Sovereignty of Agency?…

We continue our comments on the manuscript sent to us by a Mormon called Stephen.(*) Click here to see the other articles in this series. You can also go to the Mormonism page to find all the articles that are in this refutation of Stephen’s document.

Mormons have no real spiritual idea about the Sovereignty of God, because they have denied it and they have invented their own god(s) who is under the laws of nature and under the sovereignty of man’s choice which is called “Agency” by Stephen. So let me explain in short what the Sovereignty of God is.

God is the Creator of the heavens and of the earth, i.e. the Creator of the whole universe, of all what exists. Nothing existed, not even time, and all existed when God created. Even the natural laws didn’t exist before God created the nature with those characteristics that we call natural laws. So God was not and is not dependent of any of the laws of nature. It is He who has chosen how and what those laws should be and how they should work, and He is able to work independently of those laws without contradicting them (example: in miracles). God also created all things with a perfect wisdom and order, making all things work in a perfect order that reflects His eternal power and divine nature (Sovereignty): “for from [the] world’s creation the invisible things of him are perceived, being apprehended by the mind through the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, — so as to render them inexcusable.” (Romans 1:20) The passage in Romans 1 continues and explains how man has been corrupted by sin, as he refused to acknowledge God as God (Sovereign), and replaced Him with his inventions which he called gods (just as Mormons did). The Sovereignty of God means that He is the supreme Ruler over all, who depends of nothing in all His creation, and of whom all things in His creation depend. Whatever happens in nature or in history depends of His supreme Choice, and He is NOT “forced” to change His plans according to some events “unexpected” by Him… Let me specify: In His Plan of Salvation, He didn’t take the counsel of any creature, not even angels, and He didn’t wait to see what men would choose in order to make His Plan of Salvation accordingly. Yes, He has created us with a free will, but this free will is not independent like God’s Will, i.e. our will is not sovereign as Stephen describes it as we will see. Yes, we can choose freely, but we can’t change God’s eternal Plan of Salvation with our choices. Before the Fall, man’s free will was good, because man had not chosen to decide his own “destiny” by himself, thus rebelling against the Sovereignty of God. The Fall happened because man chose to be like God, knowing good and evil. We have seen in our article Did Adam have to choose between two sins? that Mormons have no idea about what this knowledge of good and evil is. Yes, just like Mormons, Eve also thought that when she eats from that forbidden tree, she would have the freedom to choose between good and evil, but the fact is that she became the slave of evil, and now we all have a free will dependent of evil (slave of sin), and we can’t choose to do anything good unless we acknowledge the Sovereignty of God over our lives. Don’t misunderstand this point: God is Sovereign even over our will which is enslaved to evil: we can’t do anything evil that may change His Plan; God uses even our evil choices and acts to His Glory without being responsible of those evil choices that we make freely. And when we choose to do good, God is not surprised by that, because it is He who makes us new creatures in Christ in order to walk in righteousness. When we believe, we don’t surprise God by some imaginary merit in us that would have made us believe, because we don’t have any such merit in us (contrary to what Mormons think). So the tree of knowledge of good and evil is not like what Mormons think: Adam and Eve were created good, so they didn’t need to be outside of good and outside of evil in order to choose to obey God or in order to have the ability to disobey and thus choose evil. You don’t need to lose all your money in order to be able to choose to keep it. This is simple logic. You can just choose to keep your money while it is still with you. In the same way, Adam and Eve could very simply choose to keep their innocence, and they didn’t need to lose it in order to choose to keep it. The knowledge of good and evil means to be independent and neutral, i.e. independent from good and evil as such, which is impossible for a creature, because he is not sovereign like God.

In our previous article, we have seen together some biblical passages that tell us about the Sovereignty of God, so I will not quote those passages again here, and I will pass directly to comment on what Stephen has said in his document against this Sovereignty of God:

For the sake of Agency—man’s right to choose for himself, He would also have to allow bad things to happen to good people.

Look how he describes the choices of God: He would have to allow… as if God were under the mercy of man’s choices… On the contrary, God has His eternal Plan independently of whatever man or any creature may choose, and according to that Plan He allows or does not allow men to choose or act in certain ways. If bad things were happening to good people dependently of other people’s bad choices and God were just allowing those things to happen without having full control over them and over their results, then the elect would not have the assurance given by passages like the following in God’s Word: “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.” (Romans 8:28-30) Of course, this is about the Foreknowledge of God or the eternal Election in Christ about which Mormons and all those who have not experienced the new birth have zero spiritual knowledge as 1 Corinthians 2:14 explains. Actually, it is this ignorance about God’s eternal Election that made Stephen call those people “good people” in such an erroneous way and in this false context of man’s freedom and right to choose: without God’s Election in Christ no one could be considered good (or righteous in Christ), because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (cf. Romans 3:23). For a good explanation of this truth, please read our article Good people?

Thus we see that Stephen describes Agency — man’s right to choose for himself — as sovereign, and he makes God dependent of this Agency in His choices. So God is not Sovereign according to Stephen and his Mormon teachers. Thus Mormon doctrine contradicts what Scripture says about God as we have already seen in our previous articles.

