Deuteronomy - Lesson 16

In this session, we will finish up our discussion of the golden calf affair, the golden calf fiasco, to highlight how if the Israel that is standing in front of Moses as he delivers these farewell addresses is the people of God, it is sheer grace. So, let’s see how this works. 

We’ll review quickly what has happened to this point. But the focus here will be on Israel’s Agent of Grace: Illustrating the Power of Intercessory Prayer. Where would Israel be if there hadn’t been an intercessor? Grace would not have hit them. 

Well, the hypothesis: Israel’s covenant relationship with Yahweh is based on the nation’s intrinsic moral superiority over the Canaanites. That’s what the people had been proposed. 

He’s testing the hypothesis: Israel’s history exhibits no evidence of moral superiority. 

The new hypothesis: Israel’s covenant relationship with Yahweh is based entirely on gracious sovereignty. 

And then finally, [testing the new hypothesis] Israel is the undeserving beneficiary of Yahweh’s grace. 

These two things are what we will talk about now. The new hypothesis and the proof of the new hypothesis. 

We are finished with the worship of the golden calf, but Moses isn’t finished telling us his story. For some reason or other, earlier he says, “I interceded on your behalf at that point,” but he doesn’t give us his prayer. He doesn’t come back to talk about the prayer until after he has made his point. “You guys are rebellious; that’s all I’ve known about you and I could talk about Kadesh Barnea and Hattaavah and whatever else, these other places where you proved who you really are.” But having made that point, then he steps back and says, “Hold on a minute, we’ve got a few more things to talk about here. How did we get here? How did we get here?” 

Verses 12-14, “Then Yahweh said to me, ‘Get up and go down from here immediately, because your people you brought out of Egypt have acted corruptly. They’ve immediately turned aside from the way I charged them to walk. They’ve made for themselves a molded image.’ And Yahweh said to me, ‘I’ve seen this people, they’re stiff-necked! Leave me alone, so I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a stronger nation.’” But then what does Moses do? His response to Yahweh’s fury. 

Well, in order to understand his prayer here, we have to look at the other prayer that we didn’t actually spend much time on, at the end of chapter 3. The background to this prayer within the book is Moses’ earlier prayer in the book. Now, chronologically, these two prayers are 40 years apart. And chronologically, they’re in the opposite order. But the way the book is written, whoever arranged these addresses arranged it in such a way that if you’re thinking of Moses, the prayer warrior, the prayer that’s ringing in your ears is chapter 3, the end of chapter 3. And that is so different. “At that time, I pleaded for grace to Yahweh. O, Adonai Yahweh, You’ve only begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your strong hand. For who is a god in heaven or on earth, who can perform great actions like this in mighty deeds like You do? Please let me cross over and experience the good land beyond the Jordan – this good hill country and Lebanon.” There’s his prayer. 

But notice, notice the prayer. It’s all orthodox and it’s how prayers should start, “O Adonai Yahweh.” When we pray to God this is a recognition that He is our suzerain, ‘Adonai,’ Greek kyrios. But then in translation it becomes, “O Adonai Yahweh – O kyrios kyrios.” But this is why we have to keep the personal name here, “O Adonai my Sovereign.” But he addresses Him by name and then he flatters Him. 

Now I’m using that word intentionally here because the normal pattern of a biblical prayer—Moshe Greenberg has written a book on biblical prose prayers, prayers that are inserted into prose narratives. They typically have this order of the address to God: “O Adonai Yahweh…” and then you have a doxology. You begin your prayer with “Praise to God from whom all blessings flow.” Some of David’s prayers are magnificent prayer. Not—what’s the prayer of Jabez or whatever else? That book. (I should have thought of that. I wouldn’t have had to work another day in my life.) But in any case, it’s in Chronicles. But the Book of Chronicles is filled with magnificent prayers. David’s prayer is absolutely spectacular, and he begins in this way by acknowledging his small status vis à vis God, that’s so appropriate. 

