 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 10/23/2010 3:09 PM (GMT -6) |   | I think the fallacy there is that the glory spoken of is that which is the RECOMPENSE of VOLITIONAL suffering WITH Christ. IOW, that glory is precisely the glory about which Paul says "we shall be glorified with him, IF INDEED we SUFFER WITH him." Mere eternal life is NOT that glorification.
That is the whole point of Christ enduring the shame FOR the joy set before him. There never was any question as to whether Christ would have eternal life, whether or not humans were redeemed. But the partaking of the glory of the kingdom he procured for himself was literally ATTAINED by his kenosis and obedience unto death. It was not going to happen any other way, however we might want to explain that.
What this means is profound. It means that it is the age-abiding GLORY of reigning with Christ that renders our suffering trivial by comparison--not eternal life, per se. Thus, even if UR is true, many will NOT reign with Christ in that way, because they never volitionally suffered WITH him. This is why I make much of the temporality (albeit, age-abiding in duration) of the kingdom/reigning. For Christ is said to reign "UNTIL ..." Viewed this way, UR can occur AFTER the reigning is complete. Consequently, those ressurected thereafter will not have partaken of THAT glory.
Anyway, that's my way of explaining why your question is not merely rhetorical.
Post Edited (Similitude) : 10/23/2010 3:14:23 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/23/2010 6:19 PM (GMT -6) | | I'm thinking that (ideally) the chief motivation for sacrificing oneself for God would not be for one's calculated expected gains from God...but purely for one's complete, heartfelt loving dedication to God. Not that delayed gratification of some type cannot be a legitimate motivator...it just is not the central concern for the God-lover.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/23/2010 6:31:13 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 10/24/2010 8:39 AM (GMT -6) | | D: ...but purely for one's complete, heartfelt loving dedication to God.
J: The word "purely" is what I have problems with. It seems to imply that there are no pleasures that are non-social in nature. But surely tastes, sights, sounds, etc can be pleasurable, per se, right? Why would Christ speak of drinking wine anew in his kingdom if taste, per se, is of no real value to a sentient being? Even God seems to be capable of experiencing purely aesthetic pleasure that doesn't entail social relationality.
These can seem better when experienced in a social complex, but that doesn't mean they are valueless, per se.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/24/2010 9:44 AM (GMT -6) | | D: ...but purely for one's complete, heartfelt loving dedication to God.
J: The word "purely" is what I have problems with. It seems to imply that there are no pleasures that are non-social in nature. But surely tastes, sights, sounds, etc can be pleasurable, per se, right? Why would Christ speak of drinking wine anew in his kingdom if taste, per se, is of no real value to a sentient being? Even God seems to be capable of experiencing purely aesthetic pleasure that doesn't entail social relationality.
These can seem better when experienced in a social complex, but that doesn't mean they are valueless, per se.
In my opinion, the pleasure that the God-intoxicated lover is centrally concerned with (and content with) is the pleasure received from their love relationship with God. Sure, the God-lover can enjoy other modes of pleasure...but all of those are placed in the context of the ultimate PROVIDER of every mode of pleasure, and that's God who sustains all things and gives all pleasure through that sustenance.
And let's not forget...it's not just ANY experience of beauty that gives God aesthetic satisfaction; it is the perspectival sociality within the "tri-hypostatic Subject", the One Triune God. I believe that, with human beings being images of God, the same holds true for us. We human have "satisfied souls" in and through our participation in God's own self-relationship (ie. the Love the Father has for the Son and the Son's love for the Father mediated by the Holy Spirit of Love.)
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/24/2010 9:47:38 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/24/2010 9:51 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I'm not suggesting that suicide would be a loving thing to do (or necessarily unloving). I'm suggesting that it's beside the point ULTIMATELY. A universalist believes in the ULTIMATE irrevlevance of obedience/disobedience and all morality. Morality decides how long it takes one to bow the knee. But if one believes that ULTIMATELY all bow the knee, then doing what's right VS what's wrong is only temporalily important. It decides how PAINFUL things are for you.
I've been assuming CHRISTIAN universalism, now. And Christianity assumes that one's life is not one's own anymore to just do with what they please. Our bodies have been consecrated to Jesus (as the Body of Christ) to do with what he wants. The Bible says not to unite the members of Christ with a harlot, right? Well, what would this principle deal with self-destroying Christ's member for the sake of one's own personal self-appraisal and self-judgment based on external conditions? If there is ANY decision where one should "lean not unto your own understanding" but "trust in the Lord with all your heart", it would be the decision of suicide. Think about it.
