I have had trouble with Bell’s take on “free-will.” It just doesn’t make sense to me that if “God is love” and “love never fails” that God will not triumph through that love with every heart. Free-will is often championed as the honoring of our choice by a truly loving Being and yet we have in Phil 2 the God who will have every knee to bow and every tongue confessing “Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father,” somehow, apparently against their will.
However, I cannot comprehend how this is forced since it says it is to “the Father” not to the judge. I think it is appropriate to compare this to earthly fathers. What would bring you glory as a father: a child that publicly admitted you were right all along while at the same time rebelling, hating, and rejecting you in his heart? (Sitting down on the outside while standing up on the inside?) Or a child that had “come to his senses” and proclaimed that you indeed were a most loving, kind father of integrity, “singing your praises” to others? Surely God must be greater than Napoleon who himself even said that anyone can make someone bow in obeisance while the real power lay in someone who could make you love them (he referenced Jesus Christ).
“Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God.” 1 Peter 2:16
“Outside of Christ we are slaves, the best of us are all slaves. In Christ, the lowest of all is a free man and a king.”
— Richard Sibbes Glorious Freedom
Free-will Part three: Napoleon
Also see series of articles on Free-will apologist Lee Strobel
Also helpful is the understanding the idea of Divine Romance which does not violate man’s freedom but redeems and heals it:
Have You Considered the Power of Divine Romance?
Be First to Comment