• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Teofrastus

Active Member
Mar 28, 2023
303
113
66
Stockholm
Visit site
✟88,639.00
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
We must try to understand the self-destruction of Western civilization in psychological and spiritual terms, not only in political and ideological ones. I believe that the phenomenon essentially concerns a "narcissism of goodness" that manifests itself as a collective psychology. Traditionally, Christianity has instilled the insight into the divided nature of human beings: that no one is capable of being completely good. "No one is good," said Jesus. But today, people believe they can be good and perfect.

According to Christian anthropology, the human being has two wills, and these wills often stand in conflict within the divided self. Paul depicts this as the contrast between the old self and the new self, anchored in Adam and Christ respectively. Paul experiences a painful inner conflict between the old self, which he cannot free himself from, and the new self that is in Christ (Rom 7:19, 24). But Paul seems overly optimistic when he says that we can put off the old self and put on the new self as a new way of being (Ephesians 4:22-24). In reality, we must continue to live with both.

Augustine teaches that the self is divided: the will contains two opposing impulses, one towards God and one towards the world (Confessions VIII). This division is not pathological but a metaphysical condition that follows from our fallen nature. Achieving wholeness of the self is not possible, as perfect integration belongs only to the eschaton. The inner person grows, but the outer person is not destroyed in this life. Our duality cannot be eliminated, even if its tyranny can be broken. This is central to the Christian understanding of the false and the true self: we must remain divided, but we must also remain aware of our divided nature.

According to Luther, the Christian is "simul iustus et peccator," at once righteous and a sinner, which is the permanent state of the Christian. The old Adam never disappears. Luther sharply criticizes the striving to achieve "saintliness," which he sees as an attempt to purify the will and achieve wholeness of the self. The more a person strives to be holy, the more he becomes a sinner. In his commentary on Galatians, Luther writes: "The saints are sinners, and they are holy not in themselves but in Christ." He therefore adds in the Table Talk: "God hates the saints that man creates."

For Luther, psychological and spiritual health depends on awareness of our dividedness, which leads to confession and forgiveness. The self is healed by being forgiven, not by becoming unified. The believer does not become less sinful, but becomes more aware of sin and more dependent on grace. In comparison, psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott reverses this structure: psychological health requires that our dividedness be removed, producing a unified self and perfect spontaneity. His theory aims at amalgamation, a fusion of inner and outer worlds into a single field of experience, the so-called transitional space. In doing so, he rejects the anthropology of Christianity.

Thus it is a distinctly modern idea that we should strive to become a unified self that is truly good and perfect, an aspiration Christian theology rejects as a sinful pursuit of self‑salvation. For Augustine, this is equivalent to pride (*superbia*). But Paul also speaks in 1 Timothy 6:17 about enjoying life, and this can be understood as a reference to the Adam within us who seeks earthly joy and satisfaction. Augustine arrives at a similar conclusion. We should not abandon the world but remain in it as pilgrims. In Luther's terms, avoiding saintliness means admitting that the sinner within us must sometimes make use of the world's goods. He wrote to Melanchthon: "Sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly."

Luther did not encourage moral laxity. He told Melanchthon to stop trying to achieve purity or saintliness, and instead to trust in Christ's righteousness rather than his own. He urged him to stop trying to unify the self and to stop obsessing over inner moral perfection. In modern Luther research, "sin boldly" is understood as Luther's rejection of moral perfectionism and the futility of striving for inner wholeness. Instead, we should give priority to the external righteousness given to us by Christ and reject mystical self-healing. Luther does not encourage sin, but he forbids attempts to eradicate sin, make the self unified, or purify the will.

We must still keep our dark side in check, or society will fall apart. And we can do this precisely because we recognize our divided nature and our imperfection. People who lack this awareness and see themselves as ideal or spotless often fall into destructive patterns of falseness and moralism, and then they become truly evil. We harm ourselves if we are too sinful, but we also harm ourselves if we are too righteous. Ecclesiastes 7:16 expresses this clearly: "Do not be overly righteous... Why should you destroy yourself?" Today, many institutions in the Western world, including parts of the Christian church, are marked by a kind of moral absolutism that denies the divided nature of the human being. Thus, they risk repeating the very pattern that Ecclesiastes warns against. The goodness-narcissists dominate the Western world today, and their influence is driving its self-destruction.

