04/23/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 LB

[Before his conversion, Paul was not so different from other members of the Jewish elite. He yearned for recognition, not for material goods.

What type of recognition?

Paul wanted to be recognized as more righteous than his peers.

He was not covetous, like those other grasping elites.

Oh yes, he was better.

He enforced the Law.]

04/20/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 LA

[Plus, there are three types of desire: the desire to approach, the desire to avoid, and the desire to not be bothered.

I cannot approach my inadequacy in fulfilling the laws as interpreted by the Saducees and Pharisees2a.

I cannot avoid my inadequacy in fulfilling the laws as interpreted by the Saducees and Pharisees2a.

But, I can desire not to be bothered by it.

Weirdly, this supports the modern notion of “freedoms” as negative rights. The original American constitution establishes the freedom not to be constrained by the state (religion).]

04/18/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 KY

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[Complicated rules for ritual purity facilitated a bondage of perpetual inadequacy2a(1a).

The Judean elite mirror of the world3a brought ‘something2a’ into relation with the possibilities inherent in me1a.

‘Something2a’ was my inadequacy in fulfilling the laws as interpreted by the Saducees and Pharisees2a.]

04/17/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 KX

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[At the time of Christ, the mirror of the world3a reflected family and tribal traditions plus religious demands of ritual purity.

‘Something2a’ attempted to satisfy the words and the bondage of these thought experiments.

‘Something2a’ attempted to satisfy the expectations of tribe or family plus the religious expectations of ritual purity.

So the possibilities inherent in me1a were capped by a double burden.

Weirdly, this supports the modern notion of “freedom” as not being constrained by tribal, family or ritual obligations.]

04/16/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 KW

[Obligations went from responsibilities to words.

The words of the Law put the majority in bondage.

Common folk (the so-called “deplorables”) were required to meet traditional family and tribal obligations.

They were never adequate when it came to ritual purity. They were good people, but they were cast as losers

All they could hope for was to avoid accusations of thinkanti-object, that is, rumors that would ruin one’s life and relations.

Does that sound vaguely familiar for today’s (2017) America?]

04/13/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 KV

[Amazingly, the children of Israel returned to their homeland.

Interpretations of the Mosaic Law were formulated, in the centuries before Christ, by an (infra)sovereign religion.

Obligations were formulated according to a thinkpro-object obsessed with ritual purity. The Saduccees and Pharisees became experts in the obligations of ritual purity. This expertise was a ticket to wealth and status.]

04/12/18

Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 KU

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[So what happened?

I continue my guess.

Obviously, problems came from establishing a king.

The formation of a sovereign encouraged competition among contending points of view. Sovereign power offered opportunities for exploitation. Royal decrees put people in bondage. The court deprived the people of what they own.

The kingdoms of Israel and Judah failed due to royal immorality and incompetence, as well as the alienation of their own subjects.

Oh, plus an attacking empire.]