IS GOD STILL SOVEREIGN?

[GodsGrace]

You have a will and you are free to exercise it. But it is not entirely free. Your will like the rest of yourself is ultimately subject to God. You are His creature after all.
Hope that doesn't scare you. That you might not have a will that is absolutely free!

Why would I be scared Avigdor??
Of course you must know by now that I, along with most other Christians, believe that man has a libertarian free will.

This does NOT scare GOD either! Since it is HE that gave us free will way back in the Garden of Eden. Neither WE nor GOD need be scared because HE is sovereign, and WE have free will to choose to be saved. Those that CANNOT CHOOSE, according to your belief system, are the ones who ought to be scared.

What do you think this means?
If I give you A CHOICE, does it not mean you have free will?

Joshua 24:15
And if it is disagreeable in your sight too servie the LORD, CHOOSE for yourselves today whom you will serve....whether the gods which your fathers served.......

If you have a choice....
it means you have libertarian free will.

 

[GodsGrace]

There is no such thing as partly sovereign. He either is or He isn't. Since He says He is in nearly every passage of the Bible, directly or by implication, I'll go with He is sovereign. Which means He is sovereign over our will. Not entirely a free will then? The fact that He largely lets us go our own way and do our own thing, and lets the fallen world wind itself down because of our "freedom", does not mean He is not sovereign. It does not mean our will trumps his. It means He has sovereignly allowed this as long as it does not interfere with His purpose. Buck up against His will and you will discover your will is not so free. And I am not talking about His revealed will, the things He tells us in His word, I'm talking about His hidden will, the things we cannot see and do not know.

Who said God is partly sovereign?
Certainly not me !

And there is something wrong with this statement of yours:
The fact that He largely lets us go our own way and do our own thing, and lets the fallen world wind itself down because of our "freedom", does not mean He is not sovereign.

First, I NEVER would say God is not sovereign.

And what do you mean by: "HE LARGELY LETS US GO OUR OWN WAY AND DO OUR OWN THING"???

Largely??
Does God predestine our life or does He not?

Again,,,you are not properly representing calvinism,,,,and then you proceed to tell me that I don't understand it.

 

[Avigdor]

Who said God is partly sovereign?
Certainly not me !

I wasn't saying that was what you thought. I was answering the question you asked.

 

[GodsGrace]

I wasn't saying that was what you thought. I was answering the question you asked.

Oh. I don't remember the question!
Anyway, I have some more of your posts to answer now that you use the quote feature.

 

[Avigdor]

Oh. I don't remember the question!
Anyway, I have some more of your posts to answer now that you use the quote feature.

Question was is God still soverign if we have free will?

 

[GodsGrace]

Question was is God still soverign if we have free will?

Thanks.

Of course God is still sovereign even if we have free will.
Why wouldn't He be?
It doesn't have to be one or the other. It could be both.
Those that believe in free will also believe God is sovereign.
I don't know any Christian that believes God is Not Sovereign.

Please reply....WHY would God giving us free will take away from His sovereignty?
I've never understood this idea.

Adam and Eve had free will.
They misused it and disobeyed God.
He still used His sovereignty and banished them from the Garden.
His sovereignty was NOT diminished.

Dinner time.

 

[Avigdor]

Of course God is still sovereign even if we have free will.
Why wouldn't He be?
It doesn't have to be one or the other. It could be both.
Those that believe in free will also believe God is sovereign.
I don't know any Christian that believes God is Not Sovereign.

Well you can't have two sovereigns existing in the same place at the same time. I think that maybe the "confusion" here between what you and I are saying is a slightly different shading of the word sovereign.
I am not disputing that man has a will and that he uses it freely. I am only saying it is not entirely free, because, for one it is always bent towards sin in our nature, and two, ultimately God can overide our will if He chooses for whatever reason, therefore He is sovereign.
As to all Christians, (the ones you know) believing that God is sovereign, I have found that when push comes to shove, they don't really. Not saying that about you, you seem to have a good grasp of the concept. We just use words differently so often I think you are saying something you are not and vice versa.

 

[Avigdor]

Adam and Eve had free will.
They misused it and disobeyed God.
He still used His sovereignty and banished them from the Garden.
His sovereignty was NOT diminished.

Right. Exactly.

 

[Avigdor]

Why would I be scared Avigdor??

