Deviant Oath? - Not a judge!

[David Merrill]

IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.

Indeed. I see your point but have actually rationalized; and I mean that mathematically that when we reach the monad of monotheism, all these gods are God. It is irrational therefore to say, Since I believe in the God of the Holy Bible, all other singular godform(s) in singular, are other gods. Because God is everywhere, it is quite impossible to have any other gods, and still conform to monotheism.

There is the CHRIST of the Fundamental Orders of 1639 for example (linked). While I am compelled to agree with you I also resort to precedence, meaning that 1639 precedes a lot of American stuff.



On that token the Charter of Freedoms and Exemptions Granted to Patroons is 1629 and the Patent of August 13 (371 years on the Five Cube Sum Number Locks) preceeds and is therefore the precedent. This is my "perpetual inheritance" and so we find lessons about estate and usage - property rights over on www.lawfulmoneytrust.com with Michael Joseph coaching me about exercising dominion. - Which of course considers the God of the (fill in the blank) in a universal light.

[Chex]

that the Case was an admiralty seizure of millions, in an astounding number of seized trust accounts, only for the sake of laundering the money through the STATE OF COLORADO CAPITAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION.

https://www.goldismoney2.com/.../colorado-articles-of-incorporation-1988-pdf.21939/

1. Cached as follows: (a) To acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise, interests: in real or personal property, or any combination thereof, to construct or install improvements

The Corporation Manual - Google Books

IPS | Articles of Incorporation http://www.protease.org/articles.htmlhttp://corporations.uslegal.com/overview/

Most States have a general corporation code that lists certain requirements, and anyone who satisfies these requirements and files the necessary papers with the government may automatically become a corporation.

In 1950, the American Bar Association published a Model Business Corporation Act (MBCA) to assist State Legislatures in modernizing State corporation laws.

In 1984, a revision of this Model Act was published (RMBCA). All states have adopted various versions of the MBCA or the RMBCA with only slight variations.

One or more natural persons or corporations may act as incorporators of a corporation by signing and filing Articles of Incorporation with the designated state government official (usually the Secretary of State).

[allodial]

IMHO; all oaths, taken as per the U.S. Constitution, are deviant regardless of the spelling or the phrasing. Unless there is an unambiguous declaration that the Sovereign entity recognized as the Supreme Authority is specifically the God of the Bible (The God of Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and and Moses), then "GOD", "GOD", GOD" or "God" can mean any number of entities.

One might say, "but they put their hand on the bible when they take an oath". Putting your hand on a book and making clear who you serve are two different things entirely. That is why a senator and a New York Judge were permitted to swear on the Koran when taking their oaths. The book does not matter since the sovereign declared is clearly "We the People" and the "Law of the Land" is not God's Scriptural Law but the "People's" law. That is how you get the act of abortion and "same sex marriage" accepted and protected by "law".

Prior to the "More Perfect Union", the State Constitutions, except Rhode Island, all specified the God of Scripture and/or Jesus the Christ our LORD and Savior as the Ultimate and Supreme Sovereign and Authority and any one desiring to enter into and serve in any office therefrom must be subject to a "religious test" and must specifically proclaim that they worship and obey the God of the Bible ONLY.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test to enter into office. That means that wiccans, kabbalists, jesuits, muslims, atheists, occultists, etc are welcomed to partake in and influence the affairs of the nation. As a result, The United States of America has been on a steady decline towards destruction ever since 1789.

The saint would probably find himself at home among the people of the free and sovereign states that created The United States of America rather than in the United States. Perhaps that is the 'secret'? If someone were to suggest the United States (singular) to not be "founded as a Christian nation", I'd really find it challenging to disagree! The states which created The United States of America were in fact on the orthodox (note the small 'o') Christian side of things--and David Merrill is very on the money when he points back even further to the 1600s. Each of those several states had its own, separate Crown prior the American Revolution. Come 1775 to 1776, while those states united in a military sense, they did not utterly unite. It was commented in Congressional records from what I recall that "U" in "United" was distinct from 'united' to show a limited kind of uniting rather than one complete or total.

