There is always a tension in affirming both divine sovereignty and human freedom. This article examines Clark Pinnock's attempt to reconcile God's sovereignty with human freedom by suggesting that God knows all that can be known, which does not include future human decisions. However, God is omnicompetent and thus able to bring about his ultimate goals.
What is the nature of human freedom in light of man's natural tendency towards sin? This article responds to a previous article in the journal by Paul Himes who argued that 1 Corinthians 10:13 provides good evidence in favour of libertarianism, at least in situations in which Christians are tempted to sin. Cowan argues contrary to Himes that the text actually supports a compatibilist view of freedom.
This essay wrestles to reconcile the sovereignty of God with human freedom. It describes the appeal to paradox, paying particular attention to the various senses of the term. The author concludes that the appeal to paradox fails as a result of its claim that a logical reconciliation of sovereignty and human freedom is known to be impossible.
What is at stake in the debate over free will and the sovereignty of God? Is it possible to take seriously human freedom and at the same time honour God’s absolute sovereignty over his creation? If God is the one who determines the course of events in the lives of men, how can man be responsible for his actions? Should Christians still pray if God in any way holds the future in his hands?