Judging the sin, not the sinner

[JRKH]

OK. Until and unless someone objects, then I am going to assume starting in this post, that acts can be absolutely determined by outward observation, to be a sin.

This is correct. But there needs to be caution in this not to jump to conclusions, as you have already addressed below.

Now when I say “absolutely,” I mean infallibly. That means, for example, you have to exclude the possibility that you are actually hallucinating or suffering from delusional thinking. I have experience at delusions and have close friends who know about hallucinating. For us, we can see a blatant sin and come up with a way to see it as an unselfish act of love – modeled directly after something Jesus did – or we can see something that is perfectly OK and be convinced beyond any doubt that it is intrinsically evil.

My first reaction to the opening of this section was that you are overcomplicating the matter, but then I see why you mention it. My response here would then be that the second level of intervention in Mt 18:15-18 provides a safeguard against this. If Frank believes that Joe has sinned but Frank is, in fact, delusional then Joe will resist Franks accusations and more people will be brought in to confirm facts and in all likelyhood Franks problem with delusional thinking will be exposed (though Frank may not see it). Then the community can work with Frank to try and get him help.

I could write a book of examples, but in one case I was playing the organ (I was the only one in the organ loft) of a church, when I became very afraid of the crucifix, and had a pretty good idea that satan had replaced the original statue of Jesus’s body on the cross, with a live minion of His own. I ducked down behind the wall and hid during Mass because I was convinced satan was using this phony crucifix to influence my music in some way to convey his evil to the crowd. I only got up when I had to play, and each time before I played I prayed to the Lord to take my music and do with it what He will, not what I will.

Why did I tell that story? One reason is that I am familiar with what it is like to think of things from radically different points of view. I do not assume anybody else shares my own understanding of anything to the degree where I could buy into it as being absolute and infallible.

I’m sorry that you have had to deal with such issues. I’ve seen this sort of thing myself in people close to me. I had a SIL who was bi-polar, an ex who was emotionally unstable, and my Dear Wife, who worked many years as a psych nurse, now has Alzheimer’s.
These are difficult matters to be sure. I hope that things are better for you now.

I hear what you’re trying to explain I think, that a sin can be defined outside of knowing intent.

However, picking on this example a bit, I notice the term “covet.” What does “covet” mean? By my understanding of the word “covet” I think it implies that you have a desire for it above and beyond need for survival – and hence implies reading one’s mind.

Covet means an inordintate desire for something. In the case of coveting another’s goods, you are inordinately desiring that which belongs to another. Now if you see that another has plenty and you have survival needs, you are certainly within your christian rights to ask him to share with you. You are not within your rights to compel him to share.

Thank you for this example. To me, it is an act of unlove against me, but once again, how do I know his love for his family and his obligation to feed them is what drove his behavior – either thinking nothing about it or thinking that it was a choice between family’s survival or needed medical care, and my inconvenience. In the interest of self-defense, I can give him the benefit of the doubt that he may have been filled with love, but I just didn’t feel it at a the time.

Consider this…
Begging is not a sin…Robbery IS a sin.

Did the hitchhiker explain that he needed money for food for his family or for mdical care or any other good reason? Did he then ask for money? did he give you the opportunity to perform an Act of Charity? Or did he just rob you?

(Cont)

 

[JRKH]

(Cont)

Now I have challenges for you. How, exactly, do you see judgment as useful from a spiritual standpoint? I can think of some ways, but I want to hear your opinion based on the statements you’re making.

The spiritual safety aspect is simply this…If your brother is sinning, then to leave him in his sin, without pointing it out to him is to leave him in danger of losing his salvation. This does not mean that you are unwilling to consider the matter, and listen to his reasoning. In fact, it should invite discussion and looking at action vs intent etc…

If you accuse the person and then find him not guilty after considering more evidence, then have you not effectively judged him just to make the indictment? You may not be able to prove he is guilty, but in indicting him you are at least saying, “I believe that you, based on what I’ve seen of your external behavior, is somebody that I cannot trust to be above the sin I’m accusing you of.” To me, in the spiritual realm we have already judged.

