What is "Sovereignty"??

[Dave G]

What's left? Lying. God, potentially, has the capability to lie, but not the character to do so, nor the fear to drive Him to do so, as humans might have.

Derf, I do not know where you get the idea that God can lie or has the potential to lie...
But it seems to me that you are reasoning this out, instead of sticking strictly to His word alone for your understanding of the subject.
Please correct me if I am mistaken.

God, potentially and according to His word, does not have the capability to lie.
Here is Hebrews 6:13-18:

" For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,
14 saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.
15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise.
16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation [is] to them an end of all strife.
17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed [it] by an oath:
18 that by two immutable things, in which [it was] impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:"

Here's what I see when I read this:

13) When God promised Abraham, because He could not swear by anyone or anything greater than Himself, He swore by Himself.
14) He said, " Surely in blessing, I will bless you, and in multiplying I will multiply you"...speaking of making a nation of him ( Genesis 22:16-17 ).
15) So, after Abraham had patiently waited, he obtained ( was given ) the promise...Isaac was that promise and was miraculously given to him by the Lord, who had made Sarah, an old woman, able to have a child when before she was barren.
16) Men truly swear by something greater than themselves, and swearing an oath in front of witnesses is to us as men something that puts to rest all fighting among ourselves.
17) In which God, willing to show to the heirs of His promise the immutability ( unable to be changed ) of His counsel ( advice, consultation ), confirmed to them by an oath.
18) That by two immutable ( unable to be changed ) things, in which it is impossible for God to lie...we ( believers ) might have strong consolation ( comfort in knowing ), we have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope ( what hope? the hope of eternal life ) that is set before us.


God's word cannot be changed, God cannot lie.
So, to me I can both trust His words, and I can trust Him in every dealing with me that He makes.

Anything He says is 100% trustable, while anything outside of God's word I cannot ever completely trust.
See Proverbs 3:5-7.

There is none good but God.

 

[Dave G]

Jesus is a different matter. Jesus was tempted with the same kinds of things we are tempted with, yet without sin. I think that means He could have worshiped Satan, He could have murdered someone, He could have committed adultery, He could have stolen. But He didn't.

I agree in that Jesus was tempted to sin, but that He was able not to.
Do you know why He succeeded where we as mere men have repeatedly failed?

 

[Derf B]

But I don't consult other English translations, having used the AV since I was called by the Gospel in 1978.
I have never had any reason to disbelieve the words as they are laid out in my Bible...

As I read these passages, I also tend to ignore the italics, which were inserted into the text by the translators in order to help with "continuity".
I don't believe that god's word needs any "help", so I simply focus on the words.

God's word doesn't need any help, but we help it along without thinking. Everybody does when we apply our understanding of those words and the grammar. That "everybody" includes translators and readers, which is a minimum of 2 layers of interpreting.

I also occasionally check the Greek or Hebrew to compare what the translators were doing hundreds of years ago, with what they are doing today.
To me, there is a marked difference in the work being done, and the motivations for that work...
But that's for another thread, IMO.

This is the same thing as checking other translations, IMO, since that's what the other translators were doing. Your checking of the Greek and Hebrew is valuable, and belies the intent of your statement above about checking other English translations. I use the AV myself, much of the time, but I like to check the Greek and Hebrew, as well as get a feel for what others that have checked the Greek and Hebrew discovered or surmised.

For now, I see that the Greek word for "cannot lie" in Titus 1:2 is , "ἀψευδής" or " apseudēs", which when translated directly to the English, means, " without lie, truthful" or literally, "un-false".
So, I look at the text and trust the words to mean that God is the complete opposite from a lie, or as the Lord Jesus put it:

I think the operative word here is "adynatos" a few words earlier. I think it means "without the power", which I'll agree sounds more like "impossible". I'm suggesting that the lack of power comes from His character than a straight inability, as if God were somehow "programmed" not to lie (which concept ties back into the sovereignty discussion, since a programming indicates a higher programmer).

" I am the way, the truth and the life..."
Jesus Christ is the embodiment of truth.
Lucifer is the father of lies...
Jesus said that he was a liar from the beginning ( John 8:44 ), so I trust the Lord to tell me the truth at all times, and the devil to lie to me.

As an example this verse says something that is both true and false, depending on how you read it. If "In the beginning" refers to Satan's beginning, it is not true. If it refers to the beginning of creation, it is true. We not only let the words speak to us, but the intent of the passage.

