08/23/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2 BE

Summary of text [comment] pages 72 and 73

Schoonenberg ‘s claim, that every virtue becomes impossible for man living in sin, is not new. Augustine thought likewise. The Council of Carthage said that grace is necessary for fallen man, so as not to commit sin, in order to will and to be able to do what we realize we must do, and so obey God’s commandments. Nobody is good by himself. Nobody uses his freedom of choice in the right way except through Christ.

The 12th century Council of Sens condemned the assertion that our free choice is, by itself, capable of some good.

08/22/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2 BD

[Yet, there is an ambiguity.

Love as a ‘state of grace’ may be actual.

But, love also belongs to the realms of normal context and possibility.

The same word is used for all three categories.

I suspect that both love and grace share this character.

One word applies to three realms.]

08/17/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2 BA-3

[The Progressive button cannot continue to hide the buttonhole of God’s opening to love.

When will viewers and critics realize that they are watching the same moral lesson over and over again in mainstream television dramas and comedies? Why do the characters never really develop into human beings?

Look how TV, as a way of talking, exploits.

Only when the button slips from the buttonhole will we find virtue, as well as our own shameful undoing.

This will come long after most of us have turned, from television, to other ways of talking.]

08/12/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2 AY

[Televisionaries transformed ‘love (agape)’ into ‘something that does not proceed from grace and that requires no conversion’. They have transformed ‘freedom’ into ‘celebrity and slavery’.

The real victims are the unsuspecting folk who do not watch Progressive television.

They have no idea what is going on, especially when they are suddenly branded as ‘bad ones’.]

08/11/16

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.2 AX

[Progressive television – ideological broadcasting – redefines ‘freedom’ as ‘without obligations’.

Yet, when the hero saves the victim (standing in for the disempowered viewer), the victim is emotionally obligated to the hero (standing in for the television producers and their Progressive religions).

These redefinitions produce an idol of unreal love (where television elites and disempowered viewers are united in hatred against a foe).

These redefinitions produce differential freedoms (the television elites are not obligated to the viewer victims, but the viewer victims are emotionally obligated to the elites).]