First off, I must sincerely thank you for taking the time for long form conversation and debate. It's becoming harder and harder to find folks who will and can engage in good faith.

You are more than welcome. Sadly, a lot of people are very reactive around their belief systems, and find it hard to be open without feeling threatened or challenged. That's because a certain amount of their belief is grounded not in awareness or understanding, but in blocking out things they don't quite understand. (My view)

but my point entirely hinges on God being omniscient, which it would seem you do no subscribe to?

Well, I do subscribe to the concept that God is omniscient, but perhaps our understanding of what that is and what that means differs.

I think that God knows and sees infinite possibilities, but there are certain possibilities that he cannot know WILL become reality because those possibilities do not hinge on God, but on someone else, a relative being.

The unfolding of time and space, the created universe, hinges on infinite possibilities coalescing into realities. If there is agency in humanity, then we are part of that process, and if free will exists, it means we ourselves have a role in shaping what certain potentialities become realities, and which do not.

Not all potentialities, but only those potentialities that hinge on OUR choices.

God's engagement with the Cosmos he created involves him traversing the ocean between absolute and relative. God is absolute, and his purpose is absolute, and his knowledge is absolute, BUT God created the universe and his purpose to be accomplished by his children starting out as relative beings, and growing into a position of absoluteness. of what? of Heart. Absoluteness of heart, where the human heart becomes absolute just as God's heart is absolute. That is what Jesus accomplished.

There is a formula for the accomplishment of God's Will. This is it:

God's portion of responsibility PLUS the human portion of responsibility EQUALS the fulfillment of God's Will.

God always fulfills his portion or responsibility, but human beings, being in a relative state, do not always fulfill their responsibility.

So when an individual or group or nation fails their responsibility, the fulfillment of God's Will is postponed, and God seeks for another individual to step in to that role to fulfill (restore) what the first person could not.

God's Will was for Adam to reach perfection and achieve perfect oneness with Him, but Adam failed, as God had to lay a foundation over millennia to give birth to another sinless son, Jesus, who would overcome and succeed where Adam failed.

God's Will was for Adam to be the original ancestor, the conduit between God and all the descendants of Adam. But Adam failed, and so that role was postponed until Jesus.

So while God's ultimate purpose is absolute; it is predestined; whether a particular individual will accomplish the mission (work) required to fulfill that Will and purpose is NOT absolutely predestined. Because the Individual is not absolute themselves.

So in my framework, God knew that Adam might fail, but God could not predetermine whether Adam would actual fail or not because this was only something that Adam himself could decide. And THAT is why the commandment was there. To Guide Adam during that period. But the outcome depended on Adam: whether he chose to have faith or to abandon faith in the commandment.

If God is omniscient, then yes, he knew they would disobey him, and chose to move forward with Creation anyway, and is culpable in all suffering since.

For the above reasons, I do not accept or believe this is true. God does not make our choices for us. Saying God KNEW they would disobey him is the same as saying that the outcome was predetermined, and if it was predetermined, then Adam had NO free will. No free Choice.

Knowing the outcome of a choice does not negate the act of making choice

Knowing the outcome of a choice is not the same as knowing WHAT choice will be made. The only way for God to know what choice Adam would make would be for it to be predetermined.

Predestination is not the same as predetermination. Between predestination and determination is: Choice, aka Responsibility.

So God predestines, but for that predestination to manifest, requires the human fulfillment of responsibility. Once that is done, then predestination becomes fulfilled and accomplished, not just a mere possibility.

The issue of the human portion of responsibility and its function and role in the Will of God is something that Christianity has not clearly understood, largely because Paul himself did not clearly understand it. But it is the one thing that unlocks and resolves so many contradictions in Christian theological structures.

You expound on the very wrinkle I have with the Creation of Man in Genesis that I find disturbing,

Again, the wrinkle you have is determined by the premises that you have accepted. They are a logical conclusion, BUT hinge on the premises you have chosen to accept as true. I.e. that God KNEW what Adam would choose INSTEAD of God knowing the possibilities that Adam had to choose from, and waiting to see what Adam himself would choose.

