Open Theism Discussion Board
  HomeLog InRegisterSearch the ForumHelp
   
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
 
Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 5/25/2002 12:07 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
When we sin do we irrevocably forfeit a certain potential for intimacy with God which would have otherwise been ours? A potential which not even the grace of forgiveness can restore?

I’ve always looked at instances of sins committed as “recoverable” in the sense that when we are forgiven we are back where we were before we sinned (as if we hadn’t sinned) and face the same potential for the same relationship with God we had before sinning. Gee, that’s what grace is isn’t it?

I don’t think this is true now and it’s really affecting what goes through my mind when I face a temptation to sin. I tend to consider the impact which yielding to temptation will have in terms of permanently forfeiting a certain potential to know and love God. I wonder how differently I would have lived in the past had I taken such a view on the relational damage sin has on us in terms of the loss of some of our potential for intimacy with God. Every sin we commit robbs our relationship with God of a certain potential for intimacy that cannot be recovered.

Comments?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 05/25/2002 5:15:03 PM
Back to Top
 

Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?




Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
 
   Posted 5/25/2002 1:43 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Hey Tom,


1Sa 13:14 …the LORD hath sought him a man after his own heart, and the LORD hath commanded him [to be] captain over his people...

Act 13:22 …I have found David the [son] of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.

I do not seen my sin, or temptation to do so, as the bigger issue; as I see my loss of being intimately honest with God and others, about the issue of my sin and temptation. The main issue, is receiving the deliverance of salvation, the forgiveness of sins, this is His gift to me, which I need so desperately from Him and others. That is to say, for me, intimacy with God is about casting all the cares of my sins and temptations upon the only person, who truly can be intimate with me, concerning them. My intimacy with God is strengthening, through my failures; this is the true success of potential with God and others, the certain forgiveness of sins.


In God’s Love,

Tim


Back to Top
 

Starkman
Registered Member




Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
 
   Posted 5/25/2002 5:56 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Personally speaking, I believe the loss, if any, is due to the time factor; what time you loose cannot be regained--how much more spiritual would I have become today were I to have not messed up in the past.

However, perhaps even time is not the barrier I feel it is. Perhaps God can, indeed, "restore unto me the joy of my salvation" and then some, when I repent.

Starkman

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 5/26/2002 10:55 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
How does THIS apply?"

    The Catechetical Address of our Father among the Saints, John Chrysostom, the Archbishop of Constantinople, given on the Holy and Light-bearing Day of the most glorious and salvific Resurrection of Christ our God.


    If there be any devout people who love God,
    let them enjoy this splendid and radiant Feast.
    If any of them be wise servants,
    let them blissfully enter into the joy of their Lord,
    If any of them have laboured long in fasting,
    let them now receive their reward.
    If any have toiled from the first hour,
    let them now receive their just wage.
    If any came at the third hour,
    let them gratefully join in the Feast.
    If any arrived at the sixth hour,
    they should not be afraid,
    for they will not be deprived of anything.
    If any of them tarried even until the ninth hour,
    let them approach without hesitation.
    If any arrived only at the eleventh hour,
    they should not worry on account of their tardiness.
    For the Master loves to grant honours
    and will receive the last just as the first.
    He gives rest to the one who came at the eleventh hour,
    just as He does to the one who toiled from the first hour.
    He shows His mercy to the last,
    and His care for the first.
    To the one He gives; on the other,
    He showers gifts.
    He accepts deeds and welcomes intentions.
    He honours labours and praises resolutions.

    And so,
    let all enter into the joy of their Lord,
    and let the first as well as the last receive the reward.
    Let the rich and the poor celebrate together.
    Let the resourceful and the slothful honour this Day.
    Let those who fasted and those who did not fast be glad today.
    The Table is bountifully set;
    let all be satisfied.
    The Calf is fattened;
    let no one go away hungry.
    Let everyone enjoy the Cup of Faith.
    Let everyone receive the richness of Grace.
    Let none grieve at their poverty,
    for the Kingdom that belongs to all people has been revealed.
    Let none weep for their sins,
    for forgive ness shines forth from the Tomb.

    Let no one fear Death,
    for the Savior’s death has set us free.
    The One Whom Death imprisoned has extinguished Death.
    The One Who descended into Hades made Hades the captive.
    He caused it distress when it tasted His Flesh.
    When Isaiah foresaw this, he exclaimed:
    "Hades was all distressed by encountering You in the nether world."
    It was distressed because it was abolished.
    It was distressed because it was mocked.
    It was distressed because it was slain.
    It was distressed because it was overthrown.
    It was distressed because it was chained.
    It seized a Body but discovered God.
    It seized the Earthly but encountered the Heavenly.
    It seized the Visible but was overcome by the Invisible.