The traditional awareness of original sin, and the corresponding need for continual self-recognition of one's sinful nature, has largely disappeared. The consequence is that people are afflicted by goodness-narcissism, which is the worst form of sinfulness. This fuels the urge to tear down civilization, since civilization is judged evil for surviving through power: prisons, repression, borders, labour systems, resource extraction, and even war. All of this is today interpreted as evil and oppression, in accordance with postcolonial theory, critical race theory, identity politics, and all kinds of radicalism and antimilitarism.

Quite simply, if we are to be holy, civilization cannot be sustained. When identity politics was established, "Western civilization" became a symbol of power, dominance, and privilege. This creates a situation where criticism of the West is not merely historical or political, but moral and existential. Civilization becomes an obstacle to "liberation," understood as the realization of Rousseau's ideal of the perfectly good natural human being. Without a living insight into original sin and the permanently divided nature of the human being, we lose the only antidote to moral absolutism.

When humanity forgets its own dark nature, it becomes dangerous, precisely because it believes itself to be good. Ecclesiastes warns precisely against this self-destructive pursuit of over-righteousness. A civilization that denies its own inner ambivalence inevitably repeats the same pattern: it tries to become purer than any human society can bear, and collapses under the weight of its own supposed goodness.
 
Last edited:

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
25,498
5,655
47
Oregon
✟1,212,062.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
We must try to understand the self-destruction of western civilization in psychological and spiritual terms, not only in political and ideological ones. I believe that the phenomenon essentially concerns a "narcissism of goodness" that manifests itself as a collective psychology. Traditionally, Christianity has instilled the insight into the divided nature of human beings: that no one is capable of being completely good. "No one is good," said Jesus. But today, people believe they can be good and perfect.

According to Christian anthropology, the human being has two wills, and these wills often stand in conflict within the divided self. Paul depicts this as the contrast between the old self and the new self, anchored in Adam and Christ respectively. Paul experiences a painful inner conflict between the old self, which he cannot free himself from, and the new self that is in Christ (Rom 7:19, 24). But Paul seems overly optimistic when he says that we can put off the old self and put on the new self as a new way of being (Ephesians 4:22-24). In reality, we must continue to live with both.

Augustine teaches that the self is divided: the will contains two opposing impulses, one towards God and one towards the world (Confessions VIII). This division is not pathological but a metaphysical condition that follows from our fallen nature. Achieving wholeness of the self is not possible, as perfect integration belongs only to the eschaton. The inner person grows, but the outer person is not destroyed in this life. Our duality cannot be eliminated, even if its tyranny can be broken. This is central to the Christian understanding of the false and the true self: we must remain divided, but we must also remain aware of our divided nature.

According to Luther, the Christian is "simul iustus et peccator," at once righteous and a sinner, which is the permanent state of the Christian. The old Adam never disappears. Luther sharply criticizes the striving to achieve "saintliness," which he sees as an attempt to purify the will and achieve wholeness of the self. The more a person strives to be holy, the more he becomes a sinner. In his commentary on Galatians, Luther writes: "The saints are sinners, and they are holy not in themselves but in Christ." He therefore adds in the Table Talk: "God hates the saints that man creates."

For Luther, psychological and spiritual health depends on awareness of our dividedness, which leads to confession and forgiveness. The self is healed by being forgiven, not by becoming unified. The believer does not become less sinful, but becomes more aware of sin and more dependent on grace. In comparison, psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott reverses this structure: psychological health requires that our dividedness be removed, producing a unified self and perfect spontaneity. His theory aims at amalgamation, a fusion of inner and outer worlds into a single field of experience, the so-called transitional space. In doing so, he rejects the anthropology of Christianity.

Thus it is a distinctly modern idea that we should strive to become a unified self that is truly good and perfect, an aspiration Christian theology rejects as a sinful pursuit of self‑salvation. For Augustine, this is equivalent to pride (*superbia*). But Paul also speaks in 1 Timothy 6:17 about enjoying life, and this can be understood as a reference to the Adam within us who seeks earthly joy and satisfaction. Augustine arrives at a similar conclusion. We should not abandon the world but remain in it as pilgrims. In Luther's terms, avoiding saintliness means admitting that the sinner within us must sometimes make use of the world's goods. He wrote to Melanchthon: "Sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly."

Luther did not encourage moral laxity. He told Melanchthon to stop trying to achieve purity or saintliness, and instead to trust in Christ's righteousness rather than his own. He urged him to stop trying to unify the self and to stop obsessing over inner moral perfection. In modern Luther research, "sin boldly" is understood as Luther's rejection of moral perfectionism and the futility of striving for inner wholeness. Instead, we should give priority to the external righteousness given to us by Christ and reject mystical self-healing. Luther does not encourage sin, but he forbids attempts to eradicate sin, make the self unified, or purify the will.

