture about God wooing us, I don’t doubt that He woos us, but I need other Scripture to help me understand hoe that wooing works, and whose perspective it is from.
2. “Compel” is in my opinion the wrong word. Think about it this way: five “minutes” before God said “Let there be light”. did He know how things were going to end? Did he know when and how He would act and when and how man would act? Did he know what knowledge Adam would start with and what the first thing he would see when he opened his eyes? Did he know how Adam would respond to what he experienced? Did God know what He Himself would do? And if He knew all these things, and still did them in precisely that way, did not He choose? We seem to think that compulsion means that God is always right behind us as a puppet master, His hand in our minds, making us do or say exactly what he wants at that moment. And clearly there are places in Scripture where he intimates that He manually reaches out and flips a switch in a man’s heart. And where does this leave personal responsibility? I would say that we are only responsible for our sins, because God says we are. He had to declare it to be so, for we could not have taken the responsibility on our own.

I do talk this in my post linked to above on Freewill and Predestination, particularly in the chess analogy. (I hate it when people say this, because it can sound so sanctimonious – “I’ve written about this before. Perhaps you’d like to talk about something that I haven’t settled” – so please know that I’m not trying to brush you off or to act like I think your arguments are stupid, this is just for sake of time.)

Anyway, I appreciate your questions. It’s good to think through some of these things. In fact, I think you’ve given me enough to write a post.

Thanks,
Charles

Samantha:

Something that bothers me though, is that we make God human. He’s not.

This is true. However, we are made in God’s image, so we aren’t completely unlike him. And when God uses human images to describe himself, I don’t think we should discard the images just because they are “human.” God may not be human, but he has human-like traits. (Or rather, we have God-like traits.)

So making God into this image of desperate man who has no control over whether or not HIS creatures will come to Him seems absurd.

I am not well-versed in official Arminian theology, but no one I know who believes in free will holds that God has “no control” or that he’s “desperate.” He has the power; He has the sovereignty. He just allows us free will and doesn’t compel us. It’s not as if he’s “stuck,” but that doesn’t mean he controls everything.

Like my favorite Pastor says (Paul Washer) (forgive me, this is a paraphrase) “Jesus Christ owns the door, if He wants to open it, He will!”

Ok, but…where in the Bible do you get this? As Mark Cole pointed, out Rev. 3:20 says “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.” This is the OPPOSITE of opening the door of his own will, no? He waits for us to open it.

Charles:

The context with which God speaks to us is not always fully explained each time he speaks.

Point taken. But this is also true for those verses that emphasize God’s sovereignty, right? You said in your post that “If God is who He says He is, then it is He who does the choosing.” This is true (and biblical), but one needs context and elaboration to understand what this means and how it works. In the context of the rest of the Bible, I don’t think it can mean that God simply wills whatever he wills and everything falls into line. The Bible places entirely too much emphasis on human choice.
Did he know when and how He would act and when and how man would act? Did he know what knowledge Adam would start with and what the first thing he would see when he opened his eyes? Did he know how Adam would respond to what he experienced? Did God know what He Himself would do? And if He knew all these things, and still did them in precisely that way, did not He choose?

I get your point, but I still balk at the idea that people are “predestined,” per se. Predestination implies that our choices are not our own, that everything we do is predetermined. If this is so, then why does God spend so much time (apparently) trying to woo people and change their minds? It would be silly to do so if the choices were pre-made. They might be pre-known, but not pre-made. (And yes, I know…that distinction is problematic. *sigh*)

I will go read your previous post on freewill. Now I’m curious about the chess analogy.

This is what I really appreciate in the Calvinistic doctrine:
1. The fact that God does choose us, and the only way we know is that we find the ability to love God.
2. The fact that it’s all about scripture, not about purely emotive responses.
3. Calvinists will always be able to give the meaning of life: To Glorify God. That is the reason and the only reason.
4. The 100% trust and faith that can be put in God “nothing can pluck me from his hand” (John 10:28 & 29) – I know I am a believer in that I simply cannot even fathom the possibility of turning away.
5. I have never loved God more than when I learned that it was all about him and nothing about me.
6. I do not have to care about ‘free will’ (whether it exists or not) anymore, all that matters is God’s will.

Thought this applies. This is an actual letter I got at a camp nearly 8 years ago. The camp still goes on, the people still get the same letter:

Dearly Beloved Friend:
How are you? I just had to send you this letter to tell you how much I love you and care for you.
I saw you yesterday as you were walking with your friends. I waited all day, hoping you would walk and talk with me also.
As evening drew near, I gave you a sunset to close your day, and a cool breeze to rest you. Then I waited, but you never came. And yes, it hurt me, but I still love you because I am your friend.
I saw you fall asleep last night, and I longed to touch your brow, so I spilled moonlight upon your pillow and your face…
Again I waited, wanting to rush down so we could talk. I have so many gifts for you.
You awakened late this morning and rushed off for the day. My tears were in the rain.
Today you looked so sad, so alone. It makes my heart ache because I understand. My friends let me down and hurt me many times, but I love you. I try to tell you in the quiet green grass. I whisper it in the leaves and trees, and breathe it in the color of the flowers. I shout it to you in the mountain streams, and give the birds love songs to sing. I clothe you with warm sun shine and perfume the air. My love for you is deeper than the oceans and bigger than the biggest want or need you could ever have.
We will spend eternity in heaven. I know how hard it is on earth. I really know, because I was there, and I want to help you. My Father wants to help you, too. He’s that way, you know.
Just call me, ask me, talk to me. It is your decision… I have chosen you, and because of this I will wait…Because I love you.

Your Friend,
Jesus

Quintin,
I have to agree with you. If anything is making Jesus sad, it is that letter…

Thanks for posting,
Charles

I laughed so much I nearly had stomach cramp. Thanks for the read.