This post harkens back to a post done during the time when Barak Obama was president of the United States, that showed that America was under judgment because Americans had put a child in the office of President.

In his Friday News Notes, David Cloud made the comment that “I believe it is very possible that both Trump and Biden are judgments of God.” That’s almost laughable. Not because it isn’t true, but because it is so glaringly obvious that they are both infantile, self-absorbed adults that never got beyond the emotional and mental age of 12.

The list of outright egregious things, both said and done, by both Trump and Biden is very long. Doing a Google search for the nonsensical, self-absorbed things spoken by both Trump and Biden yields a bountiful harvest. Neither man is particularly intelligent, but both think they are intellectual giants. Then Sen. Biden’s cringe-worthy performance in the Clarence Thomas hearings brought to light just how self-absorbed Joe Biden is. But Trump fares no better, as he has lost more money by being in business, than he would have if he had just invested it in the markets. Both men are dishonest beyond belief. Both act like gangsters.

And yet, Americans have propelled both these fools to the pinnacle of political power.

America, the joke’s on you, as is the judgment.

Righteousness is the quality of being equal in all one’s ways. Conversely, iniquity is the quality of being unequal in any of one’s ways. Righteousness is the absence of iniquity in everything one is responsible for. As such, righteousness is predicated upon the conditions of one’s existence. Only the LORD God is totally and infinitely righteous, with all of His creatures tasked with having to meet the limited righteousness of their established existence. For man, this originally meant that he was required to meet one, single test: To not partake, in any way, of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. For angels, this meant they were to maintain their prescribed station for which they were created.

The Fall of Man consisted of becoming unequal to the commandment by transgression, which yielded sin. The fall of angels consisted of leaving their prescribed station and rebelling against the LORD God and choosing to follow Lucifer. The fall of Lucifer consisted of determining that he, in and of himself, was deserving of the throne of God.

The order of the fall from righteousness consists of first becoming unequal in one’s heart, and acting upon that inequality, thus transgressing one’s prescribed station, which yields sin, which is defined as ‘missing the mark.’ The state of iniquity colors and alters one’s existence so that one cannot accurately perceive equity without assistance, and is unable to determine how to become righteous in and of themselves. In fact, this distortion of equity requires that one be made completely new before they can become righteous. Hence, existence in the state of iniquity means that one abides in eternal darkness.

Scripture References

Ezekiel 18:25-30; Malachi 2:6; Psalm 107:42; Jeremiah 9:23-24; Psalm 145:17; Psalm 147:5; Ezekiel 3:20; Ezekiel 33:12; James 2:8-11; Ezekiel 18:4; Ezekiel 33:10-11; Philippians 3:4-6; Ezekiel 44:10-12; Genesis 2:16-17; Romans 5:12-14; Revelation 12:3-4; Jude 1:6; II Peter 2:4; Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:14-19; Genesis 3:2-6; Matthew 23:25-28; Jeremiah 33:8; Psalm 32:5; Job 13:23; Isaiah 59:1-14; Matthew 15:7-20; Romans 3:10-20; Hebrews 11:1-6; John 3:3-8; Romans 6:2-7; Jude 1:4-13.

Scriptures

It isn’t like this is news. Rather, it shouldn’t be news that man is a creature of hypocrisy. Nonetheless, some hypocrisies are easier to bear than others.

There are a lot of hypocrisies surrounding the issue of firearms and firearms ownership. There are also a lot of hypocrisies surrounding the issue of abortion. Generally, those supporting abortion are the more hypocritical of the two camps. The reason for this is quite simple:

Anytime you kill someone for no greater purpose than avoiding personal responsibility, you have entered morally indefensible territory.

Without doubt, the vast majority of abortions take place for no greater reason than it is inconvenient for the woman to be pregnant.

And yet, people pitch a fit over an 18 yr old going off the deep end and murdering a classroom full of kids — but the violence of a mother against her unborn child, resulting in its death goes without notice. In fact, it is accepted as “normal.”