But given where Moses is spiritually in that first address, I get the sense that Moses is flattering rather than being genuine. I think there’s a problem here. And he says, “Who is a God in heaven like You? There’s nobody like you.” Theologically, it’s all true, but the tone of voice here is probably somewhat suspicious. 

“So, let me cross over and experience…” I mean, all he’s concerned about is, “Let me cross over and experience the good land.” Literally it’s, “See the good land.” But the word for ‘see’ often means simply, it means to experience, to handle, to sense. God takes him literally in this. He says, “Yes, I’ll let you see it. Go up to the top of the mountain. Have a look.” But of course, that’s not what Moses has in mind. “I want to touch it. I want to feel the dirt. I want to smell it. I want to eat the fruit. This good hill country and the Lebanon, all the way up north.” 

But look at God’s response. “But Yahweh was angry with me because of you and He refused to listen to me. And Yahweh said to me, ‘That’s enough!’” Shut up. Would God say that? I have a feeling that’s what it is here. “Don’t speak to me about this anymore. Climb to the top of Pisgah and look out to the west and to the north and to the south. Look with your own eyes.” You say you want to see it, I’ll answer that prayer, “But you will not cross this Jordan. Instead, charge Joshua and encourage and strengthen him, for he will lead this people.” Wouldn’t you love, if you were in Joshua’s place, wouldn’t you love to have Moses preach your ordination sermon? When you know he’s grousing the whole time? Oy vey. “So we remained in the valley near Beth Peor.” That’s as far as Moses got. 

Well, there’s humongous differences between these two prayers. First, whereas Moses’ prayer here was intended to stave off divine fury against others (by here I mean Deuteronomy 9), the goal of the later, actually earlier in the book, prayer was personal and private. Indeed, Moses seems embarrassingly self-absorbed. It’s all about his own personal experience. 

Second, whereas at Horeb, Moses was willing to sacrifice ambition and life itself, he doesn’t say that here, but in Exodus, “Blot out my name, but save this people.” He does this to win the favor of Yahweh on the people’s behalf. It’s an extraordinary self-denial. His account of his personal prayer reveals a man focused on himself and the satisfaction of private wishes. 

Third, whereas his prayer at Horeb consisted of profound theological arguments, his request in chapter 3 involved merely a personal desire, “Please let me go in to see the land.” Moses could at least have declared his intention to celebrate Yahweh’s faithfulness to the ancestors, “I’d like to cross over the Jordan to celebrate that You have kept Your promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” Maybe even set up a memorial altar in God’s honor. He could have done that, like Abraham did at Shechem when he crossed over in the first stopping point. You’re there, buddy. And what’s he do? He builds an altar. He could have done that, but he doesn’t. 

Most telling of all, without a hint of acknowledgment of his own culpability for an offense that had precipitated the Lord’s closing the door to the Promised Land for him, when Yahweh rejected his request, he blamed the people, “It's your fault I can’t cross over the Jordan.” 

God answered his prayer. Literally, he let him see the land. But He also answered it, “No, you’re not going over. Stop it. I don’t want to hear again of this.” And we actually do hear again. He mentioned it in chapter 4 again, “It’s your fault.” He’s a stubborn coot like some of us. 

Well, here, Moses’ intercessory gesture. We learned about this already in verse 18. “Then I threw myself down before Yahweh as I’d done for 40 days and 40 nights; I ate no bread, drank no water because of the great sin you’d committed, by doing the evil.” 40 days and 40 nights he wrestled with God on Israel’s behalf. This is amazing. This is 40 years ago. 

What has happened to Moses in those 40 years and his attitude toward the people, his attitude toward God, whatever else? Which is why I’m shocked that he ever reports that event in that first address. Moses doesn’t do himself any favors by reporting it. We don’t think more highly of him for it. But obviously, the author had this manuscript in front of him and on that manuscript there, it’s in the text. Moses, you’re saying this? “I was terrified because of the furious anger that Yahweh had ignited against you to destroy you. But again, Yahweh listened to me. And your sinful object – the calf – I burned in the fire and I made you drink it. And against Aaron also, You were angry and I prayed and God answered my prayer.” 