The idea of The United States of America or the United States being founded in 1776 seems to be a lie. The (plural) declarations of independence were made in 1775 if not also before. The United States according to respublic vs. sweers is a revamp of the United Colonies resulting from the Articles of Association of 1774--so much for the Weishaupt and secret sauce theory of the founding America.

If one really gets it, then obligations the British Monarchy had to anyone else ceased to have any significance in the former-colonies at the end of the America Revolution (except maybe for private businesses run by British concerns). Nonetheless, it seems the efforts between 1861 to 1870 and after was to put America under an ancient yoke.

Rhode Island.
Newport was a major slave hub and is said to be location of one the first prominent Masonic Lodge in America (it was most certainly not the Christian convivial club that is said to have typified lodges prior to Scottish Rite or Grant Orient being introduced into America). Note: prior to 1661, slavery was unlawful in all of the colonies.

[BLBereans]

IMHO, the "god" proclaimed by Muslims is not the same God of the Bible. Mohammad came from a polytheistic background and decided, through "divine revelation" to pick 1 of the many gods worshiped by his brethren (Allah) and proclaim that this is the ONLY true god. This is why Mohammad was rejected by both Jews and Christians during his "peaceful" campaign in Mecca. He turned violent when he found a willing and able army in Medina which conveniently happened to coincide with his "new" revelation of domination and forced conversion through jihad.

Those who continued the ways of the Pharisees ("jews" who reject Jesus the Christ as the prophetic Messiah) also worship an entity other than the God of the Bible. That is why Jesus himself told said Pharisees that they are of their father the devil. Satan is who they follow and worship - their "God".

The rejection of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ our LORD, is the ONLY test which denotes whether or not the True God is the One being evoked. Those who reject Him worship false god(s). Unitarianism, gnosticism, theosophy, hinduism, occultism, kabbalism, etc. ALL reject the truth of Jesus of Nazareth as LORD and Savior, therefore, they worship "other gods" which is a direct sin against the Pre-Existent One - The Creator of ALL things. Many of these belief sets claim that "God is everything and everything is God". This is a humanistic belief which was offered, and accepted, in the garden as the original lie. The belief that man can be equal to God is first lie where from ALL other lies derive.

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

If you do not know the TRUE Lord thy God, you cannot fulfill these two essential Commandments.

[Michael Joseph]

Not to throw stones, but I find it interesting that so many folks rely upon Names - as if God [the True God - the Eternal One] cares about a Moniker. Michael Joseph is a fiction. It is merely a tool of which relationships may be founded. Michael Joseph is not a WAY OF BEING. The Scriptures I read tell me that the The All in All is not a respecter of persons. Finding a name [moniker] a person [tool] or a fiction subject to some set of laws, how then can a claim be made about Monikers of God?

Isn't the truth closer to "ways of God"? Clearly we can know them by their fruits. How many have been slaughtered in the "name" of Christendom? How many more in the name of Islam? Shall we explore roots? Abraham fathered [established] both Isaac and Ishmael. A couple of weeks ago I was in a Mediterranean restaurant and I met a man who was of the Islamic faith. He asked of my faith and I told him I followed Christ. Paramount before me is Love. I then told him that in fact we are brothers of One Father Abraham. But as Jesus said before Abraham I AM. And who is Jesus? The Word. Now is Jesus some of the Word [according to Men] or all of it?

As for my house, I reject all monikers as God. What will we call God? Jacob asked the same question. For after struggling all night [in ignorance] he asked "what is your name?" And the response "For what cause do you seek my name?" I wonder that same question when I consider the control systems of religion and the false Idol placed in the temple of God - NAME. For what end does it serve mankind to know the proper name of the Eternal? It seems to me that this is just another way to perpetuate bloodshed upon the face of the earth.