This is an utterly hypocritical position to hold.

Moreover, there is a subtle, unspoken message sent by this situation:

That life only matters — so long as your life isn’t inconvenienced. If you are inconvenienced, then life is of no consequence, and whoever it is that is inconveniencing you should be removed.

It is ironic that adults don’t realize that kids can spot this hypocrisy easily. Kids know that if it inconveniences an adult, they will fall last on the list. That is the clear message Salvador Ramos obviously got throughout his rather disturbing childhood.

Salvador Ramos is solely responsible for the decisions he made as a result of this. Nonetheless, the society is responsible for sending this horrendously hypocritical message.

There are no innocent parties here. The society that exists in America is responsible for the callous way it treats individuals, and the individuals are responsible for how they choose to respond to society.

By the way, the government cannot fix this — except to removed any protection for abortion. The rest of the correction of this situation must come from each and every individual.

Back in April of 2011, I wrote a post critical of Barak Obama for his childish behavior. This was a year before Obama ran for, and was elected to a second term. The post is very clear that Barak Obama was, and still is in many respects, a child. I wrote nothing else about Obama for the duration of his time in office as I really didn’t have time to write, and it was clear that America was content with a child president.

That contentment with an infantile president was amply demonstrated in 2016 and since, by the election of Donald Trump as president. I actually thought that America would not elect a president more childish than Obama, as Americans would become sick of his childishness. I was wrong.

Rather, Americans have doubled-down on insisting on having a child for president. If anything, Donald Trump is far more childish than Obama. Trump is also far more erratic and unstable, exhibiting serious signs of mental instability, even to the point of delusional pronouncements such as the following gems:

“Big areas don’t want sanctuary cities. They want to be safe. They don’t want them. We had to fund our military. Our military was depleted.” (Yes, the “sentences” run back to back, without pause.)

“Six years ago, I wasn’t even running. The Republican of the year award. Maybe they knew what was going to happen.” (This was 2017 and six years previous Trump did not get any such award)

(The following is from November, 2019. If you can follow it, it’s pretty wild. It’s also not coherent)
“The light bulb — they got rid of the light bulb that people got used to. The new bulb is many times more expensive and — I hate to say it — it doesn’t make you look as good. Of course, being a vain person, that’s very important to me. It’s like — it gives you an orange look. I don’t want an orange look. Has anyone noticed that? So we’ll have to change those bulbs in at least a couple rooms where I am in the White House. … We have a situation where we’re looking very strongly at sinks and showers. And other elements of bathrooms — where you turn the faucet on, in areas where there’s tremendous amounts of water, where the water rushes out to sea because you could never handle it — and you don’t get any water. You turn on the faucet and you don’t get any water. They take a shower and water comes dripping out, just dripping out, very quietly, dripping out. People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times, as opposed to once. They end up using more water. So EPA is looking at that very strongly, at my suggestion. You go into a new building, or a new house or a new home, and they have standards where you don’t get water. You can’t wash your hands practically, so little water comes out of the faucet. And the end result is you leave the faucet on and it takes you much longer to wash your hands. .. For the most part. you have many states where they have so much water, it comes down — it’s called rain. They don’t know what to do with it. … A lot of things we do are based on common sense. If I didn’t get elected you wouldn’t have a steel industry. … We weren’t going to have a steel industry.”

There a literally dozens of such pronouncements from Donald Trump. Each of them disconnected from reality. Yet, the Republicans see no problem with this and do not even question Trump’s fitness for the office of the Presidency.

This is literally children reinforcing the bad behavior of a child, instead of acting as a check and balance on Trump’s behavior.

Thus, it bears repeating:

Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child, and thy princes eat in the morning! (Ecclesiastes 10:16)

And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable. (Isaiah 3:4-5)

Truly, America has a child ruling over it, and children in positions of authority. This is a curse from the LORD God. This will not end well.

On May 23, the New York Times Editorial Board decided to weigh in on the “same sex” marriage referendum in Ireland.