If God was completely sovereign (never allowing anything He disagreed with) over Satan and made him as the father of lies, God is complicit in the lying. But if God made Satan good in his beginning, and Satan fell of his own covetousness, then God is not complicit in the lying. The example confirms one version of sovereignty, the one I proposed, and denies the other.

 

[Derf B]

I agree in that Jesus was tempted to sin, but that He was able not to.
Do you know why He succeeded where we as mere men have repeatedly failed?

I can give my thoughts on it. I can't say for sure that my thoughts are the right ones.

He succeeded because
1. He did not have a fallen nature, by virtue of His virgin birth
2. He was completely submissive to the Father's will. (His will and the Father's will were united.)

 

[Dave G]

@Derf B

I think perhaps it's a good idea if I summarize how I view the subject of God's sovereignty so that there is no misunderstanding on my position:


1) God has the power to effect His will over His creation.

2) He can and does work all things after the counsel of His own will.
While some of those things may look like a disaster to us as men, under the surface, God's will is actually being done, in the greater sense.

3) When it comes to the salvation of sinners, God's will, not ours, is done.
When the Lord makes a person born again, it frees them of their slavery to sin and they then naturally seek to do God's will over whatever else comes along.
It's not perfect, but it does grow as the believer grows, spiritually.

4) God is completely sovereign in the sense that He tolerates sin for His own purposes, and will someday judge the actions of those outside of Christ.
The only reason He is withholding His wrath is until the fullness of the Gentiles who are elect, are gathered to Him.
Until then, He is very patient towards sinners for the sake of His elect.

Make no mistake about it, He can and does rule over the affairs of men, who will answer to Him for the wrongs they have committed.
For example, He will hold the governor who misuses his or her authority in office, accountable for how he or she has executed that office.
The only ones who will escape this judgment are those of us who have believed on Christ from the heart...

Those whom God has had the mercy and kindness to rescue from our own love of sin and hatred of Him and His ways.
But we will still be there to be witnesses and to take part in the Judgment.


This is my final reply in this thread, sir.
I wish you well, and may you have a good afternoon.

 

[37818]

1. He did not have a fallen nature, by virtue of His virgin birth

No. Bv virtue of Having the divine nature not ceasing to be God. He was still fully human being born by His virgin mother. Hebrews 4:15. Mark 10:18.

 

[George Antonios]

God, in his sovereignty, chose to allow angels and men the kind of free-will that could and does thwart his will for them in many areas, except in matters where he states he won't allow that to happen.

That's the Biblical presentation of "sovereignty" and it's wonderful.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

I heard someone say recently that Jesus , though a prophet, never said, “Thus sayeth the Lord.” But He still taught with authority, showing His Lordship.

Yes, exactly: “Verily, verily I say unto you…’ How else would a prophet who is the LORD say it? He wasn’t just expressing Lordship, but Divine Lordship—Yahweh walked among them. “Before Abraham was, I AM.”

 

[Particular]

I heard someone say recently that Jesus , though a prophet, never said, “Thus sayeth the Lord.” But He still taught with authority, showing His Lordship.

But God doesn’t always get people to do what He tells them. For instance, He told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but they still did it. So His command was not “fully executed as He commanded.” Same with the Israelites; they turned away to other gods after God said to them, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Being Sovereign does not mean that sin would never be permitted.
When God wills for something to happen, it happens. For example, God would not allow Balaam to curse Israel. At the same time, God willed for Nebuchadnezzar to remove Judah into exile.
It was by God's ordination that Eve and Adam could disobey. Adam didn't do something outside of God's ordained plan. Does that make God evil? No. It Makes God Sovereign in allowing sin to happen to fulfill a greater plan that we finite creatures cannot comprehend.

 

[Derf B]

@Derf B

I think perhaps it's a good idea if I summarize how I view the subject of God's sovereignty so that there is no misunderstanding on my position:


1) God has the power to effect His will over His creation.

2) He can and does work all things after the counsel of His own will.
While some of those things may look like a disaster to us as men, under the surface, God's will is actually being done, in the greater sense.

3) When it comes to the salvation of sinners, God's will, not ours, is done.
When the Lord makes a person born again, it frees them of their slavery to sin and they then naturally seek to do God's will over whatever else comes along.
It's not perfect, but it does grow as the believer grows, spiritually.