What a difference. What a difference. One prayer God answers with a “No, nyet, don’t think about it, it’s not going to happen.” And the other one, which actually deserved the judgment, Moses in the first case claims “It’s not my fault I’m innocent. Let me go in.” Here the people actually deserve the judgment, and God backs off completely. 

Well, his disposition, Moses’ disposition, is clear in chapter 25, where he falls down before God. But now look at his prayer. It begins in verses 26 to the end here. “I prayed to Yahweh and I said, “O, Sovereign Yahweh!” Did you see that? He starts out exactly the same. “O, Lord Adonai Yahweh. Do not annihilate Your own special possession, Your people.” 

What had God said? God had said to Moses, “Your people whom you brought out of Egypt.” Moses says, he throws it right back to Him, “Do not annihilate Your people, Your own special possession whom You redeemed with Your great power and You brought out of Egypt with a strong hand. Remember Your servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Do not pay attention to this people’s stubbornness, their wickedness, or their sin.” Overlook it. Act as if it had never happened. “Otherwise, the country from which You brought us will say, ‘Because Yahweh was unable to bring them into the land as He promised, and because He hated them, He brought them out to kill them in the desert.’ But they are Your people. Your special possession, whom You brought out by Your great power with Your outstretched arm.” And that’s the end of the prayer, I think. It is. The chapter ends there and it doesn’t even say, “And the Lord changed His mind.” 

If you go to the Exodus version, at that point, you’ll have, “And the Lord changed his mind – nāḥam.” Whatever that version or whatever that word means, the Lord withdrew the threat and He didn’t kill. He doesn’t say that here. It’s just quiet. He has just stuck this prayer in. 

But we need to we need to look at this prayer. There are three texts in the Pentateuch that give us Moses as an intercessor. You have Exodus 32, this same event, but the narrator is telling the story, he remembers the prayer. In Numbers 14:13-19 after the Kadesh Barnea fiasco, the Lord says, “I’m going to wipe them out” and Moses intercedes again. There you have a prayer, and then you have Moses’ recollection of this prayer. 

But his arguments here are very interesting. He begins with Israel is Your people, not mine. He’s correcting Yahweh. 

Second, he says, “Yahweh has invested great effort in saving the Israelites from bondage of Egypt. And by implication this means, to destroy them would mean all of that was wasted.” What was the point of that? Accomplished nothing. 

Third, he says, “Hold back for the sake of the patriarchs; overlook the sin. Remember the ancestors? You promised their descendants would get the land.” 

And fourth, “Your reputation among the nations will be damaged. If You destroy them, they will think you were unable to carry through on your agenda, or you were deliberate. You are a monster, You brought them, You tricked them into coming here in order that You could destroy them here. You can’t afford that. Your reputation’s at stake. Because He hated them, that’s what they will say. They won’t see the human causality. They’ll see only Your causality.” 

And then he ends as he began, “Israel is Your people, Your inheritance, whom You brought out with Your great power. They’re not mine. They’re Yours. It’s not—don’t leave me with this lot.” 

Finally, “Yahweh has invested great effort in saving the Israelites from the bondage of Egypt, and by implication, to destroy them would mean…” 

Well. Now I’ve got all of those three prayers color-coded here with the arguments, and you will notice of the three renderings of the prayers, this is the fullest. In the others, it’s the narrator remembering the prayers. And he reports what Moses prayed. Here it’s Moses’ autobiographical and it’s the fullest. But you will notice that the color-coded indicates the order in which the arguments come. So that the point, Israel is Your people not mine, comes at the beginning here and it comes again at the end. Twice he does this. But the other that “You’ve invested great effort, look, You’ve redeemed them from Israel, why would You kill them now?” So it’s a waste. “Hold back for the sake of the ancestors.” 

And then, “Your reputation among the nations is at stake.” 

