Issued: 6/17/24

“I have kept silent from ages past; I have been quiet and restrained Myself.”

Isaiah 42:14

PLEASE NOTE:  Because Bible versions sometimes differ from each other in crucial ways, the version quoted here will be the one that best clarifies the point being made.  For a quick comparison between versions, please go to: http://www.biblehub.com.

   All bracketed material may be authorial comments, attempts at proper syntax, or minimal rewordings of Scripture for the sake of clarity and continuity.  These emendations will not be italicized.

   The “/” will be used to signify “and/or.”  The symbol “↔” is used to connect verses corroborating each other and so establishing doctrinal truths (Matthew 18:16↔2Corinthians 13:1).

   In differentiating between Yahweh Son [Jesus] and Yahweh Father [the Most High God], lower case letters have been used when discussing the former; upper case letters are reserved for the Only and Most High God.  Since Jesus was at pains to differentiate himself from Father, we have followed his lead here.

   The term neo-Christians will be used to differentiate between false Christians and Jesus’ true followers.

The “Because He Thought So, It Must Come to Pass” Argument

   There is a notion in predestination that if Father conceives anything in His Mind, it must come to pass. Scripture argues differently: In order for things to come to pass, He must command them out loud. Thus Genesis 1:3 is the only record in Scripture when He did so: “Let there be Light“; whereupon Yahweh Son came into being (Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14). Every other time in Scripture when Father formulated a thought, someone else expressed it for Him: Either the voiceless Holy Spirit (John 16:13; 1Corinthians 2:10); some heavenly being (Matthew 3:17; Mark 9:7; Luke 3:22); but most of the time His chosen “Word/Verb,” Yahweh Son/Jesus (John 1:11↔Revelation 19:13; 1Timothy 2:5). The Matthew, Mark and Luke verses obviously exclude Jesus: He was the person being exalted from on high yet silent throughout. We will return to this ‘speaking synergy’ presently.

   What is important is the recognition that the being/soul/essence or what-have-you within Jesus’ mortal body was the pre-existent Yahweh Son. This much is clear from Jesus’ comments in John 8:56-58, 17:5: In the former, Jesus was alluding to his personal interactions with Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3,7, 15:1-7, 17:1-8, 18:1,13-14,25↔John 5:22, etc.); while in the latter to the glory of being chosen Father‘s proxy God/Creator before the world was. Thus to say Jesus was born in whatever historical year may be true in relation to his body but untrue in relation to his indwelling self.

   Peter then tells us that Jesus’ crucifixion was a done deal even before sin entered the world (1Peter 1:20); and he too uses the word “destined/foreordained” in the sense of being “foreknown.” Though there is no Scriptural record of Father‘s negotiations with Son at that stage, it makes sense that Father made Jesus aware Creation would go to pot once Satan came into being. The reader may ask, “why was Satan created in the first place?”; but lacking chapter and verse, one may surmise that Father wanted angels and men to have free will in order to be worshipped the way meaningful to Him: Spiritually and wholeheartedly (Jeremiah 29:13; John 4:23-24). What gives credence to this interpretation is that neither Satan nor his ‘unspiritual’ children, even though relishing lording it over others [a no-no in Christian doctrine↔Matthew 20:25-26], give a hoot about the sincerity of their subjects’ worship, but only that they grovel powerless at their feet. As evidence, we have had breathing and walking ‘demos’ in all human endeavors, social strata, and nationalities to this day.

   Later statements in Scripture fill in the gaps. If men were to be deprived of grace for being sinful and disobedient, Jesus was willing to remain free from sin and obedient to the end in order to redeem those ‘sick’ but wishing to be healed (Luke 5:31-32; Romans 5:14-21), a personal commitment Father found worth rewarding (Isaiah 53:4-12; John 6:39, 10:11,17-18; Hebrews 10:5-10; 1Peter 2:21-25). In the process Father would cut Jesus no slack (Isaiah 53:10; John 18:11): Nepotism may be de rigueur amongst mortal powers that be, but not for a God priding Himself in having no favorites (Deuteronomy 10:17; Job 34:19; Acts 2:39, 10:34-35). Thus Jesus had to bite the bullet like all sinners if he was to have the moral high ground to inspire/lead them (Hebrews 2:10, 5:7-10). Beloved Son that he was, he did not have an easy time of it.