I subscribe to the latter. God knew all possibilities, but like Schrodinger's cat, the reality would only come into existence at a certain juncture where all other possibilities are evaporated and one reality is manifested. Prior to the reality manifesting, all the possibilities exist.

So prior to the Fall, it was possible for Adam to NOT fail and fall into faithlessness, and it was also possible that he would. It was for Adam to open the box, not God. That is both the blessing and the challenge given to Adam.

Same again with Cain:

Why are you angry,” said the LORD to Cain, “and why has your countenance fallen? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you refuse to do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires you, but you must master it.”

Two possibilities. Do what is right, and be accepted. Refuse to do what is right, and 'sin' will pounce on you.

For Adam, there were two possibilities. Eat the fruit, and you will die. Do not eat the fruit, and you will live.

but seem to side-step it in entirely by saying God was surprised by their actions, which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Do I side step it? Not sure of the nuances of your use of that expression here, but from my viewpoint, I am simply subscribing to the understanding of God and myself and the universe that makes the most sense to me and which is reinforced by experience, and logic, among other things.

To me it is contradictory to posit a God of love on one hand and say the failure of Adam and the subsequent suffering of humanity was predetermined on the other. And I have for too much direct evidence and experience of the God of Love for me to adopt any other view.

which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Yes, I agree. But here is the thing: Christianity is not perfect, and the belief systems are not perfect. Paul himself was VERY clear that he recognized that his present understanding was limited and that he foresaw a time when his limited understanding (on which the vast bulk of Christian theology of the last 2000 years is based) would be augmented and increased. Up to full speed, no less.

Now we see a dim reflection, as if we were looking into a mirror, but then we shall see clearly. Now I know only a part, but then I will know fully, as God has known me.

There is MUCH that Christian theology of the past 2000 years has not and does not understand. But too many conveniently ignore that fact and ignore the very scriptures that prove it.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come....

But I don't have a quarrel with Christianity of the last 2000 years, BECAUSE I know, well, I believe and am confident in the belief, that there is MUCH that can and is being elucidated. Christianity has been the object of Jesus love and work for the past 200 years.

However, the question is, when Christ returns, will Christianity be able to accept and grow, or, like the Israelites of 2000 years ago, stubbornly hold on to their existing beliefs and refuse to be 'upgraded'?

I tell you, He will promptly carry out justice on their behalf. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?”

Why would he even ask that?

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Hmmmm.... So, perhaps Christianity does not know everything....

etc.

History repeats. Israel was prepared for 2000 years to receive Jesus and be upgraded through him, to a higher understanding of truth. Yet, they failed. In the form of the Jewish leadership, the Jewish people rejected Jesus and eventually murdered him.

Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it, and built a tower. Then he rented it out to some tenants and went away on a journey.

When the harvest time drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his share of the fruit. But the tenants seized his servants. They beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.

Again, he sent other servants, more than the first group. But the tenants did the same to them.

Finally, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.

But when the tenants saw the son, they said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and take his inheritance.’ So they seized him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard returns, what will he do to those tenants?”

“He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and will rent out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him his share of the fruit at harvest time.”

Very clearly a metaphor for the Israelites "chosen people" and God and Jesus.

God predestined Israel to accept Jesus and become the center of the world, with Jesus as a king of Glory, but Israel rejected Jesus, stuck in their own understanding and narrowness of heart. So, what would happen?

Jesus paid the price to re-open the way by his sacrifice on the cross, and founded Christianity. Christianity is the 2nd Israel, with the purpose of laying the foundation and preparing for the second coming of Christ.

But what will Christianity do when Christ returns? What if he returns in a manner they do not expect? What if he begins saying things that seem to contradict their own limited theology? Will they reject him? Or will they reverse the failure of the Israelites and embrace him?

Do you see how the issue of predestination is key to the issues of the whole Bible, but also how it has not been clearly resolved or even understood?

The apparent contradictions are there because the vantage point is limited. From a higher level vantage point, seeming contradictions become parts that make sense in a different framework. The question is, what over arching framework can make sense of scripture and its many apparent contradictions?

