katabole vs. themelios: Will the real foundation please be laid...

[Eleutheros]

PART TWO

So, here are those three remaining quotes where proginōskō appears and the ulterior King's  interpreters used those especial words 'foreknow' and 'foreknew'-as well as the very misleading, very inaccurate and very ulterior word 'foreordained'; very revealing that!

I will be using the CLV text here, even as you did and will also provide it with my annotations as well as with the complete thought, that is, with the context.

Rom 8:25-30 "Now, if we (Believers) are expecting what we are not observing, we (Believers) are awaiting it with endurance. Now, similarly, the spirit, also is aiding our infirmity; for what we (Believers) should be praying for, to accord with what must be, we (Believers) are not aware, but, the spirit itself is pleading for us (Believers) with inarticulate groanings. Now He Who is searching the hearts (of Believers) is aware what is the disposition of the spirit, for in accord with God is it pleading for the saints.
Now we (Believers) are aware that God is working all together for the good of those (humans) who are loving God, (those humans) who are called according to the purpose that, (those humans) whom He foreknew, (through knowing intimately their hearts) He designates beforehand, also, to be conformed to the image of His Son, for Him (Jesus) to be Firstborn among many brethren. Now those (humans) whom He designates beforehand (because He knows their hearts), these (humans) He calls also, and whom He calls, these (humans) He justifies also; now whom He justifies, these (humans) He glorifies also."

You said simply:

Here we have God's foreknowledge of the "saints".

And I somewhat agree. However it does not say he has foreknowledge of the future, as a fact.

Let me pull the misleading word 'foreknew' and insert another phrase:

"Now we (Believers) are aware that God is working all together for the good of those (humans) who are loving God, (those humans) who are called according to the purpose that, (those humans) whom He knows before, (through knowing intimately their hearts) He designates beforehand, also, to be conformed to the image of His Son, for Him (Jesus) to be Firstborn among many brethren."

Now that, to my mind, lines up much better with the thought that the living God is the savior of all men, especially of those who believe!

So, what is the difference, then, between knew and know? Answer: Not much, except for the context.

For instance the phrase: "I know what's going on" implies current knowledge or knowledge gained in the present and "I knew what was going on" implies knowledge gained from the past.

Therefore, since Paul is keeping his talk in the present tense I feel it is justified to use 'know' rather than 'knew'. And because Knoch was inconsistent in his own translational goal here and also because of what I've read of his heart in his commentaries, I've concluded that he was pre-disposed to use 'foreknew', which means 'knew before' rather than the more accurate 'foreknow', which means 'know before'.

Like I said, I'm not a language scholar and I would welcome any constructive input on this. Because I foreknow that what I am doing here would seem to be taking liberties to prove my point. And that it would seem, to those who don't like what I am saying, that I am 'claiming' to know more than those who are learned in languages.

My only defense, for now, to such a charge, would be to quote you Doc:

...we have study tools available that can show us the way that biblical words are translated isn't what they really mean at all.

And that is all I am doing; using these tools while studiously examining my own thoughts for ulterior motives and prove my logic and reason against false, contradictory conclusions.

So, more to the point, what I perceive Jehovah actually foreknows, or, has intimate knowledge of, here, is not the "saints", as a singular, corporate body, but, specifically, the saint's individual hearts; as well as, individually, all the other humans and their hearts; which, as I've defined it biblically for you, the human heart is the sum-total of the thoughts in us that lead us to speak what we speak and act as we act.

But, it does not say here that Jehovah has foreknowledge of the future.

However, consider this: If Jehovah does, indeed, 'foreknow' the human heart- and there are a ton of scriptures to support that idea, including Jesus' uncanny ability to read human minds- for being intimately acquainted with each and every one of us, even as the word proginōskō is an intimate word, cannot He then predict or prognosticate what the human whose heart He knows so well, will do, given a set of circumstances? And with an almost unbelievable accuracy so that it seems He knew what they were going to do, as a fact, even before they did?

And according to Paul, for those humans who have received holy spirit, that spirit pleads for us to give us strength in our weakness as it prays for us 'in accord with what must be'; which 'what must be' is not the future, per se, that is, the future as a foreknown fact, but is, instead, what Jehovah determines should come to be for exactly what He does know.

And so, I ask, how does this thought, differing from the one Calvin gave you to believe about what Jehovah 'foreknows', diminish His sovereignty over the Universe He created? Did not He Himself say: "All souls are Mine"?

Answer: It doesn't diminish His sovereignty. In fact this thought gives my heart a much clearer vision, much more in line with the God I've come to know; a God Who is truly loving, Who really is agape and is intimately acquainted with every human soul, even mine such that the very (few) hairs (left) on my head are numbered. And that He is ever-acting among all humans, especially through Believers, who have had holy spirit deposited into them, begetting them anew, to bring about exactly what Paul said we Believers know by experience, "…that He is working all together for the good of those (humans) who are loving God, (those humans) who are called according to the purpose that, (those humans) whom He knows before, (through knowing intimately their hearts)He designates beforehand, also, to be conformed to the image of His Son, for Him (Jesus) to be Firstborn among many brethren."

So, if you didn't know this before, being a Believer, then now you know exactly what Jehovah has foreknowledge of and what He is using this foreknowledge to accomplish, the salvation of all, on the fly!, so to speak, even as the future unfolds with each new thought we think and with each new human that is created by us when we come to ginosko each other as intimately as He is intimate.

All souls are His and He is particularly fond of all of them- even those souls that would not turn from wickedness and will eventually have to be destroyed, first, because of sin, before their spirits can be redeemed and restored to what he/she were intended to be from the beginning, that is, good.

He even, out of His Love, gave to us a way of knowing, intimately, this Love that He is, fondness and affection, agape, by giving us the ability to become Fathers and Mothers through our awe-inspiring sexuality, that is, when we make love, so that we would know how it feels to be God, The Father, as we love the children created by us, in a moment, while we engaged each other's soul in pure and passionate intimacy.

And now the next verse, similarly annotated:

Rom 10:16-11:4 But not all (humans) obey the evangel, for Isaiah is saying, "Lord, who believes our tidings?" [Consequently, faith is out of (hearing the) tidings (of the evangel), yet the tidings (come) through a declaration of Christ.] But, I am saying, Do they (all humans) not hear (in order to perceive)at all? To be sure! (Yes, they do get to hear, toward understanding the evangel, because it is as Psalm 19 says:) "Into the entire earth came out their (creation's testimonial) utterance, (Rom 1:20-21) and into the ends of the inhabited earth (go) their declarations." But, I am saying, Did not Israel know (what was going to happen to them for their recalcitrant ways) at all? First Moses is saying, I shall be provoking you (Israelites) to jealousy over those (humans who are) not a nation (of My making); Over an unintelligent nation (umm... that would be us, the Gentiles) shall I be vexing you.(Boy, Howdy! Is this ever a truth!)
Yet Isaiah is very daring and is saying, "I (God) was found by those (humans) who are not seeking Me; I became disclosed to those (humans) who are not inquiring for Me." Now (however) to Israel He is saying, (frustrated and angry) "The whole day I spread out My hands to a stubborn and contradicting people!"
I am saying, then, Does not God thrust away His people? May it not be coming to that! For I also am an Israelite, out of Abraham's seed, Benjamin's tribe. (Therefore) God does not thrust away His people (the Israelites) whom He foreknew. Or have you not perceived in Elijah what the scripture is saying, as he is pleading with God against Israel? "Lord, Thy prophets they kill, Thine altars they dig down, and I was left alone, and they are seeking my soul." But what is that which apprises saying to him (Elijah)? "I (God) left for Myself seven thousand men who do not bow the knee to the image of Baal."

You said:

Here we have God's foreknowledge of "His people".

I agree. But, still it is not foreknowledge of the future, as a fact.

Again, though, what God foreknows here, because of his intimate experiences with them, are His set-apart-by-covenant humans, namely, "His people," Israel and their individual hearts. Thus, He is intimately acquainted with their wrong ways of thinking, which show up in their stubbornness and contradictions. However, God also foreknew Paul, for his foreknowing his heart, in much the same way that He foreknew those 7,000 Israelites that had not bowed their knee to worship Baal for being equally acquainted, intimately, with their righteous hearts. And so we read in The History how Jehovah used this foreknowledge of them to set these 7,000 aside from the destruction He was going to bring, through Jehu, Hazazel and Elisha, whom He also foreknew, to those unrighteous ones who did worship Baal, also whom He foreknew.

And finally this quote from Peter's first letter to the Believing Jews scattered (or sown) in to Asia for their belief in Jesus Christ:

Wherefore, (you Jewish believers by) girding up the loins of your comprehension, being sober, expect perfectly the grace which is being brought to you at the unveiling of Jesus Christ. As obedient children, not configuring to the former desires, in your ignorance, but, according as He Who calls you is holy, you (Jewish believers) also become holy in all behavior, because it is written (to you) that, Holy shall you (Israelites) be, for I am holy.
And if you are invoking the Father, Who is judging (you each) impartially according to each one's work, you may behave, for the time of your sojourn, with fear, being aware that not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, were you ransomed from your vain behavior, (behavior) handed down by tradition from the fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, (Jesus, who is given) as of a flawless and unspotted lamb, foreknown, indeed, before the disruption of the world, yet manifested in the last times because of you (the Jewish believers), who through Him are believing in God, Who rouses Him (Jesus, the Lambkin)from among the dead and is giving Him (Jesus) glory, so that your faith and expectation is to be in God.

You said, with much emphasis:

Here we have God's foreknowledge of the blood of Christ before the disruption of the world.

On that, given what I've learned of proginōskō, from the last two quotes, I would disagree.

However, I can't fault you or any other Believers who think that Jesus' sacrifice was foreknown, as a fact, because you were taught to think this, on purpose, by the KJV interpreters who deliberately and seriously mistranslated these words of Peter's this way:

"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who, verily, was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,  who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God."

Did you catch that? The KJV interpreters 'foreknew' that if they put the word 'foreknown' here that their cover would be blown because this passage, above all the others, shows that it was Jesus who was foreknown by the Father, intimately and personally, (John 17:24) before the disruption of the world- Not His sacrifice, as a fact, known before the 'foundation' of the world, as if it had already happened for God foreknowing (and even planning?!? God forbid!) 'The Future' like it was all laid out before Him in all it's excruciating and sinful detail.

So, they used foreordained, which is not even a synonym, because, without the knowledge present in our thoughts that God knows the future, in this way, Calvin's false teaching that there are those predestined for 'heaven' just like there are those predestined for 'hell', would be shown for what it is- a lie. A very logical and internally consistent lie, but a lie, nonetheless.

And so that peculiar idea that comes in to your head when you read the word, 'predestination', was actually translated into existence, right along with that peculiar hell that John Calvin loved so much.

For the KJV interpreters hid the truth from us here by seriously mistranslating proginōskō as 'foreordained' and katabole as 'foundation' - a diabolical and deliberate double deception that worked very well toward making Believers think a very confusing thought about what exactly your God foreknows, even as you said of this quote, with much emphasis:

Here we have God's foreknowledge of the blood of Christ before the disruption of the world.

Which brings us now to prognōsis

Did you follow the link? Funny, isn't it, how we transferred into English, with spelling intact from the Greek, but with only a slight difference in pronunciation our noun 'prognosis'?

What does that tell you about what this word really means?

Well, here are the two quotes from the CLV, annotated as before:

Men! Israelites! Hear these words: Jesus, the Nazarene, a Man demonstrated to be from God for you by powerful deeds and miracles and signs, which God does through Him in the midst of you, according as you yourselves are aware -- This One, given up in the specific counsel and prognōsis (foreknowledge) of God, you, gibbeting by the hand of the lawless, assassinate, Whom God raises, loosing the pangs of death, forasmuch as it was not possible for Him to be held by it.

What does this curious phrase,  "...this One, given up in the specific counsel and prognōsis (foreknowledge) of God" mean? For two things are at play here to determine that this One should be given up: specific (or determined) counsel and a prognōsis.

You said:

So here in Acts 2 we have the foreknowledge of God specifically applied to the sacrifice of Christ.

Well, I wouldn't use the word 'applied'. I would say that here we have Peter revealing that the prognōsis of God, gained from His specific counsel with Wisdom (Jesus), specifically determined that a sacrifice would now be needed because the world we were intended to know was disrupted in the Garden when The Adam turned.

In other words, it was determined, by counsel among God's plurality, that, after the disruption of the world, not before it, Jesus needed to become a human being, created without a deposit of human male sperm and thus, not of 'the seed' of Adam, but, of the woman only; hence a virgin birth. And then, for being the only sexually begotten Son of God, which means He is a human with an untainted spirit, He would be put to death by Satan, (of whom the scriptures say he would not have murdered Jesus had he foreknown what was going to happen) because Satan thought he would win out over God by killing His Son (even as God foreknew what Satan would do; remember the chess game parable?) Why? So Jesus could enter the realm of the dead and get those keys!! HALLELUIAH! After, God would raise Him from the dead! GLORY! And thus loose the pangs of death that came on us because of sin, through faith in Jesus!  A-MEN! Even as Paul later explained:

"Yet now Christ has been roused from among the dead, the Firstfruit (offering) of those (dead humans) who are reposing. For since, in fact, through a man came death, through a Man, also, comes the resurrection of the dead. For even as, in Adam, all (humans) are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all (humans) be vivified."

And now you know, Doc, besides from a literal reading of the Genesis account, exactly where I got the strange and seemingly stupid notion that Jehovah did not know, as a fact that The Adam was going to turn, before He created them! It was from what Peter said here.

So, with whom did God counsel? And why was this counsel called determined or specific?
 