The Silent Father and the Speaking Son

   Isaiah 42:14 is one of those verses, like Genesis 1:3, Deuteronomy 32:35,39↔Romans 12:19, and Revelation 16:17, we may attribute to Father rather than Son. Deuteronomy 32:39 clearly differentiates a God claiming to have/serve no higher gods from a Son who does (John 14:28; Revelation 3:12↔1Corinthians 15:24-28). But while Genesis 1:3 is a fait accompli and Deuteronomy 32:39 a statement of fact, both Deuteronomy 32:35 and Revelation 16:17 express objectives to be accomplished at a future date; as such, they constitute unspoken intentions rather than realities.

   Words make actions possible: What remains unspoken in the mind does not automatically find expression in the external; likewise, what Father thinks does not immediately take place unless He utters that thought. This is the gist of Romans 4:17: “God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.” It was that ‘verbal’ power Father bestowed on Son to bring about the rest of Creation (Hebrews 1:2), while at the same time living up to His commitment to remain silent for the duration of human history (Isaiah 42:14).

   Hence the necessity for “Word,” or Son as Father‘s proxy God (John 1:2; Revelation 19:13); for Son could quote Father without events coming to pass the moment Son uttered them. The clearest example of this is in Genesis 22. In verse 22:1, “God” decides to test Abraham’s faith, though it is unclear whether “God” refers to Father or to proxy God Son; however, it has to have been Son who directly asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Verse 22:11 identifies the being who made that request as “the Angel of Yahweh.” This is no run-of-the-mill angel: Except for Son, all angels are subordinate to him (Hebrews 1:5-14). Proving Paul’s assertion in Hebrews 1:14, we have Revelation 22:8-9, where an angel tells John he is a fellow servant with him, “with your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book.” ¹

   In Verse 22:12, the “angel” tells Abraham that by not refusing to sacrifice Isaac, the Patriarch has proven he fears not the angel himself but God the Father—the only Being Jesus instructed should be feared (Matthew 10:28). Why? Because Jesus is not the destroyer of bodies and souls at Armageddon: Father is (Revelation 20:9); and because Father only listens to those who take Him at His word (Isaiah 66:2; John 9:31). It is He Who runs the show: Jesus is only the implementer of Father‘s will (John 5:19); and only in this specific sense, they are one (John 10:30). Verse 22:15 again identifies Son/Angel of Yahweh by the fact he is speaking; but in verse 22:16, Son quotes Father verbatim: As Paul tells us in Hebrews 6:13-18, it was the Most High God [↔Deuteronomy 32:39; Isaiah 44:8] Who made the promise to Abraham, which excludes lower ranking Son↔John 14:28].

   Thus a dynamic was set in place: Son could repeat Father‘s instructions (John 7:16, 12:49) and express his own mindset without either coming to pass the moment Son uttered them. Notable examples of the latter are found in Genesis 6:7 and Jonah 3:1-4: Yahweh Son proclaimed destruction yet repented and did not carry through. Such a turnaround would have been inconceivable with Father: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has he said, and He won’t do it? Or has He spoken, and he won’t make it good” (Numbers 23:19)? While these have been interpreted as Biblical contradictions, they never were in the sense we have explained them; plus they serve even a more important objective: To differentiate between Yahweh King, Who never changes His mind (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17), and His Redeemer, Yahweh Son, who on occasion does. That Father gave Son His own name is the gist of Exodus 23:21↔Hebrews 1:5-9; and that there are two Yahwehs in Scripture, One passive and the other acting in lieu of but subservient to the former, is the gist of Isaiah 44:6↔1Corinthians 15:24-28↔Revelation 3:12.²

   We conclude, then, that Son was appointed Father‘s sole ‘voice’/Spokesperson (1Timothy 2:5↔Hebrews 13:8): During his preexistence as the interactive God of the Old Testament [↔Isaiah 33:22, 35:4, 43:1, 54:5; Ezekiel 34:11,17,20]; during his earthly ministry as Jesus of Nazareth (John 7:16, 12:49); and post-resurrection as the “anointer” of the Holy Spirit teaching men Father‘s “hidden wisdom” (John 15:26, 16:13; 1Corinthians 2:10; 1John 2:27). Throughout all these phases, Father remained silent and detached, perpetually unseen/unheard by men (John 1:18, 5:37; 1Timothy 1:17); whereas Son was seen and heard in a variety of settings (Genesis 32:24-30↔Hosea 12:4; Exodus 3:6, 24:11; Numbers 12:8; Deuteronomy 4:12,33; Isaiah 6:5; etc.). This dynamic had been outlined in Genesis 41:40,43-44,55: Pharaoh and Joseph being shadow to the substance of Father and Son [↔John 14:28; 1Corinthians 15:24-28; Revelation 3:12], it was higher-ranking Pharaoh appointed Joseph as his plenipotentiary steward over his people (Genesis 41:55↔Matthew 17:5; Hebrews 3:6).³

