What is compatibilism?

Answer

Compatibilism is an attempt to reconcile the theological proposition that every event is causally determined, ordained, and/or decreed by God (i.e., determinism, not to be confused with fatalism) with the free will of man. Originally promoted from a philosophical perspective by the Greek Stoics and later by various philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes and David Hume, and from a theological standpoint by theologians like Augustine of Hippo and John Calvin, the concept of compatibilist free will asserts that even though man’s free will may appear incompatible with determinism, they can coexist and are “compatible” with each other.

The basis of the compatibilistic notion of free will lies in how “will” is defined. From a theological angle, the definition of the will is understood in the context of the revealed, biblical truths of original sin and the spiritual depravity of man. These truths lead to defining the “will” concerning fallen man as “captive to sin” «For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. », (Acts 8:23), a “slave of sin” (John 8:34;Romans 6:16-17) and subject only to its “master,” which is sin «For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. », (Romans 6:14). Therefore, although man’s will is “free” to act as it pleases, it tends to act in accordance with its nature, and since the fallen will’s nature is sinful, every intention and thought of the fallen man’s heart is “only evil continually” «And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of hisheart was only evil continually.” , (Genesis 6:5, cf: Genesis 8:21). He, being naturally rebellious to that which is spiritually good (Romans 8:7-8;1 Corinthians 2:14), “is bent only on rebellion” “An evil man seeketh only rebellion: Therefore a cruel messenger shall be sent against him.” , (Proverbs 17:11). Essentially, man is “free” to do as he wishes, and he does just that, but man simply cannot do that which is contrary to his nature. What man “wills” to do is subject to and determined solely by his nature.

Here is where compatibilism makes the distinction between man having a free will and being a “free agent.” Man is “free” to choose that which is determined by his nature or by the laws of nature. To illustrate, the laws of nature prohibit man from being able to fly, but this does not mean that man is not free. The agent, man, is only free to do that which his nature or the laws of nature allow him to do. Theologically speaking, though the natural man is unable to submit himself to the law of God (Romans 8:7-8) and unable to come to Christ unless the Father draws him to Him “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.” , (John 6:44), the natural man still acts freely in respect to his nature. He freely and actively suppresses the truth in unrighteousness “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;” , (Romans 1:18) becauseHis nature renders him unable to do otherwise (Job 15:14-16; Psalm 14:1-3; 53:1-3; Jeremiah 13:23; Romans 3:10-11). Two good examples of Jesus’ confirmation of this concept can be found in Matthew 7:16-27 and Matthew 12:34-37.

With the distinction between free agency and free will defined, compatibilism then addresses the nature of the free agency of man in respect to the theological proposition known as determinism and/or the biblical truth of the omniscient nature of God. The foundational issue is how man can be held accountable for his actions if his actions were always going to occur (i.e., the future is not subject to change) and could not have been anything other than that which occurred. Although there are numerous passages of Scripture that address this issue, there are three primary passages to examine.

The story of Joseph and his brothers

The first is the story of Joseph and his brothers (Genesis 37). Joseph was hated by his brothers because their father, Jacob, loved Joseph more than any of his other sons, “Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours.” (Genesis 37:3) and because of Joseph’s dreams and their interpretation (Genesis 37:5-11). At an opportune time, Joseph’s brothers sold him as a slave to traveling Midianite traders. Then they dipped his tunic in the blood of a slain goat in order to deceive their father into thinking Joseph had been mauled by a beast (Genesis 37:18-33). After many years, during which Joseph had been blessed by the Lord, Joseph’s brothers meet him in Egypt, and Joseph reveals himself to them.(Genesis 45:3-4). It is Joseph’s conversation with his brothers that is most relevant to the matter:

“So then, it was not you who sent me here, but God. He made me a father to Pharaoh, lord of his entire household, and ruler of all Egypt” «So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God: and he hath made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house, and a ruler throughout all the land of Egypt. », (Genesis 45:8).

What makes this statement surprising is that Joseph had previously stated that his brothers had indeed sold him into Egypt (Genesis 45:4-5). A few chapters later, the idea of compatibilism is introduced:

“You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to achieve what is now being done, the saving of many lives” «But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive. », (Genesis 50:20).

The Genesis account informs us that it was, indeed, the brothers who sold Joseph into Egypt. However, Joseph clarifies that God had orchestrated it. Those who dispute the concept of compatibilism might argue that this verse simply suggests that God “utilized” the actions of Joseph’s brothers for good. Nevertheless, this is not the message conveyed in the text. Throughout Genesis 45-50, we learn that (1) Joseph’s brothers had sent him to Egypt, (2) God had sent him to Egypt, (3) Joseph’s brothers had malicious intentions in sending him to Egypt, and (4) God had benevolent intentions in sending him to Egypt. Therefore, the question arises: who sent Joseph to Egypt? The perplexing answer is that both Joseph’s brothers and God did. It was a single action carried out by two entities, the brothers and God, simultaneously.

The commission of Assyria

The second passage that reveals compatibilism is found in Isaiah 10, a prophetic warning passage for God’s people. As divinely promised in Deuteronomy 28-29, God is sending a nation to punish His people for their sins. Isaiah 10:6 says that Assyria is the rod of God’s anger, “commissioned” against God’s people to “seize loot and snatch plunder, and to trample them down like mud in the streets.” Notice, however, what God says about Assyria:

“Yet [Assyria] does not so intend, Nor does it plan so in its heart, But rather it is its purpose to destroy And to cut off many nations” «However, he does not mean so, neither does his heart think so; but it is in his heart to destroy and cut off nations not a few. », (Isaiah 10:7, NASB).

God’s intent in the Assyrian invasion is to inflict His righteous judgment against sin, and the intent of the Assyrians is to “destroy and cut off many nations.” Two different purposes, two different entities acting to bring about this purpose, in one single action. As we read further, God reveals that, although this destruction is determined and decreed by Him «For the Lord GOD of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, in the midst of all the land. », (Isaiah 10:23), He will still punish the Assyrians because of the “arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the pomp of his haughtiness” «Therefore it shall come to pass, that when the Lord has performed his whole work upon Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, I will punish the fruit of the stout heart of the king of Assyria, and the glory of his high looks. », (Isaiah 10:12, cf: Isaiah 10:15). Even though God Himself had infallibly determined the judgment of a disobedient people, He holds those who brought the judgment.

Accountable for Their Own Actions.

The Crucifixion of Jesus Christ

The third passage of Scripture that speaks of compatibilism is found in Acts 4:23-28. As revealed in Acts 2:23-25, Christ’s death on the cross was carried out by the “predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God.” Acts 4:27-28 further reveals that the actions of Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles, and the people of Israel had been determined and decreed by God Himself to occur as they “gathered together against” Jesus and did “what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.” Although God had determined that Christ should die, those responsible for His death were still held accountable for their actions. Christ was put to death by wicked men, “yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer” «Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. », (Isaiah 53:10). Once again, the answer to the question “who put Jesus to death?” is both God and the wicked people—two purposes carried out by two entities within a single action.

There are other passages of Scripture that pertain to the concept of compatibilism, such as God hardening the hearts of individuals (e.g., Exodus 4:21; Joshua 11:20; Isaiah 63:17). While compatibilism seems bewildering to us (Job 9:10; Isaiah 55:8-11; Romans 11:33), this truth has been revealed by God Himself as the means by which His sovereign decree is reconciled with the will of man. God is sovereign over all things Facebook Comments