I'll refer back to Paul:

Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face.

The problem is that people forget that they are seeing dimly as in a mirror. Hey, its better than nothing, but it's not complete and it's..... well, it's dim.

Humility is the one thing that Lucifer could not do, and its the one thing that the Israelites refused to do as well, when it counted.

How will Christianity do, do you think?

First off, I must sincerely thank you for taking the time for long form conversation and debate. It's becoming harder and harder to find folks who will and can engage in good faith.

You are more than welcome. Sadly, a lot of people are very reactive around their belief systems, and find it hard to be open without feeling threatened or challenged. That's because a certain amount of their belief is grounded not in awareness or understanding, but in blocking out things they don't quite understand. (My view)

but my point entirely hinges on God being omniscient, which it would seem you do no subscribe to?

Well, I do subscribe to the concept that God is omniscient, but perhaps our understanding of what that is and what that means differs.

I think that God knows and sees infinite possibilities, but there are certain possibilities that he cannot know WILL become reality because those possibilities do not hinge on God, but on someone else, a relative being.

The unfolding of time and space, the created universe, hinges on infinite possibilities coalescing into realities. If there is agency in humanity, then we are part of that process, and if free will exists, it means we ourselves have a role in shaping what certain potentialities become realities, and which do not.

Not all potentialities, but only those potentialities that hinge on OUR choices.

God's engagement with the Cosmos he created involves him traversing the ocean between absolute and relative. God is absolute, and his purpose is absolute, and his knowledge is absolute, BUT God created the universe and his purpose to be accomplished by his children starting out as relative beings, and growing into a position of absoluteness. of what? of Heart. Absoluteness of heart, where the human heart becomes absolute just as God's heart is absolute. That is what Jesus accomplished.

There is a formula for the accomplishment of God's Will. This is it:

God's portion of responsibility PLUS the human portion of responsibility EQUALS the fulfillment of God's Will.

God always fulfills his portion or responsibility, but human beings, being in a relative state, do not always fulfill their responsibility.

So when an individual or group or nation fails their responsibility, the fulfillment of God's Will is postponed, and God seeks for another individual to step in to that role to fulfill (restore) what the first person could not.

God's Will was for Adam to reach perfection and achieve perfect oneness with Him, but Adam failed, as God had to lay a foundation over millennia to give birth to another sinless son, Jesus, who would overcome and succeed where Adam failed.

God's Will was for Adam to be the original ancestor, the conduit between God and all the descendants of Adam. But Adam failed, and so that role was postponed until Jesus.

So while God's ultimate purpose is absolute; it is predestined; whether a particular individual will accomplish the mission (work) required to fulfill that Will and purpose is NOT absolutely predestined. Because the Individual is not absolute themselves.

So in my framework, God knew that Adam might fail, but God could not predetermine whether Adam would actual fail or not because this was only something that Adam himself could decide. And THAT is why the commandment was there. To Guide Adam during that period. But the outcome depended on Adam: whether he chose to have faith or to abandon faith in the commandment.

If God is omniscient, then yes, he knew they would disobey him, and chose to move forward with Creation anyway, and is culpable in all suffering since.

For the above reasons, I do not accept or believe this is true. God does not make our choices for us. Saying God KNEW they would disobey him is the same as saying that the outcome was predetermined, and if it was predetermined, then Adam had NO free will. No free Choice.

Knowing the outcome of a choice does not negate the act of making choice

Knowing the outcome of a choice is not the same as knowing WHAT choice will be made. The only way for God to know what choice Adam would make would be for it to be predetermined.

Predestination is not the same as predetermination. Between predestination and determination is: Choice, aka Responsibility.

So God predestines, but for that predestination to manifest, requires the human fulfillment of responsibility. Once that is done, then predestination becomes fulfilled and accomplished, not just a mere possibility.

The issue of the human portion of responsibility and its function and role in the Will of God is something that Christianity has not clearly understood, largely because Paul himself did not clearly understand it. But it is the one thing that unlocks and resolves so many contradictions in Christian theological structures.