My answer is found here in these quotes:
 
"Now I am saying, for as much time as the enjoyer of an allotment is a minor, in nothing is he of more consequence than a slave, being master of all, but is under guardians and administrators until the time purposed by the father. Thus we (Jews) also, when we (Jews) were minors, were enslaved under the elements of the world. Now, when the full time came, God delegates His Son, come of a woman, come under law, that He should be reclaiming those who are under law, that we (Jews) may be getting the place of a son."

How did God know it was the 'full time'? In other words what does it mean that the time was right to send His Son?
 
It has been said that because of the Roman rule of the civilized world at that time, with the Roman peace and the Roman roads, that the timing for Jesus to come was perfect for all that followed, right up to the foretold destruction of the Jewish Temple and thus the Jewish way of life, in 70 A.D. And recently I read about how, because of the way the Pharisees and Sadducees thought, it would not be hard to predict that they would kill Jesus for the things He both said and did.

And so I ask this: Jesus could read the thoughts, or hearts, of men, often freaking them by answering, out-loud, questions they had only thought. Which means he can know the true intentions of anyone who's thoughts He comes to know and so He can act and speak uncannily concerning them. Indeed, John says this of Him:

"Now as He was in Jerusalem at the Passover in the festival, many believe in His name, beholding His signs which He did. Yet Jesus Himself did not entrust Himself to them, because of His knowing all men, for He had no need that anyone should be testifying concerning mankind, for He knew what was in mankind."

"He knew what was in mankind". And for His foreknowing them this way, the prognōsis was that He shouldn't entrust Himself to them, even though they believed in his Name but only for the miracles He had done." Of which He also said to the really stubborn ones, "...and if ever you are not believing Me, be believing the works, that you may be knowing and believing that in Me is the Father, and I am in the Father."

The last quote is once again from Peter's first letter to the Believing Jews scattered (or sown) in to Asia for their belief in Jesus Christ:

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the chosen expatriates of the dispersion of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, the province of Asia, and Bithynia, (expatriated) according to the prognōsis (foreknowledge) of God, the Father, in holiness of spirit, for obedience and (because of the)sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: May grace and peace be multiplied to you!"

You said:

Here in first Peter, Peter is an apostle according to the foreknowledge of God.

On that there would be some disagreement. Not necessarily between you and I but scholarly disagreement over who Peter said God had this prognōsis of, the Jewish humans in the Asian scattering  (the word 'Elect' was unjustifiably added in the KJV at the beginning of 'verse' 2  in order to justify this thought) or of Peter who was to be an apostle. The Greek seems unclear here.

However, after much study and thought, I find that I have a different take. First off, Peter does not write like Paul. Peter writes like Peter. And Peter, while an intelligent man, was not a man learned in letters, like Paul was. He was a Galilean and a fisherman. So, his meanings are sometimes more difficult to discern; for his writing style seems to me to be like someone who writes run together sentences and leaves out important prepositions. (See 2 Peter 3:19-21 for a good example of what I mean.)
So, given that, I also note that Peter chose the word prognōsis here, not proginōskō.
Proginosko is a verb that, in it's usage, always clearly refers to the knowledge gained of a human for knowing, intimately, their hearts, even as a human can do this and even I've shown it to be. While prognōsis is a noun that in it's first and only other usage clearly indicates that what God knew ahead of time, or had foreknowledge of, was an event that would take place, not of a person; specifically His prognōsis that the sacrifice of Jesus  was now needed after the world was disrupted. And for that significant difference I conclude that what Peter is trying to say is that God's prognōsis was that these believing Jews would be 'thru- sown' in to Asia for their faith which was, "…in holiness of spirit, for obedience and (because of the) sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ".

And the fact that this greeting was obviously meant by Peter to be an encouragement, reminding them that God knew what they were going through, I was helped to conclude that what God 'foreknew' here was His prognōsis that they would be expatriated for their belief in Jesus as the Messiah.

OK that's all of them.

It's taken me a long time, a lot of typing and a lot of research to get to this point; and again I think you Doc for hanging in there with me and challenging me as you have.

~

Let me sum up with a word picture what I perceive Paul and Peter meant when they used the word proginōskō to describe what Jehovah actually 'foreknows' and how I think this gives Him a prognōsis or 'foreknowledge' of the immediate future.

On September 11, 2001 America was attacked by radical Muslim terrorists trained in a seriously wrong way of thinking. Seriously wrong because, with these wrong thoughts in their hearts they were able to override their own instinct for self preservation and 'righteously' (from their perspective) murder more than three thousand of us in a matter of a few hours by using our freedom to travel as we wish and where we wish, against us.

Obviously, then, the God who knows when a single bird falls from it's nest and dies and who can tell me, should He need to, tomorrow, how many hairs I have left on my head after I wash and dry it, must have known before, even as the widows of the Twin Towers top most floors filled up the passenger laden airliner's cockpit view that single second before the first impact, that thousands of humans were going to die that day.

So, I ask, when did God begin to know that the events of this day were going to happen? From the foundation of the world? This is what you were taught to believe.

I say not. It is an Ugly and Capricious God, indeed, Who would create us knowing, as a fact and that with excruciating detail, what would happen when He created us. And then keep on watching us destroy ourselves and each other in horrible ways while He takes tens of centuries to work out His 'Plan A' to save us.

So, when did Jehovah begin to know that the events of September 11, 2001 A.D. were coming?

My answer: When the evil heart of the wrong- thinking human, Osama Bin Laden, first conceived the idea.

Not a second before.

Think about it.

Concerning  the rest of your replies to what I wrote, Doc, I have saved them and for now I will simply say, "Thank you." You've given me some thoughts to ponder even as I hope I have done the same for you.
 
I admit that I currently don't possess a clear understanding of the 'End Times' or of that time when God is All and in All, but I am working on it. And that is because I foreknow, from experience, that I will find that understanding because I know that The Words were meant to be understood by those whose eyes have been opened and can become acquainted with truth and thus with discernment.

It's taken me almost 17 years worth of new thoughts and much unlearning to gain this weird understanding I have now. And so I will continue to think on these things till I know even as I am known.

END OF PART TWO

[Eleutheros]

PART THREE

TO ALL:

If you've read this far, I thank you. Know then that I intend to move on, soon enough.

I did not come here to Tentmaker to convince any of you to believe what I do. I engaged you all because I knew that I needed to have my understanding challenged, just as I foreknew that the way of thinking that is in most of you, for my reading your own words, would provide enough testing to disprove or prove what I know to be truth.

I know how odd what I have come to put my faith in seems to you. Even as what many of you have put your faith in is as different to me for your imagining those 'layers of meaning' that logically preclude a literal understanding of The Words, especially in Genesis, where a literal understanding, first, is vital to truth, even as I have, hopefully, demonstrated.

I do understand, though, what so many of you here mean when you say that 'The Earthly' is a figure of 'The Heavenly' which is 'The True.' For it is as Jesus said when speaking to Nicodemous about being begotten anew:

 "Verily, verily, I am saying to you that which we have perceived are we speaking, and to that which we have seen are we testifying, and our testimony you are not getting. If I told you of the terrestrial and you are (not persuaded to be) believing, how shall you be (persuaded to be) believing if I should be telling you of the celestial?"

My understanding of this says we humans must grasp the 'terrestrial' literally and first, before we can even begin to perceive how these things teach us about the 'celestial.'

For example: Remember how Phillip Keller's' A Shepherd looks at Psalm 23 opened your eyes of understanding for the things terrestrial that he gave into your minds about sheep and shepherds, things you were unfamiliar with before you read his book? And how this newly acquired terrestrial and literal understanding led you to better grasp the celestial understandings of Sheep and The Good Shepherd that you individually took away from this book?

That is what I mean when I say that The Words must be grasped literally, first, before you can know you understand the spiritual. For it is as I said (even if you are want to reject it as truth), unless you know what spirit is then you can't know that you understand things spiritual.

And that is because spirit is the stuff, or 'breath' that makes us conscious of our own existence. With it we become sentient and self-aware; having spirit means we are able to perceive when we understand. Therefore, spirit is the ability to reason and think and know. Without it we would be animals. Spirit is passed on to us through a sperm and an ovum meeting. And it is through spirit that God foreknows us as we imprint on it, by what we think do and say, who we are. It is from God and returns to Him when this body/soul duality that houses this spirit 'stuff' ceases to function. And that is why, because of sin, we need to be re-sired, through holy spirit- which 'holy' means only 'set aside for a special purpose'- to become the good humans we were intended to be, from the beginning, had The Adam not been turned in the Garden, thus disrupting the world Jehovah intended for us to know.

And that world was intended to be good and age-enduring and pleasurable, just as, through spirit, we can experience and gain the working knowledge we need of all those cool abstract things like the Three Loves and Words and Language and Poetry and… Stories, allegorical, metaphorical and literal… and Creating Art and Beauty and appreciating Symmetry and Grace and Playing at Games and Making Music and Dancing and Cooking and Eating and Falling in Love and Romancing and Marrying and Romancing and Making Love (not just 'having sex')… and creating those wonderful, beguiling Little Humans...  and all that other really cool knowledge that leads us to perceive the reality of the truths we know through our conscience; truth's that were meant to guide us into goodness, when followed and make it such a grand and glorious thing to be a good human.

So, for those who have been following this and wondering, you now have my understanding of what spirit is. And for most all of you I hope it is a fresh definition to ponder even as the majority of you would have had no ready answer, before,  if I asked you to tell me what the human heart is prior to my defining it here.

And so, unless I've inspired anyone to boldness and re-evaluation here on Tentmaker and if there is anyone who would want to know my heart of thoughts better and will ask it of me, so that they might perceive it, I will soon be moving on.

If anything I hope that I leave you knowing, now, why I say, as always, even as I know it likely irritates a few of you because of what you believe.

Be good!

It is what you were created to be!

Dennis!

[Doc]

Dennis,

The problem with all of this, as I see it, comes down to what we know about God from other scripture as well. Sometimes it takes more than a handful of verses containing certain words to identify things about God. If God does not foreknow in the traditional sense, then how can it be that God can declare the end from the beginning if he does not know it? How can he prophesy directly or through his prophets if he does not know the future (including the distant future)? God is not some divine fortune-teller that just makes really good educated guesses (which is what a prognosis is).

Maybe it's senseless to even discuss God's knowledge of the future; as a being who exists both inside and outside of time, perhaps he just sees everything in the "eternal now" and nothing is past or future to Him!

As to the serpent/ nachash issue, I will evidently need to do more research on that.

[Eleutheros]

Dennis,

The problem with all of this, as I see it, comes down to what we know about God from other scripture as well. Sometimes it takes more than a handful of verses containing certain words to identify things about God. If God does not foreknow in the traditional sense, then how can it be that God can declare the end from the beginning if he does not know it?

Hey there!

You read all that that fast?!?

OK! Well, as I was hoping to demonstrate with what I wrote, it all depends on what the original writers meant by 'know'.

Augustinian theology was not cut from whole cloth. There had to be something there, in The Words, for them to twist. Even as Peter said of Paul's writings:

"And be deeming the patience of our Lord salvation, according as our beloved brother Paul also writes to you, according to the wisdom given to him, as also in all the epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things hard to apprehend, which the unlearned and unstable are twisting, as the rest of the scriptures also, to their own destruction."

(Man! Talk about a runtogethersentence, declaring the word of truth, according to what he knew, just as what he writes, for the benefit of all, is first declared to the Jews!)

What I am trying to do is untwist the tangled and hurtful and traditional theological mess they made in my mind for what they gave into it as they shoe-horned their ugly theology into The Words of God to give us the beautiful King James Bible.

Is it a surprise to you that Satan can metamorphisize himself into an angel of light?

Which means, for my grasping this, that nothing they gave into my mind to believe about my God is sacrosanct; including what comes up in your mind, Doc, for what you were led to conclude from their deliberately deceptive misinterpretation of The Words when you read the English words: 'hell', 'predestination', 'foreknew', 'foreknow' 'foreordained' and 'foundation'. (Lot's of 'f' words there!)

For what comes into your mind was what they put there, even as I have uncovered their knavery in exactly the same way the Tentmakers have uncovered their knavery demonstrating that what used to come into your mind when you read the English word "hell", Doc, was what they put into your mind for you to think, even as they translated that peculiar hell into existence!

For it is a truthful and logical question to ask, just as I have asked it from the very first:

"Given the deliberate, ulterior motivated dishonesty of the KJV interpreters, how can we trust the rest of their work? Indeed, why should we?

I'm challenging the sacrosanct, yes, I know that. Just as that peculiar hell that they gave you to believe existed was, once, sacrosanct.

And that is why I'm being open about it. I'm the only one I've ever met who dared to do this; tread on those sacred ideas that come into your mind when you read your KJV Bible and come across the words: 'predestination', 'foreknew', 'foreknow' 'foreordained' and 'foundation'.

Someone once began to speak out to Believers that the Living God is the savior of all men. Which, of course, meant to the Believers that, if this someone were right, then that peculiar hell they knew existed would, logically, be made obsolete. And so this someone was/is labeled 'a heretic' and 'a danger'.

Just so and in a similar fashion, I'm being open about my questionings because there may be someone, somewhere, who needs to hear what I am saying for recognizing the twisted logic that is required in order to continue believing the Calvinistic idea, necessary for his theology to have credence, that Jehovah knew, as a fact, that The Adam was going to turn before He created them.

How can he prophesy directly or through his prophets if he does not know the future (including the distant future)? God is not some divine fortune-teller that just makes really good educated guesses (which is what a prognosis is).

From where you are now, in your thoughts, even as I used to think as you do, I can understand why you're going to perceive what I am saying to be that God is a divine fortune-teller that just makes really good educated guesses.

It will require a paradigm shift in your thinking before you will be able to perceive what I truly am saying. Just like it took a paradigm shift before you could grasp UR.