For if man truly understood that name is Way of Being, then man would be more interested in the Way of Life and less interested in defining and confining and refining the Everliving - as if man could even do that! But nevertheless men march on to war in the Moniker of their "God" - marching to the tune of idolatry. For these men are NOT one with God. How could they be? For by their very words they profess that God is without them. Unwilling to take their thoughts and desires captive they go forth to slaughter their brothers and sisters in the moniker of their God - excuse me Idol. I wonder how long until Love replaces Hate in the Heart of man?

Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

How hard is it for one to accept that the Scriptures declare us to think ourselves equal with God? Who can lead save he who has humbled himself? For with much power comes much responsibility. It seems when I look around today that what I see is men [and women] seeking to get something for nothing by use of some certificate. We cannot abide laziness. Let us work to keep and guard and preserve the Common Faith while pushing on to Pentecost and Tabernacles!

What a horrific and wonderful revelation it was to realize that I [my lower mind] was standing in the temple of God showing myself to be God. In surrender one is raised O Excellent Theopollis - or Reuel. We must be careful to rightly divide else we may fall into superhero worship. Mergeance into El Elyon - one is Friend of God.


And now we see 1st Samuel 8. And the choice of mankind to place the created [another adam] at its head. Is this not Idolatry? What now of Church? How many sit at the feet of pastors who do nothing but destroy the pleasant vineyard of God? I see a relationship between a man and a beautiful woman. The beautiful woman is society or laity. And the man is politician or pastor. Both the same model. And He speaks softly to this woman telling her "its going to be okay baby - I will ensure your safety and change is going to be for the good." But we both know these are lies and the woman being excited in her emotions - for she wants to believe - gives him a 2nd and 3rd ..... chance to make good on his many lies. Hoping against hope that their superhero will win the day! Always looking without her windows she cries at the doorstep wondering why oh why does he treat me this way. And yet, she takes the abuse for He speaks in the NAME of her God.

Is he not the Leader of the Cult of Personality?

I would hope that we can move away from judging each other and come to see the truth which lies behind the different systems of names. For there is a truth. And knowing and doing that truth sets one free. For instance Jesus told the masses don't pray to me and what do the masses do? The very opposite. Jesus said "of myself I can do nothing" but what do the masses do? They worship him. But Jesus said "Ye shall do greater than I." And now I wonder how can this be as long as one prostrates himself in do nothingness under the feet [false understanding] of pastors who do nothing but keep the world in a constant state of false hope. I see these as Agents of Satan in the pulpit. They seek their Own self in Power and Prestige and Office. These are finely clothed in riches.

This is the Rich Man of which came to Jesus in the Scripture. For knowing the Law and following it, Jesus told him go sell everything you have and come follow Me. And Jesus leads one INWARD. But this Rich Man is addicted to outward riches - fame, power and desire. How will he find Himself? And what of his Inner Child? Can this Rich Man be as Jacob and go "all in" going headlong into Egypt?

For just as Islam has its 72 Virgins so to does a Hebrew Israelite [One who has crossed over]! Are we ready for Shin-Mem or Shin-Mem-Yod-Mem. Sweet the rains new fall - Sun Lit from Heaven..... let the latter rain fall.

Psa 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.


Finding the only one I can try to change is Me, I shall have no other gods before Me. Rightly dividing the Word, is it no wonder that Carnality cannot understand for it seeks only its Own? Is it now time to "leave it all behind and face the truth?"

Two Suns in the Sunset - Let us all Finish the Race! Can we have the courage to Co-create our Will or will we continue to live under and within the Dream and Vision of men who died 1000 years ago? Can we have the courage to bind the little foxes that spoil the vine to overcome OUR SELF? With eyes on Christ, Peter walked on Water.


Quoting Zimmy: "Though the rules of the road have been lodged, its only peoples games you have to dodge"....

[marcel]

What state?

Massachusetts. I did online request here https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/f...public/request
and got the oath 5 days later. For "Agency" I selected "Dept of Justice - Office of Information Policy"
There is no fee.

