Corey: Brandon (emphasis mine): POST-ROCK BOTTOM, a person has not come to the realization that it’s own resources aren’t doing the trick.

Corey: I've re-read your post a couple times and think you made a typo. I think you understand that the model as presented makes the opposite claim. During the deliberation phase (post rock bottom, pre faith) the person's experience of the God-shaped vacuum is maximized; there is zero epistemic distance between the person and their futility. If there's one thing they know, it's that "their own resources aren't doing the trick."

Brandon:  Yep. Typo. At POST-ROCK BOTTOM the person realizes that they can’t do it on their own. At this point they look “outward.”

Corey:  Brandon: ...not solidify them unto “ultimate harm” or “ultimate resignation”...

Corey: I would not make this equivalency. Rember this model comes from applying SK's "double movement of faith" to the specific scenario we're considering. The first movement, "infinite resignation" is a necessary and APPROPRIATE response in relating to one's self. It's not equivalent to ultimate harm, it's equivalent to the rock-bottom experience.

Brandon:  Well I used it, because I thought that was what Meph Man was saying here. He was saying on page 22 in two different posts:

“As I'm understand through Corey's view, moral freedom only requires that they have the ability to rationally deliberate into choosing something OTHER THAN pursuing a love relationship with God post-rock-bottom as a means of ending the futility, not that they can resist the "ultimate resignation" and ensuring unchangable desire to move away from the futility.”

“By postulating the "ultimate resignation" that occurs from the rock-bottom experience, that process of curving in on oneself in utter self-reliance is STOPPED! It CANNOT continue because of the being has realized that it's at the end of all it's own resources. This stops the process of self-solidification unto "ultimate harm"

In other words, the person has the freedom to choose something other than God to end the futility of it’s existence. This doesn’t mean that the person can resist “ultimate resignation” NOR ensuring an unchangeable desire to move away from the futility. I guess I was reading the second paragraph incorrectly. Ultimate resignation occurs at ROCK-BOTTOM in relation to the person coming to an “end of themselves.” “Ultimate harm” is in relation to their solidifying such that there is no chance of desiring God and an unchangeable desire to move away from futility.

Corey:  Corey:

Is it accurate to sum up your objection like this?

(1) True deliberation cannot occur if one cannot test their candidate concepts.

(2) One cannot test their candidate concepts post rock bottom.

(3) Therefore, true deliberation cannot occur post rock bottom.

Brandon:  It is not so much a matter that one cannot deliberate that say, daisies would “do the trick.” It’s that if there ARE IN FACT NO DAISES one cannot test them to deliberate whether they are in fact something they would WANT TO TEST (at least as an option). All it would in be is just some mental exercise (they are left with their own psychological rational naked selves). And if there are no real options, then, right, one cannot test their candidate post rock bottom. In which case, genuine deliberation has not occurred (of other resources outside of the self) but only deliberation of the psychologically, rational naked self.

Corey:  It seems that limited testing of candidate concepts is possible. I'm reminded of Elijah and the prophets of Baal at Mt. Carmel. The prophets beseeched their "candidate concept" in earnest for a good chunk of time. Time itself became the test. After some reasonable amount of time, NO RESPONSE. Then immediately following Elijah's "test" of God, things happened.

Remember too that the person has profound motivation to not just let the "test" of these false candidates run on forever. There comes a time when they'll realize that their candidate concept "isn't doing the trick" either and they'll try another candidate (the box of pennies shakes). They won't keep waiting for the false candidate forever because this would just enhance their experience of futility, and this is the EXACT OPPOSITE of their primary objective at that point.

Brandon:  Right. This “trying out” of the options (if they genuinely exist outside of the self) will not last forever, because it would contribute to the futility. My issue is that in the O.T. cases, one HAD a genuine option to test with. In hell, it doesn’t seem that they do. The other thing is that we must remember that not only did people put their option to the test, but they LIVED ACCORDINGLY. They were “satisfied” with their god’s and idols. Their idols acted as a surrogate god for the REAL God of the universe in which they were content with their existence. I mean, sin is fun and we use all kinds of false gods to fill the void of our true selves. All, I’m saying is that if the resources outside of the self “aren’t working?” The resources of the self ARE, to some extent I.e. self-righteousness as opposed to true righteousness, materialism and the food at the King’s table as opposed to the King Himself.