But, once shifted, you will see prophesy in a different light than what is currently available to you.

So, since all paradigm shifts begin by using words to convey ideas in a logical and reasoning fashion, I am using words to convey boldly and in a logical and reasoning fashion that Jehovah did not know, as a fact, that The Adam was going to turn before He created them.

And the reason I am doing this is because I foreknow that what follows, logically, from this idea will lead you to understand many things in scripture that seem 'mysterious' and 'unknowable' now.

Maybe it's senseless to even discuss God's knowledge of the future; as a being who exists both inside and outside of time, perhaps he just sees everything in the "eternal now" and nothing is past or future to Him!

Ah! C.S. Lewis! God bless him! The funny thing is, it was The Chronicles of Narnia that set me on the path to thinking as I do now!

He too, like me, wrestled with the contradictory ideas forced into his mind for the English words, 'hell' and 'predestination' and 'foreknow' and 'foreknew' and 'foreordained' and 'foundation', because of exactly what he was taught to believe the beautiful KJV Bible and tradition had taught him to believe.

And for that, your observation of the futility of this is what he also concluded and which you believe when you said:

Maybe it's senseless to even discuss God's knowledge of the future;...

Because as long as you continue to trust that what they gave you to believe is, of truth, the truth about God's foreknowledge of the future, it will be senseless and incomprehensible to even try to discuss God's foreknowledge of the future.

As to the serpent/ nachash issue, I will evidently need to do more research on that.

Yes. That is good. I hope you find even more accurate and truthful things to consider for being willing to re-evaluate your thoughts. Jehovah is an accurate God and so we should also be as accurate as we know how to be.

Be good!

Dennis!

[Doc]

Well, the funny thing about all of this is; The mainstream church does not teach that God foreknew Adam's fall (specifically). The mainstream church teaches the more Arminian idea that humans were given this fabulous power called free-will that actually has the ability to thwart God's will, and has the ability to surprise Him. So the idea that God foreknew (and even planned) Adam's fall, was not an idea that entered into my mind until after accepting UR. The ironic thing is that some UR teachers who come from the same concordant perspective we do, actually reinforce this idea (Martin Zender comes to mind).

Rom. 8:20,21 For to vanity was the creation subjected, not voluntarily, but because of Him Who subjects it, in expectation that the creation itself, also, shall be freed from the slavery of corruption into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

Sounds like God planned it to me...

[Eleutheros]

Well, the funny thing about all of this is; The mainstream church does not teach that God foreknew Adam's fall (specifically). The mainstream church teaches the more Arminian idea that humans were given this fabulous power called free-will that actually has the ability to thwart God's will, and has the ability to surprise Him. So the idea that God foreknew (and even planned) Adam's fall, was not an idea that entered into my mind until after accepting UR. The ironic thing is that some UR teachers who come from the same concordant perspective we do, actually reinforce this idea (Martin Zender comes to mind).

Rom. 8:20,21 For to vanity was the creation subjected, not voluntarily, but because of Him Who subjects it, in expectation that the creation itself, also, shall be freed from the slavery of corruption into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

Sounds like God planned it to me...

OK, Doc! You got me!

What can I say? For you, Martin Zender speaks the truth. With but one single verse you've shown to yourself that nothing I've said here is worth the time and effort to grasp because, apparently, against what we humans would have wanted for ourselves, your God, from the very beginning, even before the very foundation of the world, deliberately planned to subject the human race and everything else He created, to vanity, including Death for us ALL- if not at the hands of those other evil humans whom He foreknew or from diseases and pestilence, all of which He planned out, from the foundation of the world, of course, then just from us simply wearing out into weak, frail beings as our bodies aged, exactly as He planned for them to.

Which is OK by you, because He is God, after all. And even though He actually planned for all this to happen, really it's OK. Because all along He foreordained that His only sex-born Son would be murdered by the Rotten Sinners He intended, even planned, from the beginning, for us to be so that, through Him, He could rescue ALL of us, not just some of us, as those stupid, ignorant hell-loving Augustinian/Calvinists believe (even though, apparently, this 'subjection to vanity' isn't what we would have chosen for ourselves, had we been given a genuine choice), so He could prove to ALL of us just how Magnanimous and Gracious and above all Loving He really is!

Yep, a Loving, Megalomaniacal Father-in-law is definately Someone I'm looking forward to spending an immortal existence with! Should be a lot of fun!

Thank's for setting me straight! ~ Just one verse! Imagine that!

And so I would ask; please, please, Doc, feel free do as it was foreknown you would do and consider every other thing I've written here as the immature machinations of a man predestined to be a wrong-thinking fool. I certianly wouldn't want you to think or speak or do anything different than what it was foreknown and therefore predestined for you to think, speak or do.

Because, like I said, I didn't come here to convince anyone of anything. I came here because, in my foreknowing the thinking of the souls who dominate this sight, I found what I was looking for; a chance to test myself against this kind of thinking. I'm satisfied with the reults, even as I said, from the foundation of this thread, that this is what I was here for.

Along the way, if any of you would have became convinced that I just might have something worthwhile to say, then that would be unexpected; welcome, but unexpected, even as I tried to encourage it.

So, feel free to go your pre-ordained ways doing only those things that you can't help but doing, exactly as your God planned it all out for you to do, from the foundation of the world, including all the bad things you have already done and all those you will do in the future as well as all the "good", of course, because, after all who can resist His will; even for you foreknowing that He will also judge you for these things He fore-ordained you to think, speak and do.

And let me become but a fore-ordained memory that, perhaps, if He willed for you to, you may chuckle at as you would a recollection of a favorite Monty Python skit, for me being as equally silly and absurd.

Truly, I would consider it an honor to be so remembered by the Tentmakers!

As for me, I'll keep choosing to be good, exactly as I was intended to be, in the beginning, before the disruption of the world and am now re-sired to be, even by Jehovah Himself for my faith in His Son Jesus Christ, Who came to free me from sin so that I might be holy and blameless before Him in the day when He evaluates the world.

And you keep on being what you can't help but be for what your God made you to be, free to be incapable of doing anything else but those things foreknown and thus predestined, from the foundation of the world, for you to do through your illusory... I'm sorry… 'mysterious' free-will, from now into all eternity!

May you come to know the freedom this truth brings you!

Dennis!

[Doc]

Alright, then how do you explain Romans 8:20-21? Surely the word of God does not contradict itself?

Oh, and; it was two verses, actually.

[Eleutheros]

Alright, then how do you explain Romans 8:20-21? Surely the word of God does not contradict itself?

Oh, and; it was two verses, actually.

OK! It was two verses! I was wrong.

And don't call me Shirley.

Seriously, though, I'll answer your question, Doc, with two questions:

Answer mine first and then I'll explain Rom 8:21-22, from my understanding, if your answering these two questions doesn't.

When did this 'subjection to vanity' take place?

And from that answer ponder this: Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?

And "I don't know" is not an answer.

Doc, your anger at what I wrote is understandable. No one takes it kindly when someone takes personal, even 'sacred' thoughts to their logical conclusions and thus illustrates them into absurdity.

It seems the equivalent of saying that you, yourself are 'absurd' because of how deep these foundational thoughts are that you build on. I'm sorry about that, but it is a very human thing to feel such emotions, when so challenged, until you realize where those emotions come from.

Therefore, I wrote that reply, unapologetically, because I know that precious few humans, of their own initiative, actually take their thoughts to their logical conclusions and then examine the conclusions (not the logic) for truth.
It's like the human mind 'foreknows' where our thoughts are going to logically take us and so, 'armed' with this 'foreknowledge', we avoid those conclusions like we would a wreck on the highway that we 'foreknow' is coming.

All said so you would know that I didn't mean offense, even though I foreknew you would take such a challenge to your thinking personally. I once would have been offended too; been there and done that.

So, that was why I did it. Because now, for my having done that, you are left in the unenviable position of having to disprove, at least to your own satisfaction, the absurdity in the logical conclusions I drew from thinking it a fact that Jehovah not only foreknew, but even planned (your word), from the 'foundation' of the world for everything to happen exactly as it has.

And that logical conclusion is that you and all humans are, individually and corporately, nothing more than a fore-ordained, predestined automaton, subject to the will and whimsy of a capricious God who did all of this so He could gain glory for Himself by 'rescuing' us from the beings we were created to and can't help but, be, which thing also included the sacrifice of His Son.

Corollary to this is the conclusion that your ability to 'choose'- your mysterious, 'free-will' (so called)-  must be a 'Matrix'-style illusion; a deliberate deception fostered on your mind, apparently, so you would buy into this God's cosmically proportioned megalomania.

Well, Doc, I can help you deal with this conundrum by giving you this thought:

We sinful humans are so racked with sin, so thoroughly depraved in our hearts and minds that these kind of disrespectful and profane 'logical conclusions' must be the product of our depravity.

Jehovah is God, after all. And if it is, of truth, revealed in His Words that He foreknows the future, as a fact, then it is must be us sinful, degenerate humans who, because of our dissolute minds, lack the ability to understand the mind of God where these things are concerned. Despite His fore-doomed and therefore pathetic attempts to help us 'understand' Him through the Jews, Jesus and this Thing we call 'The Scriptures'.

There. I hope that helps.

I need you to know something, Doc; if you ever want me to just 'go away' just leave any of my replies unanswered and I promise you I will be gone.

Be good!

Dennis!

[Molly]

Hi Dennis, I appreciate all the work you have done on those words.  Words are very important.  I remember when I first started reading the Bible seriously, I said to myself, yikes, I'm becoming a Calvanist.  It's the only conclusion you can draw really from the way some of those passages are written. So I put it aside for another day because I knew instinctively there must be a problem.   I'll need to go back and re-read what you wrote more carefully.  But, as we come to know God more intimately, it's clear that he is in no way a monster--quite the contrary, his name is called Wonderful!

So, I appreciate you doing your part to honor his name.


and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.


--Isa 9

[rosered]

Seriously, though, I'll answer your question, Doc, with two questions:

Answer mine first and then I'll explain Rom 8:21-22, from my understanding, if your answering these two questions doesn't.

When did this 'subjection to vanity' take place?

And from that answer ponder this: Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?

And "I don't know" is not an answer.

  wow been reading this very interesting   conversation   between  you and Doc
    they are challenging indeed , some strong stuff , wow !
 
  I wait for  Doc , but
  I have  two simple answers 
for your questions Dennis 

     hope you dont mind me reading and  getting in on this friends ..
 

[Doc]

No, rosered; go right ahead. I'm interested in what you have to say, because I frankly don't have the time or mental energy right now to answer.

Frankly though, at the end of the day I don't think it matters when it was subjected; only that it was, and that it was done by God, which Romans clearly points out. The answer to when the creation was subjected doesn't really solve the question of whether God foreknew the fall (unless it was clearly subjected before the fall), because even if he subjected it at or after the fall, it doesn't guarantee he did or did not foreknow.

The rest of the Romans passage talks about the purpose for which we were subjected.

Seriously, Dennis; Go back and read Romans 7:14-25 and tell me that represents free-will. I do not believe that God created us automatons either. We do have some level of choice and we clearly have a will. But Romans 7 does an excellent job of pointing out that that will is not anything like "free".

[Eleutheros]

To Molly and rosered:

Hi Dennis,

Hey Molly! Good to hear from you again!

I appreciate all the work you have done on those words.

You're welcome. Believe me when I say that the pleasure is mine.

Words are very important.

Yes they are! And for knowing this, I take Peter's warning seriously for believing that Truth is knowable.

I remember when I first started reading the Bible seriously, I said to myself, yikes, I'm becoming a Calvanist.

Oh, Molly! When I read this: "…when I first started reading the Bible seriously, I said to myself, yikes, I'm becoming a Calvanist." … well, Molly, I hadn't laughed so hard in a long time…
   
Thank you! You summed up everything I've been trying to say here in one simple phrase!

I laughed hard because that is exactly how I once felt.

Under the scholarly tutelage of my Baptist sponsored High School, when my friends and I used to fruitlessly argue predestination vs. free-will during lunch I came to realize, "Yikes! I'm becoming a Calvinist!" LOL!!

I soon quit arguing and decided that 'the truth' was as I had heard it said:

"No one will believe an omnipotent God who creates faulty humans and blames them for His mistakes!"

It's the only conclusion you can draw really from the way some of those passages are written.

Exactly!!! You go girl! And the result of reading this beautiful KJV translation was.... what? Confusion! Not clarity and understanding, which are the road-signs to Truth.

So, I put it aside for another day because I knew instinctively there must be a problem.

God bless the feminine soul! Designed by your creator to know from experience, you wonders graciously leap over logic and reason to conclusions that take a masculine soul a journey to discover!

I'll need to go back and re-read what you wrote more carefully.

I am honored to think that you would do that. Thank you.

And please ask me questions, any questions at all that may come into your mind.

Because I've found that learning how to ask questions and seek the answers to those questions is the best way for anyone to learn truth.

But, as we come to know God more intimately, it's clear that he is in no way a monster--quite the contrary, his name is called Wonderful!

Yes and yes! That's it exactly! Dang! Your experience parallels mine.

And that is why Jehovah is unconcerned about the character assassination that is Augustinianism- He knows that what The Saint and his toady said about Him, isn't Who He is. And so He also foreknows that any who experience Him through His forgiveness and His goodness also come to realize that, despite what they are reading in the KJV, there is a 'problem' somehow, somewhere, with Calvinism.

Some just put it aside till another day as you did, secure in knowing Him, by experience, for Who He is.

And many, like eagelsway, investigate it and come to draw the only conclusion they can draw that will keep the 'logical monster' out of their minds for believing what they read in KJV English to be truth; it's all a mystery (i.e. 'confusing') how God can have the kind of foreknowledge the KJV says He has and still act like He doesn't have it for His giving humans 'room to repent' (free-will).

