Ordained to Rebel?
How Calvinism Defines God's Sovereignty
Some time ago, an image of a dress circulated on the internet. There was nothing particularly fascinating about the picture or the dress, except that some people saw a blue and black dress while others saw a gold and white one.
It instantly went viral.
Arguments ensued over what color the dress was. Eventually, the owner posted a clearer picture, confirming the true colors to be blue and black. Those who had only seen gold and white in the previous image were aghast. How could they have seen things so differently?
I believe God’s sovereignty is Christendom's blue and black dress.
For centuries, Christians have been engaged in a contentious debate over God’s control and man’s free will. Calvinists, Arminians, Lutherans, and others offer their interpretations, going back and forth on various definitions and concepts.
We’re all looking at the same dress and seeing different colors.
I, like many Christians, used to stand on the outside of the conversation. “It’s a mystery!” I often concluded, forever the conflict-avoidant peacemaker. Of course, there is nothing wrong with landing there and moving on with life. Reality remains unchanged regardless of our correct comprehension of it. And yet, there comes the point when settling on mystery is not enough for the hungry mind. As years stretch and curiosity revives, one starts to itch and twitch over such things.
“If God ordains everything, then why does evil exist?” *Itch
“If everything has already been decided, do my choices matter?” *Twitch
Eventually, the itch must be scratched.
I turned my attention to these particular questions because I had always held a deterministic view of God’s sovereignty. I believed, as many Calvinists do, that the loftiest perception of God required acknowledging His supreme control, or rather, his 'sovereignty,' meaning a meticulous providence over everything. In other words, God had foreordained all that comes to pass, and no “rogue molecule” goes where he does not wish it to go.
In the general Calvinist view, this meticulous providence can also be applied to man’s sin.
John Calvin, the namesake of Calvinist doctrine, wrote, “The decree, I admit, is dreadful; and yet it is impossible to deny that God foreknew what the end of man was to be before he made him, and foreknew, because he had so ordained by his decree. Should anyone here inveigh against the prescience of God, he does it rashly and unadvisedly. For why, pray, should it be made a charge against the heavenly Judge, that he was not ignorant of what was to happen? Thus, if there is any just or plausible complaint, it must be directed against predestination. Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it.”1
R.C. Sproul Jr. puts it more simply: “God desired for man to fall into sin. I am not accusing God of sinning. I’m suggesting that God created sin.”2
Or take the opinion of Calvinist Mark Talbot, who wrote in a book edited by John Piper that "God brings about all things in accordance with his will. In other words, it isn't just that God manages to turn the evil aspects of our world to good for those who love him; it is rather that he himself brings about these evil aspects for his glory and his people's good. This includes—as incredible and as unacceptable as it may currently seem—God's having even brought about the Nazis' brutality at Birkenau and Auschwitz as well as the terrible killings of Dennis Rader and even the sexual abuse of a young child."3
Incredible indeed.
Not all those who consider themselves Calvinists take such an extreme position, yet the consensus among them seems to be that even when God permits evil, he is ultimately ordaining for that evil to occur, turning his permission into causation.
According to Calvinists, any view that does not define God’s sovereignty as meticulous providence belittles God’s glory since God is honored most when his prerogative is affirmed.
This was my perspective of the world, and I could not comprehend a different reality. I didn't believe it was possible for God to not directly cause everything. The gold and white dress was firmly fixed in my mind’s eye.
The hues, however, eventually began to flicker.
A Glitch in The System
Imagine my surprise when I learned that Christian non-Calvinists also believe that God is all-powerfully sovereign. Everyone within orthodox Christianity affirms that God has the right to rule as he wishes, which is what “sovereignty” means in the English language. It is a term used in non-theological contexts quite often. For instance, a nation can be sovereign, a king is a Sovereign, and a CEO, homeowner, or captain has sovereignty over their spheres.
And yet, somehow, Calvinism argues that the definition of “sovereignty” must shift when applied to God, an all-powerful being. No king, parent, or boss can maintain absolute control over everything within their jurisdiction, but if they could, they surely would. According to this logic, since God can directly control everything, he must want to directly control everything.
