Can I Deny God’s Sovereignty and Still Be a Christian?

Published On: November 27, 2025

If I struggle with the doctrine of God’s sovereignty—or even reject it outright—does that mean I’m not really saved?

Many today insist we can. Some even claim that election, exhaustive providence, and sovereign grace are optional extras—important for some folks, but not essential for salvation.

Scripture and the entire Reformed tradition answer with one voice: No.

We cannot persistently and knowingly deny God’s exhaustive sovereignty and, at the same time, possess saving faith in the true God. Temporary confusion or immaturity is common among new believers, but informed, willful, hardened rejection of God’s sovereignty is incompatible with Christianity itself.

SAVING FAITH TRUSTS THE TRUE CHRIST

Salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ alone. “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2:8-9). When Paul told the Philippian jailer what he must do to be saved, he said simply, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31).

But faith in which Jesus? The Christ of Scripture is the sovereign King.

DOES THE THIEF ON THE CROSS PROVE WE CAN DENY SOVEREIGNTY?

Many point to the dying thief as proof that deep theology is unnecessary. But notice what he confessed: “Jesus, remember me when You come into Your kingdom” (Luke 23:42). Even in his dying moments, with virtually no theological training, the thief’s faith bowed to Christ’s lordship and coming sovereign reign. He didn’t demand a say in Christ’s kingdom; he pleaded for mercy from its King.

Calvin is clear in his Institutes (3.2.6–8) that saving faith includes knowledge of God’s character, not merely emotional attachment to a name. We cannot divorce faith from its object. Saving faith is trust in the true Christ, and the Christ of Scripture is the sovereign King who does whatever He pleases (Psalm 115:3).

The thief may not have grasped the fine points of election or predestination, but his faith implicitly submitted to Christ’s absolute authority. There’s a world of difference between the immature believer who hasn’t yet understood sovereignty and the professing Christian who, when confronted with Scripture’s clear teaching, militantly rejects it.

Therefore a person who knowingly and persistently rejects God’s exhaustive sovereignty is, at that point, rejecting the God of the Bible. Such rejection is incompatible with true faith. As John warns, denying essential truths about Christ reveals we do not truly know Him (1 John 2:23; 4:2–3).

TO REJECT GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY IS TO REJECT GOD HIMSELF

God’s sovereignty isn’t a dispensable doctrine meant only for advanced students. It’s woven into the very fabric of who God is.

Scripture declares God’s absolute rule unflinchingly. He created all things and sustains them by His power (Colossians 1:16-17). He “works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Ephesians 1:11). Not a sparrow falls apart from His decree (Matthew 10:29). He declares the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10). Even human decisions and seemingly random events fall under His sovereign hand (Proverbs 16:33; 21:1).

In salvation specifically, Scripture is unflinching. Jesus said, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). Paul wrote God “chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). God has mercy “on whomever he wills” (Romans 9:18). These aren’t isolated proof texts—they’re the consistent testimony of Scripture about how salvation works.

You can no more be a Christian while rejecting God’s sovereignty than you can be a Christian while rejecting His holiness or Trinity. As Francis Turretin argued, God’s sovereignty belongs to His essential nature—it’s not an elective attribute we can decline. To worship a God who is not sovereign over all is to worship an idol of our imagination, not the God who has revealed Himself in Scripture.

WHAT ROMANS 9 ACTUALLY TEACHES ABOUT GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY

In salvation specifically, Scripture gives no quarter to human autonomy. Jesus said, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). Paul wrote that God “chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4).

Romans 9 confronts us most directly: “So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy” (v. 16). When Paul anticipates the objection—”Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?”—he doesn’t soften the doctrine. He doubles down: “But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?” (vv. 19-20).

Paul doesn’t apologise for God’s sovereignty. He worships it: “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God!… For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen” (Romans 11:33, 36).

WHY ASSURANCE COLLAPSES WITHOUT SOVEREIGN GRACE

God’s sovereign grace isn’t abstract theology—it’s the foundation of Christian confidence.

First, our assurance depends on it. If salvation rests even partly on our decision, our grip, our faithfulness, then our security is only as strong as our weakest moment. But if God sovereignly keeps those He has chosen, nothing can separate us from His love (Romans 8:38-39). Spurgeon said it memorably: “I believe the doctrine of election, because I am quite certain that, if God had not chosen me, I should never have chosen Him.”
Second, our worship requires it. A god who merely reacts to human choices, who hopes things work out, who is surprised by events—this is not the God of Scripture. Our God reigns. He does whatever He pleases. Anything less diminishes His glory and makes Him unworthy of worship.
Third, our suffering becomes meaningless without it. Without sovereignty, tragedy is random chaos. But Scripture promises that God works all things—even suffering—together for good for those who love Him (Romans 8:28). That “all things” only comforts if God actually governs all things.

WILLFUL REJECTION: IMMATURITY OR UNBELIEF?

Here’s where we must speak with both clarity and charity. Scripture expects believers to grow. “By this time you ought to be teachers” (Hebrews 5:12). Peter commands us to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord” (2 Peter 3:18).

