God is Said to do that which He Merely Allowed or Permitted

[victoryword]

First, I have conculted numerous scholars on this subject and most agree that in the Ancient Near Eastern idiom, God, due to His omnipotence and sovereignty, is held responsible for all that happens, even if He is not the direct cause of it.

Second, there are some Hebrew words such as shalach and nathan that should have been translated "allowed" or "permitted" in some passages of Scripture but were not. For the sake of not writing too long of an opening post, I will refrain, for the moment, from citing examples (but one interesting one is found in comparison to Ex. 12:12 and 12:23).

But most important of all, SCRIPTURE AFFIRMS THE TRUTH THAT GOD IS OFTEN SAID TO DO THAT WHICH HE MERELY ALLOWED OR PERMITTED.

Here is just one most obvious examples out of numerous ones I have found in Scripture. In the following passage God is said to have tempted David to sin and number Israel and then later punish him for it:

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. (2 Sam. 24:1)
​

Yet, the New Testament tells us that God is not the One who entices people to sin:

“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13)
​

So either God tempts and the Bible is contradicting itself, or God is schizophrenic, neither of which I accept, or the Bible is PROGRESSIVE REVELATION, which is what I believe is the truth. There was very little knowledge of Satan in the Old Testament, especially in the beginning. As numerous scholars have affirmed for me (I really did my homework), knowledge of Satan came at a later period in Jewish history.

In the cases of David, 1 Chron. 21:1, which was written many centuries after 2 Samuel 24:1, speaks about the same incident but this time makes Satan the tempter: "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."

Again, this is a clear example of the Hebrew idiom of permission. God is very often said to do the thing which He allowed or permitted. This has been a foundational truth in WoF teaching and I am amazed that some on this forum discard it.

I am starting to believe that this forum has become infested with a new kind of WoF breed over the years. I hope that others on here will see the fact that making God the creator of evil is a grave error that can lead to many, many other false ideas.

 

[victoryword]

In light of my opening post, let me now show everyone a better way of interpretting Isaiah 45:7 in light of comparing Scripture with Scripture.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isa. 45:7)
​

In the context, the Lord was at war with Babylon and He was letting them know that as a part of His judgment upon them He would SEND calamity or trouble their way. The calamities are the result of judgment upon nations like Babylon that oppose God (Isa. 45:24) and who will reap what they have sown (Ps. 7:14-16; Gal. 6:5-6).

Interpreting Scripture with Scripture, we see that God is not the author of the disasters (evils) that came upon Babylon. He permits these disasters due to their sin.

“And the Lord said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go to be among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them. Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us? And I will surely hide my face in that day for all the evils which they shall have wrought, in that they are turned unto other gods.” (Deut. 31:16-18).
​

The word “evils” in the passage above is the Hebrew word “ra”; the same word used in Isa. 45:7. Interpreting Scripture with Scripture we see that evil comes when the Lord is absent. This is the proper understanding of the phrase “I create evil”.

Examining Isa. 45:7 in light of the above, we see that God is light (1 John 1:9; James 1:17) and creates darkness when He withdraws and darkness prevails. God offers men His light in spite of their rebellion (Isa. 50:10; John 8:12; 12:46; 1 Pet. 2:9) but men reject it because they hate it (John 1:5-11; 3:19-20).

Therefore, Isa. 45:7 is permissive in that God is allowing men the consequences of their choices. God is not the author of physical or moral evil. Evil comes when the source of good that protects from evil is forsaken. This is permission and not causation.