I was joking. Thus the smiley. I know. It is hard to tell with this format but I was actually smiling when I wrote it.

 

[Avigdor]

What do you think this means?
If I give you A CHOICE, does it not mean you have free will?

Joshua 24:15
And if it is disagreeable in your sight too servie the LORD, CHOOSE for yourselves today whom you will serve....whether the gods which your fathers served.......

If you have a choice....
it means you have libertarian free will.

No I don't think having a choice automatically means your will isfree. But I already explained what I mean in my last response so no need to go over that again.
As for the quote from Joshua, we have to remember that we are talking about two different covenants here, and two different types of covenants. The choice given in this passage is in reference to the covenant that God made with Israel that involved the land He granted to them, and His care, protection, and provision of them. It was God saying, "if you do this, I will do that" and if you don't do such and such, the land, protection etc. was null and void. Not that He totally abandoned them (because He also had the covenant of faith with Abraham, fullfilled in Christ, in which God meets all the conditions and none are required of the covenant people) but they bore the consequences or reward of their actions. There yes, God gave them a clear choice, not of whether or not to believe in Jesus, but of disobedience or obedience.
There is a really good book called Covenant Theology by Michael Hortan that you might enjoy. It gives us an understanding of covenants, but also a much ignored framework through which to see scripture. And yes Hortan is a Calvinist but that is not what this book is about.
If I have missed anything I need to clear up, just hollar.

 

[GodsGrace]

Well you can't have two sovereigns existing in the same place at the same time. I think that maybe the "confusion" here between what you and I are saying is a slightly different shading of the word sovereign.

Sovereign has a specific meaning.
ONLY GOD is sovereign...
man is NOT sovereign.
Man does not rule the universe. He cannot change anything that happens. He does not rule over other men. He certainly does not rule over God.

Let's get a definition for Sovereign:
I like this one, and the entire article is interesting.


Sovereignty means “rightful authority.” A dictionary gives “supreme rank” as one definition, and a thesaurus lists jurisdiction and dominion as synonyms. The doctrine of God’s sovereignty tells us God is the rightful ruler of the universe. He has legitimate claim to lordship. His government is just. In fact, justice is defined as his rule. God’s sovereignty doesn’t tell us whether God does in fact rule—just that he ought to, and that we should acknowledge his rule and obey it.

source: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/is-sovereign-the-best-descriptor-for-god/


Although the article states that the word CONTROL is not part of the description of the word SOVEREIGN, I can concede easily that God IS in control of everything...I have no problem with this.
Those that are not of the reformed faith just do not believe God DESIRES to control every movement we make.

If God controlled every movement we make (as calvinism/reformed states) then why would Jesus have cried over Jerusalem?
Matthew 23:37

Because God has given man free will changes nothing about man's sovereignty.
Man IS NOT sovereign...A King would be but this has nothing to do with our conversation and with salvation.

I am not disputing that man has a will and that he uses it freely. I am only saying it is not entirely free, because, for one it is always bent towards sin in our nature, and two, ultimately God can overide our will if He chooses for whatever reason, therefore He is sovereign.

I agree that man is BENT toward the sin nature.
But even non-believers have the free will choice to steal an item from a store, or NOT steal it.
Even though they tend toward sin....most persons DO NOT steal.

As to God overriding our will.....
I agree that God can do whatever He wills to do.
But when God does override our free will He is entering into time and we usually call this a Miracle.

As to all Christians, (the ones you know) believing that God is sovereign, I have found that when push comes to shove, they don't really. Not saying that about you, you seem to have a good grasp of the concept. We just use words differently so often I think you are saying something you are not and vice versa.

I just find it very strange that someone could think God is not sovereign.
What do they think He is??!
God is omnipotent...ALL POWERFUL.
If someone is ALL POWERFUL, it means He is sovereign.
These persons that don't accept God's sovereignty are not understanding something about His character.

Good that we agree on His sovereignty.
I think we agree on free will too....not sure.

 

[GodsGrace]

No I don't think having a choice automatically means your will isfree. But I already explained what I mean in my last response so no need to go over that again.

I think that maybe you might know about philosophical free will which is different than
biblical free will.

I know nothing about philosophical free will so let me clarify:
When the bible speaks of free will it means that we have the freedom to choose between two moral choices. We might be influenced by an outside idea,,,,however, we are left free to decide for ourselves which action to take and that we COULD HAVE taken the opposite action.

