« Why Shouldn't We Trust the Non-Canonical Gospels Attributed to James? | Main | The Centrality of Jesus' Death Defies Relativism »

November 18, 2013

Comments

Great clarification, Greg. It made me realize why, despite the protests of some who say otherwise, I still see myself as a sinner before God. I'm a FORGIVEN sinner, to be sure, but my sin is ever before me and my human frailty all too evident to me. On the other hand, such thoughts also prompt me to be ALWAYS thankful for the redemptive work of Christ on the cross which spares me the punishment I deserve for my sins.

It seems God too confesses sins.


We arrive there, but, not at first. First there is this business of surrendering, which all love knows:


A surrendering of arms. Confession is in a sense a kind of motion. It is that motion of the Self in relation to Other which we find aborted in Eden and adopted in Gethsemane. Love has but one Garden and the road out of it and into God can only be by love’s motions, and this yielding, this surrendering, this acquiescence is called on here.


Thine: Yes.
Mine: No.


By this surrendering of arms we find Joy. We discover this in marriage. In friendships. In our own salvation. There is no such thing as love void of dying. Not anywhere. We thought we would find the God Who is Love and thereby escape such motions. But how could it be?


For those of us in our mutable corruptness here outside of love’s garden confession is some lesser form of surrender than that category which the Last Adam propagates inside of His mutable innocence inside of Gethsemane. His is more, ours is less. His witnesses joys unthinkable, ours is nearly blind, grasping. Innocence in Eden entering into Him is but Innocence in Gethsemane entering into Him, and we, corrupt, by love’s motion, enter into that Last Adam, and therein where He goes, we are. By our confession we are saved.


Your-Word: Yes.
My-Word: No.


Such a motion never can end, for, within God’s necessarily triune E Pluribus Unum we find Love’s Eternally Sacrificed Self in delight Poured-Out, just as, we find Love’s Timelessly Glorified Other in delight Filled-Up, and thereby these Two by embrace perpetually manifest the begotten God, that singularity of Unity that is the begotten Us, the Great I-AM, E Pluribus Unum. He tastes love’s dying. He tastes love’s restoration. Perpetually. Life Poured-Out, and, Alive-Again. The Self Debased, and, Glorified.

The inverse of confession, the inverse of that motion “out of Self and into Other” is that motion “out of Other and into the Isolated-Self”, thereby on necessity void of Other, void of I-You, and is the Isolated-I. While such is amid God’s Perfect Distincts but the Great I-AM, All-Sufficiency in every direction, such is for any created self sheer In-Sufficiency, that vacuum void of Immutable Love, which is simply hell by ontology’s definition. And we find that in Him there is this Pure-Self, this Isolated-I, amid love’s necessarily triune I-You-Us. This Purity of I, of Self, of My and not Thy, He knows to the Nth degree. This motion in Him yields, not death, but Life. He can’t sin, for, whither He goes, He finds Himself. Inside of His I-You-Us there is but this: E Pluribus Unum.


God does not know what it is like to confess His Own sins, but, that is not in question really. No one knows what it is like for God to confess a sin, just as no one knows what it is like for God to learn, for there are no such motions in existence. God does not know of things that do not exist. Like God coming into existence, and so forth. Ontology suffers no ill here. That motion of a man confessing sin, of man learning, is known both by God and Man, for, what Man knows, can know, God knows better than we. Discovery is a man in motion, not God in motion, and God knows what Man knows. What height or depth does a neuronal flux rise or fall to but for those limits set by His Mind’s delight there in Genesis? What is a neuron’s or a spirit’s flux up-and-in or spin down-and-over but those walls and limits and curves which God Himself has with His Own finger touched, felt, the limits of? We discover gravity; gravity drips from His Mind’s taste buds, and, that experience of discovery within a man’s mind, capacitated in us by His Finger’s feeler, likewise drips from His Mind’s taste buds. God confesses sins in more sense than this, though. The accuser of the brethren stands night and day confessing our sins, and, Love’s Great Abolitionist shouts ever in agreement, confessing the truth of all my sins, and, then, with this He answers Hell: “Yes, and what of it?” And Hell has no answer. None. Love casts out all my fear.


In all forms God confesses, for, within His Pure Self, that Isolated-I, what shall we call Him? He is therein the Great I AM and nothing less. Within His triune interior He motions into the Pure-Self which is for Him a motion which yields Life (which is for we the created a motion which yields separation, death). That motion which is the inverse of surrender, that of “My and not Thy!” is in Him All-Sufficiency (yet is in any created self simply hell’s isolation into insufficiency, out of All-Sufficiency). From inside of Isolation He can speak, perpetually. He knows. He becomes our sin, just as, He never changes. Then, timelessly, from there, that Pure-Self, that Isolated-I, in Him, also surrenders, as all Selves in Love do. In confession we find that yielding, that painful business of loss, of pouring-out, of Love’s Dying surrender in His Eternally Sacrificed Self, and this is not done by Him in mere gesture, but is done in full actuality. “Thy and not My!” is likewise in Him All-Sufficiency, for all Distincts in Him are but the Great I-AM. We think Gethsemane is the first best surrendering of arms. No. It is only our first best. Not His. He had no such first, nor will He have a last, for Love’s motions have no start, no end. Only Time, Universes, Created Sprits, Multi-Verses, and other such oddities have starts; not all of which will have ends.


Love has no cause, no start, no end, but is instead our A, our Z, our Cause. By Love we come to confession.


In Atheism's ontology of Indifference as the A and the Z, "confession" is we know not what. It is but the equal of, "I itch. I scratch", for we find no abolitionists in physical systems, as all are, forever, irrational slaves pushed this way and that way by some other precursor, and never, on intent, pushing back. There is no intent in atheism's ontology. There is only indifference. A vacuum void of love.

And how does he know all this? That is, what reasons do you have to believe it?

Practically?

Intent.

Thus Mind.

Thus the contextually triune.

Imaginary spheres? My mind perceives no such thing.

But, that's just a start.

RonH,

As “Mo” commented elsewhere,


“You've been at this site for a long time now. You are well familiar with all the reasons provided here. There is so much material to be had, and you have access to it all. But for those who have their minds set on rejecting it, no reasons/evidence is ever enough.”

I'm not sure you are interested in revelation, though you may be, but I am quite certain that you are not interested in observational evidence. Inexplicable axiom is your go-to even when more plausible sums are at hand, simply because your presupposition is your belief in unbelief. Something as simple as “critical thinking” is we know not what inside of cascading dominoes being forever pushed around irrationally inside our skulls. With a wave of the hand…… inexplicable. Observational perception is claimed as your test of validity until it becomes a choice between imaginary spheres or the very simple geography of intent. That and so many other examples……. The proofs of your commitment to unbelief despite mind’s perceptions in observational evidence.


The comments to this entry are closed.