We must still keep our dark side in check, or society will fall apart. And we can do this precisely because we recognize our divided nature and our imperfection. People who lack this awareness and see themselves as ideal or spotless often fall into destructive patterns of falseness and moralism, and then they become truly evil. We harm ourselves if we are too sinful, but we also harm ourselves if we are too righteous. Ecclesiastes 7:16 expresses this clearly: "Do not be overly righteous... Why should you destroy yourself?" Today, many institutions in the Western world, including parts of the Christian church, are marked by a kind of moral absolutism that denies the divided nature of the human being. Thus, they risk repeating the very pattern that Ecclesiastes warns against. The goodness-narcissists dominate the Western world today, and their influence is driving its self-destruction.

The traditional awareness of original sin, and the corresponding need for continual self-recognition of one's sinful nature, has largely disappeared. The consequence is that people are afflicted by goodness-narcissism, which is the worst form of sinfulness. This fuels the urge to tear down civilization, since civilization is judged evil for surviving through power: prisons, repression, borders, labour systems, resource extraction, and even war. All of this is today interpreted as evil and oppression, in accordance with postcolonial theory, critical race theory, identity politics, and all kinds of radicalism and antimilitarism.

Quite simply, if we are to be holy, civilization cannot be sustained. When identity politics was established, "Western civilization" became a symbol of power, dominance, and privilege. This creates a situation where criticism of the West is not merely historical or political, but moral and existential. Civilization becomes an obstacle to "liberation," understood as the realization of Rousseau's ideal of the perfectly good natural human being. Without a living insight into original sin and the permanently divided nature of the human being, we lose the only antidote to moral absolutism.

When humanity forgets its own dark nature, it becomes dangerous, precisely because it believes itself to be good. Ecclesiastes warns precisely against this self-destructive pursuit of over-righteousness. A civilization that denies its own inner ambivalence inevitably repeats the same pattern: it tries to become purer than any human society can bear, and collapses under the weight of its own supposed goodness.
I see the decline of western civilization, and the world right now, as being meant to happen, and I've made my peace with that, since it is only God's will paving the way for something greater, eventually, etc. Politics in and of itself is not responsible, and neither is any other human, but it's just something that is supposed to occur/meant to happen, and I try not to fight that current/flow anymore, as it can lead to your will being divided, etc.

And as for more on the duality of man, or most people, I've moved past that, and my will is no longer divided most of the time, etc, except for only very, very temporarily at some times when I temporarily approach a difficult decision, or something like that, but most of the time, it's not as much of a problem anymore, as having too much pride/ego/vanity/entitlement is the real problem/source of that, etc.

Most of the time, my decisions are quick, and don't require a whole lot of thought on my part anymore, because I've learned how to allow my yes's to be yes's, and my no's no, most of the time, etc. This is probably due to how much time I've spent away from other people, and the rest of the world probably, and still do, etc. You start seeing everything with new/different eyes, etc. And your will no longer has to be divided about most things most of the time, etc. I'm neither good, nor bad anymore, but I just simply "am", etc, and I've learned how to be content with that. When I do something that I think is wrong, then I own it, and know it is because I chose it in that instance, and it was my will for that period of time, or in that instance, knowing that I also might say no to doing that at other times also, etc, and I'm more than ok with it/that, etc.

But I'm neither good nor bad, and I 100% believe that pride/ego/vanity is true root of all evil, etc, and it makes you foolish/stupid, and so for these reasons (and some more) I absolutely hate it, and hate to see it in others, and have done everything to all but completely shed it or get rid of it in my own case, etc, and with God's help, and with my time spent out away from the world, and other people, we seem to have had some success with it, etc, but it really irritates me to see it in other people, as most don't even realize it, and it's extremely prevalent in other people, and I do mean "extremely", etc, and it is responsible for their two divided wills I think, etc.

Any attempt to be or make yourself holy or good is almost certain to frustrate/fail when it's mixed with ego/pride, etc. It is my opinion that when many people try to do this, that they might actually be making themselves worse, because most of the time when we are trying to do this, or what they mean by this, in their own mind, is they mean better than some other, either group or individual people/person, etc, which is certain to frustrate/fail/fall on it's face always, etc, and it is my belief that that will is divided from other one because of this, etc. We're still motivated by evil in a lot of cases, even in our attempts to be/do good, and so our wills are still divided because of this.