    O Death, where is your sting!
    O Hades, where is your victory!
    Christ is risen, and you are abolished!
    Christ is risen, and the demons are cast down!
    Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice!
    Christ is risen, and Life now reigns!
    Christ is risen, and the Tomb is emptied of the dead!
    For in rising from the dead,
    Christ became the First-Fruits of those who have fallen asleep.
    To Him be glory and power for ever and ever!
    Amen.


Edited by - PotOnWheel on 05/26/2002 4:00:17 PM
Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 5/26/2002 11:22 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
SPEAKING OF LIMITATIONS...

So while I was driving to back from work the other day, and thinking about how the question of just what the "knowledge of good and evil" means has a strong propensity to irk the Protestant mind.

HERE'S SOME THOUGHTS ON SIN AND LIMITATION.....

In the garden scene of Genesis Adam and Eve eat from the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil."

I'm guessing that the issue of "Knowledge of Good and Evil" is a tough one for Protestants because Protestants look at it from a post-Reformation perspective; one in which the "knowledge" element of belief is inflected by knowledge as being something a bit autonomous.

But there is an alternative way of viewing it!

In anthropology a city, a temple, a body can be diagramed as "sacred" spaces and "profain" places. "Sacred" and "Profain" could easily be compared to "Good" and "Evil." I just wonder whether that is the way we should read Genesis. If so, then Adam and Eve ate from the "Tree of the Knowledge of "Sacred" and "Profain." And I'd like to guess what that means.

It would indicate a great answer to the situation where Adam and Eve were not ashamed of their bodies before sinning and were ashamed after sinning. It goes like this.

To not know the boundary between sacred and profain is to percieve by living all as in communion with all. To know the boundary between sacred and profain is to focus on the self and perceive all else as being opposed to the self. Suddenly everything outside of one's own body is profain; and you are naked.

Before this opposition of "sacred" and "profain" Man was in communion with woman, with God, and with creation.

To know the opposition of "sacred" and "profain" was to become autonomous, and thus sin.


How was that?
Back to Top
 

Winghead
Registered Member


Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 132
 
   Posted 5/26/2002 12:49 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Interesting question, Tom. Here are my thoughts on the matter:

Tom:
quote:
When we sin do we irrevocably forfeit a certain potential for intimacy with God which would have otherwise been ours? A potential which not even the grace of forgiveness can restore?


As worded, I would say, "No," our intimacy with God can always be restored. What scripture would lead you to consider this question. 1 John 1:9 comes to mind as one that suggests a "No" answer.

Tim:
quote:
My intimacy with God is strengthening, through my failures; this is the true success of potential with God and others, the certain forgiveness of sins.


I agree. God wants us to depend on Him. David in Psalm 51 reflects the kind of heart God likes. Our ability to walk in righteousness is a spiritual thing (cf. Rom 7:14).

Starkman:
quote:
I believe the loss, if any, is due to the time factor; what time you loose cannot be regained--how much more spiritual would I have become today were I to have not messed up in the past.


I agree, if I understand you right. Sin does come between us and God. The relationship is negatively impacted during the time of sin. After we confess our sins and repent, the relationship is restored. However, we cannot reclaim the time lost, we can only move forward in relationship with God. There is also a time factor in recovering our sensitivity to the Lord. If we have been walking closely with the Lord all week, we will likely be more senstive to Him by the end of the week. If spent the first four or five days in sin, we may not be as sensitve to him by the end of the week.

Yet, with God, there is not easy "formula." There can be a great outpouring of His Spirit on us at the time of repentence. That can be extremely intimate. Afterall, we are very exposed and volnerable at that point. Our "defenses" against God might be at their weakest.

Sin can also affect our walk with the lord by its side-effects. For example, if we give in the the temptation of pornography, even if we repent, we have opened ourselves up to thoughts and suggestions that will tempt us in the future. It can affect how we interact with people at the time. Or, the affects of a hang-over will cloud our minds, making us less able to perform the next day.

The contemplatives like John of the Cross understood how things -- even things that are not themselves, sin -- can come between us and God. What are we getting life from? We need to seek God, and God alone. We should not prefer even our "experience of God" to God, himself. Perhaps this is what is implied behind this comment?

PoW:
quote:
To know the opposition of "sacred" and "profain" was to become autonomous, and thus sin.


For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 1 Cor. 2:2 (NRSVA)

God is infinite and eternal, and as such, I think we have great potential of being filled to capacity by Him.

In Christ's Love,
Winghead

"...you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’ The second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ No other commandment is greater than these.”
Mark 12:30-31 (NLT)
Back to Top
 

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 5/27/2002 12:17 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Thanks everybody for your comments. My guess is that Doc would basically agree that sin robs our relationship with God of a certain potential. If not, then is free will really finite? If after sinning we can become exactly the same people and achieve exactly the same intimacy with God which was possible before sinning, then how is our free will finite?