I believe in Libertarian free will.
This means that I know what God would want me to do in a given situation....
and I am totally free to act as I desire to...even if it means sinning.

The reformed/calvinist believe in compatible free will.
This means that God MAKES YOU want what He wants.
This goes BEYOND the Holy Spirit speaking to your heart and giving your conscience advice...it means God actually makes the decision for you...He makes you desire what He desires in a different way than with libertarian free will.

IOW,,,we are not truly free. God makes the choices for us.
This is known as determinism...God determines our choice.

Please comment.

As for the quote from Joshua, we have to remember that we are talking about two different covenants here, and two different types of covenants. The choice given in this passage is in reference to the covenant that God made with Israel that involved the land He granted to them, and His care, protection, and provision of them. It was God saying, "if you do this, I will do that" and if you don't do such and such, the land, protection etc. was null and void. Not that He totally abandoned them (because He also had the covenant of faith with Abraham, fullfilled in Christ, in which God meets all the conditions and none are required of the covenant people) but they bore the consequences or reward of their actions. There yes, God gave them a clear choice, not of whether or not to believe in Jesus, but of disobedience or obedience.
There is a really good book called Covenant Theology by Michael Hortan that you might enjoy. It gives us an understanding of covenants, but also a much ignored framework through which to see scripture. And yes Hortan is a Calvinist but that is not what this book is about.
If I have missed anything I need to clear up, just hollar.

So nice that you know the covenants....!
Many do not.

I do believe that above you're referring to the Sinai Covenant which is a
conditional covenant between a Sovereign (God) and a vassal (the Israelites).
Blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. (as you've stated).

Let's not get off topic, however.
It doesn't matter that Joshua was asking the people to choose between Yahweh and the gods of those living in Canaan.

The fact still remains that a DECISION had to be made as to which "god" to serve.
The people do not want to forsake THE LORD for other gods.
So they CHOOSE to serve Yahweh.
Is this not a free will choice? (no matter the situation).

It's the same as Deuteronomy 30:19
19“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,

 

[Fastfredy0]

Freddy,
You say things so much more clearly and precisely than I can! This post is superb.

Well, I wish I could take the credit. I read books and organize and quote from my readings into my own personalized "Systematic Theology". I try to note the book/author in my notes.

So they are afraid, for many reasons, to see God in any of His attributes but love. They want to define what is just and fair.

Agreed. And Arminism is, I feel, the default position. "God is love" and "it's up to me to decide" is a great sales pitch. I thought I saved myself by believing in Christ's work for a long time. The default position, in my opinion, is 'man-centered' (anthropocentric); our theology is, as you said, based on what we have been taught about fairness and teaching of God loves everyone. Sounds great, sounds fair. God and scripture is God-centered,--theocentric--(after all, He is the only being that has intrinsic value).
It takes time to see things our way--reformed (assuming we are right). I could never figure it out without teachers organizing biblical concepts to make it coherent. Example: for a long time I thought about the verse about God's favoritism: "God does not show favoritism" (Romans 2:11). From an anthropocentric point of view I could not understand the statement as God obviously does show favoritism (i.e. Ephesians 3:12 "remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world". From Jacob to Christ, Gentiles had almost no chance of salvation. Even now, people that never heard the 'word' have no chance. Sounds life favoritism to me. But, from a theocentric viewpoint--God takes a hunk of clay and modes each person to suit His desire. Then He treats each according to the amount of goodness He put into it. No favoritism, just clay molded into something He loves, or hates. (or so my thinking goes)

And that is the criteria, believing, even if a person has the process cattywampus. There is no reason for people to be wary of trusting God. If you believe, He did it.

Agreed. If God chose me for salvation before the foundation of the earth, then I am saved. In regards to salvation, I don't have to worry that I have enough faith, I don't have to worry that I believe ALL the needed things or that I believe anything that would invalidate my salvation. The other side (save myself with God's help)--according to the logical consequences of their thinking have to be VERY careful to get it all right.
The following words are in the bible in combination with the word “believe”. This can cause confusion.
Believe and pray
Believe and confess sin
Believe and confess Christ
Believe and be baptized
Believe and repent
Believe and make restitution
Believe and obey
What exactly do I believe? What if I change my mind?
very tricky

Back to the covenants. I came across an excellant book in my study called Covenant Theology by Michael Horton.