Granted, the Irish decided to continue down the road to national oblivion in approving “same sex” marriage as legal in their constitution. However, that is Ireland’s business if they are insane enough to do that. But, it hasn’t helped Ireland that it has been on the wrong side of history for quite a few decades now. Ireland has been steadily going down the road to cradle to grave socialism for quite some time now – and it has had its effect.

Presently, Irish debt to GDP is at 123%, which means they owe more than they can make. In short, they are economically bankrupt. However, that mirrors the moral situation perfectly, as they are morally bankrupt as well.

Nevertheless, that is Ireland’s problem, and not the United States’ problem. However, the New York Times decided to stick its nose in that situation, sniff, and then pontificate to us poor, unwashed, unenlightened masses about how worthless our values and morals are.

Specifically, what they stated is this:

“In a statement conceding defeat, the Iona Institute, the main opposition group, said it would continue to affirm “the importance of biological ties and of motherhood and fatherhood.” The absurdity of that statement speaks for itself.” ((The Victory for Same-Sex Marriage in Ireland))

I suppose the members of the Editorial Board of the Times entered the world as hatchlings? They surely couldn’t be human, because humans require a mother and a father. When we don’t have that, it is destabilizing.

It is quite clear that children that have both a father and mother who are present and accounted for, do far better than children in any other “arrangement” that exists. If you really care to dispute that, then look at the crime demographics, particularly for children of unwed mothers, or children of households in which one parent is missing. Kindly look at the suicide rate for those who identify themselves as “gay.” Examine the suicide rate for children of those “non-traditional” households.

I guess the New York Times thinks these are good things?

However, that is not the end of the story. The Times Editorial Board evidently thinks that history doesn’t matter. They would do well to note that the rise of Western Civilization was built on families which had a mother and a father. Western Civilization is being torn down and destroyed even as the “traditional” family is collapses. So it is that the short-sighted journalists of the Times cannot see that they are cheerleading destruction and degradation.

I am well aware that the Times Editorial Board does not believe in the LORD God. Thus it is virtually pointless to warn them about history and the witness of every society on earth which has turned this way. All those societies were destroyed. I am certain the Times is totally blind to that. Thus, it would be pointless to warn them.

That’s okay. They will have all eternity to figure it out.

Do you have the inherent right to abort a child?

Do you have the inherent right to abort the life of anyone?

I had a lengthy conversation with a gentleman today. During that conversation he brought up a point that was dead on applicable to so much of the culture we live in. The belief that so many have regarding whether they have a “right” to perform some action doesn’t seem to be grounded in anything — period. The specific topic at that point in the conversation was atheism and the inane idea atheists have about how everything came to be. With regard to the creation of things, he made a statement that was profound in its implications. I don’t know whether he came up with this or heard it and repeated it, but it is well worth considering and taking to heart particularly in certain contexts, such as the abortion debate:

If you can’t create it, you have no business destroying it.

However much anyone might like to claim, getting pregnant is not a sure thing for any woman. Moreover, the child that is destroyed in an abortion, cannot be brought back to life again. Unless the person killing the child has the power to bring it back to life again, they have no business killing the child.

If you do not have the inherent power to create life and bring the dead back to life, then you don’t have the inherent right to take life.

This is why that all taking of life must be legally justified. The state cannot take life unless the person deprives another of their life, and that is proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. The individual cannot take life unless theirs is imminently threatened. There must be a compelling, beyond the shadow of a doubt reason for life to be taken — and for such a drastic action to be justified.

Otherwise, you are simply a murderer.

— End of story —

 On January 15, in the wake of the Islamist attacks on the French Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine, the Pope came out and had the following to say about the violent attacks ((I should note here that the Vatican website notes that the interview took place, but somehow doesn’t have the text. Emphasis in bold is mine.))

“You cannot provoke,” Pope Francis said on Thursday. “You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.”

