The following is a guest post written by my friend Dan Tsouloufis.
How Do We Understand God’s Sovereignty?
This morning I’m going to be teaching on the doctrine of the sovereignty of God, a doctrine which is deeply rewarding to study and contemplate, but is also quite daunting and perplexing to wrap our minds around.
First, I’m going to explore this doctrine from the perspective of God’s absolute freedom, and how God’s will is expressed in two different senses: His “decretive will” and His “preceptive will”.
Second, I’m going to explore this doctrine from the perspective of God’s plan of salvation. Thus, I’ll make the case for the Reformed/Calvinist view of salvation.
Third, and last, I’m going to drill down a little deeper and address two important questions: “Are we free to choose God?” and “Did Christ die for everyone?” Thus, I’ll make the case for the doctrine of definite atonement (aka limited atonement).
Part 1: What Does it Mean that God is Sovereign?
- To say that God is sovereign is to say that He is supreme over all things; that there is no one above Him; and that He is absolute Lord over creation. God’s Lordship over creation means that there is nothing out of His control, nothing that He hasn’t foreseen or decreed.
- God’s sovereignty implies His absolute freedom to do all that He wills to do. God’s sovereignty doesn’t mean He can do anything. For example, God cannot sin. But it means He can do anything that He wills to do. Nothing, or no one, can compel Him or thwart Him or diminish His absolute freedom.
- The manifestation of God’s sovereignty involves the expression of His will in two different senses: His “decretive will” and His “preceptive will”. In the first sense, God’s “decretive will” is His hidden, secret will by which He decrees things will come to pass according to His plans and timetable. This aspect of God’s will is hidden from us until after it comes to pass. This includes things that God actively causes, or even passively permits, to happen. Everything is under His sovereign control. Thus, in this first sense, God’s decretive will and His permissive will are really two sides of the same coin with respect to His hidden, secret will.
- God’s “decretive will” is expressed in such passages as Ephesians 1:11-12, which states, “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.” Similarly, as stated in the Westminster Shorter Catechism, God’s will is “His eternal purpose according to the counsel of His will, whereby for His own glory He hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.”
- The second sense in which God expresses His will, as mentioned earlier, is His “preceptive will”. This is the revealed will of God as expressed in His commandments; that is, His instruction given in Scripture concerning how we should believe and how we should behave. In Scripture, God reveals His character and His precepts regarding how He wants us to live, and reminds us that we are ultimately accountable to Him. As Isaiah 33:22 declares, the Lord is our judge, our lawgiver, and our king.
- Even outside of Scripture, God’s “preceptive will” includes the moral law that He reveals in the hearts of everyone. As Christians, we believe that notions of right and wrong are woven into the fabric of the universe because of God. We all have a moral intuition and a moral conscience because we are created in His image. And since we are created in His image, we therefore bear His likeness and we have His law written on our hearts, to which our consciences also bear witness (as expressed in Romans 2:14-15). Even though our consciences are seared due to the effects of Original Sin, we are still accountable to God for our actions. God’s laws, whether in Scripture or in the heart, are binding.
- To summarize the above points with respect to God’s sovereignty, it is not for us to know, certainly beforehand, God’s hidden, secret will – His decretive will. We can only know God’s preceptive will, which is revealed to us in Scripture and in the moral law written on our hearts. As Deuteronomy 29:29 states, “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.”
Even if we affirm the doctrine of the sovereignty of God, we must humbly acknowledge that it raises several philosophical dilemmas:
- The first is the presence in the creation of those things which God cannot approve, such as evil, pain, and death. The Bible says that God created everything and called it good. Evil, pain, and death are not good. If God is sovereign, He could have prevented their coming into existence. Why did He not do so?
- Another problem has to do with the will of man. If God rules His universe by His sovereign decrees, how is it possible for man to exercise free choice? And if man cannot exercise freedom of choice, how can he be held responsible for his conduct? Is man not a mere puppet whose actions are determined by a behind-the-scenes Deity who pulls the strings as it pleases Him?