4) God is completely sovereign in the sense that He tolerates sin for His own purposes, and will someday judge the actions of those outside of Christ.
The only reason He is withholding His wrath is until the fullness of the Gentiles who are elect, are gathered to Him.
Until then, He is very patient towards sinners for the sake of His elect.

Make no mistake about it, He can and does rule over the affairs of men, who will answer to Him for the wrongs they have committed.
For example, He will hold the governor who misuses his or her authority in office, accountable for how he or she has executed that office.
The only ones who will escape this judgment are those of us who have believed on Christ from the heart...

Those whom God has had the mercy and kindness to rescue from our own love of sin and hatred of Him and His ways.
But we will still be there to be witnesses and to take part in the Judgment.


This is my final reply in this thread, sir.
I wish you well, and may you have a good afternoon.

Thank you, Dave.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Derf B]

No. Bv virtue of Having the divine nature not ceasing to be God. He was still fully human being born by His virgin mother. Hebrews 4:15. Mark 10:18.

Probably a topic for another thread, but what you’re saying, it sounds like, is that Adam and Eve were created with a fallen nature, ie, not “very good”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Derf B]

Being Sovereign does not mean that sin would never be permitted.
When God wills for something to happen, it happens. For example, God would not allow Balaam to curse Israel. At the same time, God willed for Nebuchadnezzar to remove Judah into exile.
It was by God's ordination that Eve and Adam could disobey. Adam didn't do something outside of God's ordained plan. Does that make God evil? No. It Makes God Sovereign in allowing sin to happen to fulfill a greater plan that we finite creatures cannot comprehend.

I think we’re mostly in agreement here, but could you clarify: is God allowing it because it suits His greater plan, or is He ordaining it as a necessary part of His plan?

 

[1689Dave]

We throw this word around quite a bit. I thought it would be a good thing to discuss.

From Cambridge Dictionary: the power or authority to rule
From Encyclopedia Brittanica: Sovereignty, in political theory, the ultimate overseer, or authority, in the decision-making process of the state and in the maintenance of order.
From Webster's 1828 (note that "sovereignty" wasn't even an entry, so I've provided the definition for "sovereign"): Supreme in power; possessing supreme dominion; as a sovereign ruler of the universe.
Easton's Bible Dictionary defines God's Sovereignty as His "absolute right to do all things according to his own good pleasure."

I'd like to suggest that the idea of God's sovereignty is not unlike that of a king's sovereignty. A king (such as in the Mayflower Compact's reference to "our dread Sovereigne Lord, King James") exercises sovereignty in these ways:
1. He determines the law
2. He enforces the law.

The enforcement of the law can take several forms, but there are two results from enforcement:
1. People obey the law and are rewarded in some way (usually by getting to continue doing what they have been doing)
2. People disobey the law and are punished in some way

The punishment of lawbreakers takes several forms:
1. Infliction of Pain (loss of happiness, perhaps, including monetary fines)
2. Imprisonment (loss of freedom)
3. Banishment (loss of communion)
4. Death (loss of life)


I believe it is easy to show that God uses all of these punishments on His creatures, but their purposes may differ.
1. The infliction of pain is intended to drive a person's behavior back to the law. God used drought or pestilence on the people of Israel. Or invasion by another nation.
2. Imprisonment is a temporary state, waiting for judgment. This prevents harm to others in the interim. I don't know if there's an analog with God's people, but Satan is bound for 1000 years during the millenium.
3. Banishment deprives the subject of the benefits of communion, which can be sharing in wealth of the sovereign or protection from enemies. God sent the people out of the land of Israel to Assyria or Babylon. Satan and his angels were banished from heaven.
4. Death is the final act, where a sovereign has no hope of rehabilitating the subject, and his actions are a danger to others.

Since God uses these punishments in much the same way as a human king would, I believe this informs us on how God's sovereignty works. It is not that God decides everything that will happen, as some say, but that God reacts to what His subjects do, and this is wholly in keeping with His divine sovereignty.

(Topic for another time is whether God knows everything His subjects will do ahead of time, and the mechanism for that knowledge.)

Whoever reacts is controlled by whoever causes what they react to. This is not God but an idol.

 

[Derf B]

Whoever reacts is controlled by whoever causes what they react to. This is not God but an idol.