Though he defended the principle of free expression and paid lip service to the notion that violence is always wrong, he warned “you can’t make a toy out of the religions of others.”

“To kill in the name of God is an aberration,” Francis said. However, he added that it was natural for those who have been insulted to lash out violently.

“In freedom of expression, there are limits, like in regard to my mom,” Francis continued. “If he says a swear word against my mother, he’s going to get a punch in the nose. That’s normal.” ((http://hotair.com/archives/2015/01/15/the-latest-to-justify-religious-violence-pope-francis/))

I wonder if the Pope really understands the difference between children and adults? Children get offended at many things and never allow an offense to pass. Adults, on the other hand, can be insulted and overlook the offensive statement, understanding that words spoken or written reflect far more on the one speaking or writing, than on what is spoken of, or written about. Apparently Pope Francis does not understand that distinction at all.

Perhaps that is because the Pope shares far more with the immature persons in the Muslim world than he does with any sort of maturity level sought for in rational western culture. At least at one time in western culture, striving to be as mature and understanding as possible was a goal.

It certainly is a desired for goal from a Scriptural point of view. In the Scripture we are admonished continually to grow and be mature and let nothing offend us. We are continually encouraged and exhorted to not be children.

But, there again, being a Catholic, the chances of the Pope actually reading the Scripture to receive that exhortation are slim to none. To defend childish behavior as normal, certainly indicates he didn’t.

Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. (Psalm 119:165)

While doing research on what various Christian denominations and groups believe about the origin of sin, I ran across the following article “Where Did Sin Come From?” which explored the question of the origin of sin. The summation of the article did not answer the question at all, but left the reader with the following questions:

To answer our question, ‘Where did sin come from?’, we make the following conclusions:

1. Although Lucifer spawned the first sin, he was not the creator of the concept of sin.
2. The concept of sin has always been known to the all-knowing God.
3. Sin exists because—either it is a created concept of God brought about by God’s decrees, or, it has always co-existed as the eternal antithesis of everything that God is.
4. Sin could only experientially exist because, although God cannot sin, He made creatures who could.

I could not bear it, and emailed the webmaster with the following question:

Who wrote this nonsense? Give me a name please.

And listed the questions above. I then finished with the following statement:

This evidences a complete and total lack of understanding. Whoever wrote this, missed the mark.

The gentleman who wrote it answered back, and was gracious (considering my initial contact email) and stated that I had contested, but gave no reasons for disagreement. Moreover, he would be glad to address my concerns.

Fair enough. After all, had he been less than gracious, I would have deserved it. I thanked him for being gracious, and sent the following reply:

Sin has a cause, and that is transgression, which is brought about because of iniquity:

And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. (Jeremiah 33:8)

Iniquity leads to transgression, which immediately results in sin.

Iniquity is the property of being unequal in any of one’s ways:

Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?  (Ezekiel 18:29-31)

When the LORD states that the ways of the people of Israel are unequal, and He then calls them to turn so iniquity will not be their ruin, He is defining what iniquity is. To help in our understanding, we can use the analogy of a math equation (which is an equality):

In thinking about equations: If we introduce into it any element that makes it unequal, what are our chances of making it equal if we don’t realize what we did? What are our chances of actually realizing we introduced an inequality? Moreover, if our understanding is not accurate because we perceive the equation wrongly (unequally — that is, not as it actually is), what are our chances of self-correction?

When a mistake is made working an equation, generally the person does not realize they erred, else they stop immediately and correct the error. However, the divergence with righteousness and iniquity here is that once a thought exists, it cannot be unthought or taken back. Since it is that the LORD judges the thoughts of the heart, once Lucifer had that one thought of being more glorious that the LORD on the throne, he committed an iniquity. Due to the very nature of inequality, he could not go back, nor find his way back.Because of this iniquity, pride arose, and Satan viewed himself to be better than the LORD God in numerous ways. Hence, he rebelled.

