Summary of text [comment] page 76
Sin renders us powerless. Sin puts man into bondage.
Yet, it does not destroy our human nature. It does not destroy our freedom.
Like grace, sin influences our nature [dispositions] in so far as it is at the disposal of the person as the seat of freedom [consciencespecified].
[At some point, admitting the consequences (of our short-sighted normal contexts) seems both natural (and grace-filled).
At some point, training the dispositions (to avoid short-sighted attractions or repulsions) seems natural (and grace-filled).
Schoonenberg claimed that the divine ordination can be seen in nature itself. He did not add the caveat that must be added today:
Natural vision requires grace.]
[Grace may improve our comforts or it may make them worse.
Grace does not typically not call us to immediate “feel good” solutions.
Yet, at the same time, grace fills our nature.
In the long run, we feel good after grace-inspired solutions have made us feel lousy.]
[Only by taking the perspective of the divine can we honestly assess good and evil.
Only by taking the perspective of the divine object can we honestly assess whether we are gaining grace or self-destruction.
The normal context that holds the single actuality of the intersection reflects some perspective.
But, that perspective cannot be articulated. It is in the Zeitgeist. The Scriptures are typically not excluded in the Zeitgeist. Sometimes they are.
The divine ordination calls us to thinkdivine.]
[This is a model, telling how a limiting and coercive normal context may sustain a contradiction-filled intersection in order to benefit from the conflict. The detractors are blamed for ‘the failure of the sovereign religion’s thoughts and actions’.
However, once the detractors (thinkdivine and consciencefree) are intimidated into silence, and the projection of thinkanti-object and conscienceanti-object onto innocents is obvious to all, then the inherent contradictions between the self-dealing moral system and its idolatrous actions become more and more undeniable.]
[The content-level nested form depicted in these two blogs is:
‘Sovereign self-empowerment3a’ brings the actuality that ‘programs of the Progressive religion are good’ and ‘the rational observations of detractors is bad’2a into relation with the possibilities inherent in the feelings of the citizens (such as the feeling of entitlement or disbelief) and of the authorities (such as feelings of strength and superiority)1a.
The above actuality is ‘an intersection of human intention and human action’.
The vertical nested form (of human intention) is:
ThinkProgressive3V brings the intentions of the bureaucratic elites2V into relation with the potential of the Progressive’s self-anointed conscience1V.
The alternates (of thinkdivine and consciencefree) are placed under suspicion and threat.
The horizontal nested form (of human action) is:
Explaining away the consequences3H brings the bureaucratic actions of welfare programs2H into relation with the potential of dispositions to trade freedom & responsibility for material benefits1H.]
[This is the problem of affirming the claim that ‘the good comes from us’.
We are always vested in the ordinate systems that we create.]
[Once a sovereign religion is established, a positive feedback loop increases sovereign power no matter what the state policies are.
The state always commands a we win-you lose advantage.]
