God Cannot Do Anything On Earth Without A Man Permitting Him?

Have you ever heard a preacher assert that God cannot do anything on earth without man's permission, that God has no legal rights upon the earth except that which man gives him?

Where did some preachers/christians get this kind of weird thought and teaching from?

Surely not from the bible.

When man fell in Eden did God get permission/legal rights from man to step in and address the issue? Or

Did God get permission from any man to come down on earth and confound the language of the human race at Babel & thus stop them from building the tower of Babel?

I marvel at the irreverent audacity of biblical ignorance with which some preachers/christians make such assertions, like God is handicapped when there is no man to give him permission and become a vessel he will use to accomplish his purposes upon the earth.

I always ask people who speak this way....."where were you when God created the earth"?

Where was man when God came down and planted the garden of Eden?

Have you never read the scripture that says when God saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: his own arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness sustained it?  Isaiah 59:16.

The fact that God works with men and uses human vessels never means he's handicapped when there is no man.

Acts 17:24-25 says "God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things".

Any presentation of God as one whose work is at the mercy of men; at the mercy of what men can bring or do with thier hands in his service, is a false testimony and a gross misrepresentation of the true God.

The statement "God cannot do anything on earth without a man permitting Him" is a non-biblical, theological error.

While it aims to emphasize the importance of human stewardship and prayer, it contradicts the core biblical doctrine of God's absolute sovereignty and omnipotence. 

Here is a breakdown of why this teaching is unscriptural:

1. It Contradicts God's Sovereignty.

The Bible teaches that God is all-powerful and does not need human permission to act. 

Psalm 115:3: "But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased."

Job 42:2: "I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee."

The Bible shows God acting autonomously in judgment & blessing.

2. Misunderstanding of "Dominion"

The phrase is often a misinterpretation of the "Cultural Mandate" or "Dominion Mandate" in Genesis 1:26-28 and Psalm 115:16, which states, "the earth hath he given to the children of men.

Stewardship vs. Ownership: God gave humans stewardship dominion over the earth, not sovereignty. 

A steward does not have to authorize the owner of the house to act.

While God frequently chooses to work through human partners (prophets, apostles, the Church), He is not bound by human consent. 

3. The Origin of the Teaching

This idea is not a tenet of secular humanism (which removes God entirely), but rather a popular, yet mistaken, religious, faith-based doctrine. It is sometimes used to overemphasize human authority, but it borders on idolatry by placing human will above divine will. 

4. What the Bible Does Teach

God Acts With Humanity: God often works with men in the faith of his word, to bring His will to pass (e.g., prayers, evangelism).

God Acts Without Humanity: God can act regardless of human permission, especially in judgments or when fulfilling prophecies.

In conclusion, one of the texts of scripture that people lift/quote out of context in trying to support this erroneous teaching, is Philemon vs 14 which reads "But without thy mind would I do nothing". They cut this line out of the verse and use it to buttress their wong doctrine in blatant disregard of what the apostle was actually saying in his address to Philemon. To them it is God saying to we(the believers) that without thy mind, I would do nothing but that's wrong.

The full verse reads: "But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly."

This was clearly the apostle writing to Philemon, beseeching him & not seeking to compel obedience or get him to do something which his mind is not willing to do.

Philemon means "friendly, loving," and it is in this character that Paul appeals to him in this epistle. Paul's comfort is the assurance that Philemon, the "friendly," or "kind-hearted," answers to his name. 

His chief purpose for writing is to beseech Philemon to receive the once unprofitable servant Onesimus who is now a saint of God.

The apostle does not insist upon any apostolic authority, but pleads for Onesimus as for a child of his own, spiritually, begotten too in his bonds, a solace given to him of God, who was now Paul the aged, and the prisoner of Jesus Christ. How many motives here to compel a free heart's obedience! Doubtless Onesimus had been an unprofitable servant, yet now he was profitable as a Christian, ready to do service to Philemon.