In legal terms what you are confusing is judgement and probable cause.
A person is indicted on “probable cause”. The case then moves on to trial, evidence and argument presented adn a judgement made.
If we look at Mt 18:15-18 again, the person goes to his brother and talks it over…He may have “probable cause” but he is also giving his brother an opportunity to share his side. In such a case, this person has not “judged”.
Now consider another possibility…The person, believing his brother sinned against him, does NOT go to him but rather talks behind his back, refuses to discuss it, etc…THEN this person has judged his brother without “trial”…such behavior is not how the person would like to be treated adn thus violates the second great commndment of Love.

Maybe I can state my idea like this: if I suspect my brother of a sin, then in my heart I have judged him capable of doing it, and thereby have called his righteousness into question. Acquittal down the line may prevent certain punishment, but we’ve already punished the person by the fallout from the accusation itself, so basically an accusation is a punishment.

There is some truth in this. The accused in our society is often seen as guilty until proven innocent. This is why Christ, in His wisdom and goodness, tells us to first go privately to your brother and then, if necessary, with just a couple of others…Thus keeping the matter as quite as possible. Only if the matter cannot be disposed of quietly should it be refered to the Church, more publically. In other words the goal is not “judgement” and “punishment” but rather, “fraternal correction in charity”.

For example, if my wife accuses me of being unfaithful based on what she has learned and believes it is sufficient evidence to raise the issue, then she has already expressed distrust in me, and whether or not I did it, and whether or not she can prove her case, the spiritual damage to the marriage is already done.

Suppose we change one phrase in the above…Change “expressed distrust in me” to expressed concern for me and our marriage…Such a change makes a great deal of difference in the tenor of the example.
Likewise, HOW she expresses her concerns (questions, accusations etc.) and how you listen and respond will make a huge difference. If it is all done in Love, then little to no permanent damage need be done. If it is not done in Love, but in anger and haste then indeed much damage could be done regardless of the truth or falsity of the accusation. In other words the underlying faith of the individuals has much to do with the outcome.

Alan, you have brought up many good points for consideration. For this I thank you.
I think that the bottom line is that, we are NOT entirely precluded from making “Judgements” but we must be extremely careful in how we do so because, as Christ says, how we judge is how we will be judged. If we judge carefully and Lovingly, for the good of our neighbor, then this is how we will be judged. If, on the other hand, we judge rashly, without proper cause and/or evidence, if we cut off our neighbor and malign him without a proper hearing, then we close our heart to God’s Love and we will be likewise judged harshly…

Peace
James

 

[AlanFromWichita]

If Frank believes that Joe has sinned but Frank is, in fact, delusional then Joe will resist Franks accusations and more people will be brought in to confirm facts and in all likelyhood Franks problem with delusional thinking will be exposed (though Frank may not see it). Then the community can work with Frank to try and get him help.

This is not too different than what psychiatrists do. You cannot test for mental illness by a blood test or scientific measurements currently available afa I know. Mental illnesses are defined symptomatically, and depend on wish-they-were-objective observation criteria. Basically dude observes me, or pokes me with ideas and questions and observes my reaction, (note I didn’t say “listening” to me which is considered subjective and therefore not objective enough) and typically goes down a checklist of which behavior traits he has observed me doing. If my checklist differs statistically from the checklist that a “normal” person – then they can say that I have a certain illness and that I need a particular kind of medication. Mental health care is really much more of a **** shoot than many people might like to think.

I’m sorry that you have had to deal with such issues. I’ve seen this sort of thing myself in people close to me. I had a SIL who was bi-polar, an ex who was emotionally unstable, and my Dear Wife, who worked many years as a psych nurse, now has Alzheimer’s.
These are difficult matters to be sure. I hope that things are better for you now.