Anyway, I might say more later, as this is enough for now. It's certainly a conversation/discussion that could go on, and on, and on, etc.

The insistence on the separate self, is also part of the problem, and is something I could talk about a whole lot more, etc. But this is enough for now.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,871
10,195
53
✟444,055.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,871
10,195
53
✟444,055.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
According to Christian anthropology, the human being has two wills, and these wills often stand in conflict within the divided self.
Nope. That’s from Evangelical origins in the 1960s. Often seen as the actual origin of the ‘two wolves inside of you’ story miss attributed to Cherokee legend.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,871
10,195
53
✟444,055.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Upvote 0

Teofrastus

Active Member
Mar 28, 2023
303
113
66
Stockholm
Visit site
✟88,639.00
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Easily attainable without religion.
No, without the doctrine of original sin, people tend to become political idealists, and once that happens, things quickly go downhill. This is a classic Christian-anthropological insight going back to Augustine: when a society forgets that human beings are divided, fallible, and prone to self‑deception, it begins to imagine that political systems can be perfected.

Once the doctrine of original sin disappears, politics turns into a moral crusade rather than a prudential art. Opponents are no longer fellow sinners but embodiments of evil; institutions are expected to achieve purity rather than stability; compromise becomes betrayal; and coercion is justified "for the sake of the good."

This pursuit of institutional purity takes many forms: environmental purity, where climate policy becomes a moral litmus test; LGBTQ+ purity, where mandatory training is used to prevent moral contamination; social-justice purity, where minor social missteps are punished as ethical violations; and scientific or technocratic purity, where science is treated as a moral authority rather than a fallible method of inquiry.

Institutional purity means denying human ambivalence, denying imperfection, and denying the reality of trade-offs. And once these denials harden, they lead inevitably to absolutism.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Stopped_lurking

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2004
1,644
646
Kristianstad
✟48,806.00
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
We must try to understand the self-destruction of western civilization in psychological and spiritual terms, not only in political and ideological ones. I believe that the phenomenon essentially concerns a "narcissism of goodness" that manifests itself as a collective psychology. Traditionally, Christianity has instilled the insight into the divided nature of human beings: that no one is capable of being completely good. "No one is good," said Jesus. But today, people believe they can be good and perfect.

No, I have yet to meet anyone that describes themselves to be perfect. I haven't met anyone that would themselves as only good, at most I have heard them describe themselves as aspiring to do good.

This is an account that doesn't seem to take into people's actual views of themselves.

According to Christian anthropology, the human being has two wills, and these wills often stand in conflict within the divided self. Paul depicts this as the contrast between the old self and the new self, anchored in Adam and Christ respectively. Paul experiences a painful inner conflict between the old self, which he cannot free himself from, and the new self that is in Christ (Rom 7:19, 24). But Paul seems overly optimistic when he says that we can put off the old self and put on the new self as a new way of being (Ephesians 4:22-24). In reality, we must continue to live with both.

Augustine teaches that the self is divided: the will contains two opposing impulses, one towards God and one towards the world (Confessions VIII). This division is not pathological but a metaphysical condition that follows from our fallen nature. Achieving wholeness of the self is not possible, as perfect integration belongs only to the eschaton. The inner person grows, but the outer person is not destroyed in this life. Our duality cannot be eliminated, even if its tyranny can be broken. This is central to the Christian understanding of the false and the true self: we must remain divided, but we must also remain aware of our divided nature.

According to Luther, the Christian is "simul iustus et peccator," at once righteous and a sinner, which is the permanent state of the Christian. The old Adam never disappears. Luther sharply criticizes the striving to achieve "saintliness," which he sees as an attempt to purify the will and achieve wholeness of the self. The more a person strives to be holy, the more he becomes a sinner. In his commentary on Galatians, Luther writes: "The saints are sinners, and they are holy not in themselves but in Christ." He therefore adds in the Table Talk: "God hates the saints that man creates."

For Luther, psychological and spiritual health depends on awareness of our dividedness, which leads to confession and forgiveness. The self is healed by being forgiven, not by becoming unified. The believer does not become less sinful, but becomes more aware of sin and more dependent on grace. In comparison, psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott reverses this structure: psychological health requires that our dividedness be removed, producing a unified self and perfect spontaneity. His theory aims at amalgamation, a fusion of inner and outer worlds into a single field of experience, the so-called transitional space. In doing so, he rejects the anthropology of Christianity.