Stephen continues:

We could respect or abuse our bodies—our own and or anyone else’s—and influence others to do the same.

And of course the Mormon god(s) is obliged to allow all this and to adjust his plan of salvation accordingly… Indeed, as we have seen above, Mormons have no real spiritual idea about the Sovereignty of God, just as 1 Corinthians 2:14 explains.

By the way, there is no way that we may truly respect our bodies unless we are born of God. Since the Fall, all humans without exception, disrespect and abuse their bodies, because they have denied God’s knowledge: “Wherefore God gave them up [also] in the lusts of their hearts to uncleanness, to dishonour their bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into falsehood, and honoured and served the creature more than him who had created [it], who is blessed for ever. Amen.” (Romans 1:24-25) Man in his fallen nature not only does not want to do good, but rather he cannot: “Because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God; for neither indeed can it be: and they that are in flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:7-8)

We continue reading Stephen’s confused opinions:

The Father was also bound to satisfy a universal law that governs the very motion of an atom’s electrons around its nucleus—the Law of Justice.

Once again, notice with me the miserable presentation of our God: according to Stephen, God is bound by something… For Stephen, God is not Sovereign or independent of His creation, but He is bound by some things… We have seen above that God’s Sovereignty means that He is the Creator who Himself made this universe with those laws that govern everything in it, including the very motion of an atom’s electrons, and that God Himself is NOT under those laws which He Himself made although He does not contradict them even when He acts independently of them. But Stephen, taught by his Mormon teachers and brainwashed by them, now considers God bound by those laws, as if it were not He who has Sovereignly and independently of anything decided every detail of everyone of those laws and even controls everything related to those laws with a perfect power!…

Now, why did Stephen do this mistake? It is because his doctrine of God’s Nature is wrong, as we have seen in our previous studies. Understanding the Trinity in a biblical way is very important to understand His Sovereignty, and we have seen how Stephen is totally ignorant about the biblical truth of the Trinity (read here). Someone who doesn’t understand how God cannot be divided to three beings and is absolutely One in Nature although three in Persons (read this), how can he understand the unity of His eternal Attributes? For Stephen, an Attribute of God like Justice may be so much separate from His Nature that it may become a law that governs the very actions of God Himself and should not contradict any other Attribute which itself is another law separate from God… Stephen does not understand that all the Attributes of God are one and united and are the very Nature of God. So the Attributes of God are not laws that are separate from Him and that govern His actions, but they are the very Nature of God, and these Attributes are not just parts that additionally form God. They are not added, but they are united as one, God being 100% of each of them and 100% of all of them! For instance, God is love, and at the same time God is Light and He is Just and He is Merciful etc. So God is not bound by these Attributes as if they were laws outside of His Nature, but He acts according to His very Nature, never contradicting Himself, because those Attributes are His very Nature.

Stephen continues:

He knew He could satisfy Justice through Mercy, but that Mercy still could not rob Justice.

Stephen still speaks about God’s Justice and Mercy as two laws that are separate from the very Nature of God, and I have explained above what is the reason behind this error.

Note also that Stephen has not yet told us what is the problem or the condition or the trouble from which God will save us, and yet he describes the things by which God is bound in this work of salvation… Don’t you find it strange that someone is trying to explain to us in how many ways God is limited and bound before explaining to us what the main problem is for which God is supposedly doing all of these compromises?… Let’s wait and see what is this big purpose for which Stephen is lowering God so much when the Bible exalts Him as the Sovereign Creator and Savior… Is the purpose perhaps that “sovereign” Agency and that precious “joy” of man for which God should sacrifice all?… Let’s wait and see…

Stephen continues:

The key to tempering Mercy, satisfying Justice without robbing it, was the Atonement. The key to the efficacy of the Atonement was the significance of the Sacrifice to be made. It had to be an Infinite Atonement. Mercy, Justice, Infinite Atonement? We will address these doctrinal points.

Stephen has not told us what the problem is from which God will save us, and yet he already began to talk about tempering Mercy… I don’t see why God has to temper Mercy, and readers have not yet understood what “Atonement” means. Stephen keeps using terms without defining them biblically, and when we in these articles explain each point biblically step by step as we advance in our refutation of his document, he complains that we are using many words to detail things and we’re not passing to the content of his chapters… Who is the one who keeps saying “we will address these doctrinal points” and yet never defines or backs up anything he says with biblical references relevant to the studied point?…

Let’s wait and see WHEN Stephen will finally explain to us what is this big trouble or problem from which God will save us and which is making it essential to talk about some Mercy, and Justice, and Infinite Atonement, all of them in capital letters… Meanwhile be well instructed in what the Bible says about the true Plan of Salvation from sin and spiritual death. We have detailed this Plan of Salvation in our first reply to this chapter of Stephen’s document; that reply is entitled How to be saved?

Grace be with you!
Disciple of Jesus Christ


Posted in: Religious Movements / Mormonism
This is part 17 of the series: Answer to a Mormon’s manuscript

This entry was posted in Answer to a Mormon’s manuscript, Religious Movements. Bookmark the permalink.