You expound on the very wrinkle I have with the Creation of Man in Genesis that I find disturbing,

Again, the wrinkle you have is determined by the premises that you have accepted. They are a logical conclusion, BUT hinge on the premises you have chosen to accept as true. I.e. that God KNEW what Adam would choose INSTEAD of God knowing the possibilities that Adam had to choose from, and waiting to see what Adam himself would choose.

I subscribe to the latter. God knew all possibilities, but like Schrodinger's cat, the reality would only come into existence at a certain juncture where all other possibilities are evaporated and one reality is manifested. Prior to the reality manifesting, all the possibilities exist.

So prior to the Fall, it was possible for Adam to NOT fail and fall into faithlessness, and it was also possible that he would. It was for Adam to open the box, not God. That is both the blessing and the challenge given to Adam.

Same again with Cain:

Why are you angry,” said the LORD to Cain, “and why has your countenance fallen? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you refuse to do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires you, but you must master it.”

Two possibilities. Do what is right, and be accepted. Refuse to do what is right, and 'sin' will pounce on you.

For Adam, there were two possibilities. Eat the fruit, and you will die. Do not eat the fruit, and you will live.

but seem to side-step it in entirely by saying God was surprised by their actions, which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Do I side step it? Not sure of the nuances of your use of that expression here, but from my viewpoint, I am simply subscribing to the understanding of God and myself and the universe that makes the most sense to me and which is reinforced by experience, and logic, among other things.

To me it is contradictory to posit a God of love on one hand and say the failure of Adam and the subsequent suffering of humanity was predetermined on the other. And I have for too much direct evidence and experience of the God of Love for me to adopt any other view.

which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Yes, I agree. But here is the thing: Christianity is not perfect, and the belief systems are not perfect. Paul himself was VERY clear that he recognized that his present understanding was limited and that he foresaw a time when his limited understanding (on which the vast bulk of Christian theology of the last 2000 years is based) would be augmented and increased. Up to full speed, no less.

Now we see a dim reflection, as if we were looking into a mirror, but then we shall see clearly. Now I know only a part, but then I will know fully, as God has known me.

There is MUCH that Christian theology of the past 2000 years has not and does not understand. But too many conveniently ignore that fact and ignore the very scriptures that prove it.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come....

But I don't have a quarrel with Christianity of the last 2000 years, BECAUSE I know, well, I believe and am confident in the belief, that there is MUCH that can and is being elucidated. Christianity has been the object of Jesus love and work for the past 200 years.

However, the question is, when Christ returns, will Christianity be able to accept and grow, or, like the Israelites of 2000 years ago, stubbornly hold on to their existing beliefs and refuse to be 'upgraded'?

I tell you, He will promptly carry out justice on their behalf. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?”

Why would he even ask that?

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Hmmmm.... So, perhaps we (Christianity) do not know everything....

etc.

History repeats. Israel was prepared for 2000 years to receive Jesus and be upgraded through him, to a higher understanding of truth. Yet, they failed. In the form of the Jewish leadership, the Jewish people rejected Jesus and eventually murdered him.

Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it, and built a tower. Then he rented it out to some tenants and went away on a journey.

When the harvest time drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his share of the fruit. But the tenants seized his servants. They beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.

Again, he sent other servants, more than the first group. But the tenants did the same to them.

Finally, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.

But when the tenants saw the son, they said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and take his inheritance.’ So they seized him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard returns, what will he do to those tenants?”

“He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and will rent out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him his share of the fruit at harvest time.”

Very clearly a metaphor for the Israelites "chosen people" and God and Jesus.

God predestined Israel to accept Jesus and become the center of the world, with Jesus as a king of Glory, but Israel rejected Jesus, stuck in their own understanding and narrowness of heart. So, what would happen?

Jesus paid the price to re-open the way by his sacrifice on the cross, and founded Christianity. Christianity is the 2nd Israel, with the purpose of laying the foundation and preparing for the second coming of Christ.

But what will Christianity do when Christ returns? What if he returns in a manner they do not expect? What if he begins saying things that seem to contradict their own limited theology? Will they reject him? Or will they reverse the failure of the Israelites and embrace him?