 

[victoryword]

Excellent summary by DBKWarrior:

I am sure you are aware that it was Kenneth Hagin that introduced the thought of Passive and Active voice in the Old Testament to WOF. In fact, it was one of his foundational teachings. To me, it doesn't really matter if the Passive and Active voice argument holds any merit, because the same outcome can be deduced by study of comparable scriptures, like Davids numbering of Israel, the death of the firstborn in Egypt, and the crucifixion of Jesus Himself. There are multiple scriptural examples where one passage of scripture says that God did ___________, yet another passage of scripture says the enemy satan did it. We can conclude from the greater context of scripture the exact same doctrine of evil being committed by satan but permitted by God through forbearance, without having to prove Passive or Active voice in the original Hebrew, of which there is no one on this forum that I am aware of adequately qualified in the language to argue, and even if there was, there is disagreement on this issue by Hebrew scholars themselves.

 

[dkbwarrior]

Troy is quoting me, I feel all warm and fuzzy inside...Lol...

Peace....

 

[Jedi.Kep]

Excellent. Thanks for sharing.

 

[victoryword]

Troy is quoting me, I feel all warm and fuzzy inside...Lol...

Peace....

And you ought to

 

[victoryword]

Excellent. Thanks for sharing.

You're welcome Jedi. Hope all is well.

ALL

I cover some of this in my latest book,, "God's Word: Devil Destruction Power". You can download a free .pdf version here:

Free Books - Victorious Word Christian Fellowship, Pawtucket, Rhode Island

Well, must go. I'll check back once in a while. Hopefully you will all move back to foundational WoF teaching.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

Examining Isa. 45:7 in light of the above, we see that God is light (1 John 1:9; James 1:17) and creates darkness when He withdraws and darkness prevails. God offers men His light in spite of their rebellion (Isa. 50:10; John 8:12; 12:46; 1 Pet. 2:9) but men reject it because they hate it (John 1:5-11; 3:19-20).

Interesting. But it doesn't answer the primary question. Ok, Troy, let's assume for a moment that this is true: God (light) withdraws and darkness fills the void.

Question: where did darkness come from? Who or what created it?

Observation: so by this, darkness can never touch or get near me (a believer), correct? For scripture tells me the following:

Joshua 1:9 (NET)
I repeat, be strong and brave! Don't be afraid and don't panic, for I, the Lord your God, am with you in all you do."

Matthew 28:20 (NET)
teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

Hebrews 13:5 (NET)
Your conduct must be free from the love of money and you must be content with what you have, for he has said, " I will never leave you and I will never abandon you ."​

God is always near me, with me; the Holy Spirit is in me. God is light that is with me and in me so darkness can't be around me nor touch me. Correct?

Therefore, Isa. 45:7 is permissive in that God is allowing men the consequences of their choices. God is not the author of physical or moral evil. Evil comes when the source of good that protects from evil is forsaken. This is permission and not causation.

The issue I have here is that permissiveness and activeness (causation) is not defined as such. In the verse in question here the word 'create' has a mood as a participle used in active voice. There are participles in Hebrew in either the active voice or the passive. If active, the subject is the doer.

Here is a site (deep as it is) that will teach these grammatical rules:
Hebrew Participles

Here you can find the grammatical links. I'm sure you can find many other sites to give this information:
Isaiah 45 - Hebrew English Translation Massoretic Text MT Interlinear Holy Name King James Version KJV Strong's Concordance Online Parallel Bible Study

Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.​

In the active voice in Hebrew I (God) is the subject and create is the active voice participle, or continuous action either past, present or future.

There is, grammatically, no permissiveness to this verse. It is a causal action by the subject, "I", which is God.

There are many places in the Old Testament that fit your teaching in this (your) post. Your teaching about David is right on. Many passive voice participles certainly have been translated in the past in an active English form. This verse, unfortunately, is not one of them.

 

[now faith]

First, I have conculted numerous scholars on this subject and most agree that in the Ancient Near Eastern idiom, God, due to His omnipotence and sovereignty, is held responsible for all that happens, even if He is not the direct cause of it.

Second, there are some Hebrew words such as shalach and nathan that should have been translated "allowed" or "permitted" in some passages of Scripture but were not. For the sake of not writing too long of an opening post, I will refrain, for the moment, from citing examples (but one interesting one is found in comparison to Ex. 12:12 and 12:23).