   If we go back to Isaiah 42:14, “I have kept silent from ages past; I have remained quiet and restrained,” Father is informing us, through an intermediary, that in future He plans to punish and do away with Son‘s enemies (Deuteronomy 32:35; Psalms 110:1) according to His own timetable (Acts 1:7) unbeknownst to Jesus, angels and men (Mark 13:31-32), except the Holy Spirit (1Corinthians 2:10-11↔John 16:13). This timetable comprises times which were/are allotted to Jews and Gentiles for reconciliation (Acts 17:30 and Luke 21:24, respectively), better known in Biblical parlance as the “time of grace.” Psalms 69:13, Isaiah 49:8 and Zephaniah 2:2-3 tell us that grace has an expiration date, possibly the day and hour when Revelation 16:17 will be uttered—possibly by Father since the voice comes from His heavenly throne.

   And here again we see that although notions of grace and allotted times were in Father‘s mind, they were conceived to implement/escape human choices; thus pre-emptying predestination arbitrarily consigning people to doom. Father and Son are in the business of trying to save rather than destroy souls (Ezekiel 33:11; Luke 9:56): Men are the ones gung-ho on doing away with non-compliers, especially professed ‘Christians’ [↔Luke 9:53-56; Titus 1:16]. Without question Father will incinerate souls at Armageddon (Matthew 10:28; Hebrews 10:27,31; Revelation 20:9), but not before exhausting every possibility of appealing to transgressors to change behaviors of choice (Ezekiel 2:5, 3:18-21; John 15:22-24). Even in the laws of men, guilt and punishment are predicated on transgressors having known right from wrong; and Father has chosen to follow that template (Romans 3:20, 4:15, 5:13; 1John 3:4).

Satan’s Propagandists

   Augustine pushed the envelope of misrepresenting Father even further: The God Who prided Himself in not being a respecter of persons (Deuteronomy 10:17; Acts 10:34↔Matthew 5:45) had in Augustine’s view, become “particularized in [His] care for the elect“; suggesting that the ‘un-elected’ were arbitrarily and irremissibly left ‘un-particularized’—i.e, bereft of Father. And while at it, being a trailblazer within the ranks of Babylon the Great’s theologians, why not argue that unbaptized, newborn/stillborn babies who neither aware nor culpable of sinful acts could be sent to hell [which does not exist, by the way] as an example of Father‘s sense of justice? Augustine himself struggled with sexual desires and like Paul felt tainted by them (Romans 7:20-25);⁴ while ignoring Paul’s crucial point that though sin ruled his body, Paul’s mind had the choice to serve God.

   Adam’s and Eve’s “original sin” was not sex but disobedience: An ‘un-predestined’ decision because they were given a choice to comply or disobey (Genesis 2:17, 3:2-3). Yet though their choice made them sinful, it does not follow that their souls were equally tainted; and while the Roman Catholic dogma of the Immaculate Conception favors the notion that Father betrayed His impartiality by keeping the taint of parental sex from infecting Mary’s soul while in the womb, it never occurred to Catholic theologians that impartial Father—had He chosen to—would have extended the same privilege to every human soul. And somehow suggesting that souls came equipped with choices and vetted in utero, we have Psalms 22:9-10, 58:3, 71:6, 139:13-16, from which Paul extrapolated Galatians 1:15; to wit, a body tainted by sin but a soul free to choose serving Father or not.