Thus it is a distinctly modern idea that we should strive to become a unified self that is truly good and perfect, an aspiration Christian theology rejects as a sinful pursuit of self‑salvation. For Augustine, this is equivalent to pride (*superbia*). But Paul also speaks in 1 Timothy 6:17 about enjoying life, and this can be understood as a reference to the Adam within us who seeks earthly joy and satisfaction. Augustine arrives at a similar conclusion. We should not abandon the world but remain in it as pilgrims. In Luther's terms, avoiding saintliness means admitting that the sinner within us must sometimes make use of the world's goods. He wrote to Melanchthon: "Sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly."

Luther did not encourage moral laxity. He told Melanchthon to stop trying to achieve purity or saintliness, and instead to trust in Christ's righteousness rather than his own. He urged him to stop trying to unify the self and to stop obsessing over inner moral perfection. In modern Luther research, "sin boldly" is understood as Luther's rejection of moral perfectionism and the futility of striving for inner wholeness. Instead, we should give priority to the external righteousness given to us by Christ and reject mystical self-healing. Luther does not encourage sin, but he forbids attempts to eradicate sin, make the self unified, or purify the will.

We must still keep our dark side in check, or society will fall apart. And we can do this precisely because we recognize our divided nature and our imperfection. People who lack this awareness and see themselves as ideal or spotless often fall into destructive patterns of falseness and moralism, and then they become truly evil. We harm ourselves if we are too sinful, but we also harm ourselves if we are too righteous. Ecclesiastes 7:16 expresses this clearly: "Do not be overly righteous... Why should you destroy yourself?" Today, many institutions in the Western world, including parts of the Christian church, are marked by a kind of moral absolutism that denies the divided nature of the human being. Thus, they risk repeating the very pattern that Ecclesiastes warns against. The goodness-narcissists dominate the Western world today, and their influence is driving its self-destruction.

The traditional awareness of original sin, and the corresponding need for continual self-recognition of one's sinful nature, has largely disappeared. The consequence is that people are afflicted by goodness-narcissism, which is the worst form of sinfulness. This fuels the urge to tear down civilization, since civilization is judged evil for surviving through power: prisons, repression, borders, labour systems, resource extraction, and even war. All of this is today interpreted as evil and oppression, in accordance with postcolonial theory, critical race theory, identity politics, and all kinds of radicalism and antimilitarism.

Quite simply, if we are to be holy, civilization cannot be sustained. When identity politics was established, "Western civilization" became a symbol of power, dominance, and privilege. This creates a situation where criticism of the West is not merely historical or political, but moral and existential. Civilization becomes an obstacle to "liberation," understood as the realization of Rousseau's ideal of the perfectly good natural human being. Without a living insight into original sin and the permanently divided nature of the human being, we lose the only antidote to moral absolutism.

When humanity forgets its own dark nature, it becomes dangerous, precisely because it believes itself to be good. Ecclesiastes warns precisely against this self-destructive pursuit of over-righteousness. A civilization that denies its own inner ambivalence inevitably repeats the same pattern: it tries to become purer than any human society can bear, and collapses under the weight of its own supposed goodness.
 
Upvote 0

Teofrastus

Active Member
Mar 28, 2023
303
113
66
Stockholm
Visit site
✟88,639.00
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
I see the decline of western civilization, and the world right now, as being meant to happen, and I've made my peace with that, since it is only God's will paving the way for something greater, eventually, etc. Politics in and of itself is not responsible, and neither is any other human, but it's just something that is supposed to occur/meant to happen, and I try not to fight that current/flow anymore, as it can lead to your will being divided, etc.

And as for more on the duality of man, or most people, I've moved past that, and my will is no longer divided most of the time, etc, except for only very, very temporarily at some times when I temporarily approach a difficult decision, or something like that, but most of the time, it's not as much of a problem anymore, as having too much pride/ego/vanity/entitlement is the real problem/source of that, etc.

Most of the time, my decisions are quick, and don't require a whole lot of thought on my part anymore, because I've learned how to allow my yes's to be yes's, and my no's no, most of the time, etc. This is probably due to how much time I've spent away from other people, and the rest of the world probably, and still do, etc. You start seeing everything with new/different eyes, etc. And your will no longer has to be divided about most things most of the time, etc. I'm neither good, nor bad anymore, but I just simply "am", etc, and I've learned how to be content with that. When I do something that I think is wrong, then I own it, and know it is because I chose it in that instance, and it was my will for that period of time, or in that instance, knowing that I also might say no to doing that at other times also, etc, and I'm more than ok with it/that, etc.

