“Please unpick this gem from a popular teacher in the charismaniac movement. Sorry there is no context, but this kind gentleman doesn’t seem to bother either.
“’Sin is often justified when a persons awareness of God’s heart is replaced with the emotional gratification of self will.'”
-Commenter, Store in a Cool Dry Place
*
Commenter SCDP knows just what kind of gifts Argo loves to get in his stocking. This comment is ripe for the picking, and pick it we shall. We shall not unpick, as SCDP suggests, but shall pick it, roots (which extend to hell) and all, and then we shall toss it into the refuse like so much brown cabbage.
And it is our digested cabbage, vomited up from our years in the kind of spiritual meat grinders (or is it vegetable grinders?) which teach this sort of interpretive rot and pass it off as reverence.
*
How you know who God can only be through the infinite and inexorable frame of reference of the SELF of your individual existence…as YOU. And you (and everyone else) must concede this as absolutely true unless you can explain to me just how you can know anything, or believe anything, or learn anything, or do anything outside the context of YOU, your SELF.
I assure you it is quite impossible. For as soon as you open your mouth to respond, or place your dainty/meaty/slender/stubby little fingers to the crumb covered keyboard (come on…you know we all eat at the computer) you have already concede my point; for it is YOU and YOUR mouth which is responding; it is YOU and YOUR fingers which are typing. And since you cannot even explain why my assumption might be incorrect without first being YOU so that you have a source for your disagreement, you are forced from the outset to acknowledge, whether you like it or not, that SELF is the only way to do anything at all…to speak, think, or know must always follow being.
SELF is not a vehicle for existence, it IS your existence. SELF is not a holding cell for your soul, it IS your soul. SELF is not the means to your existential end, it IS the end. Being YOU is not a stepping stone to some higher purpose God has for you; it is His ONLY purpose for you. LIFE, that is SELF, is not a middle man…some kind of purgatory between birth and heaven or hell. Rather it is the singularity of existence in total. There is nothing from which LIFE is merely an extension, and no external objective to which life is merely a highway.
*
Knowledge proceeds from the individual SELF. Your knowledge of anything is a direct function of your inherent ability to know; and your ability to know is a direct function of your SELF; your body, which is also your mind (your brain). Knowledge, or learning, or understanding, be it of God or of anyone else is utterly dependent upon YOU to be YOU first, before it can serve any rational purpose, which also includes existence (as a rational and efficacious objective: to be whatever it is). Meaning, without the life of man as a categorical prerequisite, there is no point to God, or the Bible, or Truth, or anything else…for all those things exist TO man, or they cannot be said to exist at all, because without the context of YOU, and ME, our lives, our SELVES, man has no means by which to argue for their substance by any definition at all…including, again, existence. Man must be man first, before any knowledge of God can be passed unto him, for any practical purpose. And thus then, naturally, the root of any purpose of any revelation from God or any action of God is man’s LIFE; meaning YOU, and ME…our SELVES.
*
If we concede that God is good, then (presuming upon my aforementioned arguments), then we are forced to concede that the human SELF is likewise good. For how is it possible to claim that the Creator of the SELF is good and yet the SELF, which He created, is not good, and utterly insufficient for acting or thinking in a way which which is distinctively, by itself, good, and allows for an efficacious understanding of God’s goodness? “The fall” of man (a non-existent concept in the Bible; for the Bible never describes man as “fallen”) cannot destroy the epistemology of man; for if this is the case, then how in the fuck can any of us acknowledge that God is good? If man’s epistemology is utterly flawed by his depravity, then man is infinitely blind of the knowledge of God’s goodness, as well as of the knowledge of anything and everything else. But if we concede that we are in fact capable of acknowledging God’s goodness, and our “infinite sinfulness” (a lie) in comparison to Him, then it is impossible to make the argument that the SELF of human beings is evil. It must be good, and it must be absolutely good in order to make an absolute statement like: God is GOOD.
Further, if God is GOOD, and we acknowledge that, then it can only be utter blasphemy to pronounce the human SELF which He created to be evil, or morally inferior, to that which is its Cause. Therefore, if the SELF is in fact good, and it is by this SELF, and inexorably so, that man acknowledges God’s perfect goodness and His great and mighty existence and supreme and utterly necessary place in the existential scheme of everything that IS, then the gratification of the SELF must by logical extension be GOOD, not evil. The question then is not whether SELF-gratification is good…for SELF-gratification IS good, and likewise SELF-interest, because the SELF is the very creation of God, and is the very and only means by which man can know Him and acknowledge His greatness. So, again the question is not whether SELF-gratification is good; the question is how do we define the SELF?