Thus for many of these souls, burdened with the lie of the double-sided coin that is Calvinism/Arminianism, UR is actually a welcome problem solver because, once that peculiar hell is disproven, thus splitting Calvinism/Arminianism into it's component parts 'Hell' and 'Predestination', you get to keep 'Predestination', the 'fun part' of Calvinism.

'Fun' because it seemingly takes the onus of responsibility for our sins off of us, exactly as it was designed to do so Calvin could justify that peculiar hell that he loved sending 'bad' humans to in the name of God.

Someone I read once, important in UR circles, described this mixture of Predestination and Ultimate Reconciliation as God taking 'Ultimate Responsibility' for creating us in His foreknowing how bad we will be. But, it's OK, because all along He intended to save us all from ourselves, predestining all to salvation, rather than just a few.

And so a collective *WHEW* arose in the ranks of UR because with that peculiar hell now sliced away from Calvin's systematic theology, they saw a way to justify the 'mystery' of 'predestination and free-will', thus keeping themselves still separated from the responsibility for their sins- the true but unspoken draw of Calvin's theology.

"After all I've been predestined for heaven because I can confess that Jesus Christ is LORD! And so, no matter what I do, I'm going to heaven! For who can resist the will of God who must have fore-ordained, through His foreknowing, the sin I now want to commit!"

And so, with his thinking firmly in place, they are much happier than the hell-minded folk and therefore a lot less likely to appreciate my challenges to what comes up in thier minds when they read the 'p'-word and all those 'f'-words, for being unburdened of that peculiar hell, which is only one-half of Calvin's theology!

And so, most UR folk don't seem to know enough of the big picture to answer kindly, with any authority, the kind of questions asked here.

Then there is the odd duck, me, who began the torturous process of disassembling Calvinism in his mind by disproving what Calvin meant by 'Predestination' first before tackling that peculiar hell.

And so the logic used to disprove that peculiar hell here on Tentmaker was not unfamiliar to me, as I came to grasp UR, even as the logic that I use to disprove Predestination should be familiar to the Tentmakers for their using it to disprove that peculiar hell!

For Calvin's theology is a system. Thus 'Hell' and 'Predestination' are united concepts intended to support each other, even as I've proven here, to my own satisfaction, that both concepts were shoe-horned into The Words of God to support Calvin's highly logical and systematic lie.

And unfortunately, you don't get to pick and choose which part of a lie you want to keep, once you become aware of the lie.
 
In fact, for my originally thinking that UR-minded folk must use this good logic on every part of the KJV English, I was really quite surprised to find, as I began to hang with UR-folk that Predestiniation was actually rooting itself even more firmly in these human's minds!

I pondered this for quite some time, even as I found that I was making myself as odious to the UR folk during our discussions, when I challenged them with the same logic they were familiar with, as they are odious to those who like the idea of that peculiar hell when challenged by UR folk on it!

So, I appreciate you doing your part to honor his name.

Thank you. I give Him the glory for helping me to see the truth as I have and thus the courage to challenge the sacrosanct but nonetheless false idea that Jehovah foreknows the future, as a fact.

Like I said, you don't get to pick and choose which part of a lie you want to keep, once you become aware of the lie.

and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.


--Isa 9

Yes, indeed He is!

Be good, Molly!

Dennis!

Seriously, though, I'll answer your question, Doc, with two questions:

Answer mine first and then I'll explain Rom 8:21-22, from my understanding, if your answering these two questions doesn't.

When did this 'subjection to vanity' take place?

And from that answer ponder this: Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?

And "I don't know" is not an answer.

wow been reading this very interesting   conversation   between  you and Doc
    they are challenging indeed , some strong stuff , wow !

Hey rosered! Welcome to ma' thread! 

I'm pleased to know that you are challenged by it. May the God of Truth give you wisdom and discernment to know if I'm a loony.
 
 

I wait for  Doc , but
  I have  two simple answers 
for your questions Dennis 

Hey, chime right on in! You're welcome by me! Doc has even chimed in so don't wait for him!

Personally, I'd love to hear what you have to say!

    hope you dont mind me reading and  getting in on this friends ..

No, of course I don't mind! Do as you wish! 

And you be good, too!

Dennis!

[rosered]

Quote from: rosered on September 30, 2009, 12:09:53 AM
Quote from: Dennis
Seriously, though, I'll answer your question, Doc, with two questions:

Answer mine first and then I'll explain Rom 8:21-22, from my understanding, if your answering these two questions doesn't.

When did this 'subjection to vanity' take place?

And from that answer ponder this: Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?

And "I don't know" is not an answer.

  Thank you Dennis and Doc for your kindness  shown ,it is appreciated 
 
 
  I have some real simple answers to each question and sure hope you  will consider them
  I thought almost instantly of this verse  here . seems everything born of flesh has sorrow /suffering , to me the youth/vanity is not  held accountable ,
 but is to learn the Truth  from error /mistakes and being corrected and chastened is painful as Paul also spoke of , but we learn  from our faith being tested to trust in God only and not anything else  such as idols etc.
 
 
 
Ecc 11:10 Therefore remove sorrow from thy heart, and put away evil from thy flesh: for childhood and youth [are] vanity.

 the second part of your question "Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?"

  To me it is this simple ,  to Learn  not to blaspheme /lie  against the Holy Spirit .
 
     because from the begining , the lies was told and believed
 and the Truth was dismissed
  the serpent  ,  Eve was decieved  Adam also and the lies grew over time
  into all areas and masses  the whole world  is in the spirit of error
 
  to me this is why  the Lord promises   the Holy Spirit to lead us and guide  us into all truth and teach us
 
  And as Children  we learn obedience
  what better way to learn but by experience
  So many scriptures  in the Word of God touch on this very thing
 
  I hope this  helps and is not laughed at ..  I feel like a first grader in a collage level  class here .. 
 
  I looked for this form of vanity for this verse,because there is different words for vain/ vanity .
 
  Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope,
 
   and it is

 
  G3153 - mataiotēs
 
  1) what is devoid of truth and appropriateness

2) perverseness, depravity

3) frailty, want of vigour

 the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God
 
  this world also hates God /and His son Jesus Christ
 
  this world  we  must overcome  though Jesus Christ who is in you when you are born from  His Holy Spirit /above the world

 
1Jo 2:16 For all that [is] in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 
 
    we learn not to blashpeme /lie  against the Truth 

   and the Lord God in His mercy and longsuffering wait till we do , learn it 
 by experience
 
  hope this makes some kinda sense to you all ,
 I know we are only accountable  for  what we  get or have from the Lord  and those who got nothing  in this life are not accountable 

   I also believe that this short time  on the earth  if it be 70 years  or more is  nothing  compared to what we will still be learning when  this part is over and done with 
  just some simple things  I have considered , I am not the deep thinker as some are  on this forum , but am  so grateful to God for them all .
  Thanks for listening 
 
    rose
 

[Eleutheros]

No, rosered; go right ahead. I'm interested in what you have to say, because I frankly don't have the time or mental energy right now to answer.

Frankly though, at the end of the day I don't think it matters when it was subjected; only that it was, and that it was done by God, which Romans clearly points out. The answer to when the creation was subjected doesn't really solve the question of whether God foreknew the fall (unless it was clearly subjected before the fall), because even if he subjected it at or after the fall, it doesn't guarantee he did or did not foreknow.
 
The rest of the Romans passage talks about the purpose for which we were subjected.

Seriously, Dennis; Go back and read Romans 7:14-25 and tell me that represents free-will. I do not believe that God created us automatons either. We do have some level of choice and we clearly have a will. But Romans 7 does an excellent job of pointing out that that will is not anything like "free".

Hey Doc! I'm sorry you're mentally tired. It certainly can get to wearing on a body to be thinking so much! So, get some rest and if you still wish to continue this discussion come back and read this reply.

For I perceive that you did answer my two questions concerning Romans 8:21-22, just not directly.

You said that you don't think it matters 'at the end of the day when creation was subjected to vanity'. And that means that you know it does matter, given the context in which you presented this quote. Otherwise you would have answered my question with  'after the fall' which is the correct answer. Instead you say, now, that you don't think it matters.

And this you say, now, because you foreknow that if you answer 'after the fall' that I will then say that Jehovah had to subject His creation to vanity, against it's 'will', because of the turning of The Adam; meaning that it was never Jehovah's intention, from the beginning, to have to subject His creation to vanity.

Or else *shudder* it was His intention, all along, to subject it to vanity, just so He could 'set it free'. Which would then beg the question why didn't He just create us 'subject to vanity' right off the bat? And it's not a pleasant thought to try and answer that question while still insisting that God is agape.
 
Just like His creating the Tree of Life and putting it in the Garden becomes a superfluous act of creation if it is a truth that He knew, as a fact, that the Adam was going to turn before He created them; superfluous  for His foreknowing, also, that He would be having to banish them from it.
And so when creation was subjected to vanity, against it's 'will', (for that was your point), does bear on the question of whether or not Jehovah 'foreknew' their turning as a fact before it happened, just like the mere presence of the Tree of Life argues against it. Otherwise you would not have brought this quote into a discussion on the question of whether God foreknew the future as a fact and thus predestined all to their individual fates!

I perceive that there are two erroneous assumptions you are making here, Doc.

The first is that I'm trying to prove to you my contentions; that I'm trying to 'solve a problem' for you by convincing you to see things my way, when it's obvious that you don't want me to because you don't see what you believe as a problem!

You've already decided what you want to believe and so I perceive that our discussions are wearing you out. And for the most part you are hoping to disprove me by catching something I say.

So, for my knowing this I also know that it would be foolish to try and convince you of anything. And so persuasion is not my motive for being here. As I have stated repeatedly I am presenting my conclusions and the reasons why I conclude what I do so I can test my own thinking against others who would certainly disagree with me, so that I can satisfy myself that I am grasping truth.

And should there be anyone that is touched by my reasoning and would like to explore these ideas further with me, I would welcome them gladly. But that is not something I expected to find here.

Frankly it doesn't touch me at the end of the day if you are convinced by me or not. If you're happy with making Calvin's 'Predestination' a foundation in your thinking then that is between you and your God, not between you and me.

As I said to you before, I appreciate the fact that it will require a paradigm shift in your heart of thoughts before you will be able to perceive and appreciate what I am presenting here.

And paradigm shifting is beyond my abilities.

All I have is logic and reason, a rebirth and a shared human experience from which to present my own heart of thoughts for you to evaluate for truth or argue against to prove to yourself that I am 'wrong'.

And for that being said know that I do welcome your challenges, Doc, in this public place, because I find you to be good for me as you keep coming to me with your replies.

I'm not afraid of being wrong, Doc. I've been that many times before. And so if you present a challenge to me that truly illustrates some absurdity in my thinking, you will be doing me a favor and I would welcome it because, of a truth, I am seeking truth.

However, as I said before, if this is wearing to much on you all you gotta do is quit replying! And if no one else comes along who is interested in reading my typing, then I will move on.

Besides, who knows, Doc, but that something I say may just be what you need to hear? That would, of course, be a God Thingy.

The second thing that is erroneous is that you are assuming I am arguing for 'free-will' simply because I am arguing against Predestination. I can understand that, given what you've been taught to believe.

Because what comes into your mind when you hear the word 'free will' is as different  from my understanding as what comes into your mind when you hear the word 'predestination'.

'Free-will' and 'predestination' are two sides of the same coin. And that coin is a counterfeit one.

That is why, when arguing from the King James English you will never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion as to which is the 'truth'; for these two points of view contradict each other. And contradiction is unsolvable as long as the axioms remain unchanged.

It began its forging when Calvin shoe-horned his idea of predestination into the original text by his deliberate mis-translation of certain key Greek words. So, because it's a lie, a dilemma was created. Specifically the dilemma became apparent because it doesn't appear, at times, that Jehovah seems, by what He says, to foreknow something He should foreknow. And also for His peculiar behaviour in seeming to allow 'room for repentance' as if He somehow hoped for there to be a change in the concerned humans- an absurd thing to do if He already 'foreknows' as a fact what these humans are going to do.

And so the idea that, 'we are free to choose to believe or disbelieve the Gospel', that we have 'free-will' was introduced as a rebuttal to Calvinism by Joseph Arminius, who, like Calvin, also liked the idea of that peculiar hell- just not that so many were going there. And of those who did, it was really their own fault, not God's, for God giving them 'free-will'.  John Wesley and his Methodist pretty much embody this idea in our time.

And thus was the counterfeit coin forged for us Believers to enjoy playing with because both sides seem to be the truth- as long as you keep it on only one side. But, flip it over and the other side seems just as equally valid. And so we've entertained and occupied ourselves these last few centuries, by fruitlessly flipping it over and over and over, with each new generation of Believers discussing each side in earnest- while the true 'coin' languished under interpretive arrogance.

And so, the best that can be done, once the futility of this flipping is realized and that for accepting this coin as being 'the truth', is to throw up your hands in resignation and incorrectly conclude that this counterfeit coin is a 'profound mystery', when, in reality, it's just a simple and stupid logical contradiction- and therefore not truth.

My understanding is a different 'coin' altogether for my beginning with the understanding that Jehovah did not know, as a fact, that The Adam was going to turn before He created them. This is a fact.

So, from that understanding I perceive that the key to understanding  Romans 7:1 to approximately  8:4 is found in 'verse' 1:

Or are you ignorant, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know law)...

Of the Gentiles, however, Paul said this in the same letter:

For there is no partiality with God, for whoever sinned without the law, without law also shall perish, and whoever sinned in law, through law will be judged.
For not the listeners to law are just with God, but the doers of law shall be justified. For whenever they of the nations that have no law, by nature may be doing that which the law demands, these, having no law, are a law to themselves, who are displaying the action of the law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying together and their reckonings between one another, accusing or defending them, in the day when God will be judging the hidden things of humanity, according to my evangel, through Jesus Christ.