[David Merrill]

Massachusetts. I did online request here https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/f...public/request
and got the oath 5 days later. For "Agency" I selected "Dept of Justice - Office of Information Policy"
There is no fee.

Please scan the oath of office and find the CODE or constitutional stipulations that are violated. If you don't want to embarrass the "judge" run it through Paint and sanitize it a little first.


P.S. I thought of you while snorkeling yesterday...

[allodial]

Not to throw stones, but I find it interesting that so many folks rely upon Names - as if God [the True God - the Eternal One] cares about a Moniker. Michael Joseph is a fiction. It is merely a tool of which relationships may be founded. Michael Joseph is not a WAY OF BEING. The Scriptures I read tell me that the The All in All is not a respecter of persons. Finding a name [moniker] a person [tool] or a fiction subject to some set of laws, how then can a claim be made about Monikers of God?

READERS: ANYONE WHO WANTS YOUR PRAYERS OR SPIRITUAL WARFARE TO BE CRIPPLED OR USELESS WANTS GET YOU TO STOP USING OR SAYING THE NAME!

The name matters very much. It means so much that many have conspired to hide or conceal the name (by taking control over Sunday schools and educational literature, etc.) I'll solve part of a 'riddle' for you:

Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 7:21-23

One reason behind Matthew 7:21-23 is that they are using titles "lord, lord" rather than using the name. The name being given and refusal to apply it is regarded as a sin (see Parable of the Talents). AFAIK, the term "god" is not necessarily a name, it regarded to be a title or points to a role or office. Yehoshua has {Note that 'eyeh'/'yeh' is encoded at the front of the name and that he specifically said he comes in his Father's name...} Specificity serves to is to prevent confusion with Canaanite gods. Of course, those who want to lead the sheep to the dragon's mouth will wish to blur the distinctions. There are those who suggest "all roads lead to God". There is a guy who has a series of videos on the book of Revelations, he seems to have a lot of "I think" mixed in there but he has reached the conclusion that effectively are only two roads: one is to the Great Dragon and one is to the Tree of Life. The distinction is in the specificity. So perhaps it is true in the sense that: 99.9999% of the roads lead you to the left hand and a specific, narrow path leads you to the Tree of Life? And perhaps that is exactly the message the OT and the NT paints.

Consider the statement, "Everyone should wear allegiance to the president." --what exactly do you mean by 'the president'. If you are not specific you might wind up as a subject of the Philippines. The same ambiguity games are played in the United States with jurisdictional names. When you say 'state of Missouri', what exactly do you mean because specificity means a lot!

Elijah dealt with the ambiguity crowd too:

If it didn't matter, 1 Kings 18 would not have been written for our edification.

A hungry dragon wanting to be fed will tell you lies to get you down in its gullet. Have fun with ambiguity? "Baal" means 'lord' (it is a title, as explained in the KJV "the LORD" refers to a specific name it does not mean "god" or "him" or "the awesome one" or "lord". Elijah specifically addressed the 'titles only' ambiguity crowd. The reason they do not like names is because of the power in the name. Casting out evil spirits or praying or healing "in the name of the lord" does not comply with scriptural requirements. Of course, since they want you to fail they discourage you from using the name, and hope you will simply stop believing rather than getting wise to the deception.

For a more clear picture of who Yehoshua was and is or to see the connection between the OT and the NT:

And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night. Exodus 13:21

And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent... Matthew 27:51

"Thou wentest forth with the YESHA [variant of ESHUA-Jesus] of [or for] thy people; with YESHUA thy MESSIAH [thine Anointed One: i.e., with Jesus thy Anointed] thou woundest the head of the house of the wicked one..." Habakkuk 3:13 (literal translation)

And thou shalt call his name Jesus (SALVATION = YESHUA);for he shall save [salvage] his people from their sins! Isaiah 53:1-12

Related:

• Jesus (Yehoshua) Already Stood On the Mount of Olives (of course, it could happen again)
• The Name of JESUS in the Old Testament

[David Merrill]

Fibonacci in the Golden Rectangle...

