God Wanted You to Read This
by Motte Brown on 09/12/2007 at 6:11 AM
Last week, Tim Challies wrote a lament about the trend of prominent Christian authors taking too many liberties with God's providence. Here's an excerpt from his blog "Bludgeoning with Providence."
... Consider the dedication from Rick Warren's The Purpose Driven Life: "This book is dedicated to you. Before you were born, God planned this moment in your life. It is no accident that you are holding this book. God longs for you to discover the life he created you to live -- here on earth, and forever in eternity." Don Piper's latest book, Heaven is Real has a similar statement within it, suggesting that God has so orchestrated your life that you are holding the book at that very moment simply so you could learn from it.
I dislike this kind of statement, and they are becoming all too common. It took me some time, though, to figure out why they make me so uncomfortable. And then, a few days ago, it struck me. These authors are bludgeoning me with providence. They are peering into the unknowable providence of God and are interpreting it for me. And, needless to say, they are interpreting it in their favor.
The "unknowable providence of God" Challies is referring to is what theologians call God's will of decree -- His secret will. And Challies says it's exactly what Warren, Piper and others have presumed to know with their declarations about God's purposes for those reading their books.
We need to be careful here because God's providence isn't easily applied with our finite minds. In the sense that God is sovereign over all, you could say that He ordained those who read the books to read the books. But to make bold proclamations about God's purposes for the reader is a misunderstanding and misapplication of His sovereign will (for more on that, read Challies post in its entirety).
It's also a little arrogant. Maybe He wanted some to read those books and speak of the "difficulties" or "problems" with them.
1. erin said the following at 8:40 AM on Sep 12:
I read Challies' blog entry last week, and then attended a conference that Friday and Saturday, where one of the first things that was said was something along the lines of, "God has brought you here, to this moment in this place, to do great things." Ordinarily I wouldn't have thought anything of it, but after reading about the "secret will" of God as Tim Challies described it, the assumption gave me pause. This was something I hadn't really considered before, and I think Challies is right in urging us to be careful of how we appropriate the will of God for our own purposes.
2. sarah said the following at 9:23 AM on Sep 12:
I've also been to many conferences and Christian meetings where something along the lines of what the blog and last comment described was announced. I've wondered myself--by making those declarations, aren't we essentially limiting God, even though we're limiting Him to big things? God's ways are too mysterious and too holy and above us for us to presume to know His will in all situations. It seems a better response to His love for us would be to say "Lord, whatever You desire here, I desire too--be it big or small."
3. Canadian Boy said the following at 9:35 AM on Sep 12:
Talk about an ego problem! "God wanted you to read MY book! God is using ME to help you! I am doing what God wants for you!"
4. Barron said the following at 9:37 AM on Sep 12:
It's a common trick of radio hucksters and televangelist charlatans: "It's no coincidence you're hearing me right now. God himself brought you here! God directed you to this station! God wants you to hear my message. God wants you to send me money."
Randomly flipping through channels and hitting on a "Jesus brought you here" message is not that different from randomly flipping open a Bible and claiming that the verse that appears is a special message from God. However, lots of people who would scoff at the former would gullibly swallow the latter.
5. tmd said the following at 10:35 AM on Sep 12:
Motte
It resembles Fatalism more than anything to do with God's providence. It's the same type of belief which causes Lutherans and Calvinists to believe those who become Christian have no choice in the matter. That God predestined them to be saved.
In both cases, it makes God out to be unloving. Those whom he does not predestine to be saved (or read a particular book) are essentially just taking up space on earth.
6. Kevin said the following at 11:09 AM on Sep 12:
Be joyful always; pray continually; give thanks in all circumstances, for THIS IS GOD'S WILL for you in Christ Jesus.
1 Thessalonians 5:16,17,18
7. Mike Theemling said the following at 12:10 PM on Sep 12:
I too dislike the use whether intentional or not of saying, "God told me..." or "God said...". Everyone also seems to forget that the penalty of saying something in God's name which was not true was death.
So I am wary of saying anything that may be inferred as from God Himself unless it is explicitly in the Bible.
It's also one of the reasons why I have problems with the concepts of the Pope's infallibility when speaking from the chair and the general "our interpretation of Scripture is the final authority" view of the Roman Catholic Church.
8. Mike Theemling said the following at 12:19 PM on Sep 12:
I forgot to add verse 22 of Deuteronomy which says:
"If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him."