And then he concludes again, “You’ve invested all of this energy in them by redeeming them with His signs and wonders and all the rest, why would You let that be wasted like this?” 

Now, of course, technically, you could say that none of this is necessary, because if God begins anew with Moses, He hasn’t actually betrayed His promises to the ancestors because Moses is a descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So, it just means that we’ve got now a chain link of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and we’re going from there. It can still work, literally. 

But of course, the amazing thing is God listens. God accepts the argument. It is the rhetoric of Moses’ prayer I find just quite extraordinary, quite remarkable. The arguments he uses to get God to change His mind. 

Now, I haven’t expressed that in very firm Calvinist terms. And our theological friends on that side of the theological spectrum they find all kinds of ways of diminishing the significance of what’s actually happening here. But the word in Exodus is very strong here, “nāḥam, nāḥam.” 

It’s the same word that you have in the book of Jonah. Jonah doesn’t want to go to Nineveh, but the second time when the Lord says and gives him the message, immediately, “You are to say to them, ‘40 days and Nineveh will be overthrown.’ And Jonah says, I can preach that.” So, he goes and he preaches and 40 days and it’s over. And the most awful thing happens, the Ninevites repent and the Ninevites say, “Who knows? Yahweh may change his mind.” Same word, nāḥam, withdraw the threat and spare us. And that’s exactly what happens. 

Well, Jonah is furious. “He burned at the nose.” That’s a very strong expression. He said “I knew this would happen. I knew what You are like. You are gracious, compassionate and slow to anger and abounding in loving kindness.” He’s quoting Exodus 34:6-7. He’s learned his catechism lesson. Well, that’s the problem. And so, the topic of this sermon on Jonah is: What’s Wrong with God? And it is that He is gracious. That’s what’s wrong to Jonah. I mean, he’s the bigot, isn’t he? 

Well, here, what’s wrong with God? He is gracious and He spares his people who absolutely do not deserve it. “Ever since I’ve known you, you’ve been evil.” 

Well, Israel is Yahweh’s people, not his. “Don’t annihilate Your people.” 

Second, Yahweh has invested great effort by delivering them from the bondage of Egypt, “whom You redeemed.” 

Third, “Hold back for the sake of the patriarchs, overlook their sin. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” 

Four, “Yahweh’s reputation will be damaged if He destroys Israel. They think You’re a demon.” Actually, they did this already at the Red Sea, remember? They get to the Red Sea and they’ve been excited. We’re leaving Egypt, and with hand-held high, they’re marching “Na, na, na, na, na, na, we’re out of here.” And they get to the Red Sea and oops, sea in front, fortresses beside, and they see the dust of Pharaoh’s chariots coming. And they say, “Is it because the Lord hated us that He brought us here into the desert to destroy us?” Well, if I had been God at that moment, I would have said, “Fine, make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.” But he doesn’t raise that moment here in his illustrations of their rebellion and faithlessness. But this is what is going on here. 

And finally, the reputation among the nations will be damaged. Otherwise, they’ll get the wrong impression about God, and He can’t afford that. “But they’re Your people, not mine. You have done all this for them.” What happens? 

Well, in Exodus, “So Yahweh changed His mind about the disaster He said He would bring on His people.” And that is not my translation at this point. It’s the Christian Standard Bible, except that I’ve changed it to ‘Yahweh.’ You know, I altered that part of it. ‘The Lord,’ I struggle with that one. 

Yahweh’s concrete gestures. Well, what happens here? The text, Moses never says at this point, “God answered my prayer.” He doesn’t say God changed His mind, but instead the disposition of God is reflected in God’s reactions. So, what happens here? Well, “At that time, the Lord said to me, ‘Carve out two tablets of stone like the first ones and come up to Me on the mountain. Make yourself a wooden chest. I will inscribe on the tablets the words that were on the first tablet which you broke.’” This is not accusing him, “You shouldn’t have done that.” He’s not. I don’t think we should interpret that as scolding Moses for having broken. It was a symbolic gesture. Moses is the spokesman for God. He represents God. 