[xparte]

Is it realistic Gods will if one does the will of God he certainly has no free will? A particularly interesting one is the fact that we don't choose our brain.
Well what about your little brain? Did you choose how it would govern the unconscious processes of your existence?None of what makes us up, is up to us.It seems like we are making decisions, but it is very likely that your brain is making them for you, and then you are becoming aware of them after they have already been made.You only have the free will to the extent of knowing what you are.. nothing more [IMHO].Its no news that we take things too seriously Names our Audience & Authorities . We over think to the point where we become anxious. We over analyze and overvalue things to the point of depression.God gave us conciliation as to become like him or posses that nature>who can we claim makes GOD jealous spiteful or judgmental. Start enjoying that will or his nature and its a long walk home for jealous spiteful and judgmental our three old friends or the fallen will ."determined to act" instead of "chosen to act." determinism and choice are much closer than they might appear. ACTORS then APPEARANCE ones Pride Predestines who? A greater debate is the naked truth.

[Michael Joseph]

Is it realistic Gods will if one does the will of God he certainly has no free will? A particularly interesting one is the fact that we don't choose our brain.
Well what about your little brain? Did you choose how it would govern the unconscious processes of your existence?None of what makes us up, is up to us.It seems like we are making decisions, but it is very likely that your brain is making them for you, and then you are becoming aware of them after they have already been made.You only have the free will to the extent of knowing what you are.. nothing more [IMHO].Its no news that we take things too seriously Names our Audience & Authorities . We over think to the point where we become anxious. We over analyze and overvalue things to the point of depression.God gave us conciliation as to become like him or posses that nature>who can we claim makes GOD jealous spiteful or judgmental. Start enjoying that will or his nature and its a long walk home for jealous spiteful and judgmental our three old friends or the fallen will ."determined to act" instead of "chosen to act." determinism and choice are much closer than they might appear. ACTORS then APPEARANCE ones Pride Predestines who? A greater debate is the naked truth.

E. Swedenborg relates a story of his witness between a group of spirits who were fashioning a lamp stand for Father El Elyon. Whilst fashioning said lamp stand they were so very pleased with themselves as they imagined every little detail in hopes of creating something wonderful to present to the King. As he looked on at this scene he was allowed to know that their work while thought to be of their own free will was in fact allowed of them of our Father. When an angel [messenger] was dispatched to inform these spirits of this truth, being that they were in the state of Love, they immediately saw the truth and they praised Father even more.

[David Merrill]

Is it realistic Gods will if one does the will of God he certainly has no free will? A particularly interesting one is the fact that we don't choose our brain.
Well what about your little brain? Did you choose how it would govern the unconscious processes of your existence?None of what makes us up, is up to us.It seems like we are making decisions, but it is very likely that your brain is making them for you, and then you are becoming aware of them after they have already been made.You only have the free will to the extent of knowing what you are.. nothing more [IMHO].Its no news that we take things too seriously Names our Audience & Authorities . We over think to the point where we become anxious. We over analyze and overvalue things to the point of depression.God gave us conciliation as to become like him or posses that nature>who can we claim makes GOD jealous spiteful or judgmental. Start enjoying that will or his nature and its a long walk home for jealous spiteful and judgmental our three old friends or the fallen will ."determined to act" instead of "chosen to act." determinism and choice are much closer than they might appear. ACTORS then APPEARANCE ones Pride Predestines who? A greater debate is the naked truth.

E. Swedenborg relates a story of his witness between a group of spirits who were fashioning a lamp stand for Father El Elyon. Whilst fashioning said lamp stand they were so very pleased with themselves as they imagined every little detail in hopes of creating something wonderful to present to the King. As he looked on at this scene he was allowed to know that their work while thought to be of their own free will was in fact allowed of them of our Father. When an angel [messenger] was dispatched to inform these spirits of this truth, being that they were in the state of Love, they immediately saw the truth and they praised Father even more.

It is surprising.