9. christopher said the following at 12:27 PM on Sep 12:
tmd,
Have you considered Ephesians 1:3-6?
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
I find it striking that the very thing Paul associated with predestination is love, the very thing you disassociate it with. “In love he predestined us for adoption as sons.” If you have difficulty associating God’s decrees with his love, I’d humbly suggest that your real issue is not with Calvin or Luther.
As a Calvinist, I do see a connection between what Warren writes and what I believe the Bible teaches. Only, I think connection is superficial. I believe the providences of God are often only subject to interpretation years after the event, whereas Warren seeks to interpret the providences of God immediately and in a manner that begs the question. How does he know that it is God’s will for every reader who picks up his book to be conformed to the image of the creature imaged forth in his book? It is at best a twisted version of Calvinism, but what more should we expect from a man who does not claim to be a Calvinist?
Warmly,
CT
10. Evan said the following at 12:50 PM on Sep 12:
I agree with Challies. The danger isn't in saying that God decreed that you read such and such book or hear such and such message -- but the world is much more complicated than most people seem to think it is. The danger is in saying that God brought someone to something for such and such purpose, especially when you do it very quickly after the fact. Things that happen in life can have consequences that are much more subtle and much more long-term than we oftentimes suppose. One of the things I find so awesome about God is the subtlety and preciseness with which he can use small events to do great things.
11. Seth said the following at 4:30 PM on Sep 12:
I think a great danger to all Christians is to put God in a box. Let the Bible speak for itself, rather than us trying to limit God to our finite understanding of what is love and what is fair.
I do believe there is an integration of our choices and God's will. We are not puppets. Here's a good Biblical example:
"But as many as received him (our choice), to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (again, our choice): which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God (God's will)." -John 1:12-13
The I in the TULIP doctrine calls this irresistible grace. I love God because he first loved me. God does not force me to do anything, he gives freedom. I cannot accept salvation because it is already mine. I was "saved" 2000 years ago. It's not my will that matters, it's God's.
God does not force me to sin. I have the choice to do good or evil, and when I sin it is to my own detriment. I alone am accountable for my actions.
12. brx said the following at 4:45 PM on Sep 12:
Motte,
It rather sounds to me like Challies and many commenters here are stuck on hearing what the author is NOT saying.
I don't have the book infront of me; so, let's just consider what Challies (and you) quoted from Rick Warren’s The Purpose Driven Life: “This book is dedicated to you. Before you were born, God planned this moment in your life. It is no accident that you are holding this book. God longs for you to discover the life he created you to live—here on earth, and forever in eternity.”
Could you tell me precisely what is wrong in those statements; is the book not dedicated to the reader; are you sure God did not plan the moment for the reader; was it an accident of the universe that the reader is holding the book; or does God not long for the reader to discover the life He created for him? Where can anyone be sure that any of those quoted statements in the book dedication are incorrect/presumptuous?
I'm not familiar with Piper's statements; so, that may be another matter.
Canadian Boy wrote:
"God wanted you to read MY book! God is using ME to help you! I am doing what God wants for you!" However, that is not what the quoted statement from Rick Warren says. Again, the problem of hearing what the author is NOT saying (nor meaning).
Mike Theemling,
Good points; do you think perhaps many of the teachers/prophets/authors of the OT experienced much of the same personal doubt and scrutiny that you mention, such as Deut 18:20~22? And still, many true prophets of the Lord were killed by people claiming to be in the religious-right. Jesus said that He would send even more prophets after him, who would be persecuted by the religious-right (Mat23:43).
I'm NOT saying that there's nothing I dislike about Rick Warren's book. However, I am saying that we should probably be very careful about picking up stones because of an implication of one interpretation of a couple sentences.
[Incidentally, I co-led a small-group through Warren's book and two of the members decided to get baptized afterwards!]
13. Jennifer said the following at 7:18 PM on Sep 12:
Thank you Motte, for this excellent link. It outlines EXACTLY what's wrong with much of the self-help literature to Christian singles that has come out over the last couple of decades. You can see it in book titles such as "When God Writes Your Love Story"...yechhh!!