I cannot even allude to the some of the categories of perversion and lies and fearful things I experienced. Please do not feel sorry for me because of it, though, because it was all part of the most beautifully orchestrated set of experiences I ever had. It was scary and troubling at the time, but now I cannot imagine having the level of peace and joy I would have now – and probably never would have experienced if I had not gone through that path.

For example, to get bothered or fearful just because somebody on the Internet finds me abrasive or rude or blasphemous or downright evil. I know beyond any doubt that one can perceive something to be evil that is, in fact, good or even inanimate. And one can do so in a way that nobody would suspect the organist up there in the balcony is having any problems of any kind.

Dare I mention what the figure of Jesus had apparently “morphed” to look like when I had the thought it was actually replaced by a figure from hell? No. No way. Not even a hint, unless you are my wife (and I just recently told her about it after several years of keeping to myself) or a person who is not squeamish to discuss things that are very terrible and disgusting. So I’d tell my intimate partner, and anyone else experienced enough in discussing evil things that I can trust them not to judge me for even saying the words that describe what I saw. For example, I could share it with certain lovers of hard core gangsta rap music, before I could discuss it with a typical lover of Christian praise music. Isn’t it funny that I can be more open and honest with an “immoral” person than one who is upstanding and is known to be a seeker of righteousness?

I just got a thought I haven’t before. Could this be, in part, the reason that Jesus seemed to find it easier to befirend the scummy “been there done that” people more than the “narrow path” righteous people? He had things to say that sounded evil, blasphemous, troubling, and all sorts of things – but only to those who presumed to judge Him and His words. :newidea:

Just a thought.

Also, I’m not afraid to be the only one in the room who says X while the others are saying Y. If they can show me, then I might say Y, too. Until then, if X makes more sense to me, then I’m not going to change my beliefs simply to model myself after the Dominant Consensus of Thought on the issue at hand.

Covet means an inordintate desire for something. In the case of coveting another’s goods, you are inordinately desiring that which belongs to another. Now if you see that another has plenty and you have survival needs, you are certainly within your christian rights to ask him to share with you. You are not within your rights to compel him to share.

Then I’d say “covet” is more quantitative than qualitative. I may think I’m starving but could actually go on two more days without food. I may think he has plenty of assets, but then I have judged how much is “enough” for him.

Consider this…
Begging is not a sin…Robbery IS a sin.

Did the hitchhiker explain that he needed money for food for his family or for mdical care or any other good reason? Did he then ask for money? did he give you the opportunity to perform an Act of Charity? Or did he just rob you?

(Cont)

From my observation, he just robbed me. I don’t know why he didn’t just ask me for the money; I’d have given it to him without having to have lost my ID when out of state, and all the other personal items that were of no value to him. Maybe he didn’t think I’d give it to him, or was too embarrassed to ask… would rather I found out he’s a crook after I dropped him off. btw I discovered the loss about 10 seconds after I dropped him off. I circled back to find him and he disappeared, with few places nearby to hide. He must have been one heck of a sprinter.

Alan

 

[JRKH]

Also, I’m not afraid to be the only one in the room who says X while the others are saying Y. If they can show me, then I might say Y, too. Until then, if X makes more sense to me, then I’m not going to change my beliefs simply to model myself after the Dominant Consensus of Thought on the issue at hand.

This is fine, just be careful not to defy what is not “dominant thought” but is, in fact, Church teaching and therefore the Will of the Holy Spirit.

Then I’d say “covet” is more quantitative than qualitative. I may think I’m starving but could actually go on two more days without food. I may think he has plenty of assets, but then I have judged how much is “enough” for him.

Good point - and speaks to how assumptions can be made on both sides of an issue. Once one removes the various assumptions and “what-if’s”, then one can determine if an act is objectively sinful. That is why the Ten commandments are so short…They don’t get into “what-if’s”

From my observation, he just robbed me.