I invented a time machine when I was forty. More like I discovered time is an illusion, or at best like Allodial has pointed out; a mutually agreed-upon holographic construct. My fantasy has been to go back in time with what I know now. My invention has delivered something better. I have sixty years of experience and memories in a sixteen-year old brain!

Neuroregenesis, I call it.

Mostly it is curcumin, in turmeric juiced with gangala ginger (pepper increases absorption past the blood-brain barrier). I am convinced that with some other treatments I have been doing since Fukushima that I have discovered spiritual ascension is assisted biochemically.

[xparte]

There is a common misconception that arises from the use of the phrase "free will" without proper definition. "Free" in the context of "free will" is usually used to mean "unfettered" as in "unfettered will", this clearly is a logical impossibility, since I can have the "will" to float over my couch unaided, but I cannot fulfill that will. So, "free will" in an objective, non-theological sense, does not mean the ability to do everything I wish, instead it means something closer to "I am free to desire anything". In a theological sense, especially in the Biblical context it means something importantly different.

"Free will" in the Biblical context usually more precisely refers to the question of "Are humans free to choose to do good vs evil?" or "Is a person unhindered in choosing their eternal destination (heaven or hell)?" We can see that narrowing the question down immediately makes it easier to find an answer in the text of the Bible.The mark of one who is dead is utter inability to do, think, feel, decide, or anything other than.. well, rot and stink. A dead person has no will, and a spiritually dead person has no spiritual will. So, we can see right away that we definitely do not have an unfettered will, nor an unhindered will. We are slaves to sin, and sin has domain over our will and therefore our actions. This is why we need God to be the initiator, and why Christ says that he leaves the 99 sheep that are safe to go find and rescue the one that is lost. (Notice that it is us who are lost, not Christ, and we are not the ones who go out to look for and find Christ, it is He who finds us.) But again, Paul sheds some clarity in this, by quoting from the Old Testament.So, before being saved and redeemed, our will is only continually desiring evil, all the time. And it is only the common grace of God that restrains evil men from being as evil as they could be, and doing the evil they wish to do. This explains why we haven't wiped ourselves off the face of the earth in our evil. So again, our will is not unhindered, it is enslaved to sin. And whats a biblical sin and a modern sin both enjoy slavery .Bible documents mans sin its greatest industry what will eventually just hold a bible as just a human research account. Enterprise is the virtue of will God is sovereign over all creation, including the will of man, it does not actually mean that He controls the will of man at all times. knowing everything that will happen is not the same as causing everything to happen. Though, again, God is sovereign, and omniscient, I just wanted to clarify that these things are not the same.

In summary, we do have a will, but it is bounded by what is possible, and the common grace of God, who does not allow us to be as evil as we could be, and as slaves to sin, we definitely do not have free will. Even after redemption, our will is a result of the new nature He gives us, the new heart (which is a Biblical metaphor for "desires", ie, the fruit of our will) so in a sense, even after being freed from sin, we still do not have a truly "free" will, it is still bounded by what is possible and by the sovereignty of God. So when God controls the believer's decisions, it is because the believer has invited God to work through them . This control is something accepted by faith. A fear of God is what we control if its measured its at free will .

[David Merrill]

There is a common misconception that arises from the use of the phrase "free will" without proper definition. "Free" in the context of "free will" is usually used to mean "unfettered" as in "unfettered will", this clearly is a logical impossibility, since I can have the "will" to float over my couch unaided, but I cannot fulfill that will. So, "free will" in an objective, non-theological sense, does not mean the ability to do everything I wish, instead it means something closer to "I am free to desire anything". In a theological sense, especially in the Biblical context it means something importantly different.