I did read Horton's "A Christians Faith A Systematic Theology".

Enjoyed our conversation.

 

[Avigdor]

The following words are in the bible in combination with the word “believe”. This can cause confusion.
Believe and pray
Believe and confess sin
Believe and confess Christ
Believe and be baptized
Believe and repent
Believe and make restitution
Believe and obey
What exactly do I believe? What if I change my mind?
very tricky

Exactly. And that is why many Christians still interpret these things as being requirements. I stopped attending church for awile, meant to try different ones, and did. I was looking for something that I could not define or know exactly what it was. The closest I could get to explaining it to myself was "I want to hear about God." As those things usually go, Reformation Theology was presented to me, not in church, but by my brother, who had it presented to him by a man he ate breakfast with at a coffe shop. Duck to water as they say. "This is it. This is what I was looking for. A great weight, as per all your "ands" above was lifted. And for the first time in 20 years I actually understood grace and mercy, they weren't just words. And for the first time I actually comprehended God's love for me. And for the first time Jesus's life, death and resurrection was actually personal. He knew my name when He hung on that cross, He knew me. He was dying for me.

 

[Fastfredy0]

I can concede easily that God IS in control of everything...I have no problem with this.

If this is taken literally; then God controls whether we are saved or not. I think you mean, God is capable of being in control of everything; but cedes often cedes that control. (form of deism)

Those that are not of the reformed faith just do not believe God DESIRES to control every movement we make.
If God controlled every movement we make (as calvinism/reformed states) then why would Jesus have cried over Jerusalem?
Matthew 23:37

Asked before and answered. God has a moral will. He wishes everyone would come to him. God has a sovereign will ... he plans everything that happens. Example: God hates sin (moral will); God allows sin to occur (sovereign will)

and I am totally free to act as I desire to...even if it means sinning.

You have not addressed the TOTAL DEPRAVITY of man (40+ verses) that save man cannot choose. "No one seeks God". Again, please explain these verses that contradict your statement.

This means that God MAKES YOU want what He wants.

This is not Reformed teaching. Please give a quote from a respectable reformed teacher that says this. Your statement would result in GOD MAKING PEOPLE SIN. No Christians believes that. If you want to know what REFORM people think, read the WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH or 1689 LONDON confession. You will NOT find anything to validate your statement.

Aside: Why is it the REFORMED people in these posts use much scripture and the Arminian side does not. The REFORMED side addresses the few scriptures the ARMINIAN side uses, the the Arminian side does not address the Reform sides scriptures? Hmmmm....

 

[Avigdor]

I know nothing about philosophical free will so let me clarify:
When the bible speaks of free will it means that we have the freedom to choose between two moral choices. We might be influenced by an outside idea,,,,however, we are left free to decide for ourselves which action to take and that we COULD HAVE taken the opposite action.

I believe in Libertarian free will.
This means that I know what God would want me to do in a given situation....
and I am totally free to act as I desire to...even if it means sinning.

I have trouble putting a label to what I believe. Not that it's wrong, I just don't ever seem to fit into the boundaries set by a label. I will however attempt to make some sense.
I can't say that I disagree with Philosophical free will with the caveat that In God's great invisible plan and purpose, and also regarding the personal plan He has for each of us, He will not allow us to make a choice that will change it. He most often I believe does this through second causes. Sometimes He might put a talking donkey in your path.
Libertarian free will, same caveat.

 

[Avigdor]

The reformed/calvinist believe in compatible free will.
This means that God MAKES YOU want what He wants.
This goes BEYOND the Holy Spirit speaking to your heart and giving your conscience advice...it means God actually makes the decision for you...He makes you desire what He desires in a different way than with libertarian free will.

IOW,,,we are not truly free. God makes the choices for us.
This is known as determinism...God determines our choice.

On this I get the sense that there is a slight misinterpretation (not on purpose) of what Calvinisim teaches. My issue is your use of the word makes because I don't know exactly what you mean by it. Are you considering make as being forced against your will? In any case the Calvinist view is as difficult to put into words as it is for non Calvinist to understand. Thus misunderstandings. I have in my library numerous discourses on it by people who have a better grasp of precision language BY FAR than I do, and I will delve into it and get back to you on that point.