For if we have a proper definition of SELF, then we can understand how to properly define OTHERS: as other individual human SELVES which are likewise morally perfect and true, as efficacious creations of God…as people who, like ourselves, exist as legitimate and infinite volitional agents, just like we are. And thus the gratification of the SELF, where SELF is rationally defined, must by logical necessity deny that this gratification can exist at the direct expense of the SELF of others.
But, again, this cannot not make the gratification of the SELF evil; it merely allows us to define the SELF in a rational way, in order that when we pursue its gratification–which we have every right to do, and must do, as this is the greatest moral GOOD: to promote and affirm and satisfy the singular source of man’s ability to know God, which is a GIFT, not a curse–we do it in a way that affirms the truth of the SELF, and not in a way that denies its truth, which must occur when the gratification of ourselves constitutes a violation of the mind, body, and/or property of other SELVES…that is, other human beings.
Finally…if we can successfully argue that man’s epistemology is veracious and efficacious, then we must concede that man is NOT metaphysically flawed; for man’s epistemology is a direct extension of his metaphysic. And thus, if man can acknowledge God’s goodness, he cannot possess a totally depraved SELF. Which means that SELF is not evil, and therefore, its gratification is likewise not evil.
unreformingtheology 
the fall?hmmmm we should rename it.the boot?lol heres a little gem,after pointing out on a thread the doctrine of original sin to be false,i get this response:
So then when you were first born is was not after the similitude of Adam and Eve? Are we not all when first born from the womb, are born of the flesh nature in selfishness, wanting never to die?
to which i responded:
so not wanting to die is a sin?lol
no response as of yet lol,you get that alot with these types,never can answer the tough? questions lol the discussion had me brushing up on my gnosticism a little lol
thnx dude peace
Gricketson,
That was a perfect response. Since the point of creation (birth) is to live, then LIFE is a moral thing, by definition. Therefore rejecting death cannot be a sin, but rather, a virtue.
But they think that God created you for death. Which is as evil as it is insane.
If the point of your existence is to NOT be you (which is what death is; the absence of YOU ), then God’s creative act is irrelevant and worse, irrational. He could have accomplished His creative purpose by not creating at all.
You see how evil their theology is? Do you see how it makes a fool of God?
Deny every evil word which proceeds from their silvery tongues.
Okay, but I am still struggling to understand how you arrive at the idea of God separated from a true SELF. I see it from this angle: that our SELFHOOD is not only the centre of our own existence, it is the centre of the existence of all of temporal reality. It is the root of temporal reality, and apart from it, temporal beings have no reality. The fall of man (original sin) is the separation from that temporal reality in that MAN forgot his TRUE SELF. Hence, we have enough bullshit conartist out there constantly telling us what true self is meant to be, when they are doing little else but mimicking the garden serpent.
Is original sin inherent in every human from birth, in our DNA, as some like to claim? Or, does every human eventually succumb to evil? The knowledge of good and evil was unleashed in the garden by man and has affected the earth and everything in it. I think we all fall short of the glory of God because of the choices we make in life. God’s grace is extended to us to take hold of (by faith, since NC a faith in Jesus Christ) at any time. We are created to bear his image but we don’t always choose to do that, which brings consequences to us, sometimes others, and the earth (our dominion).
SCDP,
Question for you is: how do you define temporal reality as opposed to just “reality”?
And remember, as soon as you concede that time is CAUSAL-meaning, we are subject to the power of time, which is a force outside of the material which makes up us, and everything else in the universe-then you have conceded determinism. And determinism destroys mans ability to know ANYTHING.
This is where things get very tricky. We must begin here to rely on reason and not on what we think our senses tell us. Like a pilot sometimes must trust his instruments because his senses tell him he is going up when h is really going down, etc.
Great questions.
Bridget,
Well…I will start by saying that I hold the first few chapters of Gen to be purely metaphorical. I deny the rationality of a literal interpretation. This allows me to use reason to explain what all that means. I don’t think thats possible with a literal interpretation. That’s my take anyway.
So, I usually start there.
Next, I don’t concede that ALL people everywhere have sinned. Because sin is a choice I don’t accept that everyone has made that choice.
All right…allergy at attack. Gotta break
Bridget,
I have more to say…just, not being able to breath is a challenge at the moment:-)
“Is original sin inherent in every human from birth, in our DNA, as some like to claim? Or, does every human eventually succumb to evil? The knowledge of good and evil was unleashed in the garden by man and has affected the earth and everything in it. I think we all fall short of the glory of God because of the choices we make in life. God’s grace is extended to us to take hold of (by faith, since NC a faith in Jesus Christ) at any time. We are created to bear his image but we don’t always choose to do that, which brings consequences to us, sometimes others, and the earth (our dominion).”
I don’t have the answers so I am going to muse a bit on what I have been thinking on the subject after years of study, etc.