And this:

Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, and thus death passed through into all mankind, on which all sinned -- for until law sin was in the world, yet sin is not being taken into account when there is no law; nevertheless death reigns from Adam unto Moses, over those also who do not sin in the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him Who is about to be.

But to the Jews Paul argues differently about… SIN; S-I-N; Sin. Not Jehovah's 'subjecting to vanity'; which His subjecting creation to vanity was because of Sin, introduced into the world at the turning and thus disrupting His good intentions for it, the creation and us, creations reason for existing.

END OF PART ONE

[Eleutheros]

PART TWO

So here in Romans 7:1 he begins to present his case to the ones who both had and understood the Mosaic Law. Specifically he was arguing to prove that the law had no power to stop a human from sinning. In fact, because of the law it was even more difficult to deal with Sin because now through the law you are aware of exactly what Sin is!

And of that He says this:

But sin I knew not except through law. For besides, I had not been aware of coveting except the law said, "You shall not be coveting."

He is not saying that coveting came into existence because of law but that before the law came he was coveting and did not know it was a wrong thing to do.

And so because Paul now knows what coveting and other sins are, he found that Sin, with a capitol 'S', was at home in him despite his desire to do what he knew was right.

As he said:

For what I am effecting I know not, for not what I will, this I am putting into practice, but what I am hating, this I am doing. Now if what I am not willing, this I am doing, I am conceding that the law is ideal. Yet now it is no longer I who am effecting it, but Sin making its home in me.

And that is the major difference between the Jew and The Gentile; the Jews, while still sinners, for having sinned, are much more keenly aware of Sin than the Gentiles are who only have their conscience, each other and what is revealed about God through Creation.

So he proves that this keen awareness of Sin, gained through the law, does not give a human the power to stop sinning but actually makes it worse because now they are keenly aware of what Sin is!

And to this precarious predicament Paul found himself in for knowing about Sin he says:

A wretched man am I! What will rescue me out of this body of death?

To which He answered:

Grace!

And then added:

I thank God, through Jesus Christ, our Lord.

So Grace, which is God forbearing our sins while He works out His plan to restore us to Himself, with the full council of His plurality, gained after the disruption of the world, is what will free us from Sin; for it was Grace that sent Jesus to accomplish the needed forgiveness of sins when, we, through faith, are re-sired through spirit, of which Paul says:

Now those who are in flesh are not able to please God.
Yet you are not in flesh, but in spirit, if so be that God's spirit is making its home in you. Now if anyone has not Christ's spirit, this one is not His.
Now if Christ is in you, the body, indeed, is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is life because of righteousness. Now if the spirit of Him Who rouses Jesus from among the dead is making its home in you, He Who rouses Christ Jesus from among the dead will also be vivifying your mortal bodies because of His spirit making its home in you.

Doc, I say this to you boldly: If you are going to grasp the truth of Romans 7 and 8 you must quit reading The Words peripherally, looking for 'spiritual' understanding and grasp the literal understanding Paul is presenting here of the before and after states of every human: Before his/her re-birth and after his/her re-birth.

Before the re-birth Sin made it's home in all humans, Jew and Gentile alike, because of The Adam's turning.

This is not what was supposed to have happened!

They were supposed to gain virtue by refusing to gain a conscience illicitly that is, by trusting Jehovah and refusing the offer to become fully like God-apart from God- a thing impossible to do anyway, as The Satan found out.

And so the conscience we now have is weak to keep us from Sin because Sin which has made it's home in us keeps us sinning, whether we know it or not; and even when we don't want to for being aware of it. We sin because we try to impulsively satisfy our bodies desires for food, shelter, sex, power over our destiny and a comfortable life all of which cause harm to not only ourselves, for this impulsive behaviour, but harms others as well, even the innocent. Truly a vain pursuit!

But now, after our rebirth, we have something we never had before! The genuine ability to stop sinning, given to us through a re-birth of spirit that cleanses our conscience and gives it the power to influence us to not be constantly sinning!

And so now Jehovah can reasonably expect those who are truly begotten anew to stop sinning. That is to say that it is not something that is no longer unreasonable for Him to ask of us, who truly have the spirit of Christ making it's home in us because the first thing the spirit did when it 'moved in' and began making itself at home in us was to ungraciously kick Sin's ugly ass all the way out the door!  Praise God!  I am Eleutheros! I am made free, indeed by The Son of God!!!!

And so Paul says:

Nothing, consequently, is now condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. Not according to flesh are they walking, but according to spirit, for the spirit's law of life in Christ Jesus frees you from the law of sin and death.
For what was impossible to the law, in which it was infirm through the flesh, did God, sending His own Son in the likeness of sin's flesh and concerning sin, He condemns sin in the flesh, that the just requirement of the law may be fulfilled in us, who are not walking in accord with flesh, but in accord with spirit.

And

Now if the spirit of Him Who rouses Jesus from among the dead is making its home in you, He Who rouses Christ Jesus from among the dead will also be vivifying your mortal bodies because of His spirit making its home in you. Consequently, then, brethren, debtors are we, not to the flesh, to be living in accord with flesh, for if you are living in accord with flesh, you are about to be dying. Yet if, in spirit, you are putting the practices of the body to death, you will be living. For whoever are being led by God's spirit, these are sons of God.

So there you have my evaluation of Romans 7

We are not free from sin. That is the problem! And that is why the creation was subject to vanity, without it's consent, when The Adam turned, so that we humans would know that we are not free to do as we damm well please! But are, instead, slaves to our impulses.

Because the only choice we have to make through our so called 'free-will ' is to sin, some more than others and to keep refusing the pull of the spirit of God, Who is dragging all humans to 'the foot of the cross' so they will come to realize their need for His forgiveness.

Some are brought there willingly and gladly through the heralding of the Gospel, these are the firstfruits as Paul called us. For those who sin less than others are foreknown to God for His constantly searching the hearts of men through spirit.
Thus he finds those, in each generation- in each new 'crop' of humans, so to speak, who recognize the purpose of a conscience in us as well as understanding God's righteousness through their interactions with others and through what is known of God by what He created. As well as perceiving the futility of our trying to be good that comes with this realization for living in a creation subject to vanity.

These are the ones who come to love the God they know this way and thus love righteousness in their inner man as Paul said:
 
For I am gratified with the law of God as to the man within,..

And these ones of whom He is aware before He designates beforehand to receive His justification even as Paul said:

Now whom He designates beforehand, these He calls also, and whom He calls, these He justifies also; now whom He justifies, these He glorifies also.

Now not everyone will be of the firstfruits for some will be dragged 'to the foot of the cross' through having to be evaluated, in the Day of Evaluation as needing to be brought to justice first and thus be destroyed as their spirits are purified of dross by unquenchable, holy fire, before they can receive His forgiveness and be restored to God through Jesus who is praised forever and worthy to receive the reward for His suffering!!! US!!

And it is exactly this way also for those covenanted ones who have the Mosaic Law. Because all the law can do is develop in us a keen awareness of Sin, not stop us from sinning.
And that is because a conscience needs spirit to be the powerful living thing it was intended to be in us.

That is something we would have had now, had the world not been disrupted when The Adam gained a conscience before They gained virtue. Even as we have exactly that now through faith; a clean and powerful conscience gained through the rebirth of spirit and that through faith in Jesus the Christ who gave Himself that He might free us from Sin and thus deliver us from Death- not 'came to save us from hell' or 'came to save us so we could go to heaven' or  'came to save us to be His Bride'- but to complete in us what was left uncompleted, so long ago the Garden, by manumitting us from Sin to live lives of righteousness even as He is righteous; a thing once impossible before, but, now, made possible even as Jesus said in context:  "All things are possible with God." Halleluiah!!
 
And that is why Jesus said you must be begotten anew, of spirit, before you can perceive the kingdom of God.

Daniel Amos, the band, summed up well my 'coin' with this two line chorus in their song Hound of Heaven

You can run but you can't hide from the Hound of Heaven
Your're free to choose, can you refuse the seeker of souls?

And so I say as always,

Be good!

It's what you were created to be!

God, but I love being human! Thank You Jesus for making me free to be good one!

Dennis!

[Eleutheros]

Rosered,

I loved what you wrote! I want to reply but don't have the time right now except to say, "Thank you!"

You were a breath of fresh air!

I'll give my reply as soon as I can!~

Dennis!

[Doc]

For I perceive that you did answer my two questions concerning Romans 8:21-22, just not directly.

You said that you don't think it matters 'at the end of the day when creation was subjected to vanity'. And that means that you know it does matter, given the context in which you presented this quote. Otherwise you would have answered my question with  'after the fall' which is the correct answer. Instead you say, now, that you don't think it matters.

And this you say, now, because you foreknow that if you answer 'after the fall' that I will then say that Jehovah had to subject His creation to vanity, against it's 'will', because of the turning of The Adam; meaning that it was never Jehovah's intention, from the beginning, to have to subject His creation to vanity.

Well, no. I said it because after thinking about it, I realized that when the creation was subjected to vanity doesn't really answer the question of foreknowledge conclusively. When might give some evidence one way or another, but subjection to vanity at the fall or post-fall would not be conclusive proof of lack of foreknowledge of the event. In other words, If God subjected the creation to vanity at the time of the fall or later, that in and of itself does not preclude the possibility that He knew in advance it would happen. The only conclusive evidence of foreknowledge specifically of the fall would be if we could clearly show that He had subjected the creation to vanity before the fall. However, His actually doing that wouldn't make any sense. We don't make advance plans then carry them out before the time they're supposed to happen. Our advance plans include the time frame for when the plans will be carried out. I hope I was clear enough for your understanding in making this point.

Or else *shudder* it was His intention, all along, to subject it to vanity, just so He could 'set it free'. Which would then beg the question why didn't He just create us 'subject to vanity' right off the bat? And it's not a pleasant thought to try and answer that question while still insisting that God is agape.

I think we have both tried unsuccessfully to show that the other is unwilling to accept certain notions about God and His plans for the universe. I have said this in other contexts before, but how would we know objectively what good was if we did not know evil? would we know what darkness was if all we ever experienced was light? I maintain that God had a plan which included a pre-planned or at least foreknown element of needing to subject His creation to vanity so that we could learn what needed to be learned. God is writing a great story, His story of the universe. You can't have a good story without a protagonist, and antagonist and some tension built into it. In order for God to create this story, and for it to be a good story, God needed to include these elements! He didn't just subject us to vanity right off the bat, because that would've had much the same (but opposite) effect in the big overarching picture as never subjecting us to vanity at all. Remember, according to Isaiah, God creates both peace and evil. Nothing that has been made has been made except by Him.

  

Just like His creating the Tree of Life and putting it in the Garden becomes a superfluous act of creation if it is a truth that He knew, as a fact, that the Adam was going to turn before He created them; superfluous  for His foreknowing, also, that He would be having to banish them from it.
And so when creation was subjected to vanity, against it's 'will', (for that was your point), does bear on the question of whether or not Jehovah 'foreknew' their turning as a fact before it happened, just like the mere presence of the Tree of Life argues against it. Otherwise you would not have brought this quote into a discussion on the question of whether God foreknew the future as a fact and thus predestined all to their individual fates!

Not necessarily. As I've pointed out, yes it does potentially bear on the question, but doesn't conclusively answer it. The Tree of Life and its placement was not superfluous in any case; nothing God does is superfluous except in our flawed understanding of why He's done certain things. One could also ask why He placed the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil unless he planned for them to eat of it. If he really intended for things to go as you have suggested (especially without the benefit of foreknowledge), then why place Adam in a position where they could be tempted, deceived and caused to fall? Your answer would probably be, to give them an opportunity to exercise a choice, which is not necessarily a wrong answer, just an incomplete one.

I perceive that there are two erroneous assumptions you are making here, Doc.

The first is that I'm trying to prove to you my contentions; that I'm trying to 'solve a problem' for you by convincing you to see things my way, when it's obvious that you don't want me to because you don't see what you believe as a problem!

You've already decided what you want to believe and so I perceive that our discussions are wearing you out. And for the most part you are hoping to disprove me by catching something I say.

So, for my knowing this I also know that it would be foolish to try and convince you of anything. And so persuasion is not my motive for being here. As I have stated repeatedly I am presenting my conclusions and the reasons why I conclude what I do so I can test my own thinking against others who would certainly disagree with me, so that I can satisfy myself that I am grasping truth.

And should there be anyone that is touched by my reasoning and would like to explore these ideas further with me, I would welcome them gladly. But that is not something I expected to find here.
Frankly it doesn't touch me at the end of the day if you are convinced by me or not. If you're happy with making Calvin's 'Predestination' a foundation in your thinking then that is between you and your God, not between you and me.

Perceptions are funny things. I'm not assuming that you are attempting to prove your contentions, nor have I already decided what I want to believe. I speak from my current understanding, but that does not mean my understanding will not change. It has changed many times already. Perhaps you are the one making incorrect assumptions about me.  

As I said to you before, I appreciate the fact that it will require a paradigm shift in your heart of thoughts before you will be able to perceive and appreciate what I am presenting here.

And paradigm shifting is beyond my abilities.

All I have is logic and reason, a rebirth and a shared human experience from which to present my own heart of thoughts for you to evaluate for truth or argue against to prove to yourself that I am 'wrong'.

And for that being said know that I do welcome your challenges, Doc, in this public place, because I find you to be good for me as you keep coming to me with your replies.

I'm not afraid of being wrong, Doc. I've been that many times before. And so if you present a challenge to me that truly illustrates some absurdity in my thinking, you will be doing me a favor and I would welcome it because, of a truth, I am seeking truth.

