In the traditional, orthodox way of approaching the nature of divinity, God is defined as an all-wise, all-powerful creator and ruler of the universe. All down through Christian history various theologians have debated just how this view of God can be squared with notion of human responsibility in relation to God’s will. I will not take much time to trace the various ways this issue has been argued both by the likes of John Calvin and Jacob Arminius, to name only the two most prominent theologians. The two perspectives, along with the logical dilemmas they generate should be familiar enough.
On the one side stand those who maintain that since God is perfect the divine will must be honored at all times and in all circumstances. John Calvin argued in this way. The difficulty here is that it becomes easy, if not necessary, to belittle the role played by human decisions in the scheme and development of human life. Or, to put it another way, it becomes difficult to avoid defining God as a cosmic puppeteer who only seems to be taking humans and their decisions seriously. Some have even gone so far as to affirm a kind of “double predestination” as part of God’s overall plan.
On the other side stand those who insist that if our human choices are not taken seriously then the whole of human life is a mere charade with everything simply following God’s plan from the outset. In the end, it is claimed, human choices must factor into the way God operates in the world and how things turn out. In one passage Arminius argued that in the story of the blind beggar receiving a gift from the rich man, the beggar surely could choose, as counter intuitive as it seems, to reject the rich man’s gift. To deny this is not only to denigrate human worth, but to do so is to deny, as well, the integrity of God’s gift itself.
There are those, of course, who simply back away from such issues in favor of the notion of “divine mystery.” They would claim that such questions are beyond the reach of our intellect and must be postponed until God reveals “all things” to us. Our intellects simply are not large enough to encompass such mysteries here on earth. This sounds pious enough, but leaves us with very little to say or think about how our choices factor into our relationship with God. It has a strong tendency to paralyze our daily lives and render them moot.
Instead of seeking to sort out all these familiar puzzles, I would prefer to focus on the Biblical passage that is most often cited as the pivot point of the view that God in one way or another controls the various events of history, causing “all things to work together for those who love God and are called according to God’s purpose.” (Romans 8:28). Instead of trying to provide a proof of what is sometimes called the notion of the “Openness of God”, or the “free will defense”, of the idea that there must be some sense in which God’s sovereignty is circumscribed or limited in relation to human choices, I shall offer what seems to me to be an obvious and reasonable solution of this dilemma.
Let us begin with the popular verse I just quoted from the eighth chapter of Paul’s letter to the Romans, verse 28. My quotation of the verse above is taken from the all- too familiar King James translation and has provided deep comfort to believers down through the ages. The problem is, the King James translation of Paul’s words is both a long way from being accurate and downright misleading theologically. Nearly all the modern translations, such as The Revised Standard Version and New English Bible, render Paul’s statement more accurately from the Greek.
To begin with, the subject of the sentence is not “all things,” but rather it is God. Moreover the Greek verb synergeo used to describe God’s activity in world events literally means “cooperates with.” Thus the verse should read “God cooperates for good with those who love God and are called according to his purpose.” This means that God is “open” to, namely seeks and employs the activity of those who are committed to the divine purpose in the world. In fact, elsewhere we are said to be “God’s fellow workers.” (I Corinthians 3:9).
Bluntly put, the verse clearly claims that God “cooperates” with, indeed, relies upon human participation in the events and decisions of human life. Or, “God is open to” even seeks and needs the cooperation of humans to participate with divine activity in the world. Any way one puts it, this verse clearly implies that the activity of human believers not only can make a difference in the outcomes of human history, but that such activity is actually sought by God.
Put differently, this translation of this key verse affirms and seeks the
participation of those who are committed to seeking God’s will realized in the world. In short, God’s will is “open” to the input of believers, indeed needs such input in order to achieve the Divine purposes. This way of seeing the issue is clearly backed up by the developments of events all through both Hebrew and Christian scriptures, as well as by those of normal human history. It’s only when we allow ourselves to beguiled by pre-established definitions of the Divine nature as being “all-powerful” or totally “sovereign” that we become confused.
