I. BRIEF SUMMARY This article is an examination of the divine sovereignty/free will tension that exists and the appeals to paradox/reason that have developed from this tension. Specifically the author examined the epistemic and logical positions within the paradox camp as well as the libertarian and compatibilist positions within the reason camp. The author summarized that the pursuit of solution to the tension is a valid one.
II. CRITICAL INTERACTION Stating that belief in this tension is the basis for the arguments is important because while there is an assumption that all theists believe that such a tension exists, the reality is simply not the case. Furthermore, the presented presupposition also requires a further presupposition in the existence of a personal deity. While many religions have a notion of the divine they would deny the immanence of such a being. This would make the question of tension moot since a non-interactive being would not be superimposing its sovereignty on the volition of its creation.
…show more content…
The entire argument is predicated on various assumptions, such as the concepts of omnipotence and omniscience. The tension does not arise from God being all-powerful or all-knowing but in how God exercises those abilities. Nor does the tension arise from God being immanent but in the extent in which he is immanent. While others have attempted to provide an alternative way to solve the tension this article does not attempt to do so but rather accepts the current assumptions and evaluates the already pursued methods of solving the