But most important of all, SCRIPTURE AFFIRMS THE TRUTH THAT GOD IS OFTEN SAID TO DO THAT WHICH HE MERELY ALLOWED OR PERMITTED.

Here is just one most obvious examples out of numerous ones I have found in Scripture. In the following passage God is said to have tempted David to sin and number Israel and then later punish him for it:

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. (2 Sam. 24:1)
​

Yet, the New Testament tells us that God is not the One who entices people to sin:

“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13)
​

So either God tempts and the Bible is contradicting itself, or God is schizophrenic, neither of which I accept, or the Bible is PROGRESSIVE REVELATION, which is what I believe is the truth. There was very little knowledge of Satan in the Old Testament, especially in the beginning. As numerous scholars have affirmed for me (I really did my homework), knowledge of Satan came at a later period in Jewish history.

In the cases of David, 1 Chron. 21:1, which was written many centuries after 2 Samuel 24:1, speaks about the same incident but this time makes Satan the tempter: "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."

Again, this is a clear example of the Hebrew idiom of permission. God is very often said to do the thing which He allowed or permitted. This has been a foundational truth in WoF teaching and I am amazed that some on this forum discard it.

I am starting to believe that this forum has become infested with a new kind of WoF breed over the years. I hope that others on here will see the fact that making God the creator of evil is a grave error that can lead to many, many other false ideas.

I know the truth is found in God's word without the need
for translation or theological opinions.

I do not profess to know the answers.

On the subject of David and Saul:

The Bible says and God sent a evil spirit to Saul.

Well there is one more circumstance to wonder.

It's not Calvinism to expound on God's sovereignty.

I am Word of Faith as well have the same background
as E.W. Kenyon.

I was formally a Free Will Baptist.

I want to be clear there is no Calvinest doctrine being
taught here.

Just because we cannot reconcile a question does
not change our beliefs.

 

[Truthfrees]

To Victoryword,
Quote isn't working for me, but from the OP:

I am starting to believe that this forum has become infested with a new kind of WoF breed over the years. I hope that others on here will see the fact that making God the creator of evil is a grave error that can lead to many, many other false ideas.

Thanks for taking time to deal with some of the wrong teaching that has been happening here.

IMO, the "new breed" is really independent thinkers who take a little from wof, and a little from other sources.

These brothers will admit: 1. they believe wof is in error, 2. what they teach ISN'T what wof teaches, 3. they don't care to follow what wof founding teachers teach, they prefer to do their own independent study and come to their own independent conclusions.

Your wof teachings are appreciated.

They help bring our forum back to original wof truths that work well when applied rightly.

As you said, wof founding teachers DON'T teach the Lord creates evil.

It's against the rules of this forum to teach against founding wof teachers and their teaching.

Please continue to explain wof teaching and clear up the false teaching.

 

[CGL1023]

First, I have conculted numerous scholars on this subject and most agree that in the Ancient Near Eastern idiom, God, due to His omnipotence and sovereignty, is held responsible for all that happens, even if He is not the direct cause of it.

Second, there are some Hebrew words such as shalach and nathan that should have been translated "allowed" or "permitted" in some passages of Scripture but were not. For the sake of not writing too long of an opening post, I will refrain, for the moment, from citing examples (but one interesting one is found in comparison to Ex. 12:12 and 12:23).

But most important of all, SCRIPTURE AFFIRMS THE TRUTH THAT GOD IS OFTEN SAID TO DO THAT WHICH HE MERELY ALLOWED OR PERMITTED.