“‘Then you shall deposit them in the chest.’ So I made a chest of acacia wood, carved out the two stone tablets like the first ones, and I climbed the mountain with the two tablets in my hand. Then Yahweh inscribed on these tablets the same text as the previous ones had, namely the Ten Words that Yahweh had spoken to you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly. And He gave them to me.” 

And this brings us full circle. In Exodus chapter 24, he said, “Moses come up to me on the mountain that I may give you the tablets.” We’re back, the covenant is back. “And then I turned and went down the mountain and put the tablets in the chest I made. And there they are.” By now they have built the tabernacle and they built the Ark of the Covenant and they all know they’re in there. That is confirmation that the covenant is on again. What grace, what mercy. So the first concrete act of God’s acceptance of this same people as His covenant people is that stone tablets; proof, exhibit A. 

Second, he installs the Levitical priests as guardians of the covenant. We tend not to recognize the significance. And there’s a parenthetical comment, “Oh, by the way, at that time, ‘Yahweh set apart the tribe of Levi to carry the ark of Yahweh’s covenant, to stand before Yahweh, to administer and to pronounce the blessings in His name as they do to this day.’” This is the narrator, the person who produced the book inserting a parenthetical comment. “Oh, by the way,” this is not what Moses is saying. It’s the author of the book saying, “That was the moment and the dedication of the Levites to this task is proof that the covenant is still on.” He has his guardians of the covenant. That’s the Levites’ role. We’ll have more time to talk about the Levites later, but here we see their role. For this reason, the Levites have no allotment or grant of land with their brothers. Yahweh is their grant, as Yahweh told them. It’s all about the covenant. It’s all about the covenant. 

And then third, He tells them to resume the journey to claim the land that He had promised by covenant and oath to the ancestors. “I remained on the mountain another 40 days and 40 nights.” There it is, we got 40 more days, “…as I had done previously. Yahweh listened to me at that time and He agreed not to destroy you. Then Yahweh said, ‘Get up, time to move on, and continue on your journey ahead of the people so they may possess the land that I promised an oath to the ancestors to give them.’” 

In the presence of three witnesses a truth is confirmed. The covenant is back on. This is not a different covenant. There are some people who will argue that this is a different covenant, but the terms are the same, the tablets are the same, identical to the past. What’s happening here is the covenant is back. It had been broken. And if it hadn’t been for the grace of God, it would have remained broken. But God never breaks a covenant. The people have opted out. The covenant hangs on. The promise is there, the promise to the ancestors. And so, it is all in place. 

This is a great text. I love this passage for many reasons. For many reasons, one of which is its lesson on prayer, the power of prayer. James 5, “The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.” Well, how righteous is Moses? Well, at this point, there is no doubt about his righteousness. This is early on in the journey. I wonder if God would have answered the same prayer if this generation of Israelites had done this and Moses had tried it, because we’ve seen a different Moses in between.

But the point is, when the righteous pray, three outcomes are possible. One, sometimes prayer is the process whereby external circumstances change, and that’s what happened here, it changed. The world changed. Acts 12: Peter is in prison and the people are all having a prayer meeting and an earthquake happens. And the chains fall off and they walk out and Peter goes to the door of the house where they’re meeting. He knocks on the door and Rhoda greets him, “You’re not supposed to be here.” Shocker. She can’t believe this. I mean, you’re praying this happens and it happens and you can’t believe it happened. But prayer, prayer matters. Sometimes this happens. Prayer changes things. 

I mentioned yesterday, above the dining room table or when you’re sitting behind the wall of the table, on the other wall, there was ‘Prayer Changes Things.’ My mother was a woman of prayer. And I’ve got to say, I am the answer, God’s gracious answer, to her prayers. We wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for God’s grace which is activated through prayer. 