Well, I'm doing my best, but it's clear that I haven't produced enough of a challenge for you as yet.

The second thing that is erroneous is that you are assuming I am arguing for 'free-will' simply because I am arguing against Predestination. I can understand that, given what you've been taught to believe.

Because what comes into your mind when you hear the word 'free will' is as different  from my understanding as what comes into your mind when you hear the word 'predestination'.

'Free-will' and 'predestination' are two sides of the same coin. And that coin is a counterfeit one.

That is why, when arguing from the King James English you will never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion as to which is the 'truth'; for these two points of view contradict each other. And contradiction is unsolvable as long as the axioms remain unchanged.

It began its forging when Calvin shoe-horned his idea of predestination into the original text by his deliberate mis-translation of certain key Greek words. So, because it's a lie, a dilemma was created. Specifically the dilemma became apparent because it doesn't appear, at times, that Jehovah seems, by what He says, to foreknow something He should foreknow. And also for His peculiar behaviour in seeming to allow 'room for repentance' as if He somehow hoped for there to be a change in the concerned humans- an absurd thing to do if He already 'foreknows' as a fact what these humans are going to do.

And so the idea that, 'we are free to choose to believe or disbelieve the Gospel', that we have 'free-will' was introduced as a rebuttal to Calvinism by Joseph Arminius, who, like Calvin, also liked the idea of that peculiar hell- just not that so many were going there. And of those who did, it was really their own fault, not God's, for God giving them 'free-will'.  John Wesley and his Methodist pretty much embody this idea in our time.

And thus was the counterfeit coin forged for us Believers to enjoy playing with because both sides seem to be the truth- as long as you keep it on only one side. But, flip it over and the other side seems just as equally valid. And so we've entertained and occupied ourselves these last few centuries, by fruitlessly flipping it over and over and over, with each new generation of Believers discussing each side in earnest- while the true 'coin' languished under interpretive arrogance.

And so, the best that can be done, once the futility of this flipping is realized and that for accepting this coin as being 'the truth', is to throw up your hands in resignation and incorrectly conclude that this counterfeit coin is a 'profound mystery', when, in reality, it's just a simple and stupid logical contradiction- and therefore not truth.

My understanding is a different 'coin' altogether for my beginning with the understanding that Jehovah did not know, as a fact, that The Adam was going to turn before He created them. This is a fact.

So, from that understanding I perceive that the key to understanding  Romans 7:1 to approximately  8:4 is found in 'verse' 1:

Or are you ignorant, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know law)...

Of the Gentiles, however, Paul said this in the same letter:

For there is no partiality with God, for whoever sinned without the law, without law also shall perish, and whoever sinned in law, through law will be judged.
For not the listeners to law are just with God, but the doers of law shall be justified. For whenever they of the nations that have no law, by nature may be doing that which the law demands, these, having no law, are a law to themselves, who are displaying the action of the law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying together and their reckonings between one another, accusing or defending them, in the day when God will be judging the hidden things of humanity, according to my evangel, through Jesus Christ.

And this:

Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, and thus death passed through into all mankind, on which all sinned -- for until law sin was in the world, yet sin is not being taken into account when there is no law; nevertheless death reigns from Adam unto Moses, over those also who do not sin in the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him Who is about to be.

But to the Jews Paul argues differently about… SIN; S-I-N; Sin. Not Jehovah's 'subjecting to vanity'; which His subjecting creation to vanity was because of Sin, introduced into the world at the turning and thus disrupting His good intentions for it, the creation and us, creations reason for existing.

END OF PART ONE

Well, as I can see from having read part 2, I now understand that you are not arguing for free-will. On to part two then..

[Doc]

PART TWO

So here in Romans 7:1 he begins to present his case to the ones who both had and understood the Mosaic Law. Specifically he was arguing to prove that the law had no power to stop a human from sinning. In fact, because of the law it was even more difficult to deal with Sin because now through the law you are aware of exactly what Sin is!

And of that He says this:

But sin I knew not except through law. For besides, I had not been aware of coveting except the law said, "You shall not be coveting."
He is not saying that coveting came into existence because of law but that before the law came he was coveting and did not know it was a wrong thing to do.

And so because Paul now knows what coveting and other sins are, he found that Sin, with a capitol 'S', was at home in him despite his desire to do what he knew was right.

As he said:

For what I am effecting I know not, for not what I will, this I am putting into practice, but what I am hating, this I am doing. Now if what I am not willing, this I am doing, I am conceding that the law is ideal. Yet now it is no longer I who am effecting it, but Sin making its home in me.

And that is the major difference between the Jew and The Gentile; the Jews, while still sinners, for having sinned, are much more keenly aware of Sin than the Gentiles are who only have their conscience, each other and what is revealed about God through Creation.

So he proves that this keen awareness of Sin, gained through the law, does not give a human the power to stop sinning but actually makes it worse because now they are keenly aware of what Sin is!

And to this precarious predicament Paul found himself in for knowing about Sin he says:

A wretched man am I! What will rescue me out of this body of death?

To which He answered:

Grace!

And then added:

I thank God, through Jesus Christ, our Lord.

So Grace, which is God forbearing our sins while He works out His plan to restore us to Himself, with the full council of His plurality, gained after the disruption of the world, is what will free us from Sin; for it was Grace that sent Jesus to accomplish the needed forgiveness of sins when, we, through faith, are re-sired through spirit, of which Paul says:

The only thing I need to insert here is that we were forgiven of sin at the cross, not when we are re-sired through spirit. Freedom from sin however, requires "re-siring" as you put it (that's salvation).

Now those who are in flesh are not able to please God.
Yet you are not in flesh, but in spirit, if so be that God's spirit is making its home in you. Now if anyone has not Christ's spirit, this one is not His.
Now if Christ is in you, the body, indeed, is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is life because of righteousness. Now if the spirit of Him Who rouses Jesus from among the dead is making its home in you, He Who rouses Christ Jesus from among the dead will also be vivifying your mortal bodies because of His spirit making its home in you.

Doc, I say this to you boldly: If you are going to grasp the truth of Romans 7 and 8 you must quit reading The Words peripherally, looking for 'spiritual' understanding and grasp the literal understanding Paul is presenting here of the before and after states of every human: Before his/her re-birth and after his/her re-birth.

Before the re-birth Sin made it's home in all humans, Jew and Gentile alike, because of The Adam's turning.

This is not what was supposed to have happened!

They were supposed to gain virtue by refusing to gain a conscience illicitly that is, by trusting Jehovah and refusing the offer to become fully like God-apart from God- a thing impossible to do anyway, as The Satan found out.

How could they have gained more virtue than they already had? Sin and the resulting death had not been introduced into the world yet. What need would they have had for conscience without knowledge of good and evil? It was a fall, remember; not from a perfect state, but from a good state.

And so the conscience we now have is weak to keep us from Sin because Sin which has made it's home in us keeps us sinning, whether we know it or not; and even when we don't want to for being aware of it. We sin because we try to impulsively satisfy our bodies desires for food, shelter, sex, power over our destiny and a comfortable life all of which cause harm to not only ourselves, for this impulsive behaviour, but harms others as well, even the innocent. Truly a vain pursuit!

But now, after our rebirth, we have something we never had before! The genuine ability to stop sinning, given to us through a re-birth of spirit that cleanses our conscience and gives it the power to influence us to not be constantly sinning!

And so now Jehovah can reasonably expect those who are truly begotten anew to stop sinning. That is to say that it is not something that is no longer unreasonable for Him to ask of us, who truly have the spirit of Christ making it's home in us because the first thing the spirit did when it 'moved in' and began making itself at home in us was to ungraciously kick Sin's ugly ass all the way out the door!  Praise God!  I am Eleutheros! I am made free, indeed by The Son of God!!!!

We have been given the ability to stop sinning, but not through self-will or effort, which Paul clearly points out.

And so Paul says:

Nothing, consequently, is now condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. Not according to flesh are they walking, but according to spirit, for the spirit's law of life in Christ Jesus frees you from the law of sin and death.
For what was impossible to the law, in which it was infirm through the flesh, did God, sending His own Son in the likeness of sin's flesh and concerning sin, He condemns sin in the flesh, that the just requirement of the law may be fulfilled in us, who are not walking in accord with flesh, but in accord with spirit.

And

Now if the spirit of Him Who rouses Jesus from among the dead is making its home in you, He Who rouses Christ Jesus from among the dead will also be vivifying your mortal bodies because of His spirit making its home in you. Consequently, then, brethren, debtors are we, not to the flesh, to be living in accord with flesh, for if you are living in accord with flesh, you are about to be dying. Yet if, in spirit, you are putting the practices of the body to death, you will be living. For whoever are being led by God's spirit, these are sons of God.

So there you have my evaluation of Romans 7

We are not free from sin. That is the problem! And that is why the creation was subject to vanity, without it's consent, when The Adam turned, so that we humans would know that we are not free to do as we damm well please! But are, instead, slaves to our impulses.

Because the only choice we have to make through our so called 'free-will ' is to sin, some more than others and to keep refusing the pull of the spirit of God, Who is dragging all humans to 'the foot of the cross' so they will come to realize their need for His forgiveness.

Some are brought there willingly and gladly through the heralding of the Gospel, these are the firstfruits as Paul called us. For those who sin less than others are foreknown to God for His constantly searching the hearts of men through spirit.
Thus he finds those, in each generation- in each new 'crop' of humans, so to speak, who recognize the purpose of a conscience in us as well as understanding God's righteousness through their interactions with others and through what is known of God by what He created. As well as perceiving the futility of our trying to be good that comes with this realization for living in a creation subject to vanity.

Exactly. We are either slaves to sin or to Christ. And we can only refuse the pull of the spirit of God for so long.

These are the ones who come to love the God they know this way and thus love righteousness in their inner man as Paul said:
 
For I am gratified with the law of God as to the man within,..

And these ones of whom He is aware before He designates beforehand to receive His justification even as Paul said:

Now whom He designates beforehand, these He calls also, and whom He calls, these He justifies also; now whom He justifies, these He glorifies also.

Does not designation beforehand require foreknowledge?

Now not everyone will be of the firstfruits for some will be dragged 'to the foot of the cross' through having to be evaluated, in the Day of Evaluation as needing to be brought to justice first and thus be destroyed as their spirits are purified of dross by unquenchable, holy fire, before they can receive His forgiveness and be restored to God through Jesus who is praised forever and worthy to receive the reward for His suffering!!! US!!

Agreed.

And it is exactly this way also for those covenanted ones who have the Mosaic Law. Because all the law can do is develop in us a keen awareness of Sin, not stop us from sinning.
And that is because a conscience needs spirit to be the powerful living thing it was intended to be in us.

Nothing in particular to disagree with here.

That is something we would have had now, had the world not been disrupted when The Adam gained a conscience before They gained virtue. Even as we have exactly that now through faith; a clean and powerful conscience gained through the rebirth of spirit and that through faith in Jesus the Christ who gave Himself that He might free us from Sin and thus deliver us from Death- not 'came to save us from hell' or 'came to save us so we could go to heaven' or  'came to save us to be His Bride'- but to complete in us what was left uncompleted, so long ago the Garden, by manumitting us from Sin to live lives of righteousness even as He is righteous; a thing once impossible before, but, now, made possible even as Jesus said in context:  "All things are possible with God." Halleluiah!!
 
And that is why Jesus said you must be begotten anew, of spirit, before you can perceive the kingdom of God.

Daniel Amos, the band, summed up well my 'coin' with this two line chorus in their song Hound of Heaven

You can run but you can't hide from the Hound of Heaven
Your're free to choose, can you refuse the seeker of souls?

And so I say as always,

Be good!

It's what you were created to be!

God, but I love being human! Thank You Jesus for making me free to be good one!

Dennis!

This is where I'm not really tracking with you. You seem to be suggesting that Adam was incomplete in the Garden (The incompleteness I don't particularly disagree with in and of itself) because they gained conscience before virtue. But I ask again, what virtue did they not already have before the fall that they would not have needed a fall to gain? God called all He created, "good".

Blessings,

Doc

[Eleutheros]

Doc!

I love you, man!

This is good stuff here! Good questions, good conclusions, good challenges!

Thank you. And thank you also for not taking my perceptions of your motives personally. Accept, if you will, my apologies for that.

I'm off to ponder and will reply as soon as I can.

Blessings to you as well!

Dennis!

[Eleutheros]

Quote from: rosered on September 30, 2009, 12:09:53 AM
Quote from: Dennis
Seriously, though, I'll answer your question, Doc, with two questions:

Answer mine first and then I'll explain Rom 8:21-22, from my understanding, if your answering these two questions doesn't.

When did this 'subjection to vanity' take place?

And from that answer ponder this: Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?

And "I don't know" is not an answer.

  Thank you Dennis and Doc for your kindness  shown ,it is appreciated 
 
 
  I have some real simple answers to each question and sure hope you  will consider them
  I thought almost instantly of this verse  here . seems everything born of flesh has sorrow /suffering , to me the youth/vanity is not  held accountable ,
 but is to learn the Truth  from error /mistakes and being corrected and chastened is painful as Paul also spoke of , but we learn  from our faith being tested to trust in God only and not anything else  such as idols etc.
 
 
 
Ecc 11:10 Therefore remove sorrow from thy heart, and put away evil from thy flesh: for childhood and youth [are] vanity.

Yes this is good rosered! The Words of God definitely agree that we should learn from our errors and our mistakes- it is definitely a truth for this age. And that is what God's Grace is all about; to give us room to learn by doing even repenting to Him when necessary because we sinned.

He is a good Father after all; the Best and the model for all. And just like it hurts us when we see our own children having to learn the hard way, I can only imagine how He must feel for being everyone's Father!

I gained a lot of respect for God as I raised my own children, that's for sure!

the second part of your question "Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?"

