Sovereignty Implies What?

[Rey Reynoso]

I know that many folk have different views of God's sovereignty so here's the question: For God to be sovereign what must definitely remain in place to enforce that concept?

PLEASE NOTE: These are examples of what I'm looking for in the phrasing--not the specific examples:
For example: God can only be sovereign if every single action and inaction is controlled.
or
For example: God is sovereign as long as He created everything and left.
or
For example: God is sovereign as long as He has the overuling decision in any given thing.

*post edited for clarification.

[Jason]

Universal jurisdiction is the least common denominator of God's sovereignty.
At the same time, this is such that one has to go back and bring in the fact that omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence are necessary, too. Otherwise He could not exercise His sovereignty over the universe.
The other issues mentioned, holiness, wisdom, love, etc. seem to point more to how God would exercise Sovereignty.
Perhaps that will muddle the issue more?

Rey Reynoso said:

So what's the "lowest" denominator that still allows God to be sovereign: not how He works it out or how it's balanced but what's the minimum requirement for God to still be sovereign? Is it total control no less? Is it ultimate power to choose, no less? Is it some other example?

[JL Vaughn]

God is sovereign as long as He retains the right and necessary power to overrule anything he wishes to overrule.

[Jason]

In other words, God has ultimate jurisdiction.
Correct?

JL Vaughn said:

God is sovereign as long as He retains the right and necessary power to overrule anything he wishes to overrule.

[Rey Reynoso]

Possibly it would muddle the issues but I don't know.

I mean, take me for instance: what would it take for me to be sovereign? I don't think I would need the power to know every decision being made and I don't think I even have to be able to do everything. But I should be able to do something with my decisions that make them over rule your decision whether you like it or not. Would I have to be all loving to still be sovereign?

Or maybe its all backwards....maybe all I need is a people in subjection to me? The right to overrule their decisions makes me sovereign over them? No matter how nasty or mindless I am or maybe not?

What makes a King a Sovereign?

Jason Skipper said:

Universal jurisdiction is the least common denominator of God's sovereignty.
At the same time, this is such that one has to go back and bring in the fact that omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence are necessary, too. Otherwise He could not exercise His sovereignty over the universe.
The other issues mentioned, holiness, wisdom, love, etc. seem to point more to how God would exercise Sovereignty.
Perhaps that will muddle the issue more?

Rey Reynoso said:

So what's the "lowest" denominator that still allows God to be sovereign: not how He works it out or how it's balanced but what's the minimum requirement for God to still be sovereign? Is it total control no less? Is it ultimate power to choose, no less? Is it some other example?

[Jason]

Rey,
I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying.
Jurisdiction is what is necessary for God to be sovereign.
Seeing it is a universal jurisdiction omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence seem necessary to this sovereignty. Otherwise, one would not be very well equipped to be sovereign. What sovereignty is is that cannot exercise jurisdiction?
The attributes of love, wisdom, etc. would not be absolutely necessary to the concept of sovereignty in general. They deal with how God would exercise His sovereignty.

A king is sovereign because he is ruler. He has jurisdiction. He may delegate that jurisdiction to some extent, but his is the ultimate authority.
He may be mean, ruthless, heartless, and cruel, or he may be just, kind, wise, and benevolent. Either way, he is sovereign because he rules.
That's my take for the present. I could be wrong, but I'm human enough to think I'm right....at least for the next five minutes :-)

[Rey Reynoso]

Ah, so you're saying for someone to be sovereign they have to have the right to do it AND the power to implement their decisions AND the power to know when and where and how to implement those decisions.


Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back.If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it.

During those days of my life am I sovereign?

[Jason]

I don't think that I asserted that one would have to know how to implement his decisions. That would come under wisdom. Dealing with the general principle of sovereignty, wisdom is not necessary. Many fools have been king.
Yes, one could be sovereign and ignorant of much, if not all that is going on. I'm saying that, in a comparative sort of way, it's no sovereignty that cannot be exercised. If universal sovereignty is to be exercised there needs to be certain attributes to enable one to exercise it. Otherwise, what good is the sovereign.
There have been, however, many incompetent kings.
Is one really a sovereign if they cannot implement their rule?
Rey Reynoso said:

Ah, so you're saying for someone to be sovereign they have to have the right to do it AND the power to implement their decisions AND the power to know when and where and how to implement those decisions.


Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back.If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it.

During those days of my life am I sovereign?

[Rey Reynoso]

Am I sovereign in the example I offered above?

Jason Skipper said:

I don't think that I asserted that one would have to know how to implement his decisions. That would come under wisdom. Dealing with the general principle of sovereignty, wisdom is not necessary. Many fools have been king.
Yes, one could be sovereign and ignorant of much, if not all that is going on. I'm saying that, in a comparative sort of way, it's no sovereignty that cannot be exercised. If universal sovereignty is to be exercised there needs to be certain attributes to enable one to exercise it. Otherwise, what good is the sovereign.
There have been, however, many incompetent kings.
Is one really a sovereign if they cannot implement their rule?
Rey Reynoso said:

Ah, so you're saying for someone to be sovereign they have to have the right to do it AND the power to implement their decisions AND the power to know when and where and how to implement those decisions.


Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back.If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it.

During those days of my life am I sovereign?

