Summary of text [comment] page 67<\/p>\n
[Does sin affect God?<\/p>\n
Why does the notion that “sin is its own punishment” appear correct but insufficient?<\/p>\n
So I turn to the question, not directly asked by Schoonenberg, but clearly implicit: Does sin distort the sinner as “an image of God”?<\/p>\n
The first implication of this question comes from the last blog. What is this symbol ‘God’? Is the One God \u201cthe God of One\u201d or \u201cthe God of Three\u201d?<\/p>\n
“God the One” is Pure Potential. Pure Potential defines the category of firstness. The realm of possibility is monadic. Despite its apparent complexity, it contains only one element. Even though various features of this element may be distinguished, they cannot be separated.<\/p>\n
A good example is the possibility underlying any spoken word. The potentials for meaning, guarantee, and message may be distinguished, but they cannot be separated. They also may contradict one another, but they cannot be separated.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Summary of text [comment] page 67 [Does sin affect God? Why does the notion that “sin is its own punishment” appear correct but insufficient? So I turn to the question, not directly asked by Schoonenberg, but clearly implicit: Does sin distort the sinner as “an image of God”? The first implication of this question comes […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2116","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-science-of-original-sin"],"yoast_head":"\n