But I'm neither good nor bad, and I 100% believe that pride/ego/vanity is true root of all evil, etc, and it makes you foolish/stupid, and so for these reasons (and some more) I absolutely hate it, and hate to see it in others, and have done everything to all but completely shed it or get rid of it in my own case, etc, and with God's help, and with my time spent out away from the world, and other people, we seem to have had some success with it, etc, but it really irritates me to see it in other people, as most don't even realize it, and it's extremely prevalent in other people, and I do mean "extremely", etc, and it is responsible for their two divided wills I think, etc.

Any attempt to be or make yourself holy or good is almost certain to frustrate/fail when it's mixed with ego/pride, etc. It is my opinion that when many people try to do this, that they might actually be making themselves worse, because most of the time when we are trying to do this, or what they mean by this, in their own mind, is they mean better than some other, either group or individual people/person, etc, which is certain to frustrate/fail/fall on it's face always, etc, and it is my belief that that will is divided from other one because of this, etc. We're still motivated by evil in a lot of cases, even in our attempts to be/do good, and so our wills are still divided because of this.

Anyway, I might say more later, as this is enough for now. It's certainly a conversation/discussion that could go on, and on, and on, etc.

The insistence on the separate self, is also part of the problem, and is something I could talk about a whole lot more, etc. But this is enough for now.

God Bless.
Classical Christian theology insists that human beings are responsible agents whose choices matter. Although the human will is wounded, it remains real, and societies rise or fall through human action. Fatalism erases this drama. It treats history as a river in which we merely drift. Christianity, however, teaches that history is a theatre of moral struggle, not a predetermined flow. God's sovereignty does not eliminate human responsibility; it grounds it. Christian theology affirms providence, but it also insists that providence is not passivity, because God's governance of history works through human initiative.

Augustine's entire theology of history, including the City of God, rests on the conviction that God rules history, yet human beings must act, resist evil, and pursue the good. To say, "I've made my peace with decline because it is meant to happen," is to confuse providence with resignation. Augustine would call this quietism, not faith.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
25,498
5,655
47
Oregon
✟1,212,062.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Classical Christian theology insists that human beings are responsible agents whose choices matter. Although the human will is wounded, it remains real, and societies rise or fall through human action. Fatalism erases this drama. It treats history as a river in which we merely drift. Christianity, however, teaches that history is a theatre of moral struggle, not a predetermined flow. God's sovereignty does not eliminate human responsibility; it grounds it. Christian theology affirms providence, but it also insists that providence is not passivity, because God's governance of history works through human initiative.

Augustine's entire theology of history, including the City of God, rests on the conviction that God rules history, yet human beings must act, resist evil, and pursue the good. To say, "I've made my peace with decline because it is meant to happen," is to confuse providence with resignation. Augustine would call this quietism, not faith.
We'll have to agree to disagree on some things.

I also don't expect you to understand me, so some mistakes in trying to determine who and what I am, are inevitable also.

Take Care/God Bless.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
25,498
5,655
47
Oregon
✟1,212,062.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
We'll have to agree to disagree on some things.

I also don't expect you to understand me, so some mistakes in trying to determine who and what I am, are inevitable also.

Take Care/God Bless.
@Teofrastus

Your error in why your will is in conflict though.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Teofrastus

Active Member
Mar 28, 2023
303
113
66
Stockholm
Visit site
✟88,639.00
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
No, I have yet to meet anyone that describes themselves to be perfect. I haven't met anyone that would themselves as only good, at most I have heard them describe themselves as aspiring to do good.
Of course such people will never claim to be perfectly good, because anyone who truly believed himself to be perfectly good would never say so. Admitting it would defeat his purpose, which is to stand out as morally exceptional.

Compare this with the familiar tactic of displaying compassion because it simultaneously elevates one's own social status. It is an effective form of concealment, and it is called hypocrisy. Goodness-narcissists secretly love the presence of suffering and degradation in any form, because without it they would lose the opportunity to present themselves as virtuous.

The suffering of others allows them to raise their own status and experience a kind of therapeutic well-being. The beggar's presence enables them to climb the status ladder in relative terms, while they unconsciously appreciate the beggar's humiliation, since the beggar becomes a surrogate who carries the subject's own hidden suffering and degradation. In this way they can present themselves as good, when in reality the opposite is true.
 
