Divine Sovereignty and Why It Matters

For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me. (Isa. 46:9)

This post attempts to answer the question, why it is important for Christians to have a firm understanding of divine sovereignty? There are three basic elements that deserve most of our focus where this doctrine is concerned: 1) what is the definition of divine sovereignty? 2) why is it important? 3) what are the implications of this doctrine for practical Christian living (Christian praxis)? Contrary to what many modern pastors would have you believe, theology matters. Why does it matter? It matters because you live what you believe every day. Therefore, if your belief is in error, your behavior will be as well. It really is that simple. Your love for others is based on a belief. Your church attendance is based on a belief. You will vote or not vote, and do so in a certain way because you have formed a certain belief about it. Theology matters! It matters a lot. Think about this: the idea that theology doesn’t matter is a belief. In other words, to say we should not take a theological position on a particular position is to take a theological position on a position. The claim that theology does not matter is a self-refuting position that should be abandoned by any serious thinker.

What does Christian theism mean when it makes the claim that God is absolutely sovereign over all the affairs of humanity? In order to answer this question, we must turn to the only source at our disposal for such an inquiry: divine Scripture. There is no other source for how one should understand and define the concept of divine sovereignty than the Christian Scriptures. When Moses asked God who it was that spoke to Him from the burning bush, God said, ʾehĕye   ʾăšer   ʾehĕye, I am who I am. I think John Frame is right to point out that this exchange took place within the context of God’s promise to deliver Israel from the most dominating government of that time. Surely it points to the Lordship of God as the all-controlling one. In fact, not only did God demonstrate his control over Pharoah and this government, He demonstrated His control over nature in the plagues He brought upon the Egyptians for their sinful rebellion against God’s right to be acknowledged and worshipped. Ps. 93:1 says the LORD reigns. The first words of Scripture, “In the beginning, God created,” testify to God’s absolute sovereign control over all of creation. When we say that God is absolutely sovereign, we are saying that God is the self-sufficient, independent being. He relies on no one or nothing for anything and all things rely on Him. All things are dependent on God for their existence.

When Christian theism affirms divine sovereignty, it is affirming the view that God is in complete control of all that has happened, is happening, or ever will happen. Christian theism is affirming that God does not depend on anyone or anything to carry out His divine plan.

Second, what God controls, God controls efficaciously. John Frame says it well when he writes, “To say that God’s controlling power is efficacious is simply to say that it always accomplishes its purpose. God never fails to accomplish what he sets out to do. Creatures may oppose him, to be sure, but they cannot prevail.” [Frame, The Doctrine of God] The prophet Isaiah said it like this, “My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure.” (Isa. 46:10) There is nothing that can stand between God and His purpose. This verb is translated in LXX by bouleuō or a compound over seventy times, “to give counsel, deliberate, purpose, determine.” [Theological Workbook of the OT] The only way that God can make such bold proclamations about his purpose, or what he has determined, is if he is absolutely sovereign. God’s sovereignty is efficacious to the point that God says that even the bird that flies in from the east does so because God brought it to pass and the man that comes from a far country only does so because God wills it.

Another example of what Christian theism means by divine sovereignty is found in Romans 9:21, “Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?” And then again in Eph. 1:11, “also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will.” So when we say that God is sovereign, we are not saying that God is just a great big overseer in the sky watching men exercise their free-will with His permission. This is essentially what theologians call general sovereignty. This view claims that God has limited what he can do and control. This is not what we mean when we say that God is sovereign. The references above would indicate that God’s control is not general. To say that even the birds are directed by God is clearly pointing to God’s specific control over the smallest events. That is what we mean when we say that God is sovereign.

The reason the doctrine of divine sovereignty is important is because it is clearly taught in Scripture. Daniel 4:35 says that God does according to His will. Job 42:2 informs us that no purpose of God can be thwarted. Ps. 115:3 tells us that God does whatever he pleases. Eph. 1:11 is especially helpful in understanding divine sovereignty. God is said to be working all things according to the counsel of his will. “For God to guarantee that his decree will be accomplished means that on at least some occasions libertarian free will must be overridden. If not, there is no guarantee with libertarian freedom that God’s ends will be achieved.” [Feinberg, No One Like Him] There are multiple examples that could be offered to show that apparent acts of freedom could not have been truly outside the sovereign control of God. The numerous events of the crucifixion of Christ would clearly place divine sovereignty in conflict with libertarian freedom. There could be no guarantee of redemption if libertarian freedom is true. If God is not sovereign, it is possible that the death of Christ on the cross could have failed to convert a single soul. After all, libertarian freedom places salvation not in the control of God but, for the most part, in the control of man. Finally, a failure to understand the sovereignty of God is a failure to know God properly. “A right conception of God is basic not only to systematic theology, but to practical Christian living as well. It is to worship what the foundation is to the temple; where it is inadequate or out of plumb the whole structure must sooner or later collapse.” [Tozer, A Knowledge of the Holy]

When we fail to understand divine sovereignty, we inevitably get our roles mixed up with God’s role. We witness all sorts of gimmicks, programs, methods, etc. in churches the world over. We believe that converting souls and persuading men to believe is really our responsibility. We believe that men can see and believe the gospel within their own natural abilities. We think that if we can introduce the right kind of music, create the right sort of programs, put together the perfect youth program, preach certain kinds of sermons, make just the right arguments, offer up just the right evidence, we will succeed in growing our churches. If we would just invest a little energy in accessing Scripture and seeking to understand the kind of God it is that is revealed there, we might spare ourselves a lot of time and resources.