Sometimes prayer is the process whereby the will of the person praying is changed and brought into conformity to the will of God. You know, prayer is a conversation, isn’t it? And sometimes it is the process whereby we can get God to do what we want Him to do. That’s happened here. Moses’ arguments swayed God. That’s not Calvinistic language. But it’s the way the story is told. But sometimes God says no, but we are the ones who are to be changed. 

Remember Daniel and his three buddies? It’s actually Daniel’s three buddies. They’re thrown into the fiery furnace. Nebuchadnezzar says, “If you don’t bow down to this image, I’m going to make the furnace seven times hotter, for which God is able to snatch you, rescue you from my hand.” And what do they say? “O King live forever.” I mean, they’re still always respectful, these guys` “O King live forever. If it’s a matter of power, our God is able to rescue us from your hand. But even if He doesn’t, it’s okay. We will not bow down to your image.” And so there you have it. The people praying are the ones who are absolutely resigned to the will of God. Sometimes. But as it turns out, God did, in fact, rescue them by sending another. There was a fourth person in that fiery furnace. Where did he come from? 

Or you remember Amos. You’re working with Amos these days in your Bible study. When you get to about chapter 7 or 8, Amos, in a vision, sees this the storm wind coming in and burning everything down and destroying Israel, His people. And Amos says, “Oh, Lord, stop. Jacob is puny; they can’t handle this.” And God backs off. And then the locusts come in and they destroy again. And he prays again, and He, God backs off, He spares them. And then there’s a third phase in this vision. He sees the vision of a plumb line. And what does Amos do? Nothing. He’s done praying. He’s not going to stave off the judgment. He knows now the judgment is deserved. So, in this case, prayer is the process whereby God got His prophet to see the justice, the righteousness of His actions. And so that’s, you know, resignation to the will of God is then the mark of faith. It’s not measured only in how much we can get God to do for us. It’s how much God can do in us. 

This is why Moses is such a fascinating character. The story of Moses in Exodus begins as an adult. It begins with God wrestling with him in chapter 3 and 4, “I want you to go and get My people out of Israel.” And Moses has five big arguments in which he says, “I’m not doing this. I’m not going. Send anybody you want, but don’t send me.” 

And at that point, God gets angry. Until that point. God just, He talks with him. “Who am I? I’m nobody.” He says, “that’s not your problem, that’s My problem, it’s who I am.” “You know, I have no talent.” He says, “That’s My problem, too, I’m the one who made the mouth.” So, there are four or five arguments. But when Moses says, “Send anybody you want, I’m not going.” Then God gets angry. Finally. But in that wrestling match, God wins because the next scene is Moses is off to Egypt. I mean, it’s funny, without a transition in the text, next thing we see is God has just been angry with him and he said, “I’m not going,” and Moses is going. God won that wrestling match. 

But the story of Moses ends with the story of another wrestling match in which Moses lets us see that he won. What a transformation of this person who resists the will of God vehemently at the beginning, but at the end, wow, what a butterfly has come out of this caterpillar cocoon. It’s an amazing story. Well, it’s a lesson on prayer. It’s a lesson on grace of covenant relationship. I mean, God doesn’t expect perfection but His grace keeps kicking in, and it does here as well. 

But then finally on leadership. True leadership is about the well-being of the people. God puts leaders in positions for the sake of the people, not the reverse. And when we look at a text like this one, that’s what we see. Unlike the first one, there the leader is acting in self-interest and bitterness toward the people. Not so here. 

Well, that’s the grace of covenant relationship. 

You know, Paul talks about we begin our life of faith, regenerate people, “As you have begun by faith so continue by faith.” If the beginning of our life with God is grace, every step along the way is grace, because at every turn we disqualify ourselves from continued privilege of serving Him. This is a great passage. 

Student: Dr. Block, when Moses prayed and God changed His mind, how does that inform us about the nature of God? Because we look at prophecy and how God plans things ahead of time, sometimes even before the foundations of the world, and we see prophecies that are, that we know have been fulfilled sometimes hundreds or even a thousand years later. And so, if God’s in control and if He’s sovereign and He has things planned ahead of time, how do we talk about Him changing His mind? How does that fit when we look at His nature? How does that fit with His sovereignty? 

