presupposition

[Gracchus]

That is interesting. I went through that line of logic also but my conclusion was a bit different, "If nothing else, I believe in God because I think the concept of God is a good idea."

That is not rigorous reasoning, but perhaps the very best you can do.

It was either that or "I am God." And I do not want to be God. I do not think so!

Well, it doesn't really matter to reality what you want. But if you are God, and don't want to be you could always pretend to be human. In fact you could pretend to be six and a half billion humans!

Oh! Wait...

 

[daniel777]

I am left to believe that God is either absolutely sovereign or absolutely not.
Few people consider the implications of a sovereign God,
even those who would say that they believe that God is sovereign.

Most of those who say that they believe in a sovereign God also believe the God is subject to: human-free-will, chance.
They believe that a sovereign God has a sequence of ideas and emotions.

In essence, very few truely believe in a sovereign God.

It may do well, at this point, to remember:
sovereign = necessary
subject = contingent

if i'm understanding everything you're saying correctly, how does any of this give you room to define what "absolute sovereignty" even is?

it seems like the only correct definition for sovereignty would be the sovereign one. how can a mere contingent possibly understand what it means to be "sovereign?

what does it mean to act sovereignly? are some acts sovereign and others not? how can you possibly know, or "be left to believe".

would granting free-will be an un-sovereign act if dying on a tree is a sovereign one? . . . maybe modern christianity is too afraid of paradoxes, trying to understand what isn't possible to understand.

 

[bricklayer]

A free-will is a will free to act according to its nature.

A human-free-will is not an uncaused cause.
As contingent beings, our wills are in course of a cause and effect sequence.
Our wills are not efficient, uncaused-causes of anything.

God is necessary, everything else is contingent.
God is sovereign, everything else is subject.

A free-will is a will free to act according to its nature.
It is our nature to be contingent, subject.
It is God's nature to be necessary, sovereign.

A human-free-will does not equate to a human-sovereign-will.

As to your other point:

A finite may apprehend an infinite but not comprehensively.

I do affirm analogy principle.
As english is a created thing, it can at best be analogous to an uncreated being.

 

[daniel777]

A free-will is a will free to act according to its nature.

A human-free-will is not an uncaused cause.
As contingent beings, our wills are in course of a cause and effect sequence.
Our wills are not efficient, uncaused-causes of anything.

God is necessary, everything else is contingent.
God is sovereign, everything else is subject.

so, God is sovereign in that he can't do certain things?

A finite may apprehend an infinite but not comprehensively.

but how comprehensively? it would be like reading the back cover of a philosophical text book that has an infinite amount of pages. sure, you can get some information, but there's a point where too far is just too far.

 

[tucker58]

That is not rigorous reasoning, but perhaps the very best you can do.Well, it doesn't really matter to reality what you want. But if you are God, and don't want to be you could always pretend to be human. In fact you could pretend to be six and a half billion humans!

Oh! Wait...

You reach a point as a mystic where God shares His knowledge with you by sharing His experience with you. One then at that point has to be careful that one does not began to think that they themselves are God. Is all.

But of course you already knew that

love,

tuck

 

[bricklayer]

God is sovereign in that He cannot be less than sovereign.

There is no degree of comprehensive, other than 100%.