I don’t mean to suggest that forgiveness is less than real, or that intimacy with God is no longer possible because of sin. Our joy is certainly restored. In fact, the glory of the later temple can be greater than that of the former (if this is an analogy). What I was interested in was freedom, and what impact the misuse of finite freedom has on future possibilities when it comes to our relationship with God. Perhaps it’s just the time element Starkman mentioned. Relationships, and relational intimacy, take time to grow even if the one we’re relating to is God.

As PoW posted, God accepts people at the first, tenth, or eleventh hour. That’s grace. But does the person who comes at the eleventh hour face the same potential (in terms of calling and relationship, for example) that she would have faced had she come in the first hour? I don’t think so.

Any clearer?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde
Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 5/27/2002 2:15 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Tom: As PoW posted, God accepts people at the first, tenth, or eleventh hour. That’s grace. But does the person who comes at the eleventh hour face the same potential (in terms of calling and relationship, for example) that she would have faced had she come in the first hour? I don’t think so.

PoW: Here are a few more thoughts on my mind...

I may always remember the older (60-plus) foks in Sunday School at a CRC church a few years ago who, with sadness, expressed something akin to longing for there being "Saints" (done in a very non-direct way, of course) and for some stepping stones to growing closer to God. Ussually in that church comes the expectation that sin will always crop up and dominate some area or another. The theological treasures of the Reformed faith like only-by-grace seem to necessitate man's continuing failures. (As if victory in us by the Spirit with our cooperation was a work of the law...come on!)

I want to echo what Tom says at the end. I think that it is most helpful to live knowing that we can waste opportunity, that THIS life certainly is, of growing closer to the Lord, and crucifying tha passions that enslave us.

Yet, we maybe all know that we can not expect anything to fall in place in such a way that we might expect. Possibly many are those who's conversion from utter brokenness has been so deep (Like mary Magdalene) that the new birth radiates for all of us to stand in awe, and worship God in the temple (temple of the holy Spirit) those persons!

Hard to map. And not our job to be cartogrphers. (May we all "not get lost.")
Back to Top
 

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 5/27/2002 3:16 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Hard to map. And not our job to be cartogrphers.
Oooo. I like that. Can I use it?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde
Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
 
   Posted 5/27/2002 3:27 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
quote:
----------------------------------------
Hard to map. And not our job to be cartogrphers.
----------------------------------------

Oooo. I like that. Can I use it?

Tom



YES. But only if you sent it through a thpell-chequer first!
Back to Top
 

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 5/27/2002 3:34 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Doc-

I would appreciate your weighin in on this one too. You're the Guru of Free Will dude, so confirm this for me if you would.

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde
Back to Top
 

GregBoyd
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
 
   Posted 6/2/2002 6:03 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Hi TGB

Boy, this really ups the ante on particular decisions doesn't it?

I don't know what I think about it just yet. I'll need to "live in" the perspective for awhile. But I'm inclined to think somethings off here Tom, though I'm not sure just what.

On the one hand, I think libertarian freedom is finite, so it makes sense that we have a finite amount of time to develop our capacity to love God and enjoy him forever. Thus far in my own reflections on this, I've been centered mostly on the sheer fact that we either become solidified as beings who are open or closed to receiving God's love. I've also always believed, along with you, that our capacity to reflect God's love is decided by us (though there are undoubtedly other variables). In my view, n heaven, we will all be mirrors of God's light, filled (and thus satisfied to the max) with God's light, but some mirrors will be larger than others (just like all the mirrors are in different shapes, and reflect the light in a different hue. This is our eternal uniqueness). So, thus far I am with you.

The part I'm not sure of is putting this into a deed-by-deed equation. This seems to formulaic. I don't see just yet that relationships or character are formed quite like this.

Seems to me that the QUALITY of decisions is more important than the QUANTITY.

A man may have made many bad decisions with regard to his marriage. Yet, he may at some point repent and change -- so thoroughly that he actually has a relationship with his wife that is more profound, more intimate, reflecting a greater capacity for shared life, than a man who never made bad decisions with regard to his marriage -- yet never made a QUALITATIVE decisions to be unreservedly open and submitted to the marriage.

And I don't see that the man who eventually came around and made a dramatic change is worse off for his past decisions. In fact, it may be that the previous bad decisions actually contribute to the qualitative decision to change.

See my point Tom.

Again, on the one hand, it is true that we become the decisions we make. So we must be attentive to how our character is being formed. At the same time, we have to remain aware of the power to bring about a qualitative change with qualitative decisions. We become the decisions we make not only by sheer repetition, but also (and perhaps even more profoundly) by the quality of our decisions. For all we know, the theif on the cross developed in one instant a greater capacity to be in intimate relationship with Jesus that a person raised in church all his life and who always made "sound" decisions.