Dr. Block: Well, probably next to the question about the ethics of getting rid of the Canaanites, this is the question that gets put to me probably more often than any other. And of course, our theological systems drive us to certain positions on this which I find sometimes are not always helpful and obscure the vibrancy, the vitality, the living-ness of God’s relationship to those with whom He enjoys the covenant with. 

After discussing Jonah’s frustration with God and the narrator’s saying that God changed His mind, the word here is, nāḥam, which means to do an about face on something. This word is actually used of both directions. Sometimes God changes His mind about the good that He had done. And to ‘change the mind’ is probably not the best translation. The word expresses the emotional, dare we use the word, turmoil that goes on in God’s mind over what is happening. God reacts. In Genesis 6, it grieved God that He had made humankind on the earth, and He nāḥam-ed. He changed His mind. And what does He do? He destroys the world with a flood. So, it’s there going from good to bad. 

In this instance, it was going from, in the case of Moses’ intercession, the word is used of going from bad to good. He threatened to destroy, but then He backed off and didn’t do it. He withdrew His hand of judgment. 

But of course, the way we answer those questions tends to fall into two opposite camps. And they have labels which aren’t always helpful, because the moment you label something, you can be very dismissive of anybody with that label. And so… But we call these camps the Calvinist approach to divine sovereignty and human freedom, and the Armenian approach. The two principal approaches represent the extremes, and we have the labels Calvinist and Armenian. 

I doubt whether Calvin would have been where many people who claim the name Calvinist these days were on these issues. As I read him, I find him to be much more sympathetic to, actually a softer version of divine sovereignty, which is why I prefer the expression rather than sovereign grace, gracious sovereignty. I find that more helpful. 

The other extreme is represented by the name Armenian from Arminius, who was a free will-er. His focus was on the freedom of human beings to do what they want and God doesn’t interfere. Again, these are exaggerated positions.

But according to the Calvinist approach, the Calvinist answer to this question of the relationship between divine sovereignty and human freedom, let’s let the red represent sovereignty and the green represent human freedom. In the Calvinist world, the divine sovereignty overwhelms human freedom, and there’s very little room for the involvement of humans in the actions of God. These are extremes. But actually, there are very few people on the actual extremes. But that is a picture of that. 

With the Armenians, it is the opposite issue and so, that God shrinks, the vision of God as being sovereign over all creation, that He is, this shrinks. And the emphasis is entirely or almost entirely, on human freedom to act. Human responsibility for human actions. These are the two extremes. 

But I think when we wrestle with expressions like, God changed His mind about destroying Israel, we actually need to go to something like this. It is not either or. In fact, if you want to count verses, I have a sense that the Armenian understanding, the texts involving an Armenian understanding, outnumber texts involving the Calvinist understanding, would be 1000 to 1 in Scripture. The assumption is always human responsibility for human fate. It’s how it talks all the way through. It’s how Deuteronomy, we’ll have this debate again in chapter 30, where God circumcises people’s hearts. Does He do it because they repent or turn around, and then He circumcises? Or is it, you know, freely done without the involvement of the humans? 

But in any case, I think the right one—both are totally true in my view. God is absolutely sovereign over everything and He does what He wants and He decrees what He wants. And it turns out in the end, according to the Divine Plan. That doesn’t mean He’s always satisfied or He is responsible. 

Isaiah will talk about, “I create shalom,” well-being “and I create ra',” disaster. Now there, ra', some translations will have, “I create evil.” No, no, no, no, no, no, no. It’s not a moral issue here. It is an experiential issue. The evil spirit from God that comes upon Saul and comes upon Abimelech, that is not morally evil, it’s a spirit from God that creates havoc in the person’s life. It’s evil in that sense. God does both: He blesses, He curses. 

