Sin suffering and individuation

Eftsoon said:

This necessary situation produces the conditions within which sin is possible.

Click to expand...

I take it the achievement of self is a good thing. If separation is necessary for individuation, wouldn't that mean sin is necessary? Or, can separation and the resulting self occur without sin as a byproduct?

Eftsoon said:

God could have created us to be indistinguishable from Him.

Click to expand...

This is probably way outside, so just a thought. The identity of indiscernables comes to mind when I read this, which says two entities cannot be separate and also share the exact same set of properties. If there are two things there must be at least one difference. Perhaps you don't mean "indistinguishable " in that strong of a sense.

Identity of indiscernibles - Wikipedia

I think one obvious difference would be that between Creator and creature, i.e. God couldn't create an uncreated God. That's enough difference to avoid the above and still preserve the idea that God could create us in such a way that didn't allow sufficient separation for the achievement of self, which would have been counter-productive.

Eftsoon said:

We are not passive recipients of a self, we are partially repsonsible for shaping it through our primary imagination

Click to expand...

This can't be said too often. It reminds me of Paul's: Work out your salvation with fear and trembling for it is God who enables the willing and doing. Becoming a self is an intentional act enabled by grace, perhaps.

Eftsoon said:

I'm consciously drawing on Coleridge when I talk about the 'primary imagination

Click to expand...

I had to look this up. Fascinating. So is the root problem in the imagination? Separation and imagination are the breeding ground for sin but also necessary for individuation?

Eftsoon said:

In order for humans to achieve self (for us to individuate), there must be a distance between us and God. This necessary situation produces the conditions within which sin is possible. Sin is any act which increases separation. Our natural disposition is to turn away from God. Suffering is the felt experience of our separation. It is separation manifest.

God could have created us to be indistinguishable from Him. We could have been made as extensions of the Divine, but there would then be no self. It is only by virtue of our separation that we can become self-creators: beings capable of creating selves.

Salvation and restoration then are made possible by the self being reimaged (reimagined). As sub-creators we are ego/self builders. We are not passive recipients of a self, we are partially repsonsible for shaping it through our primary imagination. A corrupted primary imagination will produce a corrupted self.
God can remake us in His image. Perhaps this is a gift which works from within and encompasses one's whole being. The imaginative faculty is transformed and everything else follows in its wake.


This is hugely speculative. I would appreciate any criticism or contributions. I feel a bit uncertain about even sharing this as it is a very free extrapolation.

PS I'm consciously drawing on Coleridge when I talk about the 'primary imagination'

Click to expand...

It's kind of funny but many Christian theologies teach that we lose our identity when we turn back to God: 'Not I, but Him', etc. But I think we're not fully ourselves unless we're in communion with God, and that we lose our true selves the minute we become prideful, with pride-an obsession with self or an inordinate degree of the God-given gift of self-love- being the reason why our "natural disposition is to turn away from God". It's not really so natural but something that humanity apparently needs to test the waters of anyway, to ultimately learn that we need Him after all. A teaching I'm familiar with says that, with the "original sin" of disobedience where man denied God's authority, and therefore His godhood over himself, man caused division in some manner between himself and God, between himself and his fellow man, between himself and the rest of creation, and within his own self.

Why would you want to be separate from God? It is in Him that we are complete. I think about being God realized and doing ministry as the highest a human can accomplish. But to sin to be equal with God is what Lucifer did to get sent to earth. You either have a huge ego or a huge deficit, but what do you really want any way, more for yourself or to stop suffering or to be like Jesus?
Be His humble servant, serve others to be greatest.

Eftsoon said:

In order for humans to achieve self (for us to individuate), there must be a distance between us and God. This necessary situation produces the conditions within which sin is possible. Sin is any act which increases separation. Our natural disposition is to turn away from God. Suffering is the felt experience of our separation. It is separation manifest.

God could have created us to be indistinguishable from Him. We could have been made as extensions of the Divine, but there would then be no self. It is only by virtue of our separation that we can become self-creators: beings capable of creating selves.

Salvation and restoration then are made possible by the self being reimaged (reimagined). As sub-creators we are ego/self builders. We are not passive recipients of a self, we are partially repsonsible for shaping it through our primary imagination. A corrupted primary imagination will produce a corrupted self.
God can remake us in His image. Perhaps this is a gift which works from within and encompasses one's whole being. The imaginative faculty is transformed and everything else follows in its wake.


This is hugely speculative. I would appreciate any criticism or contributions. I feel a bit uncertain about even sharing this as it is a very free extrapolation.

PS I'm consciously drawing on Coleridge when I talk about the 'primary imagination'

Click to expand...

You can take any command in scripture and have Biblical support for calling that command “Man’s Objective” and have Biblical support for saying that, but there are two overriding commands all other commands are bases on.