*************************************
Tom:
A universalist could reason that if his life thus far has brought as much pain and suffering to others as it has blessing, OR if he believes himself incorrigible (i.e., whatever good he might manage to do he'll always be commiting evil and hurting others) that committing suicide would be a loving thing to do overall. Even if it turns out he's wrong and ends up suffering in hell for it, surely since his MOTIVATION was to AVOID hurting others (even at risk of being wrong and suffering in hell for it), that sets him apart from your common criminal. That is, might his reasons for committing suicide be blameless so far as his motivation is concerned even if he's objectively wrong?
1) A true Christian could never believe in absolute incorrigibility. That's equivalent to the despair of thinking oneself beyond forgiveness and healing.
2) Christianly speaking, a motivation for any action is only "blameless" to the degree that it is grounded in the total love of God and the empathetic love of neighbor and self. Sure, a person may think that they would do the suicide solely for others, who would supposedly "be better off without them", but this may just conceal a deeper motivation: it would just be the despairing person wanting to do away with their own experience of themselves always commiting evil and hurting others. It still has "self" at the center of the concern.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/24/2010 10:08:40 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/24/2010 9:54 AM (GMT -6) | | | It's chiefly the notion of REWARD FOR SERVICE that I'm having the issue with I think. If people serve God chiefly because of how much they will be rewarded by God for their faithfulness, how is this not implicitly mercenary? Seriously. For example, if I do something sacrificially for my wife...and my ultimate intentions for doing so involve my own momentary "suffering" for the sake of my own delayed self-gratification, how is this being motivated by love? Even IF she were to say "If you do what I want, I'll reward you with X", if I were to do such with that primarily in mind, then I am a "hireling" pretty much, not a husband. I'm not serving HER...I'm serving MYSELF using service to her as the mean for securing my own gratification and happiness.
I think we do the same with God ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the time.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/24/2010 10:48:00 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 10/24/2010 12:46 PM (GMT -6) | | But there is a sense in which the very FACT that God rewards our volitional suffering such that the reward renders the suffering literally trivial, by comparison, is so indicative of the awe-inspiring benevolence of God/Christ that, when that fact is contemplated on aright (letting the word dwell in us richly in psalms, etc), it can't help but CAUSE our motivation to be one of reciprocal love. IOW, God's willingness to reward us thus is just one way in which God expresses His love to us FIRST, thereby conditioning the possibility of us responding aright. So I'm not seeing the contradiction in what I'm saying and what your saying. And consequently, it still seems like a coherent way of arguing against suicide for a Christian UR adherent.
By saying "...but purely for one's complete, heartfelt loving dedication to God," we're still dealing with sentient motivation. So there's no getting around that, even per your approach. You take away the aspect of sentience and nothing makes sense about ethics/morality/religion/etc.
You said it right, I think, many moons ago when you were saying that perfect love is when one feels as one's own pain the disappointment or suffering of one's beloved. Thus, though I am being rewarded for my own volitional suffering, I also, if I love with proper sympathy, suffer from the anticipated disappoint of my beloved if I do LESS for him than he wants me to do.
Similarly, I will naturally desire the praise and regard of one whose values I most regard myself. If I perceive God as having precisely those qualities I most admire, I will get the most satisfaction from getting God's praise, rather than the praise of those who are deficient in those qualities.
When we first believe, we have that kind of "first love" that motivates in these ways. So long as we act on it faithfully, we won't lose that first love and the kind of motivation it produces. If we DO lose that first love, scripture implies it can be re-acquired if we properly repent. Then the whole love-motivated response can start all over again, growing and producing fruit.
Post Edited (Similitude) : 10/24/2010 12:56:56 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/24/2010 7:43 PM (GMT -6) | | S:
You said it right, I think, many moons ago when you were saying that perfect love is when one feels as one's own pain the disappointment or suffering of one's beloved. Thus, though I am being rewarded for my own volitional suffering, I also, if I love with proper sympathy, suffer from the anticipated disappoint of my beloved if I do LESS for him than he wants me to do.
"Do not grieve the Spirit..."
***********************************************
S:
Similarly, I will naturally desire the praise and regard of one whose values I most regard myself. If I perceive God as having precisely those qualities I most admire, I will get the most satisfaction from getting God's praise, rather than the praise of those who are deficient in those qualities.
"No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs--he wants to please his commanding officer."
**********************************************
S:
To put it another way, Paul says it is our reasonable service to give our bodies as living sacrifices to God. That means, as far as I can tell, that INDEPENDENT of any reward, just what we get by pure grace is sufficient to render all our sacrifices REASONABLE. How much MORE, then, is an ADDITIONAL glory that is associated with suffering with him an awesome thing that renders suicide an imprudent choice on consequentialist grounds alone?
'Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master's happiness!'
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:08 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|