Just so - He robbed you. He stole from you. This is teh objective fact. He committed a sin. He may have had his “reasons” and I am sure they seemed good to him at the time. But it does not change the fact that he took what was not his without permission.
Stealing = sin.

I don’t know why he didn’t just ask me for the money; I’d have given it to him without having to have lost my ID when out of state, and all the other personal items that were of no value to him. Maybe he didn’t think I’d give it to him, or was too embarrassed to ask… would rather I found out he’s a crook after I dropped him off. btw I discovered the loss about 10 seconds after I dropped him off. I circled back to find him and he disappeared, with few places nearby to hide. He must have been one heck of a sprinter.

All of this might be true…And so we should perhaps not judge the person too harshly. Yet we know that stealing is a sin, and this person stole…Therefore this person sinned…

Peace
James

 

[AlanFromWichita]

James,

I may not get to your second half of the post today, but I might.

Meanwhile I just want to reiterate how much I appreciate your views. I think we are on very nearly the same wavelength, with just enough separation in our views to gain insight into greater dimensions as we fine tune our close-but-different outlooks by communicating via this thread. Thank you for getting detailed and technical with me on these things, and for considering that statements I make may sound absurd, but may still have value.

TTYL,
Alan

 

[JRKH]

James,

I may not get to your second half of the post today, but I might.

Meanwhile I just want to reiterate how much I appreciate your views. I think we are on very nearly the same wavelength, with just enough separation in our views to gain insight into greater dimensions as we fine tune our close-but-different outlooks by communicating via this thread. Thank you for getting detailed and technical with me on these things, and for considering that statements I make may sound absurd, but may still have value.

TTYL,
Alan

You are welcome…I’ve been through some of this already so some of it sounds quite familiar…

Peace
James

 

[AlanFromWichita]

You are welcome…I’ve been through some of this already so some of it sounds quite familiar…

Peace
James

I don’t know how much time I have until my next interruption, so I’ll try to make this brief.

I wish to offer you a point of view that I would not likely to have had, were it not for my experience. If you find it interesting, that makes my “episode” take on value, which is my way of hoping the Lord can turn evil into good.

If I get radical about not judging, then I call nothing and nobody in God’s creation, good or bad – except for conversational purposes, for illustrating points to people who must judge do to their vocation or profession. That isn’t to say it’s right, it’s just a model of an absolutist interpretation of “not judging” that I wish to present as a thought exercise.

In a world where there is no judging, nobody knows really what is good and evil, and we can pretend we are in the Garden, or if you prefer, kingdom, where peace, joy, and love abound. If we do wrong, we trust that Somebody is in charge and will teach us if He wills us to learn a new trick or unlearn an old trick.

Now, I alluded to the experiences of evil I had while I was sick. Let me tell you, the experiences and runaway thoughts spanned the range of all things I can imagine, out of my conscious control and at “breakneck” speed.

Was it good or bad for me, to have experienced that intense closeness to evil during the Mass? Well, without evil and fear, how would I really appreciate peace? Doesn’t the one who has the deepest sins rejoice the most when they are forgiven? Oh yeah, we’re not allowed to even talk this way because there is no judging so therefore I do not know good and bad.

So tell me whether it was a demon or an angel influencing my thoughts, or was it just my own imagination running wild, without supernatural interference. Honestly, I don’t know and I think it’s interesting to reflect on, but it makes no material difference to me. You know why? Because they forced my mind to take on experiences ranging from subtle to extreme, in all directions and in all dimensions, and not only did I live through it, I am better off now than before I had the episode. I personally believe the episode was a necessary ingredient for me to think of the next question at this time.

Remember Get Smart, with Maxwell Smart and agent 99 and the chief?

I trust you always rooted for Control, and for the defeat of KAOS. But which side do you think caused you to laugh the most?

Now I am ready for my last question. Which photo is more visually appealing to you, or is it is more complex than that? On top is a fractal which represents chaos, unpredictability, and confusion, and on bottom is a graph of a nicely behaved math equation, representing order, control, precision and grace. Can you say one is objectively more pleasing to the eye than the other? There are no wrong answers.