"Free will" in the Biblical context usually more precisely refers to the question of "Are humans free to choose to do good vs evil?" or "Is a person unhindered in choosing their eternal destination (heaven or hell)?" We can see that narrowing the question down immediately makes it easier to find an answer in the text of the Bible.The mark of one who is dead is utter inability to do, think, feel, decide, or anything other than.. well, rot and stink. A dead person has no will, and a spiritually dead person has no spiritual will. So, we can see right away that we definitely do not have an unfettered will, nor an unhindered will. We are slaves to sin, and sin has domain over our will and therefore our actions. This is why we need God to be the initiator, and why Christ says that he leaves the 99 sheep that are safe to go find and rescue the one that is lost. (Notice that it is us who are lost, not Christ, and we are not the ones who go out to look for and find Christ, it is He who finds us.) But again, Paul sheds some clarity in this, by quoting from the Old Testament.So, before being saved and redeemed, our will is only continually desiring evil, all the time. And it is only the common grace of God that restrains evil men from being as evil as they could be, and doing the evil they wish to do. This explains why we haven't wiped ourselves off the face of the earth in our evil. So again, our will is not unhindered, it is enslaved to sin. And whats a biblical sin and a modern sin both enjoy slavery .Bible documents mans sin its greatest industry what will eventually just hold a bible as just a human research account. Enterprise is the virtue of will God is sovereign over all creation, including the will of man, it does not actually mean that He controls the will of man at all times. knowing everything that will happen is not the same as causing everything to happen. Though, again, God is sovereign, and omniscient, I just wanted to clarify that these things are not the same.

In summary, we do have a will, but it is bounded by what is possible, and the common grace of God, who does not allow us to be as evil as we could be, and as slaves to sin, we definitely do not have free will. Even after redemption, our will is a result of the new nature He gives us, the new heart (which is a Biblical metaphor for "desires", ie, the fruit of our will) so in a sense, even after being freed from sin, we still do not have a truly "free" will, it is still bounded by what is possible and by the sovereignty of God. So when God controls the believer's decisions, it is because the believer has invited God to work through them . This control is something accepted by faith. A fear of God is what we control if its measured its at free will .

Thank you for that post. It is good to hash this out now and again.

This sounds hedonistic, but to me free will is the choice to feel guilty or not. Conscience is what decides what is worthy of guilt. Sin is the emotion of guilt, not the action.

I spoke to somebody today who ascribes to ACIM. I showed the finding of fact that Bill and John were dosing Helen with LSD. My only twang of guilt was that this fellow might become scared or angry about what I presented. Then I might feel guilty about turning what is allegedly a good experience (loving) into a fearful one.

It has always been so easy to forgive Bill and John because they were products of the Cold War and dosed people with LSD as part of their military duties. Then the perfect laboratory (Helen) came along and she trustingly sipped her morning tea with Bill.






It took me a lot longer to forgive Ken, who had already made millions on erroneous interpretation of the Text. He died in 2013 but MK-ULTRA was declassified in 2001 so there was twelve years for him to expose the truth and to adjust his teachings according to the findings of fact.

I did finally forgive Ken though. But as I sit in class I realize that he has caused fear to guard falsity in people who otherwise seek peace, joy and love. So I don't bring up LSD as a rule.



P.S. In five years of study groups I have found only one or two people who seem to have acquired a sustainable "Holy Instant". The rest are there to gripe why they cannot, or more commonly why it has to be in their future and not now or in their past.

I presume it is due to the "Wapnicult of Nihilism" as I call it. Ken's teaching that reality is a dream.

Row, Row, Row your Boat...

[allodial]

Re: the will of God
There are some who see God as a micromanager of their lives when it comes to "doing the will of God". I see the will of God as more of you work with the Original Plan or you work against it. You love your neighbor as you love yourself (hopefully you love yourself to start!) or you don't. Love of course in the sense of a kind that stems out of sound mind and sound morals and sound doctrine (i.e. having sex with your hog isn't the kind of love of discussion). The automaton, Divine micromanager "What sock do I put on first? What hand should I put out first to get the sock?" view, I don't see as scriptural.

I've met people who would swear up and down they were doing the will of God when they abandoned their children, mistreated their husband, stole money from people regardless of the admonition to put duty to family before duty to the secular or to put the body of Christ before the secular.

If you were to hate your neighbor and yourself, perhaps you'd not be doing God's will?