Do you see how the issue of predestination is key to the issues of the whole Bible, but also how it has not been clearly resolved or even understood?

The apparent contradictions are there because the vantage point is limited. From a higher level vantage point, seeming contradictions become parts that make sense in a different framework. The question is, what over arching framework can make sense of scripture and its many apparent contradictions?

I'll refer back to Paul:

Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face.

The problem is that people forget that they are seeing dimly as in a mirror. Hey, its better than nothing, but it's not complete and it's..... well, it's dim.

Humility is the one thing that Lucifer could not do, and its the one thing that the Israelites refused to do as well, when it counted.

How will Christianity do, do you think?

First off, I must sincerely thank you for taking the time for long form conversation and debate. It's becoming harder and harder to find folks who will and can engage in good faith.

You are more than welcome. Sadly, a lot of people are very reactive around their belief systems, and find it hard to be open without feeling threatened or challenged. That's because a certain amount of their belief is grounded not in awareness or understanding, but in blocking out things they don't quite understand. (My view)

but my point entirely hinges on God being omniscient, which it would seem you do no subscribe to?

Well, I do subscribe to the concept that God is omniscient, but perhaps our understanding of what that is and what that means differs.

I think that God knows and sees infinite possibilities, but there are certain possibilities that he cannot know WILL become reality because those possibilities do not hinge on God, but on someone else, a relative being.

The unfolding of time and space, the created universe, hinges on infinite possibilities coalescing into realities. If there is agency in humanity, then we are part of that process, and if free will exists, it means we ourselves have a role in shaping what certain potentialities become realities, and which do not.

Not all potentialities, but only those potentialities that hinge on OUR choices.

God's engagement with the Cosmos he created involves him traversing the ocean between absolute and relative. God is absolute, and his purpose is absolute, and his knowledge is absolute, BUT God created the universe and his purpose to be accomplished by his children starting out as relative beings, and growing into a position of absoluteness. of what? of Heart. Absoluteness of heart, where the human heart becomes absolute just as God's heart is absolute. That is what Jesus accomplished.

There is a formula for the accomplishment of God's Will. This is it:

God's portion of responsibility PLUS the human portion of responsibility EQUALS the fulfillment of God's Will.

God always fulfills his portion or responsibility, but human beings, being in a relative state, do not always fulfill their responsibility.

So when an individual or group or nation fails their responsibility, the fulfillment of God's Will is postponed, and God seeks for another individual to step in to that role to fulfill (restore) what the first person could not.

God's Will was for Adam to reach perfection and achieve perfect oneness with Him, but Adam failed, as God had to lay a foundation over millennia to give birth to another sinless son, Jesus, who would overcome and succeed where Adam failed.

God's Will was for Adam to be the original ancestor, the conduit between God and all the descendants of Adam. But Adam failed, and so that role was postponed until Jesus.

So while God's ultimate purpose is absolute; it is predestined; whether a particular individual will accomplish the mission (work) required to fulfill that Will and purpose is NOT absolutely predestined. Because the Individual is not absolute themselves.

So in my framework, God knew that Adam might fail, but God could not predetermine whether Adam would actual fail or not because this was only something that Adam himself could decide. And THAT is why the commandment was there. To Guide Adam during that period. But the outcome depended on Adam: whether he chose to have faith or to abandon faith in the commandment.

If God is omniscient, then yes, he knew they would disobey him, and chose to move forward with Creation anyway, and is culpable in all suffering since.

For the above reasons, I do not accept or believe this is true. God does not make our choices for us. Saying God KNEW they would disobey him is the same as saying that the outcome was predetermined, and if it was predetermined, then Adam had NO free will. No free Choice.

Knowing the outcome of a choice does not negate the act of making choice

Knowing the outcome of a choice is not the same as knowing WHAT choice will be made. The only way for God to know what choice Adam would make would be for it to be predetermined.

