Thomas Boston continues his discussion of affliction (the crook in one’s lot) by defending the idea that it is a function of God’s providence. He works all things according to the counsel of his will (Ephesians 1:11). The biblical evidence for this idea of God’s sovereignty revealed in providence is overwhelming and I won’t dump all that on you.
Boston provides additional distinctions. Some afflictions are “pure and sinless”. Though painful, they do not defile you. Such things would be poverty, infertility, disability and so forth. Such things are not necessarily one’s fault (some causes of all mentioned could be someone’s sin however- in that case they would be “impure sinful crooks”). The storm that killed Job’s children was pure & sinless. The theft of his livestock by the Chaldeans was impure and sinful.
Sadly, sometimes we bring them upon ourselves. Romans 1:19ff talks about how God hands people over to sin, and their desires become progressively dark and destructive. “He justly withholds His grace, which the sinner does not desire, takes off the restraint under which he is uneasy, and, since the sinner will be gone, lays the reins on his neck and leaves him to the swing of his lust.” This sounds like what Mark Driscoll calls “Cruel Calvinism” in his sermon on Ruth 1. But Genesis 50 reminds us “20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” Driscoll has forgotten the aspect of concurrence in the doctrine of providence. Joseph’s brothers intended evil- the destruction of Joseph. Satan intended the evil of destroying the promise of Genesis 3. God intended the preservation of Joseph, his family and therefore the promise as channeled through Abraham and his descendants. So, I’m sticking with the Westminster instead of Driscoll’s “softer” view of providence with God granting ‘permission’.
But why such trials?