Then, since neither mountains nor trees share a will, then Paul is referring specifically to people with the word "creature" (or "creation") in Romans 8:20-21, and, according to Greek grammar, the verb phrase "was subjected" and the prepositional phrase "to futility" in Romans 8:20 must be associated with "creature"
Exactly it is referring to creation that you call creature.
You assume it(creation) is Adam and nothing else.
Where does Paul say Adam?
Kermos' calvinist bias is why it must be assumed it(creation) is Adam,
Subjected to futility, because of Adam's sin the creation is subjected to futility, God does this
Genesis 3:17-19
- Then to Adam God said, because you have heeded(obeyed Eve) the voice of your wife and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you saying, You shall not eat of it,
-
cursed is the ground for your sake,
- in toil you shall eat of it, all the days of your life
-
both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
- and you shall eat the herb of the field,
-
in the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken, for dust you are, and to dust you shall return
therefore, "the creature" "not willingly" ate of the tree forbidden as food subjecting creation to vanity yet God supplies the hope in Christ to the creatures because of the Greek grammar used by the Apostle Paul.
Kermos perverts the word of God. Nowhere in Romans 8:20 does Paul say the creation ate of the tree.
This is adding his twist on Romans 8:20. You cannot find creation eating anything in this verse.
Romans 8:20,
- For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of God who subjected it in hope
Where is Adam eating fruit from the tree God forbade him?
Kermos is making stuff up!
Nowhere in Romans 8:20-22 does Paul state that he was writing figuratively, so you confusedly change Paul's writing with no grounds.
Paul absolutely without a doubt uses figurative phrases in Romans 8:20.
This is ridiculous!!!! Paul does not have to state "I'm writing figuratively here folks"
It is understood by the context.
Paul was writing Spiritually,
Obviously,
No one would argue against this.
so Paul does include Adam in Romans 8:20-22!
No, you have Added to Gods word by teaching creation is Adam.
Adding Adam was eating from a tree in Romans 8:20.
This is interpreting scripture through the lenses of TULIP colored glasses.
Then you confusedly changed Paul's words from "not willingly" to "not at fault" when you vividly wrote "not willingly means: not of it's own fault" in your quoted post (
proof link). In Romans 8:20,
This is figurative. Paul is speaking of creation not a particular man named Adam. That is where you are inserting your biases into the text.
Yes, and words have no meaning taken out of context.
Which is exactly what you have done with the word not,
willingly.
The word pistis is Greek for faith.
It sometimes means gospel.
Other times means belief.
You cannot know the meaning of a word unless you know the context of that word being used.
Ephesians 4:5,
- One Lord, one faith(pistis), one baptism
Here the greek word pistis does not mean person belief.
Paul is using pistis to mean the gospel system by which there is only ONE.
Context matters!
Galatians 1:6-7,
- I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different
gospel, which is not another(Paul stated in Ephesians 4:5 there is only ONE gospel(pistis).
In Jude 3 the word faith(pistis) is used for the gospel that was once delivered.
Jude 3,
- Beloved while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for
the faith(pistis, gospel) which was once for all delivered to the saints
Paul uses pistis which by greek definition to mean different things based on the CONTEXT.
Words have no meaning when the context is ignored.
Or in Kermos' case, intentionally taken out of context.
this means Adam's will was not involved with eating of tree forbidden as food thus subjecting creation to futility per Paul in Romans 8:20.
Above is Kermos' wrong interpretation that Adam had no will of his own to eat of the tree which was sin.
This is the reason Kermos' interpreting the Bible proves why he is irrational and confused.
Why would any rational person accept his explanation of why Adam sinned?
It makes no sense that God would punish Adam if Adam commited sin not willingly!!!
According to Kermos Romans 8:20 has Adam eating of the tree not willingly,
So the question that Kermos needs to answer is,
Why does God punish Adam when Adam took no part in choosing to eat of the tree?
Adam according to Kermos played no part in his own actions.
Kermos' reasoning is ridiculous and this is why his position cannot be rationally explained.
Any belief that cannot hold up against scrutiny must be abandoned.
Kermos doesn't think. He just repeats the same illogical theology because he is a dyed in the wool hardcore calvinist that cannot be reasoned with.
Folks who cannot be reasoned with are a waste of time.
Matthew 7:6,
- Do not give what is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine lest they trample them under their feet and turn and tear you in pieces