- As the late A.W. Tozer has noted, the attempt to answer these questions has divided the Christian church neatly into two camps, which have borne the names of two distinguished theologians, Jacob Arminius and John Calvin. Most Christians are content to get into one camp or the other, and deny either the absolute sovereignty of God or the free will of man. Some, like Tozer, have embraced a modified form of Calvinism.
- Regarding the age-old dilemma of the problem of evil, we cannot know with any degree of certainty why God allows evil things to happen to people – or even, for example, why God allows evil dictators and regimes to come to power. Yet we know that He allows these things. Is all of this outside of God’s providence? Of course not. God has His ultimate plans and purposes, for which we cannot know due to our finite, limited perspective (Deut. 29:29; Daniel 2:20). In fact, in Daniel 2:21, Daniel said that God “changes times and seasons; he deposes kings and raises up others.” Clearly, God was sovereign over Pharaoh (see Ex. 9:16 and Rom. 9:17).
- Lastly, we do not hold to a dualistic view of the universe, where God and Satan are battling it out, where sometimes God wins and sometimes Satan wins. Nor do we believe that God’s sovereignty is limited, either by man or by Satan. Otherwise, that would ultimately make God contingent on something or someone, and thus negate His sovereignty. But the Bible does not portray such a view of God, where God is contingent on anything or anyone. God has absolute freedom as well as absolute knowledge. Nothing happens outside of His control or His knowledge, and we must accept this mystery. Otherwise, we would have no real hope for the future, since man’s will and Satan’s will would be in perpetual competition with God’s will. But God’s sovereign plans and purposes cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2; Isaiah 14:24; Rom. 11:33-36). And we can have certain hope of future glory because of God’s sovereignty and God’s faithfulness (Rom. 8:11; 1 Pet. 1:2-5; Rev. 21:1-4).
Part 2: The Reformed/Calvinist View of Salvation
Next, I’d like to make the case for the Reformed/Calvinist view of salvation, since in some circles it’s still deemed controversial due to such characteristic doctrines as predestination, unconditional election, definite atonement, and so forth. Additionally, due to its adherence to God’s sovereignty in all things, including in man’s salvation, this view is thought to violate man’s free will, as well as make God seem unfair or unjust. Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s important to note that the Reformed view of salvation is a thoroughly biblical view that informs its theology, not the other way around. There are those who claim that the Bible is used to fit into a “preconceived” Reformed theological framework, but I believe this is a gross misunderstanding of the Reformed tradition, which has always been guided by the principle of the authority of Scripture. Therefore, what I’ve tried to do here is provide a high-level overview of the Reformed view of salvation by highlighting the main themes that characterize this view.
While the Reformed perspective does emphasize God’s sovereignty in man’s salvation, nowhere does God’s sovereignty mitigate man’s responsibility. It is true that God is sovereign, and the Bible affirms this. If God is not sovereign, He would be less than God. It is also true that man is free, albeit in a limited sense, and man is responsible for his actions; the Bible affirms this too. Man is truly guilty in spite of the fact that God is sovereign. Therein lies the mystery. This mystery is difficult to reconcile philosophically within our limited, finite minds; but we believe it nonetheless because it’s what the Bible teaches.
Nowhere does Calvin, nor any other major Reformed thinker, ascribe to man the status of a robot. Nor does the Bible. The Bible describes a holy God who is eternal, self-existent, all-knowing, and all-powerful. In other words, sovereign. The Bible also describes man as flawed and sinful; yet man is responsible, and accountable, for his actions.
Regarding man’s salvation, it is all by God’s sovereign grace from beginning to end. Man in his natural, unregenerate state remains under the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13) and under God’s wrath (Rom. 1:18; Eph. 2:3). Thus, man is not on neutral ground with respect to God. Man is in rebellion against God (Col 1:21) and man is spiritually dead in his sins (Eph. 2:1). Therefore, man cannot choose God or the gospel of Christ; God must choose man (John 6:44; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:11; Titus 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:10).