Are you saying God doesn't actually forgive us of sins when we ask?
Did Jesus not really follow Jairus to his house?
Was the second set of tablets Moses brought down not really written by the finger of God?

What you are saying is completely antithetical to the whole of scripture. God is not controlled by us when He answers prayers, but as a loving Father, He willingly interacts with us, not giving us a stone when we ask for bread or a scorpion when we ask for fish.This is what relationship looks like.

Jesus constantly reacted to the people around Him. Constantly. But He was controlled by none of them.

 

[1689Dave]

Are you saying God doesn't actually forgive us of sins when we ask?
Did Jesus not really follow Jairus to his house?
Was the second set of tablets Moses brought down not really written by the finger of God?

What you are saying is completely antithetical to the whole of scripture. God is not controlled by us when He answers prayers, but as a loving Father, He willingly interacts with us, not giving us a stone when we ask for bread or a scorpion when we ask for fish.This is what relationship looks like.

Jesus constantly reacted to the people around Him. Constantly. But He was controlled by none of them.

God must first save a person before they can want forgiveness. Until then you love sin and hate God.

 

[Particular]

I think we’re mostly in agreement here, but could you clarify: is God allowing it because it suits His greater plan, or is He ordaining it as a necessary part of His plan?

You would have to have God answer this question. However, I do know that God always accomplishes exactly what he has ordained. There is no surprise, no need to readjust and reconfigure. God takes the rebellion of man and works it perfectly into his fulfillment of his will.

 

[Miss E]

God is like a Father, and indeed He is our Father in Heaven, and in being such, He exerts His authority over His children, but a child has the freedom to obey or disobey the father and thus, gets the consequences or rewards of his/her actions in doing so. The Bible has always presented God in this way as far as authority goes. He is sovereign, knowing all things and having power in all things, but saying God uses His power to force His children to decide to trust His son or not is making Him seem like an abuser, not a loving, merciful Father who Loves His children regardless of what they choose.

 

[Derf B]

God must first save a person before they can want forgiveness. Until then you love sin and hate God.

Your original statement:

Whoever reacts is controlled by whoever causes what they react to. This is not God but an idol.

was much more broad than that. Are you retracting that original statement and replacing it with this one? You are then agreeing with me that God reacts to our prayers, and sins, and actions, at least in every instance except where it involves salvation?

So, regarding salvation, how does this verse fit:
[Act 3:19 KJV] Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
The purpose of the repenting is "that your sins may be blotted out", but if the repenting only comes after we are converted, Peter must have gotten it all wrong.

Are you saying God isn't capable of doing it the way Peter described, because it must take a back seat to His sovereignty at that point (though never any other time)?

 

[1689Dave]

Your original statement:

​

was much more broad than that. Are you retracting that original statement and replacing it with this one? You are then agreeing with me that God reacts to our prayers, and sins, and actions, at least in every instance except where it involves salvation?

So, regarding salvation, how does this verse fit:
[Act 3:19 KJV] Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
The purpose of the repenting is "that your sins may be blotted out", but if the repenting only comes after we are converted, Peter must have gotten it all wrong.

Are you saying God isn't capable of doing it the way Peter described, because it must take a back seat to His sovereignty at that point (though never any other time)?

Both statements are accurate. You must be saved before you can want to repent. It's foolishness until then.

 

[Derf B]

You would have to have God answer this question. However, I do know that God always accomplishes exactly what he has ordained. There is no surprise, no need to readjust and reconfigure. God takes the rebellion of man and works it perfectly into his fulfillment of his will.

Do you think He does that with every act of rebellion of every person? In other words, let's say Joe Blow has been sitting in his basement for 3 weeks straight, playing video games instead of helping his elderly mother get groceries. Somebody else ends up helping her with the groceries.

Joe ends up dying of inactivity, and at the GWT judgment, God pulls out the books, and shows Joe that he was supposed to be helping his mom. Do you think God sovereignly had to have used every second of Joe's idle time in the fulfillment of His will? Or might some of that idle time have been wasted in the cosmic scheme of things, and Joe bears the responsibility for the wasted time?

My contention is that while God CAN use any act of man to fulfill His purposes, like the quintessential example of Joseph's brothers, that doesn't mean He HAS to use every act. In fact, if God HAS to use every act, then God might be seen to be dependent on the sinful acts of man, which degrades His sovereignty substantially.