You expound on the very wrinkle I have with the Creation of Man in Genesis that I find disturbing,

Again, the wrinkle you have is determined by the premises that you have accepted. They are a logical conclusion, BUT hinge on the premises you have chosen to accept as true. I.e. that God KNEW what Adam would choose instead of God knowing the possibilities that Adam had to choose from.

I subscribe to the latter. God knew all possibilities, but like Schrodinger's cat, the reality would only come into existence at a certain juncture where all other possibilities are evaporated and one reality is manifested. Prior to the reality manifesting, all the possibilities exist.

So prior to the Fall, it was possible for Adam to NOT fail and fall into faithlessness, and it was also possible that he would. It was for Adam to open the box, not God. That is both the blessing and the challenge given to Adam.

Same again with Cain:

Why are you angry,” said the LORD to Cain, “and why has your countenance fallen? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you refuse to do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires you, but you must master it.”

Two possibilities. Do what is right, and be accepted. Refuse to do what is right, and 'sin' will pounce on you.

For Adam, there were two possibilities. Eat the fruit, and you will die. Do not eat the fruit, and you will live.

but seem to side-step it in entirely by saying God was surprised by their actions, which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Do I side step it? Not sure of the nuances of your use of that expression here, but from my viewpoint, I am simply subscribing to the understanding of God and myself and the universe that makes the most sense to me and which is reinforced by experience, and logic, among other things.

To me it is contradictory to posit a God of love on one hand and say the failure of Adam and the subsequent suffering of humanity was predetermined on the other. And I have for too much direct evidence and experience of the God of Love for me to adopt any other view.

which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Yes, I agree. But here is the thing: Christianity is not perfect, and the belief systems are not perfect. Paul himself was VERY clear that he recognized that his present understanding was limited and that he foresaw a time when his limited understanding (on which the vast bulk of Christian theology of the last 2000 years is based) would be augmented and increased. Up to full speed, no less.

Now we see a dim reflection, as if we were looking into a mirror, but then we shall see clearly. Now I know only a part, but then I will know fully, as God has known me.

There is MUCH that Christian theology of the past 2000 years has not and does not understand. But too many conveniently ignore that fact and ignore the very scriptures that prove it.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come....

But I don't have a quarrel with Christianity of the last 2000 years, BECAUSE I know, well, I believe and am confident in the belief, that there is MUCH that can and is being elucidated. Christianity has been the object of Jesus love and work for the past 200 years.

However, the question is, when Christ returns, will Christianity be able to accept and grow, or, like the Israelites of 2000 years ago, stubbornly hold on to their existing beliefs and refuse to be 'upgraded'?

I tell you, He will promptly carry out justice on their behalf. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?”

Why would he even ask that?

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Hmmmm.... So, perhaps we (Christianity) do not know everything....

etc.

History repeats. Israel was prepared for 2000 years to receive Jesus and be upgraded through him, to a higher understanding of truth. Yet, they failed. In the form of the Jewish leadership, the Jewish people rejected Jesus and eventually murdered him.

Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it, and built a tower. Then he rented it out to some tenants and went away on a journey.

When the harvest time drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his share of the fruit. But the tenants seized his servants. They beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.

Again, he sent other servants, more than the first group. But the tenants did the same to them.

Finally, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.

But when the tenants saw the son, they said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and take his inheritance.’ So they seized him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard returns, what will he do to those tenants?”

“He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and will rent out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him his share of the fruit at harvest time.”

Very clearly a metaphor for the Israelites "chosen people" and God and Jesus.

God predestined Israel to accept Jesus and become the center of the world, with Jesus as a king of Glory, but Israel rejected Jesus, stuck in their own understanding and narrowness of heart. So, what would happen?

Jesus paid the price to re-open the way by his sacrifice on the cross, and founded Christianity. Christianity is the 2nd Israel, with the purpose of laying the foundation and preparing for the second coming of Christ.

But what will Christianity do when Christ returns? What if he returns in a manner they do not expect? What if he begins saying things that seem to contradict their own limited theology? Will they reject him? Or will they reverse the failure of the Israelites and embrace him?

Do you see how the issue of predestination is key to the issues of the whole Bible, but also how it has not been clearly resolved or even understood?