  To me it is this simple ,  to Learn  not to blaspheme /lie  against the Holy Spirit .
 
     because from the begining , the lies was told and believed
 and the Truth was dismissed
  the serpent  ,  Eve was decieved  Adam also and the lies grew over time
  into all areas and masses  the whole world  is in the spirit of error
 
  to me this is why  the Lord promises   the Holy Spirit to lead us and guide  us into all truth and teach us
 
  And as Children  we learn obedience
  what better way to learn but by experience
  So many scriptures  in the Word of God touch on this very thing

This is a good point! Yes, lies have replaced truth such that we live in a sea of lies, as Molly once said. I hadn't thought that one of the reasons why He would subject the creation to vanity would be to teach us not to go against The Holy Spirit that He promised to us to guides us into all Truth.

Certianly this works in well with God being a Father especially of those who Believe. Because we may need some room to learn as we live out our new regenerated lives In Him!   
 

  I hope this  helps and is not laughed at ..  I feel like a first grader in a collage level  class here .. 

Awwww, rosered, just because Doc can be snippity at times and I can be long-winded and vague doesn't mean were 'college level'!!

We're just like you, searching to know better the God we love so much by studying His precious Words.
 

  I looked for this form of vanity for this verse,because there is different words for vain/ vanity .
 
  Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope,
 
   and it is

 
  G3153 - mataiotēs
 
  1) what is devoid of truth and appropriateness

2) perverseness, depravity

3) frailty, want of vigour

 the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God
 
  this world also hates God /and His son Jesus Christ
 
  this world  we  must overcome  though Jesus Christ who is in you when you are born from  His Holy Spirit /above the world

 
1Jo 2:16 For all that [is] in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 
 
    we learn not to blashpeme /lie  against the Truth 

   and the Lord God in His mercy and longsuffering wait till we do , learn it 
 by experience

Yes! Good research.

Indeed, through Him we are more than over-comers… We are conquerors of this world's hold on us which is through Sin!

Experience is a good teacher, especially for those who truly love righteousness which is nothing more than doing what we know is right. And those who love righteousness love God. So certainly these ones will learn quickly from their experiences so that they sin less and less and do good more and more!
 

hope this makes some kinda sense to you all ,
 I know we are only accountable  for  what we  get or have from the Lord  and those who got nothing  in this life are not accountable

Yes I agree. One of my favorite proverbs is 24:12 If you say, "Behold, we did not know this!" Does not He Who weighs and ponders the heart perceive and consider it? And He Who guards your life, does not He know it? And shall not He render to everyone according to his works?

I also believe that this short time  on the earth  if it be 70 years  or more is  nothing  compared to what we will still be learning when  this part is over and done with

Now that is a time that I truly look forward to!
 

just some simple things  I have considered , I am not the deep thinker as some are  on this forum , but am  so grateful to God for them all .

rosered, I can tell that you are a very thoughtful woman and that you know your God well. So you keep on thinking about Him and Loving Him and He will give you understanding.

Besides, 'deep-thinkers' sometimes drown in their own thoughts, don'tcha know?
 

Thanks for listening 

    rose

Hey, I'm the one honored to read your replies! Chime in anytime you feel like it rosered. I'd personally love to hear what you have to say!

Be good!

Dennis!

[rosered]

Quote from: rosered on September 30, 2009, 12:09:53 AM
Quote from: Dennis
Seriously, though, I'll answer your question, Doc, with two questions:

Answer mine first and then I'll explain Rom 8:21-22, from my understanding, if your answering these two questions doesn't.

When did this 'subjection to vanity' take place?

And from that answer ponder this: Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?

And "I don't know" is not an answer.

  Thank you Dennis and Doc for your kindness  shown ,it is appreciated 
 
 
  I have some real simple answers to each question and sure hope you  will consider them
  I thought almost instantly of this verse  here . seems everything born of flesh has sorrow /suffering , to me the youth/vanity is not  held accountable ,
 but is to learn the Truth  from error /mistakes and being corrected and chastened is painful as Paul also spoke of , but we learn  from our faith being tested to trust in God only and not anything else  such as idols etc.
 
 
 
Ecc 11:10 Therefore remove sorrow from thy heart, and put away evil from thy flesh: for childhood and youth [are] vanity.

Yes this is good rosered! The Words of God definitely agree that we should learn from our errors and our mistakes- it is definitely a truth for this age. And that is what God's Grace is all about; to give us room to learn by doing even repenting to Him when necessary because we sinned.

He is a good Father after all; the Best and the model for all. And just like it hurts us when we see our own children having to learn the hard way, I can only imagine how He must feel for being everyone's Father!

I gained a lot of respect for God as I raised my own children, that's for sure!

the second part of your question "Why Did Jehovah subject the creation to vanity; to what purpose was this done?"

  To me it is this simple ,  to Learn  not to blaspheme /lie  against the Holy Spirit .
 
     because from the begining , the lies was told and believed
 and the Truth was dismissed
  the serpent  ,  Eve was decieved  Adam also and the lies grew over time
  into all areas and masses  the whole world  is in the spirit of error
 
  to me this is why  the Lord promises   the Holy Spirit to lead us and guide  us into all truth and teach us
 
  And as Children  we learn obedience
  what better way to learn but by experience
  So many scriptures  in the Word of God touch on this very thing

This is a good point! Yes, lies have replaced truth such that we live in a sea of lies, as Molly once said. I hadn't thought that one of the reasons why He would subject the creation to vanity would be to teach us not to go against The Holy Spirit that He promised to us to guides us into all Truth.

Certianly this works in well with God being a Father especially of those who Believe. Because we may need some room to learn as we live out our new regenerated lives In Him!   
 

  I hope this  helps and is not laughed at ..  I feel like a first grader in a collage level  class here .. 

Awwww, rosered, just because Doc can be snippity at times and I can be long-winded and vague doesn't mean were 'college level'!!

We're just like you, searching to know better the God we love so much by studying His precious Words.
 

  I looked for this form of vanity for this verse,because there is different words for vain/ vanity .
 
  Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope,
 
   and it is

 
  G3153 - mataiotēs
 
  1) what is devoid of truth and appropriateness

2) perverseness, depravity

3) frailty, want of vigour

 the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God
 
  this world also hates God /and His son Jesus Christ
 
  this world  we  must overcome  though Jesus Christ who is in you when you are born from  His Holy Spirit /above the world

 
1Jo 2:16 For all that [is] in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 
 
    we learn not to blashpeme /lie  against the Truth 

   and the Lord God in His mercy and longsuffering wait till we do , learn it 
 by experience

Yes! Good research.

Indeed, through Him we are more than over-comers… We are conquerors of this world's hold on us which is through Sin!

Experience is a good teacher, especially for those who truly love righteousness which is nothing more than doing what we know is right. And those who love righteousness love God. So certainly these ones will learn quickly from their experiences so that they sin less and less and do good more and more!
 

hope this makes some kinda sense to you all ,
 I know we are only accountable  for  what we  get or have from the Lord  and those who got nothing  in this life are not accountable

Yes I agree. One of my favorite proverbs is 24:12 If you say, "Behold, we did not know this!" Does not He Who weighs and ponders the heart perceive and consider it? And He Who guards your life, does not He know it? And shall not He render to everyone according to his works?

I also believe that this short time  on the earth  if it be 70 years  or more is  nothing  compared to what we will still be learning when  this part is over and done with

Now that is a time that I truly look forward to!
 

just some simple things  I have considered , I am not the deep thinker as some are  on this forum , but am  so grateful to God for them all .

rosered, I can tell that you are a very thoughtful woman and that you know your God well. So you keep on thinking about Him and Loving Him and He will give you understanding.

Besides, 'deep-thinkers' sometimes drown in their own thoughts, don'tcha know?
 

Thanks for listening 

    rose

Hey, I'm the one honored to read your replies! Chime in anytime you feel like it rosered. I'd personally love to hear what you have to say!

Be good!

Dennis!

  Wow thank you Bro D ,
   I do appreciate your reply
  and  good thoughts !
   this that  bro Paul
  speaks of has blessed me so much   

 Romans 5 1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:   


 Rom 5:2   By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 


 Rom 5:3   And not only [so], but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation works patience; 

 Rom 5:4   And patience, experience; and experience, hope: 


 Rom 5:5   And hope makes not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.    

  its all good 
 
  you be good too  now Dennis , ya hear lol..
 
 God   Bless ya     rose

[Doc]

Doc!

I love you, man!

This is good stuff here! Good questions, good conclusions, good challenges!

Thank you. And thank you also for not taking my perceptions of your motives personally. Accept, if you will, my apologies for that.

I'm off to ponder and will reply as soon as I can.

Blessings to you as well!

Dennis!

No problem.

Also, somehow I left out this quote to comment on in my previous replies:

"That is why, when arguing from the King James English you will never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion as to which is the 'truth'; for these two points of view contradict each other. And contradiction is unsolvable as long as the axioms remain unchanged."

I'm unclear if this is a general "you" or a specific "you", but as I've said before, I don't argue from the King James English. All of my scripture quotations are from the CLV. Be that as it may...

[Eleutheros]

Doc!

I love you, man!

This is good stuff here! Good questions, good conclusions, good challenges!

Thank you. And thank you also for not taking my perceptions of your motives personally. Accept, if you will, my apologies for that.

I'm off to ponder and will reply as soon as I can.

Blessings to you as well!

Dennis!

No problem.

Also, somehow I left out this quote to comment on in my previous replies:

"That is why, when arguing from the King James English you will never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion as to which is the 'truth'; for these two points of view contradict each other. And contradiction is unsolvable as long as the axioms remain unchanged."

I'm unclear if this is a general "you" or a specific "you", but as I've said before, I don't argue from the King James English. All of my scripture quotations are from the CLV. Be that as it may...

In context it was the general 'you'. Should have said, "...King James English one will never..."

I am known as someone who massacres the King's English... 

Dennis!

[reFORMer]

This is mostly a copy of something I posted a while back, though it may have been changed a little.  As soon as I read page 2 and 3 I'll try to share more about the perspective I have had, at least for a while, knowing I'm ready for change when light increases...
___________________________________

The Two Shall Be One


A similar image found many places in scripture concerns successive levels of holiness, of entrance into the Divine and stages of development.  At the start of "In Beginning," or, "Genesis" there is in the world an Eden (Lit., "pleasure") land that has a garden sanctuary which at it's center has two trees.  In the world there is an Israel land that has a Jerusalem city which has at it's heart a mountain (representing a kingdom) called Zion.   Similar is the outer court (30 fold,) holy place (60 fold,) and the holy of holies (100 fold.)  Just as there are two cherubim, a cherub and a cheruba, in the innermost of the temple so there are two trees in the midst of the sanctuary in Eden.  Male humans (cherubs?)have an x and a y chromosome; as one tree is a duality, good and evil; so also of the two basic forces not nuclear one which encompasses light is electromagnetism having polarity, positive and negative.  Females (cherubas?) have double y chromosomes; as the other tree is a singularity, life; so also the other non-nuclear basic force is unitive, gravity.

From the tree of the knowledge of good and evil many repudiate the evil from their God knowledge.  How about the good?  Would you walk into incorruptible immortality in the next half an hour if you knew how?  Where is our freedom to will it or to choose it that we could demonstrate this aspect of the real nature of Christ to which we are connected?  So, why don't we know how?  Jesus has opened the door and no man can shut it.  Others have entered into things pertaining to it and God is no respecter of persons.  I can't at this moment, but in sample experiences, obtain the body of resurrected glory.  I can't accuse God of unfairness.  I just don't qualify.  That is no different than qualifying to be slain by Him who both wounds and heals, kills and makes alive.  Each of us walks around with a glory cloud by our head that we can reach up into and a sucking whirlpool at our feet that we can with one step fall into destruction.  Don't imagine you can keep an insipid balance.  God gives spirit things that push us farther than our own self control would let us go.

There are times when the sword of the Spirit cuts into the flesh to bring forth the certainty of absolute grace and grace alone.  Then another time it may be we are incited to good works while it is yet day.  The living and active word of God is to accomplish His purposes in achieving His goal of reproducing His Image and Likeness in us.  What may be needed today is abandonment to God and His Sovereignty.  Tomorrow it is our personal responsibility that is emphasized.  It is a two-mouthed sword.  The point is Jesus.

Of the two trees some propose not eating of the tree of good and evil and to choose life instead.  Hence, we have also exercised ourselves to not think thoughts of duality, only one-ing awareness.  In Psalm 63, having gone progressively out through the thirsty soul into the craving of the flesh, "In land arid and faint, without water," Elohim, His strength and glory, is envisioned in the Sanctuary.  The place where David (Lit., "Beloved," [60 fold]) says, "In the shadow of your wings shall I be jubilant" would be under where the wings of the Churubim "kiss" called the Mercy Throne.  From there he expects those who would ruin his soul to be removed.  (Grace, Greek, "charis" is "the result of being fulfilled," the result of the need having been met.)  Mercy is "chesed," a desire to meet the need, meaning, "The ardor to fulfill whatever is lacking."  It is God's covenantal love in action.  It is His throne upon which the Glory rests.  Overcomers are there.  A line in the song (63) says, "Your Mercy (chesed) is better than life."