A new believer confused about sovereignty may possess authentic faith while being wrong about important doctrine. But willful, informed, ongoing denial of God’s sovereignty isn’t a mark of immaturity; it’s a mark of an unregenerate heart that prefers a manageable god of its own imagination. This is the exchange Paul describes in Romans 1:21–23—suppressing the truth about God and fashioning a deity more to our liking.

John Owen, in his treatise on apostasy, insisted persistent rejection of revealed truth demonstrates a heart that has never been regenerated.

There’s a difference between struggling with sovereignty and militantly denying it. Struggling says, “I don’t fully understand this, but I submit to Scripture.” Denying says, “I refuse what the Bible clearly teaches because I want to remain autonomous.”

The Canons of Dort addressed this directly: Those who teach that true believers can utterly fall away are contradicting Scripture and undermining the comfort of believers (Rejection of Errors, V.6). Why? Because denying God’s sovereign preservation reveals fundamental confusion about the nature of salvation itself.

PASTORAL HOPE FOR THOSE STRUGGLING

So can we be Christians and deny God’s sovereignty?

If we’re wrestling with these truths, saying, “I don’t yet understand how God can be sovereign and man responsible, but I want to submit to Scripture”—we’re in the exact place God loves to meet His people. Jacob wrestled; so may we.

Many of us once recoiled at election and providence. God was patient with us and He will be with you. But if we knowingly, persistently, defiantly reject what Scripture plainly teaches about God’s absolute rule over all things, we’re not wrestling with a difficult doctrine. We’re rejecting the God who has revealed Himself. We’re fashioning a god in our own image.

RELATED FAQs

What’s the difference between not understanding sovereignty and rejecting it? Charles Hodge drew this distinction clearly in his Systematic Theology. Not understanding means we’re still teachable—and we submit to Scripture even when confused. The Bereans “received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily” (Acts 17:11). To reject sovereignty means we’ve heard what Scripture teaches and refuse it because it offends our sensibilities. Hodge wrote the mark of a regenerate heart is submission to God’s Word, even when it contradicts our natural preferences. One posture shows humility; the other reveals pride.

What did Jonathan Edwards say about knowing God’s sovereignty? Jonathan Edwards argued in Religious Affections that true saving faith produces a love for God’s attributes—including His sovereignty. He wrote, “A true love to God must begin with a delight in his holiness, and not with a delight in any other attribute; for no other attribute is truly lovely without this.” Edwards believed the regenerate heart increasingly delights in God’s absolute rule, while the unregenerate heart resents it. If someone claims to love God but hates His sovereignty, Edwards would question whether they truly know Him at all.
How does Open Theism relate to this discussion? Open Theism—the view that God doesn’t know the future exhaustively—was explicitly condemned by evangelical Reformed bodies in the 2017 Nashville Statement and earlier declarations. Article 2 of the 1999 Affirmations and Denials by the Evangelical Theological Society stated Open Theism is “incompatible with the nature of God and Scripture.” RC Sproul called it “a more serious departure from historic Christian orthodoxy than Arminianism” because it denies God’s exhaustive foreknowledge altogether. While Arminians affirm God knows all things, Open Theists claim He doesn’t—making salvation itself uncertain.

Did Charles Spurgeon think Arminians could be genuine Christians? Yes, but he thought their theology was inconsistent with their salvation. Spurgeon famously said, “I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism.” Yet he also said, “I believe there are many Arminians who are saved souls, but they are not saved by their Arminianism.” Spurgeon argued Arminians are saved despite their theology, not because of it—they trust Christ more consistently than their system allows. However, he would distinguish this from outright rejection of God’s sovereignty.

What did John Piper mean by saying, “God’s sovereignty is my oxygen”? In The Pleasures of God, Piper explained God’s absolute control isn’t just doctrinally true—it’s spiritually vital for daily life. He wrote, “If God is not sovereign, I am a fool to worship Him.” Piper argues every prayer, every act of trust, every moment of worship assumes God has the power to accomplish His purposes. Without sovereignty, prayer becomes wishful thinking and worship becomes flattery of a deity who can’t actually help. For Piper, denying God’s sovereignty doesn’t just affect theology; it suffocates faith itself.
Can we be genuinely confused about election and still be elect? Yes. BB Warfield distinguished between the reality of God’s electing grace and our understanding of it in his essay “Predestination.” We can be chosen by God while we’re still confused about how election works. But Warfield insisted persistent hostility toward the doctrine, once clearly taught from Scripture, reveals a heart that refuses God’s self-revelation. He wrote the doctrine of election “is eminently a Christian doctrine… and stands or falls with Christianity itself.”

What would RC Sproul say to someone who says, “I love Jesus but hate Calvinism”? Sproul would ask: Which Jesus? In Chosen by God, he wrote, “We are not called to believe in a Jesus of our own imagination, but in the Jesus who is revealed in Scripture.” Sproul argued “Calvinism” is simply biblical Christianity without compromise—it’s just letting Scripture speak about God’s sovereignty without editing out uncomfortable parts. He’d say you can love Jesus and misunderstand aspects of Reformed theology, but you cannot love Jesus while hating the attributes that make Him who He is. The Jesus who saves is the Jesus who sovereignly chose to save before the foundation of the world.

OUR RELATED POSTS