Here is just one most obvious examples out of numerous ones I have found in Scripture. In the following passage God is said to have tempted David to sin and number Israel and then later punish him for it:

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. (2 Sam. 24:1)
​

Yet, the New Testament tells us that God is not the One who entices people to sin:

“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13)
​

So either God tempts and the Bible is contradicting itself, or God is schizophrenic, neither of which I accept, or the Bible is PROGRESSIVE REVELATION, which is what I believe is the truth. There was very little knowledge of Satan in the Old Testament, especially in the beginning. As numerous scholars have affirmed for me (I really did my homework), knowledge of Satan came at a later period in Jewish history.

In the cases of David, 1 Chron. 21:1, which was written many centuries after 2 Samuel 24:1, speaks about the same incident but this time makes Satan the tempter: "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."

Again, this is a clear example of the Hebrew idiom of permission. God is very often said to do the thing which He allowed or permitted. This has been a foundational truth in WoF teaching and I am amazed that some on this forum discard it.

I am starting to believe that this forum has become infested with a new kind of WoF breed over the years. I hope that others on here will see the fact that making God the creator of evil is a grave error that can lead to many, many other false ideas.

To me the confusion arises from not recognizing that God chooses to behave differently in the New Covenant than in the Old Covenant. See Isa 54:9-10; this was a prophesy fulfilled by the Cross of Jesus. In the New Covenant, we have a better covenant and God promises all people a period, the church age, of kindness and peace, lasting til the start of the tribulation.

 

[now faith]

Quote isn't working for me, but from the OP:Thanks for taking time to deal with some of the wrong teaching that has been happening here.

IMO, the "new breed" is really independent thinkers who take a little from wof, and a little from other sources.

These brothers will admit: 1. they believe wof is in error, 2. what they teach ISN'T what wof teaches, 3. they don't care to follow what wof founding teachers teach, they prefer to do their own independent study and come to their own independent conclusions.

Your wof teachings are appreciated.

They help bring our forum back to original wof truths that work well when applied rightly.

As you said, wof founding teachers DON'T teach the Lord creates evil.

It's against the rules of this forum to teach against founding wof teachers and their teaching.

Please continue to explain wof teaching and clear up the false teaching.

Do the Founders you quote so often teach that God is not capable of controlling evil.

Evil must be a mighty force in that God has no authority in its doings,is this what you are saying?

Please provide the Founders rules that you say are being violated.

1 The Name of the founder.

2 A direct quote from the founder that clearly teaches open Theism.

Then please list a majority of other founders who support the same thing.

Please provide direct quotes not commentary.

You have continuously spoken of the Founders well put it up for the rest of us to read.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

To me the confusion arises from not recognizing that God chooses to behave differently in the New Covenant than in the Old Covenant. See Isa 54:9-10; this was a prophesy fulfilled by the Cross of Jesus. In the New Covenant, we have a better covenant and God promises all people a period, the church age, of kindness and peace, lasting til the start of the tribulation.

"Kindness and peace?" In what context? Jesus said to/about the believer:

Mark 10:29-30 (KJV)
29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's, 30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.​

We seem to forget that persecutions are promised. The world hates us. The devil despises us.

Paul told us that he faced persecutions for the gospel's sake. And that all believer's will face persecutions. Further that those who persecute us will grow worse and worse.

2 Timothy 3:11-13 (KJV)
11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.​

But we know how to deal with it. Resist the devil and he will flee. Doesn't say he won't be back. But the promise is given as to how to deal with him.

Scripture tells us we will face persecution at the hands of the world. Sometimes even at the hands of fellow believers, trust me on that one.

 

[hhodgson]

Quote isn't working for me, but from the OP:Thanks for taking time to deal with some of the wrong teaching that has been happening here.

IMO, the "new breed" is really independent thinkers who take a little from wof, and a little from other sources.

These brothers will admit: 1. they believe wof is in error, 2. what they teach ISN'T what wof teaches, 3. they don't care to follow what wof founding teachers teach, they prefer to do their own independent study and come to their own independent conclusions.

