Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 DN
[These post-religionist enlightenment gods constitute the theological actuality in the modern objectrelation. They substitute for a Christocentric Godhead.]
07/18/17
Category Archives: message underlying religion
06/9/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 CN
[How to Define the Word ‘Religion’ offers another viewpoint.
The message underlying the word religion is an intersection.
The intersection consists of a nested form for reason, the divided vertical axes, and a nested form for the body, the horizontal axis.
I label the single actuality composed of human thought and human action: ‘what is virtue and what is sin’.]
05/8/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 BR
Summary of text [comment] page 82
[The entire person, body and soul, was vulnerable to hearing what I want to hear and acting against the good (of thinkdivine and lawessential).]
03/30/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 AT-2
[The person who chains his conscience to a thinkgroup lacks ‘the freedom to be righteous before the Lord’. That person has no bones. That person is spineless.
At the same time, the person cannot deny the feeling in “her” bones. The bones long to stand righteous before the Lord.
Therefore, the opposition between flesh and bones serves as a metaphor for the exclusive yet interpellating relation between consciencelacking and consciencefree.
The flesh may be sold into the bondage of sin. The bones cannot be sold. The bones always want to lift the flesh back up, back to where it is supposed to be, standing righteous before the Lord.
What a remarkable way to portray the conflict within us.]
03/14/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 AI
Summary of text [comment] page 80
[I designate the specification of conscience as lacking freedom as ‘consciencelacking’.
The terms ‘powers’, ‘tendencies’, ‘instincts’ and ‘passions’ enumerate features the dispositions. These features may be distinguished but not separated from consciencespecified.
Sinful acts consolidate the realm of possibility, promoting the specification of conscience and the narrowing of dispositions.
To me, it seems, contra Schoonenberg, that an integration may accompany sinful acts, but that integration coincides with the idea of an evil attitude and an inability for the good.
Sinful integration yearns to exclude thinkdivine and consciencefree.
But it cannot last long, since …
… lawessential eventually comes into play.]
03/9/17
03/8/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 AF-1
Summary of text [comment] page 80
Schoonenberg claimed that actions are always more than their external manifestations. They are more than their limited content.
Each external manifestation passes away, but not completely. A long lasting disposition or attitude remains.
After murder, hatred lingers. After impurity, egoistic desire agitates.
[How to say this in terms of nested forms?
Consider the intersection describing the message underlying the word ‘religion’.
The intersection of two nested forms yields a single actuality: What is virtue and what is sin.
This single actuality is the fusion of two: human action and human thoughts.
Human acts and human thoughts are always contextualized by justifications (thinkgroup_or_divine) and admissions (lawaccept_or_deny). Human acts always situate both conscience and dispositions.]
03/7/17
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 AE
Summary of text [comment] page 80
[Once we have adopted a thinkgroup that ordinates us to seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, no matter whether these pleasures or pains are material or immaterial, we are hooked by that particular religion, even if we deny that ‘it is a religion’.
We step into Schoonenberg’s analysis of sin.
The inclination to evil is a sequel to sin.]