Calling singleness a gift or a calling is a classic example of "Bludgeoning with Providence". It assumes that God gave singleness to you specifically as a gift (as if it's not about something else, such as the consequence of human beings exercising their will, individually and corporately). It falsely puts God's stamp of approval on our own choices, whether it's a lifestyle or a spouse. It removes us from personal responsibility. It takes away the need to be compassionate to those who suffer with their "gift", because, after all, it is a "gift", isn't it??
In all, "blugeoning with providence" is what's behind much of the smug language of hypocrisy that is so obvious to non-believers (and such a bad witness to them), but can seem like second nature to so many of us raised amid evangelical culture. We'd do well to turf out some of our cherished platitudes, such as "Where you are now is right where God wants you to be!"
14. Samuel PG said the following at 10:23 PM on Sep 12:
I will admit that we can claim too much with our proclamations of providence. To say that God planned for this thing to happen at this moment might not quite be true if we infer that to mean "God willed this to happen at this moment." However, if we were to say "God knew from all eternity that you would be reading this right now," that would be undeniably true. God knows all things. It would not, however, be a particularly helpful statement, but would be akin to saying "You are reading this sentence." It must be true.
With that said, I disagree with Canadian Boy's judgment that Rick Warren was saying that egotistically and with Barron's statement that this is a common ploy. I do not know much about Rick Warren, except for what I have read of his book, what I have read about him and what I have heard about his church from people who attend there. From what I do know, however, I have no reason to suspect that he is particularly egotistical, but in fact would believe the opposite. As for this being a common ploy in the sense of being used intentionally to manipulate people, I do not think that lends most preachers enough credit.
I remember attending camp when I was younger and the speaker saying something about God having planned for all of us to be there for centuries and it really resonated with me. It really communicated just how important it was that I listen to what God was trying to tell me. That was definitely a positive outcome.
15. Samuel PG said the following at 10:25 PM on Sep 12:
Jennifer,
I actually laughed out loud reading your comment. Not that you said anything outrageously incorrect, but it reminded me of our extended discussion a while back on the gift of singleness.
16. Leah said the following at 12:08 AM on Sep 13:
Yeah I don't like it either. I don't like the attitudes where people say every little thing is planned out by God and it's God's will that you eat a chocolate icecream and not the strawberry and that if you choose to drive a red car rather than a blue one that's ok because that's God's plan...
I want to yell at them NO, IT'S NOT! God gives us the freedom to choose certain things in life which are inconsequential- like, which icecream you eat or what colour car you drive or what book you read. (Aside from the bible of course :P)
17. Fred said the following at 2:38 AM on Sep 13:
Brx, where is Mat23:43?
18. tmd said the following at 10:45 AM on Sep 13:
CT
Yes, I have been told numerous times by Calvinist-influenced believers that Eph. 1:3-6 is one of the main supports for predestination. However, predestination has nothing to do with humanity having no say in what happens...have you not heard of free will?
The fact of the matter is that if God has predestined you and I to be saved, even in "love", then he has essentially predestined others to be eternally damned. That's not love. And that's certainly not a loving God. It is in direct conflict with I Timothy 2:4. How can God damn a portion of humanity and on the other hand say he wishes all might be saved?
Even more ironic is the fact that Calvinism teaches one never truly knows if they are "predestined to be saved" until death. That, too, is in conflict with Scripture (Acts 16:30-31, etc). How do we then know Calvin even got it right himself?
God creating humanity in his image included the ability to make choices. Otherwise, Adam and Eve were just agents of fate, or as you put it, predestined in love, as God was poking them with a stick, making them sin.
Please don't judge me: "If you have difficulty associating God’s decrees with his love, I’d humbly suggest that your real issue is not with Calvin or Luther."
I have found that those ascribing to Calvinism have the habit of suggesting that others aren't saved if they don't adhere to the predestination theory.
In any case, no matter how the bread is sliced, what Motte quoted in his post did contain Fatalism.
19. Justice said the following at 10:54 AM on Sep 13:
goodness, why blame these two easy targets? I grew up with people saying the same things, big deal.
Why are Christians constantly critisizing other Christians that God has obviously used in a bigger way than themselves? It sounds like their pride got the best of them. God has used Warren and Piper in extraordinary ways. I can't imagine that God is happy when Tim whoever criticizes people that he set apart to preach the gospel.
20. christopher said the following at 12:48 PM on Sep 13:
Dear tmd,
I’ll try to respond with each of your paragraphs.
