06/14/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2U-2

[What has the person not seen?

Perhaps, “she” has not seen the situation-level nested form. “She” has not seen how “her” divine nature situates “her” feelings of attraction. “She” becomes smaller. In modern terms, “she” objectifies “herself”. “Her” carnal expectations situates “her” feelings of attraction.

“She” does not sense “her” self-destruction.]

06/9/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2S

Summary of text [comment] page 72

Schoonenberg quoted 1 John 4:20. If anyone says, “I love God”, yet hates his brother, he is a liar. He who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.

Is ‘love for what we see’ intrinsic to ‘the love for what we do not see’? When we love our fellow human in his deepest reality, we love him, implicitly or explicitly, in God.

06/8/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2R

Summary of text [comment] page 71

[In sum, ‘the idea of natural love’ is pure propaganda.

It moves the interpellated person away from what the human evolved to be.

Where does one see this idea propagated in contemporary society?

On television and in the movies?

In popular books and magazines?

Wake up.

Does anyone writing for popular television, movies, books and magazines suffer the consequences of misleading their consumers?

Let the buyer beware.

‘Natural love’ sells, just like perfume.]

06/2/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2P

Summary of text [comment] page 71

[A brief review of male-female pair bonding is in order.

The human male evolved to be the female’s helper.

This adaptation could not take place without assurance by the female of the male’s paternity of the children.

The female evolved a hard to fake behavior that provides this crucial assurance.

She put the male in charge of the family.]