Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YV
09/17/19
Category Archives: Interscope & Intersection
09/16/19
09/13/19
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YT
[Before I go another round in chewing the cud on this, I want to briefly re-iterate the interscope and intersection proposed in section 2.1.
Consider two nested forms:
I recognize myself as an image of God.
My human nature is to participate in divine nature.
The intersection produces two contrasting single actualities: grace and self-destruction.
Here they are.]
09/12/19
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YS
Summary of text [comment] page 88
[Here, I take a breath and step back.
I have been going round and round within the model of ‘the thought experiment where ‘I choose something’.
At least I am not still on page 83 of Schoonenberg’s text.]
09/11/19
09/10/19
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YQ
Summary of text [comment] pages 87 and 88
[To me, it seems that concupiscence (literally, ‘the state of being with Cupid’) resonates with bondage. Disintegration goes with words.
Imprisoning, disintegrating words are co-opposed to bondage-inducing concupiscence.]
09/9/19
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YP
[Responsibility and freedom are open to grace.
Words and bondage are not open to grace.]
09/6/19
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YO
[Note how Schoonenberg echoes the previous co-oppositions.
Obligation is co-opposed to exercises of the heart.
Responsibility is co-opposed to freedom.
Words are co-opposed to bondage.]
09/3/19
Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 2.3 YL
Summary of text [comment] pages 87 and 88
[On one hand, the realm of actuality does not like contradictions.
It obeys the laws of non-contradiction.
On the other hand, if there is a contradiction, then there is actuality.
This is why the person knows “he” has a heart2 only when it is broken (filled with contradictions).]
08/30/19