Would “Loving God and secondly others with all our heart, soul, mind, and energy” be our Mission statement?

God is Love, but how do we define this Love and measure this Love?

This Godly type Love is defined by Jesus’ words and deeds (you can also use 1 Cor 13 and 1 John 4), so what is that?

Can we measure the “love” one being has for another being by the amount the first being is willing to unselfishly sacrifice for the other being?

Is God this ultimate Lover? Would that “Love” compel even God to make beings that could Love like He Loves (this “Love of God” is totally unselfish [a measure of pure Love] and thus is not for God’s sake at all, but is totally for the sake of others [which would also be God’s sake])?

So if God is not doing anything for His own sake and everything for the sake of others, would He be expecting or needing anything from man or would God just be trying to give the greatest gift He could give to man?

The reason this “Love” is the most powerful force in all universes is because it compels even God. So to have this Love would make us like God Himself, so why does God not just make us with this Love and place us in heaven?

Are there something God just cannot do: like make another Christ, since Christ was never made but always existed?

Could God place this Godly type Love in a person at his/her creation (an instinctive love) or would an instinctive love be like a robotic love and not like God’s Love?

Could God just force His Love on man against the “will” of man or would that be like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun?

What does man need that he does not have instinctively in order for man to fulfill this Mission?

Man’s objective seems to be to obtain and grow this Godly type Love to fulfill the mission (statement) of Love God and secondly others with all our heart, soul, mind, and energy.

Our “objective” while here on earth is to just accept God’s gift as it was given as pure charity.

God is not trying to get you to do something, but is trying to give you something.

The problem is not sin (unforgiven sin is a huge problem), because God will forgive our sins which helps us to Love (…he that is forgiven much will Love much….) God hates sin, but does allow it, so we can more easily accept His Love (in the form of forgiveness the easiest way for us to accept His charity). The problem is always our fulfilling our objective.

The Garden is a lousy (impossible) place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective and we can thank Adam and Eve for going through that example and providing us and them with that knowledge.

Sin is not only inevitable, but it unfortunately is necessary for humans.

The easiest way for humans to accept God’s charity (Love) is out of a huge need and that need is the relief from the burden of hurting others in the past (sin). By accepting God’s forgiveness we accept God’s Love (mercy/grace/charity) and thus we will Love much since Jesus has taught us (we also see this in our own lives) “…he that is forgiven much will Love much…” Luke 7: 36-50.

This world is “very good”, but not “perfect” like heaven is perfect and does not have the same purpose as heaven. This messed up world is actually the very best place for willing individuals to fulfill their earthly objective.

Death is not “bad” in and of itself, but the way good people go home and the way bad people quit doing bad stuff.

It is truly tragic and unfortunate that Christ had to be tortured, humiliated and murdered in order to help willing humans in their fulfilling of their objective, but God is willing to make huge sacrifices to help willing individuals. It is also very sad other humans who had the opportunity to fulfill their primary earthly objective continued to refuse God’s charity to the point they would never of their own free will accepted God’s charity. These God Loved individuals will thus go to their death and destruction as a help to some other humans who have not refused God’s help to the point of never accepting His help.

Eftsoon said:

Sin isn't necessary, but it is inevitable

Click to expand...

That reminds me of Paul Tillich who said we have a destiny to sin, which I took to mean it wasn't necessary but inevitable.

"Sin is neither original nor hereditary; it is the universal destiny of estrangement which concerns every man." TIllich from his Systematic Theology.

Eftsoon said:

Not necessary imo, but inevitable yes.

Click to expand...

Why does God allow us to sin if it were not necessary?
How can you first obtain Godly type Love any other way then Jesus taught us: "...he that is forgiven much Loves much...", we have to sin in order to be forgiven of an unbelievable debt and with that forgiveness we obtain an unbelievable Love (Godly type Love)?

Eftsoon said:

Yes, the self is fractured. There is no wholeness. The project of humanity for aeons has been to restore wholeness. Abysmal failure

Click to expand...

And the whole point of our faith is that God, and only God, can unfracture us, can accomplish in us what we cannot. We're fractured to the extent that were disunited with Him IOW

Eftsoon said:

In order for humans to achieve self (for us to individuate), there must be a distance between us and God.

Click to expand...

ImCo:
If this refers to sin then it is wrong - GOD does not need evil to fulfill HIS purpose because ALL evil is inimical to, contrary to and set to the destruction of HIS Purpose!!!

Light cannot need dark - dark does not enhance light in any way but only impedes it. How can light impede or block out light??? IF GOD is light then HE cannot create dark evil without being a house divided and we know what our Lord said about that!