Hence, the Reformed doctrines of unconditional election and effectual calling, whereby man is elected, called, and regenerated by God’s efficacious grace through the work of the Holy Spirit, so that man will believe and choose the gospel of Christ. Without rebirth man has no desire for Christ. Without a desire for Christ, man will not choose Christ. Man will not truly seek God as He is apart from God’s special grace and divine calling. Thus, the Holy Spirit must first awaken and illuminate the truth of Christ in man’s heart in order for man’s desire to turn toward Christ. Once this work of regeneration takes place, man will, by his own faith and volition, choose the gospel of Christ. The guiding principle here is that regeneration “precedes” faith, since the sinner is passive in the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Without the Spirit, man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him (1 Cor. 2:14).
How God works His efficacious grace in man is a mystery, known ultimately only by God, the author and perfecter of our faith (Heb. 12:2). Certainly, the Bible gives us a road map; but how the Holy Spirit works, behind the scenes, is truly a mystery and a miracle of epic proportions. Also, it is important to recognize that God is not obligated to give grace to anyone (Rom. 9:15, 11:35). God gives grace to whom He wills (John 5:21, 6:39) for His glory and purpose (Rom. 8:28, 9:21-23).
There’s an important point that needs to be made concerning the controversial nature of the doctrine of unconditional election (i.e. whether God “chooses” to elect some people and not others). Many people think this doctrine makes God seem unfair or unjust, as well as violate man’s freedom to accept or reject the gospel. While this is admittedly a very difficult doctrine to accept, even if we don’t accept it, the alternative isn’t much better. If God doesn’t “choose” anyone, but He leaves it completely up to us to choose Him, the fact is, some people will still end up in Hell. Thus, it begs the question, “If God knew beforehand I would not choose Him, and I end up in Hell, then why did He allow me to be born in the first place?” You see, it doesn’t really let God off the hook. One could ask, “Is that fair? Is that just?” So a third option is to consider a more “open” view of God, whereby God doesn’t always know in advance what events will take place until they occur, and thus He doesn’t know who will choose Him until they do. While this option may let God off the hook so to speak, it completely undermines His sovereignty, plus it makes God contingent on His creation. In my mind, any such view of God is not really God at all, and clearly the Bible does not portray this lesser view of God. Therefore, we’re back to the age-old dilemma of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility, and how this plays out. The Bible asserts both of these realities, but it does not reconcile them, at least not in a way that our finite minds will be satisfied. However, we are reminded of the Doxology in Rom. 11:33-36.
“Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable His judgments, and His paths beyond tracing out! Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counselor? Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever! Amen.”
Part 3, Question 1: Are We Free to Choose God?
Biblically, it is proper to assert that man is free, albeit in a limited sense.
Regarding man’s free will, the Westminster Confession of Faith informs us that “liberty does not imply ability”. This is because liberty is not identical with ability. Due to the fall and the entrance of sin, man lost the ability to do good, not liberty. This is an important distinction. What many people call liberty, they really mean ability. Thus, they speak of man as being “free” to do good or evil, but what they really mean is that man is “able” to do good or evil. But due to the fall, man’s ability to do good has been corrupted.
Therefore, liberty cannot mean that we’re always able to do what we want (i.e. always choose good over evil). This is why, even as regenerate believers, we are not able to do God’s will perfectly; sin is always present with us. We see this dilemma depicted in Romans 7:15-25 where Paul laments his own inner struggles to do good and avoid evil. All of us know the constant struggle of wrestling with (and giving into) the lures of temptation.
As I previously stated regarding man’s salvation, without rebirth man has no desire for Christ. Without a desire for Christ, man will not choose Christ. Man will not seek God as He is (Rom. 3:11) apart from God’s special grace and divine calling. Thus, the Holy Spirit must first awaken and illuminate the truth of Christ in man’s heart in order for man’s desire to turn toward Christ. Once this work of regeneration takes place, man will, by his own faith and volition, choose the gospel of Christ.