If libertarian free-will is true, then divine freedom is false. If God is not absolutely free, it necessarily follows that God is not sovereign. If God is not sovereign, then chance rules the day. And if chance rules the day, then God cannot be trusted to deliver on a single thing he has promised to do. And if God cannot be trusted to deliver on his promises, he is just another god unworthy of worship and devotion. By now you should feel the nearness of the Greek gods in this scenario of sovereignty. A deficient understanding of sovereignty, when taken to its logical end, produces a god much like that of the Greek pantheon. If this is true, then it seems that it matters a great deal what we believe about divine sovereignty.

But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases. (Ps. 115:3)

Divine Predestination and Philosophical Alternatives

One of the most vexing problems in philosophy concerns the problem of what appears to be a highly structured universe and the seemingly undeniable fact of human freedom. For centuries philosophers have struggled with this problem without much progress. The problem arises from the fact that we have conflicting beliefs about two different states of affairs. First, we are confronted with what seems to be the unavoidable fact of human morality. From the standpoint of experience, it seems abundantly clear that humans are morally responsible for their acts. The view that some acts are praiseworthy while others stand self-condemned seemingly needs no defense. Who among us does not condemn the atrocities of Auschwitz? Indeed, is there is any among us that did not praise the captain of the US Airways flight when he landed it safely on the Hudson River without loss of a single life.

However, we are also confronted with the fact that seemingly every event in the universe is the consequent of some antecedent cause. Halverson writes, "It seems self evident to many people, for example, that every event has a cause."[1] The fact of universal determinism and the fact of human responsibility seem to create an insurmountable dilemma for philosophers. It is a dilemma for which the solution remains contested to this day. Philosophy has generally suggested three alternatives as a solution to this problem. The task of the Christian is to examine these three alternatives in the light of Scripture. To be more precise, the task of this project is to examine the three alternatives offered by philosophy in light of the biblical doctrine of predestination. The question I shall offer is this: do any of the three alternatives proffered by philosophers in this project cohere with the biblical doctrine of predestination?

The three positions are Hard Determinism, Libertarianism, and Compatibilism. I will treat these three positions in the order I have listed them above. Following an explanation of each view, I will provide a brief explanation of divine predestination as taught in Scripture.

Hard Determinism makes the argument that the freedom that is a condition of moral responsibility is not compatible with universal determinism. Since it is true that universal determinism is the nature of the case, then it only follows that humans are not free in the sense that is required to render us morally responsible. The logical outworking of Hard Determinism then is that human beings are not morally responsible. Since every event, to include human behavior, is the consequent of some antecedent cause, it follows that humans do not possess the freedom necessary to be morally responsible.

Libertarianism, on the other hand, contends that the freedom that is a condition of moral responsibility is not compatible with universal determinism. Moreover, it is clear that humans do in fact possess this freedom. Therefore, universal determinism is false. This view is probably the most common view among non-philosophers. Frankly, it is most common in all likelihood because most people simply fail to reflect on the issues involved in the question.

A third view is the view known as Compatibilism. This view is also called soft-determinism. This view is the view of most philosophers. Philosophical Compatibilism affirms that the freedom that is a condition of moral responsibility is compatible with universal determinism. Therefore, we may be morally responsible even if determinism is the case. What must be understood about soft determinism is that it is no less a deterministic system than hard determinism. The difference lies in how each view defines human freedom. The question now to which we turn is whether or not any of these views comport with Christian doctrine, specifically, the doctrine of predestination.

The biblical doctrine of predestination teaches that God has predetermined whatsoever comes to past. No event has ever occurred that God did not decree. The Apostle Paul teaches us that God is always, continually, working all things according to the counsel of His will. (Eph. 1:11) In fact, there is nothing that happens that God has not ordained it to happen from eternity past. Every event to have ever taken place in the history of humanity has only taken place because the sovereign God of the universe decreed it to take place. At the same time, Christian doctrine affirms without hesitation that human beings are morally responsible for their actions even though God decreed their actions in eternity past.

Hard Determinism contradicts the clear teachings of Scripture in regard to human responsibility. Paul tells us that humanity is morally culpable for its immoral behavior and is without an excuse. (Rom. 1:20) In addition, Paul informs us that human beings are created in the image of God and know intuitively that they are morally culpable for their behavior. (Gal. 2:14-16)

Libertarianism fares no better than Hard Determinism. Scripture teaches that human beings are enslaved to their sin nature. Their will is bound by their innate desire to engage in various lusts, lies, murders, drunkenness, and various other sinful passions. Paul describes the condition of men as being held captive by Satan to do his will. The human will is not an island unto itself. The human wills to do what the mind thinks is best or desires most. The human will has a causal relationship with desire. In addition, human desire has a causal relation with human nature. Christian doctrine teaches that men are not free from God's divine decree. Judas, it was said by Christ, would have been better off had he not been born. Pharaoh did exactly what God determined he would do. Peter explains in Acts 4:28 that even the rulers that murdered Jesus did so by the predetermined counsel of God. And yet, these men would be held responsible for their actions. So then, Libertarianism is not consistent with the biblical doctrine of predestination.

Finally, we must ask if philosophical Compatibilism can do better than its alternatives. While philosophical Compatibilism may come closer to cohering with biblical predestination, it still falls short. The main problem with philosophical Compatibilism is in its affirmation of universal determinism. This view is contrary to Christian theism in that it holds that the universe is governed by impersonal natural laws operating in law-like fashion. Hence, this explains why we see such regularity in the universe. There is no room in Christian theism for impersonal laws of nature operating in and of themselves. Scripture everywhere teaches that God upholds the universe and all that is in it by the power of His Word. A better alternative to philosophical Compatibilism is theological Compatibilism. But that is a subject for a different day.

---

[1] Halverson, William H. A Concise Introduction to Philosophy, 4^th ed. (New York, NY: Random House, 1981) 240.