[Jason]

That's really tough.
I would lean toward a "no" on that one.
What sovereign is so absent that the ruled are ruled by themselves?
"I would lean toward a 'no.' There I go equivocating again......

Rey Reynoso said:

Am I sovereign in the example I offered above?

[Jack]

No,Rey! To be actually sovereign, as God is, You need to have absolute unlimited power, absolute unlimited knowledge, of the past, present, and potential future, and be always present everywhere, at the same time to exercise that power.
Human rulers have been called Sovereigns, but that is mere flattery! Human rulers have extremely limited power, allowed by God, over a limited territory, for a limited time, with extremely limited knowledge, and none of which can alter, in the slightest, God's overall, and detailed plan which God had predetermined prior to creation.
I just heard a lot of blood vessels pop! Heh! Heh!
the Geezer( Rey, now, you will get the response you had been looking for)

Rey Reynoso said:

Am I sovereign in the example I offered above?

Jason Skipper said:

I don't think that I asserted that one would have to know how to implement his decisions. That would come under wisdom. Dealing with the general principle of sovereignty, wisdom is not necessary. Many fools have been king.
Yes, one could be sovereign and ignorant of much, if not all that is going on. I'm saying that, in a comparative sort of way, it's no sovereignty that cannot be exercised. If universal sovereignty is to be exercised there needs to be certain attributes to enable one to exercise it. Otherwise, what good is the sovereign.
There have been, however, many incompetent kings.
Is one really a sovereign if they cannot implement their rule?
Rey Reynoso said:

Ah, so you're saying for someone to be sovereign they have to have the right to do it AND the power to implement their decisions AND the power to know when and where and how to implement those decisions.


Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back.If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it.

During those days of my life am I sovereign?

[Rey Reynoso]

Jack I didn't ask what it takes for me to be God. For the sake of memory and reiteration let me bold what I said:

Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back. If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it. During those days of my life am I sovereign?

Jack said:

No,Rey! To be actually sovereign, as God is, You need to have absolute unlimited power, absolute unlimited knowledge, of the past, present, and potential future, and be always present everywhere, at the same time to exercise that power.
Human rulers have been called Sovereigns, but that is mere flattery! Human rulers have extremely limited power, allowed by God, over a limited territory, for a limited time, with extremely limited knowledge, and none of which can alter, in the slightest, God's overall, and detailed plan which God had predetermined prior to creation. I just heard a lot of blood vessels pop! Heh! Heh! the Geezer( Rey, now, you will get the response you had been looking for)

Rey Reynoso said:

Am I sovereign in the example I offered above?

Jason Skipper said:

I don't think that I asserted that one would have to know how to implement his decisions. That would come under wisdom. Dealing with the general principle of sovereignty, wisdom is not necessary. Many fools have been king.
Yes, one could be sovereign and ignorant of much, if not all that is going on. I'm saying that, in a comparative sort of way, it's no sovereignty that cannot be exercised. If universal sovereignty is to be exercised there needs to be certain attributes to enable one to exercise it. Otherwise, what good is the sovereign.
There have been, however, many incompetent kings.
Is one really a sovereign if they cannot implement their rule? Rey Reynoso said:

Ah, so you're saying for someone to be sovereign they have to have the right to do it AND the power to implement their decisions AND the power to know when and where and how to implement those decisions.


Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back.If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it.
During those days of my life am I sovereign?

[Jason]

Jack,
I agree with you.
I have dropped to mostly discussing mere sovereignty.
The problem is that God is holy and transcendent. That makes it difficult for us to speak well of Him.
I've gotta get off here and go to bed.

Jack said:

No,Rey! To be actually sovereign, as God is, You need to have absolute unlimited power, absolute unlimited knowledge, of the past, present, and potential future, and be always present everywhere, at the same time to exercise that power.
Human rulers have been called Sovereigns, but that is mere flattery! Human rulers have extremely limited power, allowed by God, over a limited territory, for a limited time, with extremely limited knowledge, and none of which can alter, in the slightest, God's overall, and detailed plan which God had predetermined prior to creation.
I just heard a lot of blood vessels pop! Heh! Heh!
the Geezer( Rey, now, you will get the response you had been looking for)

Rey Reynoso said:

Am I sovereign in the example I offered above?

Jason Skipper said:

I don't think that I asserted that one would have to know how to implement his decisions. That would come under wisdom. Dealing with the general principle of sovereignty, wisdom is not necessary. Many fools have been king.
Yes, one could be sovereign and ignorant of much, if not all that is going on. I'm saying that, in a comparative sort of way, it's no sovereignty that cannot be exercised. If universal sovereignty is to be exercised there needs to be certain attributes to enable one to exercise it. Otherwise, what good is the sovereign.
There have been, however, many incompetent kings.
Is one really a sovereign if they cannot implement their rule?
Rey Reynoso said:

Ah, so you're saying for someone to be sovereign they have to have the right to do it AND the power to implement their decisions AND the power to know when and where and how to implement those decisions.


Let me pretend for a second. For the general benefit of the thread. Let's say that one day I suddenly had the power to overrule all and overturn all. If someone dies, I can overrule it and bring them back.If a court makes a decision I can overrule it and overturn it. My problem is that in everything else I am still me. I don't know what's happening next door (but if I did I could overrule and overturn). I get tired. I sleep. Yet in all this I keep my power till the day I die and only rarely use it.

During those days of my life am I sovereign?