But one wonders at the reasoning for this leap. God is sovereign and omnipotent, of course, which means he has the right and the ability to rule in any way he chooses. But does having the right and the ability mean that God must? If sovereignty means that God has the right to rule as he wishes, then wouldn’t the right question be, how does God wish to rule?
Could a sovereign God choose to create autonomous creatures capable of going against his desires? Is an all-powerful God powerful enough to restrain his own power?
More significantly, doesn’t a doctrine that limits God's method of rulership to meticulous providence deny his right to rule in any way he wishes?
*Flicker.
The Calvinist system demands that God be constrained to operate in a particular way. Those outside this doctrine affirm God’s power and ultimate authority without requiring that he must ordain everything that occurs.
So, how does God choose to rule his universe? The answer depends entirely on what kind of Ruler we believe God to be and what sort of relationship he wants with the humans he has made.
Guided by Character
While Calvinism seems to assert that God’s ability is what makes him most glorious, others would say it is God’s character that truly makes him shine. What God can do is less significant than what God chooses to do.
The Bible shows that God is good, loving, just, holy, and many other awe-inspiring things. We also see that he desires a genuine relationship with humanity. It is not an absurdity to assume that these are the attributes and priorities that guide his decisions. God chooses to use his authority and power in ways that align with his character, and to do otherwise would be to contradict himself.
For example, it would contradict God’s justice to command people to repent after foreordaining them not to repent and then judge them eternally for not repenting.
It would contradict God’s holiness and hatred of evil for him to cause every wicked thing that occurs, from the gas chambers of the holocaust to the sexual abuse of a small child.
It would contradict God’s commitment to truth for him to express a desire for us to follow his commands while secretly willing that we break them.
God does not contradict himself, which means he uses his power in accordance with his character.
But Calvinism has made a comfortable home in contradiction since its conception.
According to the Westminster Confession, “God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass, yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures;”4
Interesting.
Put in simpler terms, God has already decided everything you will ever do, and yet you can do whatever you want.
If this sounds like a blatant contradiction, that's because it is.
I used to let these things slide because it took too long to reason out the knots (after all, if the Westminster Confession says it’s true, then it must be, right?) This is the troublesome sort of double talk that is often utilized to make God the cause of all things without making him culpable of evil. God created sin and is not the author of sin. God is the one who decrees precisely what will happen, and yet man is free to make his own decisions. When asked to explain how these contradictions work, Calvinists will often appeal to mystery (as I regularly did) and give it a fancy name like “compatibilism” or an “antinomy.”
No one argues that God does not have the prerogative to rule as He wishes. This is, after all, what the word “sovereignty” means. But one can be sovereign over one's domain without causing every single thing that occurs within it. A father can be sovereign over his household and still choose to give his children freedom. A king can have authority over his citizens and still allow them to make their own choices. In fact, this is what makes rebellion against the Sovereign Lord a real and serious offense.
But how can man rebel against God when God Himself ordained their rebellion?
Those who do not espouse Calvinism are not content with the equation. Truth dictates that two plus two equals four, not five, and we believe God is as committed to truth as he is to his character.5
Reality According to Scripture
Of course, God had the right to create any world he wanted to, and he did not have to create humans with free will. Instead, the question is, what kind of world does the Bible say God created? Are we told in Scripture to view reality as a deterministic script, where every choice and event is set in stone?
Quite the contrary.
One does not need to be a Bible scholar to see that, at the very least, God treats and speaks to humanity as though they are capable of free will. Throughout the Bible, God expresses disappointment over man’s sin (Genesis 6:5- 6) and longing for humans to turn from evil (2 Kings 17:13- 14). He is consistently angered over wickedness (Judges 2:20) and experiences genuine grief over mankind’s disobedience (Psalm 78:40- 41). We see throughout the Old Testament that choices are offered and that the possibility of different outcomes is presented (Deuteronomy 30:15-20, Joshua 24:15, 1 Kings 18:21). The Bible also takes note of God’s unique intervention throughout history to accomplish his greater purposes, implying something separate from himself in which to intervene (Genesis 6-9, 11:1-9, 18-19, Exodus 3:7-10, Joshua 10:12-14, Daniel 3). Principles for wise living are shared, along with the assurance that pursuing righteousness leads to life (Proverbs 21:21) and walking in wickedness results in ruin (Proverbs 28:18).