The apparent contradictions are there because the vantage point is limited. From a higher level vantage point, seeming contradictions become parts that make sense in a different framework. The question is, what over arching framework can make sense of scripture and its many apparent contradictions?

I'll refer back to Paul:

Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face.

The problem is that people forget that they are seeing dimly as in a mirror. Hey, its better than nothing, but it's not complete and it's..... well, it's dim.

Humility is the one thing that Lucifer could not do, and its the one thing that the Israelites refused to do as well, when it counted.

How will Christianity do, do you think?

First off, I must sincerely thank you for taking the time for long form conversation and debate. It's becoming harder and harder to find folks who will and can engage in good faith.

You are more than welcome. Sadly, a lot of people are very reactive around their belief systems, and find it hard to be open without feeling threatened or challenged. That's because a certain amount of their belief is grounded not in awareness or understanding, but in blocking out things they don't quite understand. (My view)

but my point entirely hinges on God being omniscient, which it would seem you do no subscribe to?

Well, I do subscribe to the concept that God is omniscient, but perhaps our understanding of what that is and what that means differs.

I think that God knows and sees infinite possibilities, but there are certain possibilities that he cannot know WILL become reality because those possibilities do not hinge on God, but on someone else, a relative being.

God's engagement with the Cosmos he created involves him traversing the ocean between absolute and relative. God is absolute, and his purpose is absolute, and his knowledge is absolute, BUT God created the universe and his purpose to be accomplished by his children starting out as relative beings, and growing into a position of absoluteness.

There is a formula for the accomplishment of God's Will. This is it:

God's portion of responsibility PLUS the human portion of responsibility EQUALS the fulfillment of God's Will.

God always fulfills his portion or responsibility, but human beings, being in a relative state, do not always fulfill their responsibility.

So when an individual or group or nation fails their responsibility, the fulfillment of God's Will is postponed, and God seeks for another individual to step in to that role to fulfill (restore) what the first person could not.

God's Will was for Adam to reach perfection and achieve perfect oneness with Him, but Adam failed, as God had to lay a foundation over millennia to give birth to another sinless son, Jesus, who would overcome and succeed where Adam failed.

God's Will was for Adam to be the original ancestor, the conduit between God and all the descendants of Adam. But Adam failed, and so that role was postponed until Jesus.

So while God's ultimate purpose is absolute; it is predestined; whether a particular individual will accomplish the mission (work) required to fulfill that Will and purpose is NOT absolutely predestined. Because the Individual is not absolute themselves.

So in my framework, God knew that Adam might fail, but God could not predetermine whether Adam would actual fail or not because this was only something that Adam himself could decide. And THAT is why the commandment was there. To Guide Adam during that period. But the outcome depended on Adam: whether he chose to have faith or to abandon faith in the commandment.

If God is omniscient, then yes, he knew they would disobey him, and chose to move forward with Creation anyway, and is culpable in all suffering since.

For the above reasons, I do not accept or believe this is true. God does not make our choices for us. Saying God KNEW they would disobey him is the same as saying that the outcome was predetermined, and if it was predetermined, then Adam had NO free will. No free Choice.

Knowing the outcome of a choice does not negate the act of making choice

Knowing the outcome of a choice is not the same as knowing WHAT choice will be made. The only way for God to know what choice Adam would make would be for it to be predetermined.

You expound on the very wrinkle I have with the Creation of Man in Genesis that I find disturbing,

Again, the wrinkle you have is determined by the premises that you have accepted. They are a logical conclusion, BUT hinge on the premises you have chosen to accept as true. I.e. that God KNEW what Adam would choose instead of God knowing the possibilities that Adam had to choose from.

I subscribe to the latter. God knew all possibilities, but like Schrodinger's cat, the reality would only come into existence at a certain juncture where all other possibilities are evaporated and one reality is manifested. Prior to the reality manifesting, all the possibilities exist.

So prior to the Fall, it was possible for Adam to NOT fail and fall into faithlessness, and it was also possible that he would. It was for Adam to open the box, not God. That is both the blessing and the challenge given to Adam.