   That being said, there was a point to Augustine’s ramblings with a basis in fact: The matter of the a remnant chosen by grace, not by deeds (Isaiah 1:9, 10:21-23, 37:31-32; Jeremiah 50:20; Ezekiel 6:8, 14:22; Joel 2:32; Romans 9:27, 11:5-15). According to Paul, Jews had been blinded to Father‘s truths because of their intransigent commitment to Mosaic traditions [↔2Corinthians 3:15-16]; but even if such Father-imposed blindness technically damned them (Mark 8:38), Paul was arguing for the time when they would be re-integrated into the Judeo-Christian nation irrespective of predestination.  His evidence for that was Ezekiel 37:19-28:

“This is what the Sovereign Yahweh [not Son, but Father↔Isaiah 44:6] says: ‘I am going to take the stick of Joseph—which is in Ephraim’s hand—and of the Israelite tribes associated with him, and join it to Judah’s [Jesus’ tribe↔Hebrews 7:14] stick. I will make them into a single stick of wood, and they will become one in My hand.’ Hold before their eyes the sticks you have written on and say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Yahweh says: I will take the Israelites out of the nations where they have gone…and bring them back into their own land. I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. There will be one king over all of them and they will never again be two nations [i.e., Jews and Christians] or be divided into two kingdoms. They will no longer defile themselves with their idols and vile images or with any of their offenses, for I will save them from all their sinful backsliding, and I will cleanse them. They will be my people, and I will be their God.'”

“My servant David [Revelation 3:7, 22:16↔Isaiah 22:20-23] will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow My laws and be careful to keep My decrees. They will live in the land I gave to My servant Jacob, the land where your ancestors lived.⁵ They and their children and their children’s children will live there forever, and David My servant (1Corinthians 15:24-28; Revelation 3:12) will be their prince forever. I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant. I will establish them and increase their numbers, and I will put My sanctuary among them forever. My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be My people (Isaiah 9:7; Revelation 21:3). Then the nations [the redeemed the world over↔Revelation 5:9-10] will know that I the Lord make Israel holy, when My sanctuary is among them forever.”

   And all of the above is substantiated by the fact that despite everything, Father loves ethnic Jews on account of their never-defaulting progenitors, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the promises He made to them (Romans 11:28-29). Which is not to say that many Jews from Cain until end-times will not perish at Armageddon, but certainly unwelcomed news for the anti-Semitic/evangelical propagandists in our midst who want to eradicate the whole of their race for whatever prejudices. And which proves Father‘s point, does it not, that not all bad apples need be discarded if some portion of them can be salvaged?—though never the case with the rotten ones to the core. It is precisely that ‘salvageable’ portion which Father saw fit, before Creation, to consider worthy of a second chance; not because He made them ‘crooked,’ but because if they took steps to correct their ‘crookedness’ in the course of history, why not help make them whole?

Final Words

   In short, there is no predestination: There are consequences for personal actions freely chosen/acted upon during people’s lifetimes; and in Father‘s playbook those actions pre-qualify people either for redemption [“vessels of mercy”] or for incineration [“vessels of wrath”] at Armageddon (Matthew 13:49-50; Revelation 20:7-10,14-15↔Psalms 68:2; Proverbs 5:11-14; Isaiah 13:8). Faith is no divine gift: It is the one wholly human asset that places the onus of guilt on us rather than external factors—including Satan and his demons, both of which human choice/determination can resist (James 4:7). Consequently we are neither predestined to sin, nor to believe or disbelieve. Whatever we get is what we sowed (Galatians 6:7↔Job 4:8; 2Corinthians 9:6).

   As a rule of thumb, extrapolating from John 15:18-19 and 1John 4:5-6, any person past, present or future who is held in high regard by the world at large, is Father‘s enemy and ours too. Consequently, when considering any type of church dogma, remember we were instructed to tune out secular/religious leaders (Psalms 146:3), for our enemies are to be found in our midst—be them relatives, religious congregations, or fellow citizens (Matthew 10:36↔Acts 20:30; 1Corinthians 11:19; 1John 2:19). Here too we are presented with a choice: Get the truth directly from Father (Jeremiah 33:3; Luke 11:13; James 1:5-8), or embrace the convenient, self-serving dogmas secular/religious leaders feed us which are far more pleasing than Father‘s truths [↔Isaiah 30:9-10; Ezekiel 33:31-32].

   Augustine, Calvin and even Luther, however lionized they are, each contributed to doctrines and divisions which continue to plague Jesus’ Church to this day. None of them was predestined to betray their commission: If they chose to, it was in the service not of Heaven but of institutions/men/egos furthering individual agendas. And neither were we, readers, predestined to follow their lead. If we do and fall into the traps they and their ilk unwittingly set for themselves and us, let us be authentic enough to own up to choices not forced upon us by Father but wholly of our own devising.