And so, in a case like this, the mystery is how these work together. Both are totally true. So that when Moses prays and God backs off, “the effectual, fervent prayer of a righteous man” works. It’s because Moses prayed. That’s a strong word. There are some people who will resist that. They will say something like, “Well, it’s hypothetical prayer; it would have turned out this way anyway.” No, it’s not hypothetical. Moses is dead serious. He takes it absolutely seriously. And so, the outcome isn’t predetermined apart from human involvement. 

But the other side of this is God’s relationship with creation, especially with human creation created as His images, this is a living relationship. And it’s like in a marriage where the health of the marriage depends upon the two parties to the relationship interact with each other. And the way one acts affects how the way the other. It’s action and response. It’s always that way. And with God, it’s that way, too. It is. God gets furious because of human sin. And God delights in life, rather than judgment, you know. And so that both of these things are true and so there isn’t a formulaic answer.

I was teaching a course on the Book of Ezekiel at one point, and my older brother (number three), my older brother was in the class and he has been fully involved in the Mennonite church. And Mennonites tend to be, or the stereotype is that Mennonites are all Armenian. Well, I have a feeling that he probably was over there on that issue, but it was a course on Ezekiel. A pastoral theology of ministry from a DMin (note: Doctor of Ministry) course, he was in my class. 

He and his wife came over for supper one day and he just blurted out, “You’re such a Calvinist! Really? My Calvinist friends don’t view me that way. But of course, it depends where you are. And I told him, “Look, when I am in Ezekiel, where he’s got this radical theo centricity, I’m preaching Ezekiel. I’m not preaching Jeremiah. Jeremiah has a different tone and I’m going with the text and somehow or other, the full picture gives us the total picture of God. And there are always on the one hand and on the other hand.” 

And this is why over time, my students have been very frustrated with me because no labels fit. They keep asking me where you are on this issue? Are you here or are you here? It’s on almost every issue. And I land myself in that notorious middle where I get shot from both sides and nobody’s happy. A lot of frustrated people out—you know… So, it is a middle road with two ditches and I think we need to be aware of both ditches. To me, that’s the problem. It’s the extremes always that the problem that gets us fighting the church. It splits the church and whatever else. 

Student: So, part of it’s the mystery of God, too, and the fact that we can pray and it actually makes a difference.

Dr. Block: It actually makes it. And how did this happen? I think that’s why when Peter knocks on the door and they say, How did you get here? She slams the door in his face and she goes back and says, Peter is at the door. Well, let him in! But I think this is why the life of faith should be a life of surprises. And what I resist in the Calvinist extremism is the reduction of life to formulas. There’s no place for adventure, the serendipities. 

And so in that middle road, you can live with the confidence that God knows absolutely what He’s doing and, in the end, what He sets out to do, gets done. Absolutely. He never will drop us. But the other side of this is what if He’s holding us here and we’re in His hand and we decide to jump out. Does He prevent you from jumping out? We all know people who apparently have jumped out. But that’s the word they use: apparent. It appears they have. But my goodness, sometimes appearance may actually be the reality.

So, we are secure in God because He will not fail us. This is chapter 4, verse 32, 31, “God will not fail us.” He will not turn His hand over like this and drop. But what He does. I mean look, Solomon. What a man at the beginning of his reign and what an utter disaster at the end. 

And Ezekiel tells us, and Ezekiel, the most Calvinist of all the prophets, Ezekiel says, “The person who sins dies.” And he says “It’s not how you begin the journey that counts, it’s how you end it.” And he says, “If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does wickedness, and he dies, it’s the judgment of God. But if the wicked man turns from his sin and does righteousness in the latter end of his life, he shall live because he repented.” You know, so that’s a tough text. It’s a really tough text for the extreme Calvinist. And I don’t—I’m not happy with what they do with it. They pretend it’s not a true text. They make it say whatever it needs to say for the system. And I think we should never. 

The high view of Scripture lets the Scriptures take us anywhere it wants without us prescribing what questions we can ask of it, or dictating what answers we allow. And our theology has to be big enough to include every scripture, which produces mystery, doesn’t it? I don’t know.