Now to look at righteousness: Being righteous is being equal in all one’s ways (which only the LORD God is):

Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.  (Psalms 98:9)

Here, like in Ezekiel, the LORD defines another term. Only in this case, it is righteousness. Putting the two together: Righteousness is the property of being equal in ALL one’s ways, and iniquity is the property of being unequal in ANY of one’s ways. It is of necessity true that if righteousness requires for all ways to be equal, that being (or becoming) unequal in any of one’s ways, means that one has iniquity. Moreover, like the math equation, being unequal in one part, spreads to every other part — and it grows.

Once one cannot perceive correctly because of being unequal (iniquity), the determination of what is the right thing to do is clouded and misperceived. It is easy to see then how we can transgress the bounds if we have difficulty perceiving where the bounds are. As soon as we transgress, we have missed the mark (sinned).

Briefly, to answer the final points you put forth in the article:

To answer our question, ‘Where did sin come from?’, we make the following conclusions: [My answers are in square brackets — italics for the web]

1. Although Lucifer spawned the first sin, he was not the creator of the concept of sin. [There is no “concept of sin.” Sin is not a concept. Rather, is a direct result of transgression (which is exceeding the bounds – thus missing the mark), which is brought about because of iniquity. Satan exercised iniquity because he thought in his heart that he was better than the LORD sitting on the throne he was covering (the descriptions of both the LORD and Satan are in the Scriptures, and that difference is significant). The “problem” is that the LORD gave both angels and men freewill and the ability to judge, but they were not given omniscience. Hence, perception and understanding were limited. Satan lost sight of who created him and gave him all that he had. To man, Satan is beyond genius. But he lost sight of the fact that he was GIVEN that. Just like his beauty and musical ability, his intelligence was given him by the LORD God. However, once he lost sight of that, it was a mere thought of the heart to become unequal – which slipped him into iniquity. Now Satan can never return from that, but only gets more and more unequal over time.]

2. The concept of sin has always been known to the all-knowing God. [No, the fact that creatures with free-will and the ability to judge, yet not having omniscience would have the potential to slip into iniquity, was known to the LORD God. Nevertheless, He chose to create them that way, and would deal with the consequences. The LORD God already knew what those consequences were, but He desired to create beings that would love Him of their own volition. The very nature of free-will, combined with the ability to judge, creates a situation in which the potential for iniquity exists. However, for love to be genuine, the will must be free, and to actually choose freely, one must be able to judge independently – that is, of oneself, given the facts to make a determination.]

3. Sin exists because—either it is a created concept of God brought about by God’s decrees, or, it has always co-existed as the eternal antithesis of everything that God is. [This is a false choice. We are to choose between the LORD God being the ultimate author of sin, or the core of Taoism? This is expressly man’s view, which lacks understanding of iniquity and righteousness.]

4. Sin could only experientially exist because, although God cannot sin, He made creatures who could. [Here you are closest to being right, but answer no questions. You would have to explain what you mean by “He made creatures who could.” How, and in what way?]

You are getting the essence of the doctrine. This is by no means extensive in addressing the ramifications of iniquity. But, it should briefly explain where sin came from. Of course, if you are of Calvinist or Reformed persuasion, you will likely reject everything I say.

In Christ,

Paul W. Davis

In the Scripture the following account is given of an interaction between the Lord Jesus Christ and a young man:

And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. (Matthew 19:16-21)

In light of the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, please answer the following questions:

1. If Calvinism is true, why did the Lord Jesus Christ lie to the young man?
2. Why did he not tell him that he was not ordained to eternal life, and there was no point in trying?
3. Surely Jesus knew the young man would not believe. Why did he string him along with a promise he had no intention of fulfilling?
4. In fact, what he told the young man couldn’t be fulfilled as the man was obviously not ordained to life. Why did Jesus do this?

Why did the Calvinist Jesus deceive the man (and everyone else who has knowledge of this incident) and lie to him? How is this righteous?

Here’s the short answer: It isn’t.