The reason she says, "our bed is green" (SS 1:16 ) is because they lie beneath the trees in the midst of the garden.  "...the mature...because of habit, have faculties (senses) exercised toward discriminating beside good and evil." (Heb 5:14)  Beside (the tree of)good and evil is (the tree of) life; but also there is a fountain, because the water that flows downhill, which divided into four heads of rivers, came forth from the midst of the holiest between the two trees flowing down the mountain (kingdom) at the center.  This was as the Shekinah between the two Cherubim.  It is something "better than life."  The two trees are made things closest to the river flowing out of the innermost.  Wherever the river flowed, everything lives.  The Cherubim represent the sons of God in their priestly aspect which is how they rule.  Priests are intercessors.  They define the boundaries.  By not guarding the holy places Adam was cast out and His ministry was exercised by Cherubim until the time appointed of the Father for the unveiling of the mature sons to reign.  We are of a place beyond good and evil and better than life.   It is beyond my will and His will duality and also better than singular Sovereignty.  There is an invitation going out to come into the feast of the Lamb's marriage.  The animal aspect will be raised to partake of permanent life, the full placing of the physical into inheriting the authority of being born out of the house of God, to be exercised in the name of Jesus over all things.

"There is a river, that flows from deep within.
There is a fountain, that cleanses from all sin.
Come to the ocean, there is a vast supply.
Drink of the river, that never will run dry."

---James Rohde

[Eleutheros]

OK! Here we go!

For I perceive that you did answer my two questions concerning Romans 8:21-22, just not directly.
You said that you don't think it matters 'at the end of the day when creation was subjected to vanity'. And that means that you know it does…
 
And this you say, now, because you foreknow that if you answer 'after the fall' that I will then say that Jehovah had to subject His creation to vanity, against it's 'will', because of the turning of The Adam; meaning that it was never Jehovah's intention, from the beginning, to have to subject His creation to vanity.

Well, no. I said it because after thinking about it, I realized that when the creation was subjected to vanity doesn't really answer the question of foreknowledge conclusively. When might give some evidence one way or another, but subjection to vanity at the fall or post-fall would not be conclusive proof of lack of foreknowledge of the event.  In other words, If God subjected the creation to vanity at the time of the fall or later, that in and of itself does not preclude the possibility that He knew in advance it would happen. Still though is does provide some circumstantial proof.

I'm tracking here with you…  Consider this: There is an understanding in American jurisprudence that allows the court to consider the actions of an individual as a whole, rather than just having to consider them individually, in order to determine if the individual is guilty of the offence they are charged with.
In other words, if the individual actions fall into a progressive time line and each action seems to build on another, leading to a specific goal, even if the actions themselves, separated into individual components, might be disproven as evidence for being so isolated, then it is assumed that there was intent on the part of the accused.

For instance Timothy McVie buying  a lot of fertilizer, some electronics, some wire, renting a truck far from where he lived, etc, would lead one to conclude that he intended to turn a truck into a bomb; even if each act, separated from the whole, might be 'explained away'. Therefore, this 'preponderance of evidence' is not ignored.

There is a preponderance of evidence that demonstrates that Jehovah did not 'foreknow' the Turning, as a fact.

Of course, when He subjected the creation to vanity is one item, even the fact that it became necessary for Him to do it; just as you said it "might give some evidence" and that it "does provide some circumstantial proof."
 
The presence of the Tree of Life, as a part of the original creation, is another for His having to stop their access to that very Tree (Gen 3:22-read the footnote).

The fact that Death came to all (which Death is what Jesus came to conquer) and thus a future evaluation of all humanity is another for the scripture declaring that the aionios fire, into which sentenced humans will go at Jesus' epiphaneia, was prepared for The Satan and his messengers, not for humans (Matt 25:41).

The scripture that declares the earth wasn't created to be a worthless waste but to be inhabited (Isa 45:18) but yet that is what it has became (Gen 1:2  &  7:4, Isa 51:6) often.

And then there is all the scriptures that declare that there is, on its way, a New Heaven and a New Earth (Isa 65:7, 66:22 2 Pet 3:5-13 Rev 21:1) despite the Psalm (78:69) that declares the earth was founded or established olam 'for the ages'.

Now, I recognize that in many human minds the creation of a New Heaven and its New Earth is the culmination of His "Plan A", as you call it, Doc, that began in the Garden.

I list it here among 'the other things' to illustrate that a whole new re-creation where righteousness dwells (2 Pet 3:13) could have been made necessary by the disruption of the world. For in the very fact that the world was disrupted, no matter when you think that was, lies the unspoken conclusion that something didn't happen that was supposed to.

So, I assume, axiomatically, that He originally intended, for there to be righteousness dwelling in this earth through all the completed humans that would descend from The Adam, after he/she gained their own completion, that is, their virtue, by passing the test, not failing it (More on that later).

For as "…Sin entered the world through one 'man'", The Adam, I think it logical and correct to conclude that, because sex was given to them before the Turning, Righteousness could also have entered the world through this one pair of humans, The Adam; even as it later did through The Man from Heaven, Jesus Christ, Who came to restore ALL things to The Father

And that restoration began when Jesus accomplished the forgiveness of all sins at the cross allowing Him to then do what couldn't be done before, create a new human inside of us that is re-sired by Jehovah Himself so that we can begin to do what we could not do ourselves because of the Turning, specifically, stop sinning! And start growing into righteousness by having our mind metamorphasized into the mind of Christ!
 
And that is why I think it is not only logical but correct to assume that Righteousness could have come into the world through The Adam just as Sin did. Because the end result is the same, righteous humans!
 
As an aside note I will tell you, Doc, of truth that I came to this conclusion I made above, as well as many others, a long time before I found out that katabole means 'disruption', not 'foundation'.
In fact, when I discovered that katabole means 'disruption', there was a massive *clicking* in my mind as things came together in an excited rush because of everything else I had concluded long before I found out the truth about Rev 13:8 & 17:8.

And that truth is that the lambkin was destined to be slain from the disruption of the world (remember Peter's declaring it was by the specific counsel of God that Jesus was given up) for our sins and that the names of all the humans that come to belong to Him are being recorded in a unique scroll kept from the disruption of the world right into the present; a scroll that belongs to the lambkin and began its existence… blank. Here is a discussion I started elsewhere about that very thing. And if you read it through it will introduce you to some other conclusions I drew just before I found out the truth about katabole.

One more item in the preponderance of evidence is that, according to Isa 51:4-8, the Heavens will disappear like smoke and the Earth will wear out with use (can anyone say "entropy"?) and that this is in the context of Jehovah preparing to bring salvation and permanent righteousness to His people, the ones with His law and His instruction in their hearts and to destroy the rest in a manner similar to what Jesus described.

However, even if any one item is removed from my above list, there is still a preponderance of evidence to deal with.

The only conclusive evidence of foreknowledge specifically of the fall would be if we could clearly show that He had subjected the creation to vanity before the fall.

I agree.

However, His actually doing that wouldn't make any sense. We don't make advance plans then carry them out before the time they're supposed to happen. Our advance plans include the time frame for when the plans will be carried out. I hope I was clear enough for your understanding in making this point.

Yes. Your point has been understood by me from the middle of our exchanges; specifically that Jehovah planned both the fall and the rescue because this is the only way for Him to accomplish His goal of making Himself ALL and in ALL, through Jesus Christ. And it's thought by you that this must be the only way to do this simply because it happened this way!

This idea is not something new to me even as I tried, earlier, for your finally using the word 'planned', to illustrate this thought into absurdity by taking it to its logical conclusion. The logic was sound, even if its  conclusion is unappealing for being absurd; and that absurdity is because the conclusion is not an accurate reflection of reality; just as you said, "I am not an automaton." And I agree because neither am I.

Or else *shudder* it was His intention, all along, to subject it to vanity, just so He could 'set it free'. Which would then beg the question why didn't He just create us 'subject to vanity' right off the bat? And it's not a pleasant thought to try and answer that question while still insisting that God is agape.

I think we have both tried unsuccessfully to show that the other is unwilling to accept certain notions about God and His plans for the universe. I have said this in other contexts before, but how would we know objectively what good was if we did not know evil?...

I could equally ask, "How would we know objectively, what evil was if we did not know good?"

But that thought seems bassakward to us! Why? Because we are born turned away from God! But, if we were born as good humans, turned toward God, right out of the womb, rather than bad, from that point of view the question, as you asked it, would be the one thought to be assbackward!

I maintain that God had a plan which included a pre-planned or at least foreknown element of needing to subject His creation to vanity so that we could learn what needed to be learned. God is writing a great story, His story of the universe. You can't have a good story without a protagonist, and antagonist and some tension built into it. In order for God to create this story, and for it to be a good story, God needed to include these elements! He didn't just subject us to vanity right off the bat, because that would've had much the same (but opposite) effect in the big overarching picture as never subjecting us to vanity at all. Remember, according to Isaiah, God creates both peace and evil. Nothing that has been made has been made except by Him.

I've read this idea before elsewhere. I think it was that guy who wrote about "Ultimate Responsibility" that I mentioned in my last reply to Molly. I'm not sure, I just know I've read it before.

So, your axiomatic truth, then, is that God is writing a story in the same way a human would write a good novel, with a Protagonist, an antagonist and some tension built into it-except He gets to use real humans, not imaginary ones. And so these real humans cannot help but go through what He is 'writing' for them to go through, which you call 'learning what we needed to learn'. Nice Father, this God.
 
No offense, Doc, but your right; that just doesn't work for me:  I am unwilling to accept that notion.

However just to entertain the notion I will take what you say and draw a logical conclusion by asking a question: Why couldn't my notion be equally valid? After all you did say:

…how would we know objectively what good was if we did not know evil?

At least with my notion there was once a chance to 'get it right the first time', to know what good was, first and thus know of evil, objectively, without Him having to 'create all the evil' that is, 'write in' all the thefts and destruction and beatings and selfishness and Communism and Liberalism and Conservatism and murders and rapes and abortions and Governments and accidents and pornography and sexual deviance and dismemberments and Hollywood and birth defects and wars and sickness and poverty and Islam and Buddhism and Hinduism and Jainism and Sikhism and disease and hunger and CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN and Fox 'news' and torture and despotism and oppression and violence and child neglect and child abuse and child pornography and… all manner of evil, even inventing new ones for us to learn from.

It is truly an epic horror story He's writing here for us to 'learn' in.

At least it's got a happy ending; Jesus (*gulp*) gets the Girl.

So, now I guess we know why it's a good thing that the former things won't be remembered. He gets to 'wipe His slate clean'. I wonder what His next novel will be like?

Doc, this quote you referenced from Isaiah is in the context of Jehovah appointing Cyrus the Persian to be a human by which He would, for the benefit of Israel, show a world already gone astray, a world disrupted, a world that knew not its Creator, that He is their God also!
For through Cyrus the decree would come to rebuild the Temple and the captives of Israel were set free exactly as Jehovah said would happen, "without price or reward."

Jehovah does not create evil so that good may come, as you are suggesting, God Forbid! He is speaking here of the peace and 'not peace' or the adversity* that He brings into a world of evil humans to cause these rebellious idolaters to remember that He is their Creator!

In other words, because we are turned away from God to worship idols, whether they be idols of stone, gold, wood, etc. or American Idols, it becomes Jehovah's agape that He, in his forbearance and Grace, does what He can to get humans to even just acknowledge His existence!
And so it is not wrong for Him to bring adversity to those who won't even acknowledge Him and peace to those who do! For in that aion, before Jesus accomplished the forgivness of sins, there wasn't much else He could do except 'punish'. And as He found out, even that becomes ineffective after a while; just as anyone with rebellious teens will attest to.

Therefore, it is very, very misleading, even as you have been mislead, to translate this Hebrew word here with our word 'evil'. And that is exactly why that bastard Calvin did it so He could use it to support his evil theology.

O LORD, My God! When will all of the evil thoughts of Augustine and Calvin be purged from our minds?
 
Like I said, it's not a pleasant thing to have to answer that question while still insisting that God is agape.

*It is true that the Hebrew word Rah can be translated with 'evil'. But, like all Hebrew words with a multitude of uses, the meaning intended is derived from the context. Here, in  Isaiah 45:7 it is used as a noun in a parallelism of 'light' (by which we perceive) and 'darkness' (which prevents perception) and 'peace' and 'the opposite of peace' which is 'adversity', a valid and much more accurate translation for this word, in this place (Eccl 7:14).

Just like His creating the Tree of Life and putting it in the Garden becomes a superfluous act of creation if it is a truth that He knew, as a fact, that the Adam was going to turn before He created them; superfluous  for His foreknowing, also, that He would be having to banish them from it.

And so when creation was subjected to vanity, against it's 'will', (for that was your point), does bear on the question of whether or not Jehovah 'foreknew' their turning as a fact before it happened, just like the mere presence of the Tree of Life argues against it. Otherwise you would not have brought this quote into a discussion on the question of whether God foreknew the future as a fact and thus predestined all to their individual fates!

Not necessarily. As I've pointed out, yes it does potentially bear on the question, but doesn't conclusively answer it. The Tree of Life and its placement was not superfluous in any case;…

No. That is not correct. The only way its presence could not be superfluous is if He never intended to have to ban them from it!

In other words, The Tree of Life was to be a part of what didn't happen; even as the word 'disruption' implies something that was supposed to happen but did not.

nothing God does is superfluous…

Exactly!

...except in our flawed understanding of why He's done certain things.

I couldn't argree more!

So, who's understanding is flawed? Mine or yours? Or are both our understandings flawed and neither one of us understands, with the correct understanding being beyond our grasp?

Or are you referring to the depraved mind John Calvin says we all have that keeps us from understanding the 'mystery' (stupidity) of his idea of 'predestination'?

Which idea begs the question; because Calvin also is a depraved human, by his own definition, why is he so sure that what he thinks of God is the truth? Why isn't what he thinks of God, which is from a depraved mind, namely his, also a depraved thought and therefore, not the truth?

Of course the answer is that what He thinks of God is, indeed, not the truth.

For The Words declare that we can know Him even as Jesus said that He came to show us The Father and even as Paul said:

For who knew the mind of the Lord? Who will be deducing from Him? Yet we have the mind of Christ!

END OF PART ONE