Hi Truthfrees... Just a few comments... and maybe a little smidget more. Your right about (some) of the teachings that have been posted here were wrong and even distorted whether it's WoF teaching or otherwise. That's why God has assigned different ones as they grow in maturity to (kinda) watch over our forum from invaders foreign or domestic (within or without) if you will.

Example...Right now, I am always a Soldier in God's army and have already been promoted a Soldier in this forum (defender of the faith). And... as I am approaching 1000 posts... I will be promoted to a "Watchman" in which I not only to remain a WoF defender but also to be patrolling our forum 24/7. (A Watchman is responsible for reporting any hostile action or approaching suspicious person. These "Watchmen" sometimes patrol the city (forum) and called out the hours of the night. (Isa 21:11–12). That will be my (Job) to help oversee our forum.

Sorry, Truthfrees... (Just a little humor), I couldn't resist quoting that.

Anyway...

Where do you think the "new breed" came from? From listening to the "old breed"(Kenyon, Wigglesworth, Hagin etc.), and spawned out of the "old breed" brought Copeland, Creflo, Price, Capps, Winston... just to name a few. They were/are all independent thinkers. IOW, they just don't go (along for the ride) of always in agreement with each other. Copeland may believe this or that about an area of (WoF teaching) and Winston and other favorites may look at it through a different lens. So who would be right? If they see things differently, then one of them is wrong. Right? You may not like my answer. But BOTH are wrong and both are right to a degree.

Example:

If eight of our top Word of Faith teachers (past or present) teach on various true Word of Faith teaching. All (8) will be RIGHT/WRONG in (some areas) with each other... even in our "core" doctrine. So who IS right? Who are the REAL Word of Faith teachers? Please stand up! With these (8), I would expect ALL of them to stand up and shout, "we all are all Word of Faith teachers?"

In your thinking (Truthfrees) wouldn't all (8) of them be teaching (false) Word of Faith if all (8) are at odds with each other. All (8) KNOW that they ALL disagree in some areas (But!)... they are all good friends and pretty well regularly take turns ministering in each others church. They crusade and have conferences together. By listening for years to EACH one of these favorites, I've heard NONE... bad mouth, or put down any of each others teaching (right or wrong). It's called respect. If any one of them gets WAY out of line, I'm sure instead of (them) debating, arguing... they come together in Love, and help the one... and UNITE together in Love and continue to do what God ordained them to do... (same as us) "win the lost and equip the saints." This can be done without being inflammatory.

Is is possible that when these WoF teachers get together and discuss their differences that they actually may come into agreement on some of those differences? Absolutely! IOW, somebody may changed their minds. One may say, "you know, I have been teaching on this particular area of (WoF) for years and you showed me where I was wrong on some things, bro!"

Example:

I watch Creflo Dollar a lot (with my notebook of course) and several months ago I noticed a very noticeable change in his way of thinking on a few issues. I have watched him for years and thinking, "Why all of a sudden is he teaching on this differently? Each day I would continue listening to him in this different light, so to speak. I have already "recognised" the difference and who Creflo was styling this from.

I thought, "hey... he is sounding just like... Andrew Wommack! This went on for several days and then Creflo announced to his congregation that he really appreciated Andrew Wommack who had recently ministered and have ministered various times at World Changers International.

Now... did Creflo see some things from Wommacks' teaching that may have changed his view on some things? And (do you suppose) that maybe Wommack seen some things Creflo teaches from a different light also? Whether some of their differences were both right or wrong, or not. They respect each other. Whether there is a (little difference or a major difference) in the way we look at things in WoF teachings, Someone will be wrong but in reality... through God's eyes we ALL miss the mark.

 

[CGL1023]

Originally Posted by CGL1023 View Post
To me the confusion arises from not recognizing that God chooses to behave differently in the New Covenant than in the Old Covenant. See Isa 54:9-10; this was a prophesy fulfilled by the Cross of Jesus. In the New Covenant, we have a better covenant and God promises all people a period, the church age, of kindness and peace, lasting til the start of the tribulation.

