Glorious Tension
Free will tends to stay one of those esoteric quandaries that is fascinating for contemplation – until its existence crashes into the reality we inhabit.
For some reason, it’s so much more palatable to numbly assert that Christ was under obligation (as we were His creation) to free us from our mess, than to stand the sight that – while He could have chosen not to redeem us – still He undertook the painful, nasty battle to bring us back. Ezekiel 16:59-60 makes it clear: “‘For thus says the Lord GOD, “I will also do with you as you have done… Nevertheless, I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth…”’” Void of any ‘mandatory duty,’ God sacrificed Himself because of His volition, and quite apart from our state, in relation to Him.
Our free will is an uncomfortable glimpse at His not ordaining “coercion” the status quo, but instead supplying us all the liberty to move into spheres which would yield searing pain and grievous repercussions. Could our desiring Him freely really have been “counterbalanced” (were spiritual matters quantifiable) by the costliness meant to Him? Why is there greater value in giving us the allowance of setting our hearts elsewhere, than in simply denying us that free choosing, and having us at least abide in right standing with Him, untainted by sin; innocent and holy?
Part of me can fully appreciate that true fellowship could not exist apart from deliberate devotion. There would be no method of securing genuine vulnerability or openness, if not for a will intentionally set on giving back to our Father in that manner. And I can recognize even that the greatest honor is in our choosing Him without any “incentive” outside of knowing Him and enjoying His presence.
Yet what disturbs my finite mind is more to do with the way our “testing,” the purification of our love for Him, cannot be separated in any way from our having all of those pain-filled options available to us. Why can’t we simply declare that we are dedicated, and then let God “lock in” our decision? Why must there still be a propensity to wander? Why must our having a ‘choice’ remain ever in operation?
For, if devotion needs a continual purifying, if a set will cannot endure apart from the constant renewal of withstanding those temptations, then are we not always susceptible to falling? Would we not be far “safer” if we could only be deprived of that choosing – and no pitfalls could anymore overtake us?
But that is not God’s way. The pain must exist. The pain we cause Him, and that which we cause others, and that which we must bear – Appealing as it is to be “stripped of free will,” unable to harm or be hurt, the elimination of pain cannot “balance,” cannot even touch on, the goodness of being in that unhindered communion of fearless, abounding love (see 1 John 4:16-18).
What greater knife is rendered? True. But what greater honor, shown to Him, or experienced ourselves, than to be the one freely chosen – as recipient of willing and devoted sacrifice?
A privilege which could not exist outside of that state where pain is also possible.
For some reason, it’s so much more palatable to numbly assert that Christ was under obligation (as we were His creation) to free us from our mess, than to stand the sight that – while He could have chosen not to redeem us – still He undertook the painful, nasty battle to bring us back. Ezekiel 16:59-60 makes it clear: “‘For thus says the Lord GOD, “I will also do with you as you have done… Nevertheless, I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth…”’” Void of any ‘mandatory duty,’ God sacrificed Himself because of His volition, and quite apart from our state, in relation to Him.
Our free will is an uncomfortable glimpse at His not ordaining “coercion” the status quo, but instead supplying us all the liberty to move into spheres which would yield searing pain and grievous repercussions. Could our desiring Him freely really have been “counterbalanced” (were spiritual matters quantifiable) by the costliness meant to Him? Why is there greater value in giving us the allowance of setting our hearts elsewhere, than in simply denying us that free choosing, and having us at least abide in right standing with Him, untainted by sin; innocent and holy?
Part of me can fully appreciate that true fellowship could not exist apart from deliberate devotion. There would be no method of securing genuine vulnerability or openness, if not for a will intentionally set on giving back to our Father in that manner. And I can recognize even that the greatest honor is in our choosing Him without any “incentive” outside of knowing Him and enjoying His presence.
Yet what disturbs my finite mind is more to do with the way our “testing,” the purification of our love for Him, cannot be separated in any way from our having all of those pain-filled options available to us. Why can’t we simply declare that we are dedicated, and then let God “lock in” our decision? Why must there still be a propensity to wander? Why must our having a ‘choice’ remain ever in operation?
For, if devotion needs a continual purifying, if a set will cannot endure apart from the constant renewal of withstanding those temptations, then are we not always susceptible to falling? Would we not be far “safer” if we could only be deprived of that choosing – and no pitfalls could anymore overtake us?
But that is not God’s way. The pain must exist. The pain we cause Him, and that which we cause others, and that which we must bear – Appealing as it is to be “stripped of free will,” unable to harm or be hurt, the elimination of pain cannot “balance,” cannot even touch on, the goodness of being in that unhindered communion of fearless, abounding love (see 1 John 4:16-18).
What greater knife is rendered? True. But what greater honor, shown to Him, or experienced ourselves, than to be the one freely chosen – as recipient of willing and devoted sacrifice?
A privilege which could not exist outside of that state where pain is also possible.
posted by Purple at 7:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home