Is God just teasing humanity? Is he putting on a show? Is God leading us on in thinking that our choices matter and that our options are real? Are his interventions a disruption of his own decrees? Did he send Jesus to die for a problem that he created himself?
The very existence of the Bible would seem to support the notion that we aren’t just puppets on strings but image bearers with the ability to reason, choose between legitimate possibilities, and be persuaded to believe in an incredible God.
The non-Calvinist view of God’s sovereignty can easily maintain his prerogative and power without inadvertently corrupting his character.
This perspective allows for a God who is truly present with people, who is actively moving in hearts, events, circumstances, and cities, and who is wooing and working and receiving and responding. This God is not some abstract author sitting back to watch the prewritten story unfold, but a real person who genuinely interacts with the humans he has created.
The implications are freeing and sobering. Our choices matter, our prayers change things, and our decisions today will have consequences tomorrow.
There is a real enemy, a real battle, and a real race to run.
And yet, we are not any less secure in the all-powerful hands of God. He is strong enough to accomplish his purposes, and no one can thwart his plans. He will allow, interact, and intervene in whatever ways are best. All who have faith in Christ are safe under his banner, and he will work all things together for the good of those who love him.
Best of all, our relationship with God is genuine, and his delight in us is sincere.
We serve the strongest General, the wisest Strategist, and the kindest Provider. He has surely given us everything we need to conquer as we trust in him with childlike faith.
A New Home
It has been three years since I started to scratch the theological itch, which resulted in an arduous process of moving my doctrine from one camp to another. Deconstructing a view is somewhat easy, after all. It’s finding where to make a new home that’s hard.6
I found a kindred spirit in Provisionism, a position that affirms God’s universal love and provision for all mankind.7 Along with its more expansive (and, in my opinion, biblical) soteriology, it also offered me a view of God’s sovereignty that finally pulled together the pieces previously fragmented into contradiction by the Calvinist hermeneutic.
I take comfort in the fact that all theologians who have ever existed, from Augustine to Calvin to Arminius, are just humans trying to make sense of what they see. Is the dress gold and white? Or is it blue and black? Regardless of our perception, objective truth exists; one day, these mysteries will become clear.
One day, we will each stand before God and be wrong about something, and yet our faith will be made sight. What a relief that the blood of Christ covers even our theological errors! He truly is our only hope and plea. And yet, in the meantime, I hope I am beginning to see the colors of God’s sovereignty a bit more clearly.
Continued, thoughtful examination of these issues is necessary to remain faithful to Scripture, especially as we live through what most would agree to be a Calvinist revival in the Western church. If Calvinism is wrong about the nature of God’s sovereignty, then this doctrine of meticulous providence has, however unintentionally, misunderstood and misrepresented the character of God.
If I and other non-Calvinists are wrong, then God ordained we should be, and we could never have done differently.
The Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, section 7 (emphasis mine)
Almighty All Over, p. 54 (emphasis mine)
WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH 1646 :: Chapter III
Steve Gregg provides an excellent, two-part lecture series on sovereignty, in which he uses this illustration to insist that God is committed to logic.
Contrary to what may be assumed, this departure from Calvinism was not in any way a breaking-off from the beliefs of my immediate family. My husband has never been a Calvinist, and my father had removed the reformed lenses long before I did. I have him to thank for the introduction to Provisionism, and after many months of discussion, I finally allowed myself to examine what he was talking about. I’ll forever be grateful for his persuasion.
It surely is the most hated of doctrines.. as my pastor will tell me. And for me the most amazing. That HE is Sovereign in Salvation. :)
I like what Edwards said: the only thing we contribute to our salvation is the sin that made it necessary.
I became a Calvinist, because the bible gave me no choice. :)
“If sovereignty means that God has the right to rule as he wishes, then wouldn’t the right question be, how does God wish to rule?” Thank you for creating and sharing words that cause us to consider God. Considering God beyond our dogma is brave and uncomfortable and most always beneficial when we seek through the lens of scripture.