Moreover, no amount of logic twisting and distorting the words of Scripture are going to make it so. How can it be acceptable for the Lord Jesus to not tell the man the truth of his predicament? After all, in Matthew 23, he told the Pharisees the truth of their predicament? What would be the difference here?

If you tell one, you have to tell the other. That is the only righteous way to deal with both situations. That is the only way that is equal.

Don’t be like the Catholics and tell me “It’s a mystery.” That is a cop out and a dodge. Besides, it is obvious that there can only be one answer under Calvinist doctrine:

This ‘Jesus’ committed iniquity.

And, since the Calvinist Jesus committed iniquity, how does he pay for the sins of anyone else? How is he that “perfect sacrifice” which is necessary for the payment of the sins of those he ‘saves?’

I would like an honest answer. Unfortunately, based upon all my interaction with those holding Calvinist/Reformed doctrine, I am not going to hold my breath waiting for it. I have yet to meet one that is intellectually honest.

Still, it would be good to see the explanation.

Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. (Ezekiel 18:29-30)

Why is it that the LORD God is able to maintain His righteousness, or the equality of all His ways in and of Himself.

To begin with, the LORD God is omniscient, that is, He knows all things. This is not merely having all knowledge, (which we typically think of as mere information) but includes all understanding of that information, and all wisdom to properly apply that information.

We must understand that having knowledge, which is information, is not merely enough, but one must know the significance of that information, which is understanding. One must also know how to apply the information to everything that concerns them. The ability to properly apply the information and understanding one has, is called wisdom. The Scripture is express that the LORD God’s understanding is infinite, which of necessity, means that His knowledge is infinite, or omniscient.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite. (Psalm 147:5)

Understanding in itself is a kind of knowledge. It does not simply deal with information, but deals with the significance of that information: that is what that information means and how it relates to everything else. Understanding is essential to wisdom, for without understanding, there is simply no way to determine the weight, or significance of one thing versus another: whether something is to be of concern, or whether it can be ignored, or is of lesser significance.

Hence, we are led to wisdom, which is essential for the construct of things. Wisdom in itself is a kind of knowledge. It is the knowledge of how information is to be applied and how it will work out as things interact. Without it, it would have been impossible for the LORD God to create anything that worked. And yet, so wise is the LORD in His creation that even in a corrupted state, it still is a wonder to behold and works quite well.

To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever. (Psalm 136:5)

The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens. (Proverbs 3:19)

Thus, when we say the LORD God is omniscient, it, in practical terms, means that the LORD God knows all that exists, and knows all the significance of everything, and is able to properly weight that information and thus apply it properly and correctly to every situation that exists or could exist, for all eternity.

In sum, the LORD God knows all things, and all out-workings that are and can be of those things and their interaction with all other things, for all time and eternity. Moreover, He knows that He knows all things which are, and knows that He knows all out-workings that are and will be. Additionally, the LORD God knows there is nothing else to know that can be known.

Without this knowledge and understanding, maintaining His righteousness would be impossible as He must know the end, and possible ends of everything that is or could be. Else, there exists the possibility of any action made by the LORD God that would be unequal in its end. This would yield unrighteousness, which is impossible with the LORD God.

But ominscience is not enough to maintain righteousness. It is not sufficient to merely have all knowledge so that in all workings accomplished, the end of all is known. Rather, one must also love equity or equality:

Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)

The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD’S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright. (Psalm 11:4-7)

(Here I speak as a man, from man’s perspective): Without a love for righteousness, there is no motivator to be righteous, though one may know all things which are, or could be, and the outworking of them all,

The LORD God delights in equity in all things, and in all His ways. It is His greatest pleasure to see things which are equal, balanced and true. Whether that equity, which is righteousness, is from the things He makes directly, or from His creatures, it is a delight to His soul to behold them.

Without this love for equity, righteousness and truth, which is in and of Himself, coupled with His omniscience, which is in and of Himself, righteousness would not be maintained.

This post updated and expanded — 07/21/2014