Thus, with respect to man’s free will, there is some degree of coercion taking place, whereby the Holy Spirit first changes man’s desire toward Christ. Is it reasonable to acknowledge that God can influence man’s desires? Of course it is. Even if one holds to libertarian, Arminian free will, they would acknowledge that God can, and does, influence man’s desires. Once that’s been established, now we’re only debating the degree in which God influences man’s desires, not the fact that He does it. Thus, there would likely be more common ground between Calvinists and Arminians if the Arminians would acknowledge the role of the Holy Spirit in influencing man’s desire toward Christ. Yet their hesitation to acknowledge this is due to a prior conviction to hold onto and protect man’s pure free choice, unhindered and un-coerced by God.
Part 3, Question 2: Did Christ Die for Everyone?
In this final section, I would like to make the case for the doctrine of definite atonement (aka limited atonement). It is a commonly held position to assume that Christ died for everyone, not just for the elect. Yet John 17:1-9 seems to indicate otherwise, as does John 17:24. As John 17:9 states: “I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.” Some other key passages are John 6:37, John 6:44, John 6:65, and John 10:25-29. There are many other passages as well, but these are just a few from the Gospel of John. The overarching point is that Christ’s atonement was sufficient and effective for His followers (i.e. His sheep, His elect). Thus, Christ loses none of His sheep; He loses none of those given to Him by the Father. This is precisely why Christ’s atonement is effective, because it secures the salvation for His sheep, His elect.
However, in the non-Reformed view of salvation, Christ’s atonement merely secures the opportunity for potential believers. Which means that Christ’s atonement is ineffective for all those who never come to Christ. Whereas in the Reformed view, Christ’s atonement was completely effective, because it secured the salvation for His elect; it accomplished what it intended to accomplish.
Let me state it another way. God is not sitting around idly waiting for rebellious sinners to turn to Him. This is because rebellious sinners won’t. Without Christ, we are spiritually dead and our will is in bondage to sin. But some will insist that God loves everyone and He desires everyone to be saved, thus the doctrine of election can’t be true. Ideally, heaven could be full and hell empty if everyone just responded in faith. Yet we know that not all will respond. Thus, shall we insist that God loves people more in response to their love of Him? Biblically speaking, I don’t think we can assert this (see 1 John 4:10, 19 and Romans 5:8, 10).
The truth is, God must first love us, not the other way around. Without the Holy Spirit awakening us, how would we truly love God, let alone desire to worship and obey Him? Our hearts are idol factories and we are self-worshippers. Moreover, if we suppose that man’s salvation is ultimately based on man choosing God out of love, then how much love is required? How would we go about determining that? What if my love wasn’t enough? What if over time, my love falters and grows cold? Will God only love me if I love Him back? How much ongoing love does He require of me? I ask these questions merely to demonstrate the difficulty of holding to the libertarian freewill position, which makes salvation ultimately contingent on man’s pure free choice to love God and choose God without any influence or coercion by God.
Yet for some, the Reformed view of salvation and election are too difficult to accept. While I can sympathize to a degree, I would also respond that the Reformed view of salvation gives us true assurance of our salvation, due to the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. God loses none of His sheep. Whereas in the libertarian freewill position, one must always wonder: if my salvation is based solely on my free choice, how secure is that ultimately? What if my love for God grows cold? What if I’m in a pattern of willful sin? How much willful sin will God tolerate? Thus, if my salvation is based solely on my choice and not on God’s choice, can I lose it?
But there’s a second problem with the libertarian freewill position. If person A becomes saved and person B doesn’t, then why? Was person A more moral? Was he more humble? Was he more intelligent? Did he have more common sense? Pick any one of these. If salvation is due solely to man’s free will and free choice, then ultimately his salvation is not by grace, but by his wise decision to choose; whereas person B did not make such a wise decision. Does this picture of salvation sound like grace? How does one get around this dilemma?
Therefore, shall we conclude that Christ died for everyone? Or did Christ die for the elect, His sheep? If Christ died for everyone, then His atonement was insufficient for many, since many will not respond in faith. And if salvation is ultimately based on man’s free choice, then Christ’s atonement is insufficient apart from man’s decision to choose. Biblically, we must reject these notions and conclude that Christ died merely for the elect, His sheep. And because He did, we can assert that Christ’s atonement accomplished what it intended to accomplish, because it secured the salvation for His sheep, for which no one can snatch them out of His hand (John 10:28).