Eftsoon said:

It strikes me as rather dangerous to suggest that God authors sin.

Click to expand...

The issue is a bit more sticky than simply declaring that. God can intend for "evil" without being stained by a moral evil, as God's purpose for the "evil" is a moral good. The same can be seen in medicine where we poison people with cancer in order to kill the cancer. So God is not the author of sin, as the intention to do evil comes from within man, but God intentionally manifests some sin that man intends and turns it to His purpose.

Eftsoon said:

It strikes me as rather dangerous to suggest that God authors sin.

Click to expand...

I never said that. God knows what sin is and hates it, but does allow humans to sin. God could have kept Adam and Eve from eatting from the tree.

bling said:

I never said that. God knows what sin is and hates it, but does allow humans to sin. God could have kept Adam and Eve from eatting from the tree.

Click to expand...

...ony by disallowing them their free will which would destroy HIS purpose to have have a heavenly marriage with them.

TedT said:

...ony by disallowing them their free will which would destroy HIS purpose to have have a heavenly marriage with them.

Click to expand...

Sin actually has a purpose for the nonbelieving sinner. Free will is needed here on earth and in heaven.

bling said:

Sin actually has a purpose for the nonbelieving sinner. Free will is needed here on earth and in heaven.

Click to expand...

Yes, GOD USES the stink of sin and the pain of suffering here on earth AFTER HIS creation created the evil in themselves. HE had no use for it in HIS purpose to enter a heavenly marriage with us, none whatsoever.

Once those chosen, those elected to be HIS Bride sinned, HE had them (the good but sinful seed) live with those who chose to be HIS eternal enemies rather than to ever be married to HIM, (the reprobate weeds condemned already to be burnt), so these elect could experience for themselves (since they refused to take HIS word for it) the eternal nature of the depths of suffering the satanic reprobate were willing to inflict upon the rest of the world.

GOD uses sin to cure sinners of their addiction to sin but to think that HE NEEDED SIN to fulfill HIS purpose of our creation is an immature theology ignoring HIS self revealed attributes and thinking that what we see is all we have ever had.

TedT said:

Yes, GOD USES the stink of sin and the pain of suffering here on earth AFTER HIS creation created the evil in themselves. HE had no use for it in HIS purpose to enter a heavenly marriage with us, none whatsoever.

Once those chosen, those elected to be HIS Bride sinned, HE had them (the good but sinful seed) live with those who chose to be HIS eternal enemies rather than to ever be married to HIM, (the reprobate weeds condemned already to be burnt), so these elect could experience for themselves (since they refused to take HIS word for it) the eternal nature of the depths of suffering the satanic reprobate were willing to inflict upon the rest of the world.

GOD uses sin to cure sinners of their addiction to sin but to think that HE NEEDED SIN to fulfill HIS purpose of our creation is an immature theology ignoring HIS self revealed attributes and thinking that what we see is all we have ever had.

Click to expand...

Adam and Eve did not and really could not fulfill their earthly objective while in the seemingly wonderful Garden situation, yet after sinning outside the Garden they could fulfill their earthly objective. We can all thank Adam and Eve for showing us all that the wonderful Garden situation is a lousy (impossible) place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective.

Sin is not the real problem (even if unforgiven sin is a huge problem), sin is a huge offence to God needing an unbelievable huge “Love” in the form of forgiveness. By accepting God’s forgiveness we obtain and unbelievable huge Godly type Love, as Jesus taught us “…he that is forgiven much Loves much…”. That Love is what we need, so sin has purpose in helping us to Love through being forgiven.

bling said:

Adam and Eve did not and really could not fulfill their earthly objective while in the seemingly wonderful Garden situation,

Click to expand...

No matter where they lived, Adam and Eve were created able to fulfill GOD's purpose for their creation right up until they sinned or He did NOT create them perfect to their needs or to HIS needs or to any measure of perfection.

The holy and elect angels had no trouble fulfilling HIS purpose for them without sin, sigh.

TedT said:

No matter where they lived, Adam and Eve were created able to fulfill GOD's purpose for their creation right up until they sinned or He did NOT create them perfect to their needs or to HIS needs or to any measure of perfection.

The holy and elect angels had no trouble fulfilling HIS purpose for them without sin, sigh.

Click to expand...

Right! Adam and Eve were not made “perfect”, Jesus is perfect, but Jesus is not a created being, He is Deity. God could not make beings which have always existed, clones of Christ, so Adam and Eve were made “very good”, which by God’s standard might mean: “As good as a being can be made”.

What Adam and Eve lacked, is why humans spend time here on earth, fulfilling their objective? Adam and Eve could fulfill their earthly objective after they sinned.

A third of the angels did not fulfill their objective and followed satan. Could that method be repeated?