 

[Fastfredy0]

And for the first time in 20 years I actually understood grace and mercy, they weren't just words. And for the first time I actually comprehended God's love for me. And for the first time Jesus's life, death and resurrection was actually personal. He knew my name when He hung on that cross, He knew me. He was dying for me.

Wow ... nice.
I had somewhat similar experience. About 8 years ago I thought. I am doing a fair amount of fiction reading (Fantasy genre ... Lord of the Rings like stuff). I said, maybe I should learn more about God as that would have much more practical benefits. I decided to start reading theology.
I had been listening to Les Felding on TV and he did things in a very organized way. I made a lot of notes from transcripts. After going through his stuff I wanted more. I wanted it to be organized though. (So much CRAP out there, mostly CRAP) I don't recall how, but I found out about SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. Hey, this was by topics and had scripture to validate and organize ideas. So I read one after another. I made (still make) many notes (about 900+ pages now). Now I believe I have a relatively excellent understanding. Reformed scholars seem particularly good at organizing theology. I love that they do so in confessions. Perhaps because their systematization harmonized well with truth (my bias). Read a couple Arminian Systematic Theology books to try to be fair.
Aside: After much study, I am not a big Les Felding supporter any more, but I started with him.
Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[Avigdor]

Sovereignty means “rightful authority.” A dictionary gives “supreme rank” as one definition, and a thesaurus lists jurisdiction and dominion as synonyms. The doctrine of God’s sovereignty tells us God is the rightful ruler of the universe. He has legitimate claim to lordship. His government is just. In fact, justice is defined as his rule. God’s sovereignty doesn’t tell us whether God does in fact rule—just that he ought to, and that we should acknowledge his rule and obey it.

Not sure I agree with this. To me sovereignty is ruling over and in control of His creation, not just that He has the right to. But I could be wrong!! Anyway, that is how I use it.
I have to stop awhile. It is dinner time!!

 

[GodsGrace]

If this is taken literally; then God controls whether we are saved or not. I think you mean, God is capable of being in control of everything; but cedes often cedes that control. (form of deism)

The very fact of the incarnation rejects Deism, as do I.
No,,,what I mean was explained in the post to which you're replying.
God is in control of everything....if He stopped being in control, the very universe would stop functioning.

Within that control, God has given us free will to make moral choices.

Asked before and answered. God has a moral will. He wishes everyone would come to him. God has a sovereign will ... he plans everything that happens. Example: God hates sin (moral will); God allows sin to occur (sovereign will)

I was asking Avigdor, I know you've already answered....I'd like HER answer.

You interestingly separate God's will into a sovereign will and a moral will.
Is God not ONE being?
I hardly ask for verses since we both know them...
but could you please show me how you came up with this idea?
God has many attributes....but He is one and cannot be separated.
If God wishes everyone to be saved...which He does, then everyone that agrees to HIS TERMS can be saved.

God hates sin. Correct.
Then why does it happen?
No need to create new theology...
Sin happens because man is free to sin.

Galatians 5:16
16But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.

We are instructed by Paul to walk by the Spirit.
Why would Paul give ANY isntruction at all if he knew that God predetermined everything?

You have not addressed the TOTAL DEPRAVITY of man (40+ verses) that save man cannot choose. "No one seeks God". Again, please explain these verses that contradict your statement.

I cannot respond to carpet bombing of verses.
Also, I had requested a separate thread for that since the post was so long.
If you care to continue, I'd be happy to, but please respond to my post in the Theological Discussion Group.

If you post one verse at a time,,,I'll be happy to explain any verse to the understanding of those that are not reformed.

This is not Reformed teaching. Please give a quote from a respectable reformed teacher that says this. Your statement would result in GOD MAKING PEOPLE SIN. No Christians believes that. If you want to know what REFORM people think, read the WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH or 1689 LONDON confession. You will NOT find anything to validate your statement.

Aside: Why is it the REFORMED people in these posts use much scripture and the Arminian side does not. The REFORMED side addresses the few scriptures the ARMINIAN side uses, the the Arminian side does not address the Reform sides scriptures? Hmmmm....

First of all I'm not an Arminian since I don't know what Arminius believed.
I believe what Jesus said, and Paul and John, etc.

I cannot know the Westminster confession of faith.
I can only know scripture.
If I want to know what calvinism teaches, I go to the Institutes that Calvin wrote.

If you don't believe the Institutes then our conversation is pretty much over.
I can't be expected to know every nuance of Calvinism.