ECT The Sovereignty of God

[Nang]

I say, without qualification that there is no authority whatsoever that is higher than God

Agreed. God is the highest and sole rule over all Creation.

and that all authority that exists outside of God (e.g. my life and volitional will) was delegated by Him

His Sovereignty and sole ruling authority is incommunicable.

If you have been delegated any authority, it can only be representative.

God's Sovereignty is absolute and cannot be successfully challenged by anyone or anything.

Agreed.

"Soveriegnty" is about authority not control.

Disagreed.

Rule without total control, is not an absolute at all, so you do not really believe in absolute sovereignty.

Just to be clear . . .

 

[themuzicman]

There most certainly is (e.g Genesis 2:17; Ephesians 2:1-3). Dead men have no power of volition nor dominion over anything.

And yet, Adam didn't die until that dominion was passed on to his children.

I really do not want to get into a "Pelagian" argument with you. The OP has already acknowledged that many choose to limit the sovereignty of God by claims of free will in men.

Nice straw man fallacy.

The purpose of this thread is to witness to the Reformed belief in our absolute Sovereign God through a sharing of the many Scriptures that reveal this wonderful Truth.

Excerpt that Reformed belief cannot stand up to a critical examination of its exegesis. So, if you claim Reformed belief is an inerrant tradition, you're bearing false witness.

 

[Shasta]

4253 pro

Strong's Concordance
pro: before
Original Word: πρό
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pro
Phonetic Spelling: (pro)
Short Definition: before
Definition: (a) of place: before, in front of, (b) of time: before, earlier than

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
Peter 1:20; πρό πάντων, prior to all created things, Colossians 1:17; (πρό τούτων πάντων (Rev. ἁπάντων), Luke 21:12); by a Hebraism, πρό προσώπου with the genitive of a thing is used of time for the simple πρό
http://biblehub.com/greek/4253.htm

As creator, God necessarily existed before anything else and He is superior to anything He made. The universe which was brought into existence by His Word is sustained by the ongoing exertion of "the word of His power" but what He sustains is our EXISTENCE and that of the entire material universe. The scriptures do NOT say that God continually exerts His power to control the choices and actions men. The verse is about God’s ongoing role as creator and sustainer of existence. The kind of Puppet Master control over people's wills and actions that you are advocating cannot be found in these verses. Had you bothered to lay aside your presuppositions long enough to consult the linguistic references that are available to all Bible students you would have seen that.

 

[Nang]

4253 pro

Strong's Concordance
pro: before
Original Word: πρό
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pro
Phonetic Spelling: (pro)
Short Definition: before
Definition: (a) of place: before, in front of, (b) of time: before, earlier than

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
Peter 1:20; πρό πάντων, prior to all created things, Colossians 1:17; (πρό τούτων πάντων (Rev. ἁπάντων), Luke 21:12); by a Hebraism, πρό προσώπου with the genitive of a thing is used of time for the simple πρό
http://biblehub.com/greek/4253.htm

As creator, God necessarily existed before anything else and He is superior to anything He made. The universe which was brought into existence by His Word is sustained by the ongoing exertion of "the word of His power" but what He sustains is our EXISTENCE and that of the entire material universe.

Agreed.

The scriptures do NOT say that God continually exerts His power to control the choices and actions men.

Not so. Proverbs 16:1,4,9; Proverbs 19:21; Psalm 37:23; Jeremiah 10:23; Matthew 10:19-20; Romans 11:34-36

The verse is about God’s ongoing role as creator and sustainer of existence. The kind of Puppet Master control over people's wills and actions that you are advocating cannot be found in these verses. Had you bothered to lay aside your presuppositions long enough to consult the linguistic references that are available to all Bible students you would have seen that.

You think? How amusing. . .

All you show is disagreement with the Reformed faith and reveal a belief that creatures can limit the will, purposes, intent, and power of their Creator.

Beware, lest it be said of you, he is "who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." Romans 1:25

 

[Shasta]

First you tell me that it is off limits to discuss, as I did, the relationship of Calvinism to Manichaeism (Persian Gnosticism which was dualistic) yet it is apparently okay for you to link other people's beliefs to the system of Pelagius. If you do not want to discuss the origin of doctrines then you should abide by the same rules.

Aside from that, I do not think you are clear on exactly what "dualism" is. Theological Dualism is the belief that two equal and opposite Forces control the universe: one of which is completelt good and the other of which is completely evil. The chief proponents of this view in the early centuries of the Church were the Manichaeans, a cult to which Augustine belonged before his conversion. In attempting to reconcile evil and good with the existence of an all-powerful God, Augustine made both to be part of God's predestined will. Calvin was a student of Augustine. Need I say more? Anthropological Dualism is the belief that the "mind" is something completely different than the material "brain." Surely you do not want to get into any of this.

 

[Nang]

First you tell me that it is off limits to discuss, as I did, the relationship of Calvinism to Manichaeism (Persian Gnosticism which was dualistic) yet it is apparently okay for you to link other people's beliefs to the system of Pelagius. If you do not want to discuss the origin of doctrines then you should abide by the same rules.