Upvote 0

Stopped_lurking

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2004
1,644
646
Kristianstad
✟48,806.00
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Of course such people will never claim to be perfectly good, because anyone who truly believed himself to be perfectly good would never say so.

Why not? This is just you assuming the correctness of your argument.


Admitting it would defeat his purpose, which is to stand out as morally exceptional.

This is just your claim.

Compare this with the familiar tactic of displaying compassion because it simultaneously elevates one's own social status. It is an effective form of concealment, and it is called hypocrisy. Goodness-narcissists secretly love the presence of suffering and degradation in any form, because without it they would lose the opportunity to present themselves as virtuous.

The suffering of others allows them to raise their own status and experience a kind of therapeutic well-being. The beggar's presence enables them to climb the status ladder in relative terms, while they unconsciously appreciate the beggar's humiliation, since the beggar becomes a surrogate who carries the subject's own hidden suffering and degradation. In this way they can present themselves as good, when in reality the opposite is true.

Do you have something against charities as well? Or volunteers at soup kitchens? If people actually do things that benefits others, how is that problematic? You are just assuming nefarious intent.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,871
10,195
53
✟444,055.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
No, without the doctrine of original sin, people tend to become political idealists,
No it doesn’t. The idea that belief in an inherited curse stops idealism is as yet un-evidenced.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,871
10,195
53
✟444,055.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
This pursuit of institutional purity takes many forms: environmental purity, where climate policy becomes a moral litmus test; LGBTQ+ purity, where mandatory training is used to prevent moral contamination; social-justice purity, where minor social missteps are punished as ethical violations;
Yes; Christianity can be very intense.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,871
10,195
53
✟444,055.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Institutional purity means denying human ambivalence, denying imperfection, and denying the reality of trade-offs. And once these denials harden, they lead inevitably to absolutism.
Yes; Christianity can be very intense.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Mama said to knock you OUT !!!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,185
12,566
Space Mountain!
✟1,537,940.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
We must try to understand the self-destruction of Western civilization in psychological and spiritual terms, not only in political and ideological ones. I believe that the phenomenon essentially concerns a "narcissism of goodness" that manifests itself as a collective psychology. Traditionally, Christianity has instilled the insight into the divided nature of human beings: that no one is capable of being completely good. "No one is good," said Jesus. But today, people believe they can be good and perfect.

According to Christian anthropology, the human being has two wills, and these wills often stand in conflict within the divided self. Paul depicts this as the contrast between the old self and the new self, anchored in Adam and Christ respectively. Paul experiences a painful inner conflict between the old self, which he cannot free himself from, and the new self that is in Christ (Rom 7:19, 24). But Paul seems overly optimistic when he says that we can put off the old self and put on the new self as a new way of being (Ephesians 4:22-24). In reality, we must continue to live with both.

Augustine teaches that the self is divided: the will contains two opposing impulses, one towards God and one towards the world (Confessions VIII). This division is not pathological but a metaphysical condition that follows from our fallen nature. Achieving wholeness of the self is not possible, as perfect integration belongs only to the eschaton. The inner person grows, but the outer person is not destroyed in this life. Our duality cannot be eliminated, even if its tyranny can be broken. This is central to the Christian understanding of the false and the true self: we must remain divided, but we must also remain aware of our divided nature.

According to Luther, the Christian is "simul iustus et peccator," at once righteous and a sinner, which is the permanent state of the Christian. The old Adam never disappears. Luther sharply criticizes the striving to achieve "saintliness," which he sees as an attempt to purify the will and achieve wholeness of the self. The more a person strives to be holy, the more he becomes a sinner. In his commentary on Galatians, Luther writes: "The saints are sinners, and they are holy not in themselves but in Christ." He therefore adds in the Table Talk: "God hates the saints that man creates."

For Luther, psychological and spiritual health depends on awareness of our dividedness, which leads to confession and forgiveness. The self is healed by being forgiven, not by becoming unified. The believer does not become less sinful, but becomes more aware of sin and more dependent on grace. In comparison, psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott reverses this structure: psychological health requires that our dividedness be removed, producing a unified self and perfect spontaneity. His theory aims at amalgamation, a fusion of inner and outer worlds into a single field of experience, the so-called transitional space. In doing so, he rejects the anthropology of Christianity.