Can you imagine where I’m coming from when I say that I fancy a world where there is absolutely no judgment? Problem is, how do we know how to truly appreciate peace and joy unless we also know fear, anxiety, and sorrow?

So yeah. We can talk sin and punishment, but to me it’s all good.

Thank you for reading my post.

Alan

 

[JRKH]

I don’t know how much time I have until my next interruption, so I’ll try to make this brief.

I wish to offer you a point of view that I would not likely to have had, were it not for my experience. If you find it interesting, that makes my “episode” take on value, which is my way of hoping the Lord can turn evil into good.

If I get radical about not judging, then I call nothing and nobody in God’s creation, good or bad – except for conversational purposes, for illustrating points to people who must judge do to their vocation or profession. That isn’t to say it’s right, it’s just a model of an absolutist interpretation of “not judging” that I wish to present as a thought exercise.

In a world where there is no judging, nobody knows really what is good and evil, and we can pretend we are in the Garden, or if you prefer, kingdom, where peace, joy, and love abound. If we do wrong, we trust that Somebody is in charge and will teach us if He wills us to learn a new trick or unlearn an old trick.

While what you write above is inetersting, I don’t know if I am able to go so far with you. If there is no judging…to the point where nobody knows what is good or evil (right or wrong), then chaos reigns for there is no one to make correction. Of course you DO mention trusting that somebody is in charge, but that one must then judge which undermines the earlier statement that nobody judges…
God gave us the rules and guidelines. He has given us the Holy Spirit and The Church to enlighten us. AND he has made us our brother’s keeper.

Now, I alluded to the experiences of evil I had while I was sick. Let me tell you, the experiences and runaway thoughts spanned the range of all things I can imagine, out of my conscious control and at “breakneck” speed.

Was it good or bad for me, to have experienced that intense closeness to evil during the Mass? Well, without evil and fear, how would I really appreciate peace? Doesn’t the one who has the deepest sins rejoice the most when they are forgiven? Oh yeah, we’re not allowed to even talk this way because there is no judging so therefore I do not know good and bad.

So tell me whether it was a demon or an angel influencing my thoughts, or was it just my own imagination running wild, without supernatural interference. Honestly, I don’t know and I think it’s interesting to reflect on, but it makes no material difference to me. You know why? Because they forced my mind to take on experiences ranging from subtle to extreme, in all directions and in all dimensions, and not only did I live through it, I am better off now than before I had the episode. I personally believe the episode was a necessary ingredient for me to think of the next question at this time.

It is very difficult to say what casued the episode. We CAN surely see God bringing good from it.

Now I am ready for my last question. Which photo is more visually appealing to you, or is it is more complex than that? On top is a fractal which represents chaos, unpredictability, and confusion, and on bottom is a graph of a nicely behaved math equation, representing order, control, precision and grace. Can you say one is objectively more pleasing to the eye than the other? There are no wrong answers.

Objectivity in artistic representation is, by it’s very nature, not objective. So I cannot say one is objectively more pleasing than the other. “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. so goes the old saying. The same cannot be said for sin.

Can you imagine where I’m coming from when I say that I fancy a world where there is absolutely no judgment? Problem is, how do we know how to truly appreciate peace and joy unless we also know fear, anxiety, and sorrow?

Yes I believe I can understand… But I think that you are looking at the wrong ideal. Imagine a world where there is not NEED for judgement because it is a world governed by the Two Greatest commandments of Love.
As to whether we can appreciate peace and joy without knowing fear, anxiety and sorrow… We will know that when we reach heaven…

So yeah. We can talk sin and punishment, but to me it’s all good.

God = Good = Love.
Not God = Not Love = Not good…

Thank you for reading my post.