Corey: Corey: I myself haven't taken any firm position as to whether or not there are external realities available to the person at rock bottom (other than God). If it helps you think about it, fine... I don't think it's a problem to posit such things.

Maybe I've thrown you a curve when I speak of maximal vacuum. I'm talking about the nature of the subjective experience (they're all-consumed with their emptiness or "dispositional longing"), not the nature of the objective environment in which the person is located.

But neither do I find such things necessary for true deliberation, as I've tried to describe. Doesn't the example of Baal show at least one way in which a person could hope in something that doesn't actually exist?

Brandon: No. Meph Man said that to retain LFW, the person in hell would have to NOT KNOW (at least at first) that pursuit of a loving relationship with God is one of the options for removing the futility. So, in such an existence, such a person would recognize AFTER THEY HAVE TRIED RELIANCE ON SELF that there are OTHER OPTIONS. And so he speaks of the sphere outside of the self such that a person is able to “try other things” to fix the futility of his/her existence. He says, “The being has begun looking OUTSIDE OF ITSELF for help and it still running up against dead ends.” And he goes on for many post to reiterate this i.e. “other directional resolution.”

And this is why I ask Meph Man, “Maybe this is not the right question, but you say, "I can try something outside of my self to help my situation that is NOT God."

What would that be in this existence or does it matter? I mean if there is "deliberation limbo" how could one try something outside of themselves?”

But then he resorts to saying that these other options don’t have to be actual. All the person needs is to find it psychologically viable to trust something other than God and that doesn’t have to be actual.

To which Tom and I had a fit. But it seems that the objective existence outside of the self is such that there ARE other options. For example, Meph Man stated:

“Basically you have a being postulating WHAT or WHO outside of itself could help it out. Speaking of a human being, this person may call on a SERIES of gods, aliens or demons to help it out. What it does know is that it cannot rely on itself...and that it DOES need something or someone else.”

Though the person may not know that these are available as a viable option, the person could call on these “other directional resolutions” to end the futility. My only question would be this. ARE THESE GENUINELY VIABLE OPTIONS OR NOT? If they are not, then I don’t see how we DON’T have solipsism (other than God somehow existing in relation to the self in hell). But if they are genuinely viable options, then it is VERY possible to see how we can retain LFW.

"It's only after reaching this point of infinite resignation (complete dying to self) that a person is capable of receiving the gospel. In a sense, after reaching infinite resignation the person is in a state of quasi-edenic (is that a word?) innocence or freedom (I'm sure there's a better word I can't think of right now). Only this time, in this neo-garden, there's no temptor, and they have the hard-gained first-hand knowledge of good and evil to assure that they don't make the wrong choice."

Well, apparently, if a person in “deliberation limbo” can call on other directional resolutions i.e. god’s, demons, aliens or what have you, these, at least to the person doing the calling would be psychologically possible. So when you ask your question above: Doesn't the example of Baal show at least one way in which a person could hope in something that doesn't actually exist? I would respond by saying, that they could hope in something that DOES exist, but when there is no help to end the futility forth-coming, they are then left with only them and God. Do you see why it was confusing? I’m just asking for clarity. Now as I think about it, yeah, they can deliberate on something they THINK exists, but then when nothing, to end the futility is forth-coming, they either go on to exhaust all other possibilities (or ones they know of) or finally turn to God (final resignation).

Corey: Corey: Isn't this a true statement, both in the scenario we're considering and in life as we experience it now? Are we not capable of genuine deliberation in this world either (since in this world "there never is an actual means other than God for solving the futility problem")? Are you saying that in this world there IS an actual means other than God for solving the futility problem? I guess I don't see what you're after here. I feel like I'm in an Abbott-Costello skit!

Brandon: If I think of futility in terms of some real sickness like cancer, then no. But if I think of it in terms of some kind of existentialism, I would still say no, but it would be qualified. Have you ever wondered how atheists make it through “dark nights of the soul?”

Corey: Brandon: My issue is that in the O.T. cases, one HAD a genuine option to test with. In hell, it doesn’t seem that they do.

Corey: I'm missing something... what exactly was the "genuine option" that the prophets of Baal had to test? I'm thinking Baal is on the same par as Tad and Buddy. What significant difference is there?

Brandon:  Well, this kinda goes back to my question about the atheist above. I’m thinking that in THIS life many people “find resolution” without God to some extent. And so I think we would have to ask what EXACTLY is the futility and what would these other resolutions do? Cure or bandage up?