Journal: Conspectus
Volume: CONSPECTUS 33:1 (Apr 2022)
Article: Is Divine Providence Risky? A Dialogue Between John Calvin And John Sanders
Author: Aku Stephen Antombikums

Conspectus 33:1 (April 2022) p. 58

Is Divine Providence Risky? A Dialogue Between John Calvin And John Sanders

Aku Stephen Antombikums

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

About The Author

Mr. Aku Stephen Antombikums taught Philosophy of Religions, Systematic Theology, and Biblical Studies at The Evangelical Reformed Church of Christ (E.R.C.C) Theological Seminary, Fadan Ayu in Nigeria. He is currently a Ph.D. researcher at the Faculty of Religion and Theology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. His main areas of interest are the Analytic Philosophy of Religion, Analytic Theology, Moral Philosophy, and Public Theology. [email protected]; [email protected]

This article: https://www.sats.ac.za/is-divine-providence-risky-calvin-sanders

Abstract

This study presents John Calvin and John Sanders as an example of the ongoing debate on the nature of divine control and human freedom. Given the time gap between Calvin and Sanders, the study uses a dialogical hermeneutics methodology. The former upheld a “no risk” while the latter propagates a “risky” conception of providence. However, the concept of providence as “risk” or “no risk” is not distinctively biblical. It has not been conceived in such a manner. Despite this, providence can be both risky and risk-free. Seemingly, the notion of divine providence constitutes a paradox, namely: as an omniscient creator, God controls everything, yet humans are free. For humans to be free, their future contingentactions must not be foreknown, because whatsoever God foreknows happens necessarily. Since both Scripture and human history show that humans are free, it follows, therefore, that God does not know all future contingent actions. In that case, divine providence is risky. This explains why God changes and repents of his earlier decisions. However, this study argues that this paradox may be softened if divine ignorance is understood from a contextual point of view. Further, libertarianism, as advocated by Sanders, is overemphasized. Lastly, divine mutability and relenting denied by Calvin are part of divine sovereignty, without which there can be no forgiveness of sin.

Keywords

creation, providence, risk-taking, foreknowledge, divine repentance

1. Introduction

Given the problem of evil, the nature of how divine control relates to human freedom is an age-old debate among philosophers and theologians. The issue continues to be particularly pressing as it relates to the

Conspectus 33:1 (April 2022) p. 59

problems of evil and suffering. Due to dissatisfaction with the explanations provided for these problems, some have come to doubt the existence of a good...