Chapter # 11 Paragraph # 6 Study # 4
July 14, 2019
Humble, Texas

• I. Who "Knew" and "Became"?
  • A. Both of Paul's verbs are "aorists" which indicate a past "event".
  • B. Both verbs insist upon a "past" wherein a "Who?" was comprehensively engaged in a process of "becoming".
    • 1. This fundamentally eliminates "deity" from the "Who?" and simultaneously posits a sufficiently long time for a "non-God" to examine all of the details of what God knows so that he/she "became" qualified to sit in on the process of God's "determining" and "help" to guide the considerations to their conclusions.
    • 2. This also, therefore, becomes an impossible question: since no one can "become" acquainted with "all that God knows", there is no possibility that anyone can "become" a "counsellor" to Him.
• II. The "Mind" of the Lord.
  • A. Six uses of this word in Romans.
    • 1. A reference to a "reprobate" mind in 1:28 that results in "doing" things that are reprehensible.
      • a. It is a judgment of God for refusing to consider a "relational knowledge" (epignosis) of Him a desirable thing.
      • b. This "mind", then, is a fountainhead of activities; it generates behavior.
      • c. Even God, from Paul's perspective, does not "escape" this reality: whatever the "mind" of the Lord is determines what the Lord does.
    • 2. A second reference which concerns a "law of the mind" that is "under-capable" (i.e., "weak in the face of") when the "law of sin" is dominant within the members of a person (7:23). In this context, the doings are not from the "mind", but from a deeper source.
    • 3. A third reference, which builds off of the second, wherein a person's "mind" is overruled by the bondage of the "flesh" to the "law of sin" (7:25). Thus, there is an undercurrent of "reality" that is capable of "steamrolling" the "mind" if there is sufficient "power" available for the "steamroller". This raises the question of "God's Steamroller": What, in God, is more potent than His "mind"? Since God is not incapable at any level regarding any legitimate thought, He does not have a "steamroller" to which He is subject. Only men are "under-capable".
    • 4. The fourth reference is the text presently under our consideration.
    • 5. The fifth is in 12:2 and it indicates that the "mind" can be "made new again" so that its possessor is "transformed" into one who has a "mind" that approves (the same term used in 1:28) being in relationship with God regarding His "good", "acceptable", and "perfect" will.
    • 6. The final use by Paul is in 14:5 where he insists that "faith" is "mental" in that it is "in the mind" wherein a person comes to an "awareness" of what is pleasing to God and what is not. The requirement, here, is that the "mind" be "fully persuaded" before any action is embraced. And, again, this does not apply to God Who is incapable of "being" in any kind of doubt about anything. This means that "mind" functions differently with men than with God because, apparently, men's "minds" are not supreme, being too ignorant about too many things.
  • B. When it comes to "the mind of the Lord", we are actually looking at the idea of "omniscience" as a part of the "glory" of the Lord which man can never possess.
    • 1. The Spirit possesses this "glory" and His possession of it is treated metaphorically in 1 Corinthians 2:10 where the notion of His "searching" into the "deep things of God" is stated (He really doesn't have to "search", but the idea is for us to have a better grasp of His "knowing" since, if we were capable of such a "search" we might find out a lot of things: this gives us a sense of the Spirit's awareness of all things; His omniscience).
    • 2. Even Paul's term for "know" in our verse strongly implies a "search" in that this kind of "knowing" is rooted in "active interaction" such as a diligent search would yield.
• III. A "Counselor" of the Lord.
  • A. Paul is the only one who uses this word in the New Testament and he only uses it this one time in the entire body of his letters.
  • B. The word is a composite word that adds a prefix to a word that signals a "determined decision". The addition of this prefix indicates that the "determined decision" was a "group" effort. Paul's question here is whether God has ever had a "creature group" (non-Gods) to influence His determinations. According to Hebrews 6:17, God's "determinations" are "immutable" and that is a "truth" that needs to be deeply embraced. No "creature" has/will ever become qualified to give input to God as to what "needs to be decided upon and pursued".
• IV. A "Pre-giver" to God.
  • A. The word is also used only once in the entire New Testament.
  • B. It is also a composite word that takes a very widely used verbal concept and adds a prefix to it to specify "an earlier issue". It means "to give before anyone else" with an understanding that the "giving" comes with "attachments" (at least one; the need to respond). Like the original question, this raises the spectre of someone who initiates action toward God as if the "initiator" was "ahead" of God in the action taken. This would, technically, make the "initiator" God and make God less than Who He is. The impossibility is obvious.
• V. A "Recipient" From God.
  • A. The "receiving back" is conditioned upon the previous "giving": God is now "obligated" by a prior-to-Him action by an impossible "Who?" to respond and "repay".
  • B. Paul is asking obvious questions: his goal is to exalt the "depth of the wealth of the wisdom and knowledge" that has resulted in "unsearchable judgments and ways beyond anyone's ability to trace out so as to see the end from the beginning".