"Kindness and peace?" In what context? Jesus said to/about the believer:

Isa 54:10 contains both "kindness" and "peace" and have an intended meaning; God knows.

I am taught that Isa 54:9-10 form the basis for James 1:13-17. God does not use evil nor does He traffic in evil during the entire duration of the New Covenant. The evil experienced over the last 2000+ years, has come exclusively from the devil.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

Isa 54:10 contains both "kindness" and "peace" and have an intended meaning; God knows.

I am taught that Isa 54:9-10 form the basis for James 1:13-17. God does not use evil nor does He traffic in evil during the entire duration of the New Covenant. The evil experienced over the last 2000+ years, has come exclusively from the devil.

Thanks for the reply. I'll look into what you reference.

I agree. God does not use/traffic in evil; or as I've said it, God does not wield evil.

 

[victoryword]

To me the confusion arises from not recognizing that God chooses to behave differently in the New Covenant than in the Old Covenant. See Isa 54:9-10; this was a prophesy fulfilled by the Cross of Jesus. In the New Covenant, we have a better covenant and God promises all people a period, the church age, of kindness and peace, lasting til the start of the tribulation.

CGL

I am afraid that I would have to disagree with you on this as well. While I accept some dispensational teaching I cannot accept the idea that God somehow changed His behavior in the New Testament. The scripture teach that God NEVER changes:

For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever (Heb. 13:8)​

If god did evil in the OT then that means He was evil and then became good in the New Testament. I can't see how that could be. What would stop Him from becoming evil again later. The simplest and most Biblical explanation is the one I provided in the OP which is that God is said to do that which he allowed or permitted.

 

[now faith]

CGL

I am afraid that I would have to disagree with you on this as well. While I accept some dispensational teaching I cannot accept the idea that God somehow changed His behavior in the New Testament. The scripture teach that God NEVER changes:

For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever (Heb. 13:8)​

If god did evil in the OT then that means He was evil and then became good in the New Testament. I can't see how that could be. What would stop Him from becoming evil again later. The simplest and most Biblical explanation is the one I provided in the OP which is that God is said to do that which he allowed or

permitted.

Deuteronomy: 30. 15. See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; 16. In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it. 17. But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; 18. I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it. 19. I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: - Bible Offline

 

[now faith]

To understand God's Word deductive reasoning is the foundation.

It is unfortunate those who seek the truth with inductive reasoning,
are simply avoiding the hard questions based on there lack of knowledge.

 

[CGL1023]

CGL

I am afraid that I would have to disagree with you on this as well. While I accept some dispensational teaching I cannot accept the idea that God somehow changed His behavior in the New Testament. The scripture teach that God NEVER changes:

For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever (Heb. 13:8)​

If god did evil in the OT then that means He was evil and then became good in the New Testament. I can't see how that could be. What would stop Him from becoming evil again later. The simplest and most Biblical explanation is the one I provided in the OP which is that God is said to do that which he allowed or permitted.

One obvious example of God changing the way He relates to man is that with the crucifixion of Jesus, He started identifying Himself as Father.

I agree with you that God does not change. I should rather have stated that God changed the way He interacts with man. I agree that what God has done was His plan from the beginning

9“For this is like the waters of Noah to Me;
For as I have sworn
That the waters of Noah would no longer cover the earth,
So have I sworn
That I would not be angry with you, nor rebuke you.
10 For the mountains shall depart
And the hills be removed,
But My kindness shall not depart from you,
Nor shall My covenant of peace be removed,”
Says the Lord, who has mercy on you.


I've displayed the text of Isa 54:9-10. This is a prophesy that is activated with the cross of Christ. We are living under its provisions which are spelled out in verses 9,10.

I cannot add anything for additional clarification because the language is so clear that it can't be misunderstood. I will accept whatever the bible scholars say this passage means.