Thus it is a distinctly modern idea that we should strive to become a unified self that is truly good and perfect, an aspiration Christian theology rejects as a sinful pursuit of self‑salvation. For Augustine, this is equivalent to pride (*superbia*). But Paul also speaks in 1 Timothy 6:17 about enjoying life, and this can be understood as a reference to the Adam within us who seeks earthly joy and satisfaction. Augustine arrives at a similar conclusion. We should not abandon the world but remain in it as pilgrims. In Luther's terms, avoiding saintliness means admitting that the sinner within us must sometimes make use of the world's goods. He wrote to Melanchthon: "Sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly."

Luther did not encourage moral laxity. He told Melanchthon to stop trying to achieve purity or saintliness, and instead to trust in Christ's righteousness rather than his own. He urged him to stop trying to unify the self and to stop obsessing over inner moral perfection. In modern Luther research, "sin boldly" is understood as Luther's rejection of moral perfectionism and the futility of striving for inner wholeness. Instead, we should give priority to the external righteousness given to us by Christ and reject mystical self-healing. Luther does not encourage sin, but he forbids attempts to eradicate sin, make the self unified, or purify the will.

We must still keep our dark side in check, or society will fall apart. And we can do this precisely because we recognize our divided nature and our imperfection. People who lack this awareness and see themselves as ideal or spotless often fall into destructive patterns of falseness and moralism, and then they become truly evil. We harm ourselves if we are too sinful, but we also harm ourselves if we are too righteous. Ecclesiastes 7:16 expresses this clearly: "Do not be overly righteous... Why should you destroy yourself?" Today, many institutions in the Western world, including parts of the Christian church, are marked by a kind of moral absolutism that denies the divided nature of the human being. Thus, they risk repeating the very pattern that Ecclesiastes warns against. The goodness-narcissists dominate the Western world today, and their influence is driving its self-destruction.

The traditional awareness of original sin, and the corresponding need for continual self-recognition of one's sinful nature, has largely disappeared. The consequence is that people are afflicted by goodness-narcissism, which is the worst form of sinfulness. This fuels the urge to tear down civilization, since civilization is judged evil for surviving through power: prisons, repression, borders, labour systems, resource extraction, and even war. All of this is today interpreted as evil and oppression, in accordance with postcolonial theory, critical race theory, identity politics, and all kinds of radicalism and antimilitarism.

Quite simply, if we are to be holy, civilization cannot be sustained. When identity politics was established, "Western civilization" became a symbol of power, dominance, and privilege. This creates a situation where criticism of the West is not merely historical or political, but moral and existential. Civilization becomes an obstacle to "liberation," understood as the realization of Rousseau's ideal of the perfectly good natural human being. Without a living insight into original sin and the permanently divided nature of the human being, we lose the only antidote to moral absolutism.

When humanity forgets its own dark nature, it becomes dangerous, precisely because it believes itself to be good. Ecclesiastes warns precisely against this self-destructive pursuit of over-righteousness. A civilization that denies its own inner ambivalence inevitably repeats the same pattern: it tries to become purer than any human society can bear, and collapses under the weight of its own supposed goodness.

I've never believed I can be completely good, even if I do attempt to slouch in that direction as much as my lower back will allow me to.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Mama said to knock you OUT !!!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,185
12,566
Space Mountain!
✟1,537,940.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No, without the doctrine of original sin, people tend to become political idealists, and once that happens, things quickly go downhill. This is a classic Christian-anthropological insight going back to Augustine: when a society forgets that human beings are divided, fallible, and prone to self‑deception, it begins to imagine that political systems can be perfected.

Once the doctrine of original sin disappears, politics turns into a moral crusade rather than a prudential art. Opponents are no longer fellow sinners but embodiments of evil; institutions are expected to achieve purity rather than stability; compromise becomes betrayal; and coercion is justified "for the sake of the good."

This pursuit of institutional purity takes many forms: environmental purity, where climate policy becomes a moral litmus test; LGBTQ+ purity, where mandatory training is used to prevent moral contamination; social-justice purity, where minor social missteps are punished as ethical violations; and scientific or technocratic purity, where science is treated as a moral authority rather than a fallible method of inquiry.

Institutional purity means denying human ambivalence, denying imperfection, and denying the reality of trade-offs. And once these denials harden, they lead inevitably to absolutism.

Oh, I don't know about that. I see plenty of political idealists on both the Left and the Right, and for those on the right, their Reformed view of Augustinian Original Sin doesn't seem to count for much where better, wiser behavior of all kinds is needed.

As for the Left, I don't think they're driven by a desire for goodness and perfection as much as they are by wanting the Liberality they require.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0