Just for clarification I also do NOT believe Genesis is completely literal. I believe it is a narrative in the story telling genre passed down through generations which was then written down probably during or after the Babylonian exile where they were afraid their entire history was going to be wiped out. I believe there are literal truths within it. (Genesis for Normal People is very good and simple read that is a good starting resource)
I believe we can gather from the narrative of Torah that sin is a choice. but because our bodies were corrupted and the earth corrupted this makes sin an easy choice. I believe we are accountable for the sins we know we commit. (babies, mentally disabled are exempt).
And I do think it was possible for people to keep the law. I think it is gross injustice to God to suggest He made laws on purpose knowing people could not keep them. I think it is leaning toward blasphmous to suggest such a thing. Can you imagine a king doing that? If we look at it that way, why send a Savior. Well, I think Christ was MUCH MORE than just the Cross/Resurrection. He showed us what God was like in the flesh.
Without free will nothing makes sense to me. And I think so much of what is labeled as “sin” is not. Like “anger”. Anger is not a sin it is what we do with anger. But since so many Christians label everything as sin it is moral chaos and the serious sin that affects so many is put in the same category as people who get angry over child molestations. Their anger is not sin at all. It is healthy. I think all this talk about us being sinners is ridiculous and negates the whole point of the cross/resurrection. If we are sinning all the time, then there was no point of any of it.
I do not believe Christians live in perpetual sin. And I do not think they even need to be perfect. They are fair, just, merciful, etc. And they have an Advocate who helps us with wisdom. We have doubts, ambitions, etc. We do not purposely use or hurt others. We are very tolerant and understand the benefit of living in a composite society as believers.
I am convinced that what we DO here that is good and just will be building for the New Earth. It will go with us. Liars, deceivers, etc do not make it. I think we (Evangelicals) have made up a religion that we sell to people that makes no real sense and makes God out to be an evil monster that sounds more like Allah. The only way it works is to totally separate you from you. It makes no sense to me because we are told we are now the temple where God resides. How can that be and not know self?
Christians ought to be the ones curing cancer, creating beauty in arts, feeding the hungry, fighting slave trafficing, rescuing the abused, caring for the dying, campaigning for justice and independence, etc. We want people free from all tyranny. That is a big part of our Evangelism. Christians would understand the possibilities NOW as we live out the kingdom and we will take that good with us to the new kingdom.
“The fall of man (original sin) is the separation from that temporal reality in that MAN forgot his TRUE SELF. Hence, we have enough bullshit conartist out there constantly telling us what true self is meant to be, when they are doing little else but mimicking the garden serpent.”
Or that evil comes from the wrong choice? (We tend to discount the evil one in these convos and it is an uncomfortable place to go because people usually err on drastic sides: He is totally benign OR he is in every wrong choice. I think the evil one has some power here to be reckoned with. How far we go with that can be a problem. Christ smashed his power but the free will still stands)
Store in a cool dry place.
“Okay, but I am still struggling to understand how you arrive at the idea of God separated from a true SELF. I see it from this angle: that our SELFHOOD is not only the centre of our own existence, it is the centre of the existence of all of temporal reality. It is the root of temporal reality, and apart from it, temporal beings have no reality. The fall of man (original sin) is the separation from that temporal reality in that MAN forgot his TRUE SELF. Hence, we have enough bullshit conartist out there constantly telling us what true self is meant to be, when they are doing little else but mimicking the garden serpent.”
* * *
If I might observe … First, the historic Christian anthropology says that the fall of man separated Man from God. This is a long standing doctrinal error that was retrofitted to accommodate Augustine’s doctrine of Original Sin. I should point out that the first three chapters of Genesis show Man a fully autonomous from God from the beginning. Man metaphysical existence begins separate from God and this existence was declared GOOD.
Argo is arguing that human identity MUST remain separate from God for their even to be a human existence. This is exactly right. Man has an identity, which means he is metaphysically wholly unique. He is “Separate” from God but not as a function of his evil, but as a function of his GOOD. This also means that salvation doesn’t have anything to do with every man returning to cosmic oneness with God.
Second, I think you are tripping over the concept of “temporal” reality. This is a concept perpetuated by the subsequent generations of Medieval thinkers … that this earth, its material existence is evil and therefore finite. This metaphysical error has been perpetuated in the modern era by preachers who pay no attention to their philosophical assertions. A temporal reality necessitates a split between consciousness and reality. Consciousness –somehow—defines a reality that is secondary(?) to an eternal reality. For a lot of reasons this is a disastrous formulation. Consciousness can only perceive the reality that it perceives. There is no other reality. So it matters not if it perceives 21st century really or a reality a billion years from now… it is only perceiving reality.
John,
Very well said. Thank you.