¹ This “angel” was Yahweh Son Angel proxy God/Jesus, Jacob’s God (Genesis 48:15-16); the Angel/God speaking to Moses from inside the burning bush (Exodus 3:2-6); and Paul’s ‘owner/master’ (Acts 27:23).  It was he who inhabited all the holy of holies built by men, something that Father would never have done (Acts 7:48, 17:24↔Isaiah 66:1).

² Further elucidating Father‘s and Son‘s separate and distinct identities, we have Hosea 7:13 and 11:7. In the first, Redeemer Son accuses his people of speaking falsehoods about him, which is exactly what Judeo-Christians do who believe him and Father to be the same person [i.e., Trinitarian Dogma] and worship him as such. And corroborating that misplaced worship, Father speaks to us through His Holy Spirit [↔John 16:13] in Hosea 11:7: “For My people are determined to desert Me. They call Me the Most High, but they don’t truly honor Me”—which would not be true, would it, if Jesus were the Most High God he clearly told us he was not (Matthew 10:28↔Revelation 20:9; John 14:28↔Revelation 3:12). All of these prove the error of Trinitarian dogma.

Please refer to http://www.biblehub.com and see how many translations perpetuate the error and feed Judeo-Christian apostasy.

³ Joseph was an early symbol for Jesus, so the parallels between them are many. Like Jesus, Joseph was betrayed by his brothers out of envy and sold for price (Genesis 37:11,28↔Mark 15:10; Matthew 26:14-15↔Zechariah 11:12). Whereas Joseph was identified by his multicolored coat (Genesis 37:3,32), Angel proxy God Son was identified by his rainbow [↔Genesis 9:13; Revelation 10:1-2↔Revelation 5:5-7; please note Jesus takes book from Father’s right hand, his stated position in Scripture while never sitting on Father’s throne (Psalms 110:1; Acts 7:56; Hebrews 1:3)] as well as symbolically by his ‘plumage’ (Ezekiel 17:3). Like Jesus, Joseph was to be Pharaoh’s proxy ruler over land of Egypt, a Scriptural symbol for the world at large (Matthew 28:18; Revelation 3:7↔Isaiah 22:22). Finally, like Jesus, Joseph was 30 years old when he started his stewardship (Genesis 41:46↔Luke 3:23).

⁴ Paul himself struggled with the desires of this flesh (Romans 7:20-25), like everybody else (James 5:17). Roman Catholic obsession with sex can be found in its conflation of Onan’s actions (Genesis 38:9) and a spin on the Commandment not to commit adultery, which has literal (Luke 16:18) and figurative meanings (Judges 2:17; Jeremiah 2:20, 3:13) transcending the purely sexual. To the Catholic ear it may sound pretty to say that sex is an expression of love for one’s spouse or a beautiful means of procreation; when in reality Paul warned keeping intercourse to a minimum if celibacy could not be an option (1Corinthians 7:1-6); copulation was subordinate to procreation even amongst animals who did not invest it with high-minded notions (Genesis 1:28); and Solomon found a more pedestrian use for it (Ecclesiastes 9:9).

⁵ Food for thought, since neither Canaan nor modern Israel was/is Jesus’ Kingdom not of this world (John 18:36). We must consider the argument we put forth in the essay As Much as We Know About Paradise: That the Old Testament’s ‘promised land,’ beside the shadow vs. substance connotations, somehow lay above the eternal and pre-existent foundation [Genesis 1:2; 2Samuel 22:16; Psalms 18:15↔Revelation 16:18-20] where Father‘s Kingdom will manifest itself after all things are burned away (Amos 9:15; Micah 1:4; 2Peter 3:7,10-11).

   And perhaps this is the intended meaning of Jeremiah 32, not that Hanamel’s field was to be Jeremiah’s possession during his lifetime but its counterpart in the world to come. Why would such boon be extended to the imprisoned prophet as Jerusalem was about to fall and its population be deported to Babylon for a period outliving Jeremiah? Still, Jeremiah went through with the deal even if realizing the calamity about to befall. But if we read from verses 39-44, we again notice the familiar pattern: A past event serving as the basis for a future return to Father‘s Kingdom; not in terms of Israelites’ historical return from Babylonian captivity, who would in time slide again into apostasy, but of a redeemed Judeo-Christian ‘Israel’ worshipping and fearing their God perpetually in a different order of things [↔Jeremiah 32:40; Ezekiel 11:19-20].