Doctrinal errors, nor vain philosophies do not define the Sovereignty of God, and Calvin was not dualistic, so why go there? (Double Predestination is not "dualism.")

Aside from that, I do not think you are clear on exactly what "dualism" is. Theological Dualism is the belief that two equal and opposite Forces control the universe: one of which is completelt good and the other of which is completely evil. The chief proponents of this view in the early centuries of the Church were the Manichaeans, a cult to which Augustine belonged before his conversion. In attempting to reconcile evil and good with the existence of an all-powerful God, Augustine made both to be part of God's predestined will. Calvin was a student of Augustine. Need I say more?

Augustine corrected his early errors. Dualism does not define the doctrine of Predestination. Absolute Sovereignty alone defines the doctrine of Predestination.

Anthropological Dualism is the belief that the "mind" is something completely different than the material "brain." Surely you do not want to get into any of this.

No, I do not, as it does not pertain to the OP. But it is my thread, and I can follow any rule I see fit, and when anyone begins to swerve away from the subject, it is my right and duty to keep discussion on track.

(Anyone interested in "Dualism" can do a Google search on the subject.)

 

[Shasta]

[Nang;4908215]Agreed.

Before you pass this off as something you always agreed with lets look at the point you were trying to make. You were attempting to use the phrase "God is before all things" as a proof of God's "sovereignty" in the Calvinistic sense, meaning that He controls the minds, and wills of every human being that has ever lived. However all this verse is really saying is that God existed before all things, that is before anything was made.

Not so. Proverbs 16:1,4,9; Proverbs 19:21; Psalm 37:23; Jeremiah 10:23; Matthew 10:19-20; Romans 11:34-36

I can always get to these scriptures which I imagine will be as misinterpreted as the others you have brought up. I prefer, however, to stick with the verse at hand before moving on.

You think? How amusing. . .

You seem to be living under the misconception that you are a profound theological thinker.

All you show is disagreement with the Reformed faith and reveal a belief that creatures can limit the will, purposes, intent, and power of their Creator.

The Reformed Faith was not established on new revelation and it is accurate only in so far as it is consistent with the original "faith once delivered to the saints" The truth of THIS faith can be found in the Bible which judges all the words of John Calvin. I think the Reformers themselves would agree that the Bible and not their formulations are the basis for doctrine. I deny the verbal plenary infallible inspiration of Calvins Institutes or any of his other writings.

As to your remark that I believe that creatures can "limit the Creator," that is a straw man. I doubt anyone here believes that. The existence of human agency is a threat to the "sovereignty" of God only Calvin's system where the term is given an idiosyncratic meaning and made an inseparable quality of His deity. That peculiar way of thinking came very late in history. All the Early Greek speaking teachers and theologians through the first 400 years of the Church universally opposed pre-determinism whenever they wrote about it.

Beware, lest it be said of you, he is "who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." Romans 1:25

Of course you can say EVERYONE except those who agree with you are idolators but that is just name-calling. You done absolutely nothing to prove your case. Believing that humans have volition does not exalt humanity, for those who are saved must depend on God and not themselves. If a person is not saved then all will see that they were responsible for their fate and not God.

 

[Nang]

You done absolutely nothing to prove your case.

O.K.

Thank you for demonstrating the opposition to the absolute Sovereignty of God.

Which is my entire motive for this thread. The subject is an either/or proposition: Either God is absolutely sovereign, or His works are limited by the wills of men.

The readers will respond to either one view or the other. But it must be admitted there will be an eternal cause for that response.

 

[Shasta]

To prove that I misinterpreted those scriptures wrongly you have to provide exegetical proof just as I did. What you or I happen to think when we read a passage in the Bible is irrelevant. It is what the words mean in the original context.

 

[Shasta]

Your claims to have superior knowledge of God's nature are unconvincing. The oblique warning of eternal judgement if one disagrees with your opinion is likewise irrelevant. What the scriptures say matters, not what you say, so call off your self-righteous thunderclouds and join with us mortals who seek to learn the truth of God's word.

 

[john w]

Your claims to have superior knowledge of God's nature are unconvincing. The oblique warning of eternal judgement if one disagrees with your opinion is likewise irrelevant. What the scriptures say matters, not what you say, so call off your self-righteous thunderclouds and join with us mortals who seek to learn the truth of God's word.

We are about due for Nag's debate ender........


"Bah...."

 

[Nang]

To prove that I misinterpreted those scriptures wrongly you have to provide exegetical proof just as I did. What you or I happen to think when we read a passage in the Bible is irrelevant. It is what the words mean in the original context.

I do not consider you interpreted these verses at all. You simply deny what they plainly reveal about the Godhood of God, while insisting they do not deny God gave volition to man.

Reformers do not deny God gave volition to man. All men are willful by nature. However, because of original sin, that willfulness is no longer free to serve God and righteousness. The will of man is enslaved to sin, death, and the devil.

 

[john w]

However, because of original sin,...

Confirmed-Calvinism/Clavinism is warmed over Roman Catholicism, in many areas. You talk like a Roman-they talk like you.