1. Calvinists allow for both free will and for predestination. We love both teachings, not because we understand either, but because both are taught in Scripture. We admit that our capacity to explain how both can be true is limited. Therefore, all we can do is humbly embrace both teachings and strive for balance. Yet by necessity, God’s sovereignty subsumes man’s free will, so the tension is felt all the more.
2. How can I respond to this paragraph generously? You seem to be placing Paul’s statement in the Epistle to the Ephesians over and Paul’s statement to the pastor of the church in Ephesus (Timothy). Here we have the same author writing within the same context. Therefore, we should be generous in our reading and look for coherence rather than dissonance.
3. As with all schools of thought, you will always find dissenters. However, Calvin and most Calvinists do not believe or teach that you cannot know if you are among the elect. See Joel Beeke’s book titled, “The Quest for Full Assurance: The Legacy of Calvin and His Successors.”
4. Since Scripture teaches that we have free will, and the Scriptures teach that God has predestined some, it is safe to infer that both are true. However, the Assurance of Salvation issue is actually much more difficult for the person denying that the free will of man either is or can be limited “in love” by God.
Here is my question. First, it has been the hope of believers for ages past that when they go to heaven; they will be fixed once for all. That is, we trust that promise of God that we will be restored and that we will have nothing left of the sinful nature causing us to rebel against God’s will. A Calvinist has no trouble saying, “In heaven, I will be free only to chose to do that which pleases God. I will no longer have the capacity to reject him. For, as Paul says, we will see him for who he is and will become like him. This is our great hope and it give us full assurance that we will not “blow it” somehow a billion years or so into eternity.
Those how desire to maintain the absolute freedom of the will can not say with any confidence (as far as I can see) that they will make it past the first week of heaven.
5. “Please don’t judge me.” If I humbly suggest and you become defensive, how can we ever engage in any meaningful discourse?
6. Again, you may have come across a Calvinist who suggested to reject our interpretation of the Scriptures is evidence of your reprobate state, but that is not the norm. Most Calvinists say something like this, “These are weighty and difficult doctrines that we find to withstand the scrutiny of thorough investigation, but they are not easily adopted. Therefore, we recognize as brothers all who embrace Christ as Savior, regardless of their understanding of these things.”
7. What is fate? Fate is blind and without purpose. God is all seeing and has his own purposes for everything that he brings to pass. There may be some vague similarities between fate and predestination, but when we consider the person and the purposes behind predestination, we move way past the cold realms of fate, we move in the realm of love.
Thanks for the exchange,
CT
21. brx said the following at 4:44 PM on Sep 13:
Fred; I'm really sorry I let that typo slip in there. It should read Mat23:34 (not 43).
22. Fred said the following at 3:37 AM on Sep 14:
Brx, thanks for the correction but what does the persecution of prophets have to do with the religious right?
23. Adam Sloope said the following at 2:24 PM on Sep 14:
I agree that providintial statements like this should be avoided. I think they are written with great motives, however, we should be careful to think we have the market cornered on God. He is an eternal God so no man could ever fully grasp Him fully. I take things like that with a grain of salt myself because I'm skeptical of most stuff I read anyways, just because you write about God doesn't mean God needs you or needs people to read what you write... I love Christian authors though and support the many individuals out there tearing apart the Word of God to inspire and prod people to action across the world.
24. brx said the following at 6:46 PM on Sep 17:
Fred asked "what does the persecution of prophets have to do with the religious right?"
Well, in regards to this post, I was recalling from the Bible, that it was often the entrenched, religious right that missed the message and persecuted the Lord's prophets/annointed.
I think a lot of us Christians would be well served by a more humble approach toward orthodoxy. I'm diggin' that term, especially when Christians start beating up other Christians without pointing out exactly and precisely where they are in error.
25. Leah said the following at 9:23 PM on Sep 17:
tmd- nowhere in the bible does it say we have free will.
You also say "However, predestination has nothing to do with humanity having no say in what happens"- actually, that's what predestination is all about.
The point remains, God chose us to be saved. We were dead in our transgressions. A dead person can't choose to come back to life, can they? The saviour must choose to revive them.
26. holmegm said the following at 9:23 AM on Sep 23:
Well, I'm sure that God *did* predestine you to be at this conference or be reading that book.
But we can't be sure *why*. Maybe He just wanted to show you some juicy heresy ...