Same again with Cain:

Why are you angry,” said the LORD to Cain, “and why has your countenance fallen? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you refuse to do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires you, but you must master it.”

Two possibilities. Do what is right, and be accepted. Refuse to do what is right, and 'sin' will pounce on you.

For Adam, there were two possibilities. Eat the fruit, and you will die. Do not eat the fruit, and you will live.

but seem to side-step it in entirely by saying God was surprised by their actions, which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Do I side step it? Not sure of the nuances of your use of that expression here, but from my viewpoint, I am simply subscribing to the understanding of God and myself and the universe that makes the most sense to me and which is reinforced by experience, and logic, among other things.

To me it is contradictory to posit a God of love on one hand and say the failure of Adam and the subsequent suffering of humanity was predetermined on the other. And I have for too much direct evidence and experience of the God of Love for me to adopt any other view.

which I think you might agree, is not a wide-held belief in Christianity?

Yes, I agree. But here is the thing: Christianity is not perfect, and the belief systems are not perfect. Paul himself was VERY clear that he recognized that his present understanding was limited and that he foresaw a time when his limited understanding (on which the vast bulk of Christian theology of the last 2000 years is based) would be augmented and increased. Up to full speed, no less.

Now we see a dim reflection, as if we were looking into a mirror, but then we shall see clearly. Now I know only a part, but then I will know fully, as God has known me.

There is MUCH that Christian theology of the past 2000 years has not and does not understand. But too many conveniently ignore that fact and ignore the very scriptures that prove it.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come....

But I don't have a quarrel with Christianity of the last 2000 years, BECAUSE I know, well, I believe and am confident in the belief, that there is MUCH that can and is being elucidated. Christianity has been the object of Jesus love and work for the past 200 years.

However, the question is, when Christ returns, will Christianity be able to accept and grow, or, like the Israelites of 2000 years ago, stubbornly hold on to their existing beliefs and refuse to be 'upgraded'?

I tell you, He will promptly carry out justice on their behalf. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?”

Why would he even ask that?

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Hmmmm.... So, perhaps we (Christianity) do not know everything....

etc.

History repeats. Israel was prepared for 2000 years to receive Jesus and be upgraded through him, to a higher understanding of truth. Yet, they failed. In the form of the Jewish leadership, the Jewish people rejected Jesus and eventually murdered him.

Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it, and built a tower. Then he rented it out to some tenants and went away on a journey.

When the harvest time drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his share of the fruit. But the tenants seized his servants. They beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.

Again, he sent other servants, more than the first group. But the tenants did the same to them.

Finally, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.

But when the tenants saw the son, they said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and take his inheritance.’ So they seized him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard returns, what will he do to those tenants?”

“He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and will rent out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him his share of the fruit at harvest time.”

Very clearly a metaphor for the Israelites "chosen people" and God and Jesus.

God predestined Israel to accept Jesus and become the center of the world, with Jesus as a king of Glory, but Israel rejected Jesus, stuck in their own understanding and narrowness of heart. So, what would happen?

Jesus paid the price to re-open the way by his sacrifice on the cross, and founded Christianity. Christianity is the 2nd Israel, with the purpose of laying the foundation and preparing for the second coming of Christ.

But what will Christianity do when Christ returns? What if he returns in a manner they do not expect? What if he begins saying things that seem to contradict their own limited theology? Will they reject him? Or will they reverse the failure of the Israelites and embrace him?

Do you see how the issue of predestination is key to the issues of the whole Bible, but also how it has not been clearly resolved or even understood?

The apparent contradictions are there because the vantage point is limited. From a higher level vantage point, seeming contradictions become parts that make sense in a different framework. The question is, what over arching framework can make sense of scripture and its many apparent contradictions?

I'll refer back to Paul:

Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face.

The problem is that people forget that they are seeing dimly as in a mirror. Hey, its better than nothing, but it's not complete and it's..... well, it's dim.

Humility is the one thing that Lucifer could not do, and its the one thing that the Israelites refused to do as well, when it counted.

How will Christianity do, do you think?