 

[Nang]

Your claims to have superior knowledge of God's nature are unconvincing.

My claim is that the nature of God is Superior and Supreme. I made no claims as to my knowledge or the importance, thereof.

The oblique warning of eternal judgement if one disagrees with your opinion is likewise irrelevant.

Your M.O. is one of insertion. You insert your thoughts into the print on your screen, without warrant. I never mentioned eternal "judgement." I referred to eternal "cause."

What the scriptures say matters, not what you say, so call off your self-righteous thunderclouds and join with us mortals who seek to learn the truth of God's word.

This thread was started to achieve just that . .

 

[Nang]

Confirmed-Calvinism/Clavinism is warmed over Roman Catholicism, in many areas. You talk like a Roman-they talk like you.

You forget that the church at Rome began from the ministry of Paul, and for many decades remained strong in the basic tenets of the Christian faith.

The Reformation worked by the Spirit of God, rescued saints held under the latter oppression of the RCC and returned them to their early fathers' faith.

 

[john w]

You forget that the church at Rome began from the ministry of Paul, and for many decades remained strong in the basic tenets of the Christian faith.

The Reformation worked by the Spirit of God, rescued saints held under the latter oppression of the RCC and returned them to their early fathers' faith.

Quite irrelevant-nice bait 'n switch...Slower....

...However, because of original sin....

You talk like a Roman Catholic-they talk like you.


Give us a "Bah," un-elect one. Please?

 

[Cross Reference]

God cannot use His power to MAKE man holy.




Man must be willing to be made holy.

 

[Shasta]

You mean like Shasta just read his beliefs into the texts that glorify God's absolute sovereignty?

You presented various verses as proof that God by exerting His divine power determines the choices that men make. The code word for this kind of control is “sovereignty.” When I looked at your proofs I found that this concept was neither stated nor implied in the text.

1 Chronicles 29:10–12
10 Therefore David blessed the Lord before all the assembly; and David said:
“Blessed are You, Lord God of Israel, our Father, forever and ever.
11 Yours, O Lord, is the greatness,
The power and the glory,
The victory and the majesty;
For all that is in heaven and in earth is Yours;
Yours is the kingdom, O Lord,
And You are exalted as head over all.
12 Both riches and honor come from You,
And You reign over all.
In Your hand is power and might;
In Your hand it is to make great
And to give strength to all.

First –the main point. While this scripture speaks of God’s power and kingship it does not say that He controls the minds, and wills of all mankind. What the passage does say is that God is great, powerful and majestic, that He rules and reigns over His Kingdom as its exalted King. Furthermore it states that the decision about who to grant power and riches to is ultimately His.
Is this saying that God has already taken complete control of all the kingdoms of this world? Obviously not. He will reign over His kingdom until He returns and loud voices from heaven proclaim:

“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.” (Revelation 11:15)

Paul describes that moment in these terms:

…24 Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. (1 Corinthians 15:25)

Notice that currently Christ has the authority to take over the governments of the earth but He chooses NOT to. Instead He lets governments continue in their wickedness while He works to bring forth the harvest. God may have all dominion, authority and power but He has not yet destroyed those who make competing claims to it. In the end, though, He will, but not before. Because God can or could have already assumed control does not mean He CHOSEN or even DESIRES to do so at this time although, in your terms, not controlling everything deprives Him of the attribute of "sovereignty."

 

[Shasta]

(answering Nangs Comments to John W.)

I thought you did not want to talk about history, Nang, but as long as you have brought it up I will remind you that the Apostolic Church fathers who were the successors of Paul and the others did not teach God's "sovereignty" defined as absolute control over men's choices so that God determines in advance who will be saved and who will be damned. If you read the letters of Clement of Rome who knew Paul you will see that he believed in that dreaded doctrine of "freewill."

Calvin did not much care for the early Greek Church fathers for the simple reason that they contradicted his beliefs. Instead, he preferred the writings of Augustine who has been called "the father of the Catholic Church." Augustine first formulated such doctrines as "original sin" which is supposedly removed by infant baptism. There is a reason why Calvin and Luther baptized infants. I would say if your Church does not practice infant baptism then it hardly deserves to be classified as Reformed.

 

[Nang]

You presented various verses as proof that God by exerting His divine power determines the choices that men make.

I presented verses that teach the absolute sovereignty of God. You read the same verses and inserted your opinion that the verses do not teach predeterminism, and then accuse me of inaccurate exegesis of scripture.

I never brought up predeterminism, predestination, the omnipotence or omniscience of God at all.

The subject is whether God is absolutely sovereign, or whether He is limited in authority.

Obviously you believe the latter, but that does not give you the right to change my intents and purpose of discussion.

Because God can or could have already assumed control does not mean He CHOSEN or even DESIRES to do so at this time although, in your terms, not controlling everything deprives Him of the attribute of "sovereignty."

You are the one declaring God does not control everything. Not me.

You are teaching a limited authority of God. You deny He is absolute ruler and Lord of all.

Fine, but be honest in your argument, please, and stop inserting yourself into mine.