« Links Mentioned on the 8/12/16 Show | Main | Is Oral Tradition in Islam Reliable? »

August 13, 2016

Comments

Jesus is telling us what it takes to pass the test Adam failed. Jesus passed it. And just as Adam's failure became our failure through imputation, Jesus' righteousness became or righteousness through imputation. But he is telling us what subjective righteousness is if we can grasp it.

I believe if we love God most, we will love others more than we could if our love for them was an end in itself.

Dave,

"I believe if we love God most, we will love others more than we could if our love for them was an end in itself."

Well stated ~~~


What a great essay/article.

Man's final felicity, Man's true good, as they say. There in the immutable love of the Necessary Being. It's worth pointing out that the term necessary and the term love with respect to love's irreducible reciprocity amid the timeless, eternal, and irreducible "one-another" (D.B. Hart) which just is the singularity of reciprocity’s “unicity” makes no sense but for the unavoidable processions within Trinity, but for Christ. When Christ tells us to enjoy Him He is speaking of reality's irreducible rock bottom, the explanatory terminus of all syntax. Literally. Those who shake their fist at Heaven and shout, "No! It is love that is the highest ethic! Not glorifying God!" are well on their way to the truth of the matter, are half right, have spied the beginnings of the ends. They just need to push their own truth claims through to the bitter ends of the ontological stuff of the "necessary and sufficient" in the absolute sense. Anything short of immutable love just won't do. Thereby reason and love both compel us into the irreducibly triune. Therefore: Christianity.

Therefore: ~ Christ ~

In the Christian metanarrative, and nowhere else, such lines constitute the chief ends of Man, Man’s true good, his final felicity. Indeed, on acquiescence unto the beloved and for the beloved, we find in the triune God that this “…….is true in two related and consequent senses: on the one hand, love is not originally a reaction but is the ontological possibility of every ontic action, the one transcendent act, the primordial generosity that is convertible with being itself, the blissful and desiring apatheia that requires no pathos to evoke it, no evil to make it good; and this is so because, on the other hand, God's infinitely accomplished life of love is that trinitarian movement of his being that is infinitely determinate – as determinacy toward the other – and so an indestructible actus purus endlessly more dynamic than any mere motion of change could ever be. In him there is neither variableness nor shadow of turning because he is wholly free, wholly God as Father, Son, and Spirit, wholly alive, and wholly love. Even the cross of Christ does not determine the nature of divine love, but rather manifests it, because there is a more original outpouring of God….. that is in its proper nature indefectible happiness.” (D.B. Hart)

If one shakes one’s fist and shouts, “Love is the ultimate ethic! Not glorifying God!” then there is only Christ and no other, there is only reciprocity’s eternally sacrificed self vis-à-vis the triune God in Whom and through Whom and by Whom all necessary and sufficient requisites of such a statement are fully satisfied and eternally sustained. There, and nowhere else, can our insufficient and contingent eyes stare into the face of truth and rightly declare of ultimate reality, “Glory to God!

Reason and love compel us.

Therefore: ~ Christ ~


The comments to this entry are closed.