It should not go unnoticed that this way of construing the issues involved dove-tails nicely with the theological views of the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead. In my opinion his view is best described as that of “pansyntheism,” one in which the world and God inter-react with one another in order to maximize good in the world and minimize evil. Charles Hartshorne, who sought to develop Whitehead’s views, coined the term “panentheism” in order to stress that these two realities interact and influence each other.
I think the particle “syn” works better to accomplish this end. It is at the heart of such notions as “symbiotic”, “synthesis”, and “synergy” each of which entails the interaction between the entities involved. (I have adumbrated this view more thoroughly in my article in Process Studies Vol. 48.1, Fall-Winter 2019). Moreover, it lies at the heart of the idea that we are “co-laborers” with God in working out the Divine will. Indeed, not only is God “open” to receiving such co-operation, it is built into the very notion of God’s taking human faith seriously.

Back around 1980 a student friend Gary Biester dropped by my house to present me with a gift of the Bruce Springsteen album “The River.” I had not heard of “The Boss” so I was interested to explore whatever it was that Gary thought was so special about him and his music. I very soon became a devoted fan of Bruce and his unique musical style. As it turned out, the lead song on the “The River” album soon became my favorite of Bruce’s vast and diverse repertoire.
Living in the Philadelphia area I soon realized that I was surrounded by a very large number of devoted fans, including many of my students. The raw power of both Bruce’s sound, together with his insights into the frustrations of the working-class experience in contemporary America, made it clear that he was a genuine phenomenon that was here to stay. His own personal story gives clear testimony to the authenticity of his vision and music. Forty-five years later Bruce’s music is still an enormous cultural force in our society.
The details of his early struggle to learn how to play and sing, of how he had to overcome his father’s disdain for his dreams and talent, and his evolvement into voice for strong ethical and political values, have all contributed to the current “Boss’s” popularity and influence. Springsteen’s songs, such as “Born to Run”, “The River”, “Born in the USA”, and “Independence Day”, have all found their way into the minds and hearts of at least two, if not three American generations, and there seems to be no end in sight to his popularity.
The media have long been full of details about Springsteen’s youth and adult life, and I will not try to rehearse such things here. What I can do is share what his songs have come to mean to me as a long-time adult enthusiastic fan. His life and lyrics resonate with my own adolescent struggles with trying to find out who I was and what I should become. A confusing family life, a seeming lack of any special talent, struggles with school and teenage romance, and finally the challenges of a complex adult are as universal as they are unique for everyone.
In particular, Bruce’s feelings and insights concerning teenage romance strike me as ever so authentic and poignant. Teenage love is all so important and real, yet so universal and mostly transitory. The feelings of a need to “escape”, to “run” from it all sometimes crowd out whatever else is on one’s radar. And then, in addition to school, which hardly gets first billing in a teenager’s consciousness, there is work. Bruce often sings about “putting; down the asphalt” and not being able to land or keep a job. No wonder kids sometime feel as though they were “born to run”. Going “down to the river” provides some temporary relief.
The other night Mari and I watched a film titled “Blinded by The Light” which tells the story of a young Pakistani boy living in England who in the midst of his teenage struggles with school, other kids, and his own traditionalist father discovers Bruce’s his music and follows it in fulfilling his own dream to be a writer. It’s a fun if painful story, but the boy becomes a young man as he discovers himself and his calling. He tries hard to follow in Springsteen’s footsteps and discovers himself in the process. Frequently Bruce’s lyrics literally help him with his own life struggles. It’s an interesting and fun flick, full of “The Boss’s” music and British pop-culture.
As a matter of fact, it is revealed after the film is over that the boy the story is about actually got to know Springsteen and collaborated with him in the making of this very film. Quite an interesting and unique story. We found it as delightful as it was informative. And, of course, the highpoint of the film is Mr. Springsteen’s music which underscores the plot. I recommend the film to all and any of “The Boss’s” fans. It’s not actually about him, and yet it really is!