The issue is perhaps one of balance. If a person neglects the importance of moment by moment decisions, putting off qualitative decisions till later, they may form the kind of character that NEVER WANTS to make a qualitative decision. But if a person focuses too much on the importance of moment by moment decisions, they may despair over the fact that they've already lost many opportunities for good moment by moment decisions and forget that a qualitative decision to love "covers a multitude of sins."

What do you think?

Love the question

Doc

"In Christ...the ONLY THING that matters is faith energized by love." Galatians 5:6
Back to Top
 

Winghead
Registered Member


Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 132
 
   Posted 6/2/2002 11:58 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Greetings all!

First, I am reminded of John of the Cross' "window" illustration. Please read Book I, Chapter V, Paragraph 6, of Ascent of Mount Carmel

http://www.ccel.org/j/john_cross/ascent/book2.html

Doc:
quote:
A man may have made many bad decisions with regard to his marriage. Yet, he may at some point repent and change -- so thoroughly that he actually has a relationship with his wife that is more profound, more intimate, reflecting a greater capacity for shared life, than a man who never made bad decisions with regard to his marriage -- yet never made a QUALITATIVE decisions to be unreservedly open and submitted to the marriage.


I think this illustrates the point well. If we can improve upon human relationships like this -- and I now we can, especially with God's help -- then why would we not be able to improve upon our relationship with the Infinite, creator God of the universe, who is the embodiment of Love?

For scriptural support, read Hosea 2 (esp. 2:14-16).

In Jesus' Love,
Winghead

"...you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’ The second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ No other commandment is greater than these.”
Mark 12:30-31 (NLT)
Back to Top
 

Tom
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
 
   Posted 6/7/2002 11:02 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Doc-

Trying to keep up with these threads is too much! I love ‘em all. I see your point. The quality of our decisions needs to figure into the mix as well. I’m thinking on it.

Doc: On the one hand, I think libertarian freedom is finite, so it makes sense that we have a finite amount of time to develop our capacity to love God and enjoy him forever.

Tom: Exactly. And if the quality of one’s relationship with another person takes time to develop, and that time is wasted in foolish decisions, wouldn’t some of the potential for quality be wasted with it? Of course, we can always improve on our relationship regardless of the past, but can we assume that what is subsequently achieved is what could have been achieved? I don’t know.

Doc: The part I'm not sure of is putting this into a deed-by-deed equation. This seems too formulaic. I don't see just yet that relationships or character are formed quite like this.

Tom: Yeah, I don’t wanna get formulaic in this, but does not there have to be some link between “we become our decisions” in general and the individual decisions we make? What did Augustine say, “Decisions become habit, habits character, and character destiny”? Perhaps the complexity of the interplay between time, individual decisions, and character development is, like creation itself, too much to formulize. We could never plot the growth of relationships or character by boiling it all down to the measured and known influence which a single decision makes in the bigger picture. But might we be right in at least positing some (even if unknowable to us) irrevocable potential for better or worse to individual decisions? That’s what I’m trying to get at.

Doc: A man may have made many bad decisions with regard to his marriage. Yet, he may at some point repent and change -- so thoroughly that he actually has a relationship with his wife that is more profound, more intimate, reflecting a greater capacity for shared life, than a man who never made bad decisions with regard to his marriage -- yet never made a QUALITATIVE decisions to be unreservedly open and submitted to the marriage. And I don't see that the man who eventually came around and made a dramatic change is worse off for his past decisions.

Tom: He may not be worse off in comparison to others who make equally bad or worse decisions in their marriages, but there’s no way we could know if he’s worse off in comparison with what HIS marriage could have been had he not committed adultery, abused his wife, or squandered away their savings at the race tracks, for example. And if it’s true that free will is finite and that our use of it expends a bit of our potential, wouldn’t we have to at least say that the guy’s marriage is not what it could have been even though God redeemed it and made something wonderful out of it?

Interestingly, doesn't the guy who “never makes qualitative decisions to be unreservedly open” to his wife therefore decided not to be open? In personal relationships, isn’t the failure to choose to pursue intimacy a choice to not pursue intimacy? My wife thinks so! Can I get an Amen from the married ladies corner of the sanctuary?

This is kinda what I’m trying to get at. The potential for “relational” intimacy by definition never remains static. It’s a dynamic thing. Though we sometimes answer people who ask us how our walk with God is with, “I’m where I was a year ago, spiritually speaking,” can this really be true? My hunch is it’s impossible to be today relationally (with anybody, God included) where you were a year ago. Relationships are always going SOMEWHERE, forward or backwards, towards intimacy or away from it. Each decision we make takes us in one of those directions.

Yes? No? Close?

Peace,
Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 06/08/2002 04:13:09 AM
Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:39 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