Alan

Peace
James

 

[AlanFromWichita]

James and others,

Thank you for your reply. I’m glad you asked me to clarify this thing I’m suggesting we discuss. I have no expectation or desire to change your beliefs on anything. I’m sorry if it came across that way.

I’m just inviting you to take a little walk with me through a garden of thought that I find beautiful. I took a few land mines on the way to this garden, but now I think I can share a taste of what it’s like without insisting you go through the same path as me to get there. If you can’t make it in person, you can check out my proverbial “videos” of it. Unless you walk in my shoes, then videos is all you’ll get – but still I’d like to offer my videos. (By “videos” I mean thoughts conveyed by these posts which are not as rich as real life experience because of their limited bandwidth, but through human empathy we can share in some of the salient highlights of that experience.) :knight2:

If you prefer, before we go into my garden, let’s take a little look at the one in Genesis. In that garden, Adam and Eve were totally satisfied, as far as I know, with life before knowledge of good and evil. It isn’t scary at all. They had no anxiety. They did not know toil from play. There was no crime. Say they were exactly two human named Adam and Eve, or say that it is figurative, I don’t much care. What I care about are the touchy-feely aspects of it. Do we not wish we could go in this garden? Even just for a minute to taste it?

I like to visit the garden, but I don’t live there and are just as happy living where I am. Because what I’ve seen and heard and thought and felt in my imaginary garden land, I can use strategically to help me find the peace and joy that Christ died for so that I may have. The experience of joy and peace I can imagine in such a garden, I can learn to change the way I think so that I might bring home some of that joy and peace to the Real World. :heaven:

If God took me and my ancestors out of the garden, I can only assume it is because He has something greater in mind than for us to go around happy, naked, and unashamed. to me that sounds quite boring. Doesn’t matter, all I consciously have contact with is my mortal self, so anything I think I know about mysticism is only useful to the degree it gives me a working model for gaining even more peace.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

God = Good = Love.
Not God = Not Love = Not good…

Aha! I hear you, and I raise you one by asking questions with no answer key.

Who loves the most? The one whose small sin was forgiven? Or the one whose many sins were forgiven?
Luke 7:47:

So I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven; hence, she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little."

Strange thing … we are given a model of love that involves sin. I think again it’s about mortification – at which time we have faith that the Holy Spirit will guide us and renew our minds and hearts.

Don’t mind me. I’m just the drama queen in the corner, avoiding any real work but observing everybody else and giving them my :twocents: .

Or think of me as the court jester. It’s my job to say things that the king may want to consider, but others at the table could never suggest and keep their heads. Think of me as a fool or as a prophet, but don’t worry; the jester is obedient to the king even though he makes outrageous statement that challenge the king’s ideas and test them.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

The spiritual safety aspect is simply this…If your brother is sinning, then to leave him in his sin, without pointing it out to him is to leave him in danger of losing his salvation. This does not mean that you are unwilling to consider the matter, and listen to his reasoning. In fact, it should invite discussion and looking at action vs intent etc…

I appreciate your reasonable approach, and frankly, if any of my friends have an honest opinion about me, I expect them to address me about it. For example, I used to get defensive at times, but I learned that when I was defensive, my writing would come across as condescending. That helped me learn how to reread my own words and see where they were coming from. Basically my friends (and enemies too, if I listen closely) will tell me when I have egg on my face.

So can judgment and warning be an act of love? Certainly.

In legal terms what you are confusing is judgement and probable cause.
A person is indicted on “probable cause”. The case then moves on to trial, evidence and argument presented adn a judgement made.
If we look at Mt 18:15-18 again, the person goes to his brother and talks it over…He may have “probable cause” but he is also giving his brother an opportunity to share his side. In such a case, this person has not “judged”.

This certainly makes sense to me.

There is some truth in this. The accused in our society is often seen as guilty until proven innocent. This is why Christ, in His wisdom and goodness, tells us to first go privately to your brother and then, if necessary, with just a couple of others…Thus keeping the matter as quite as possible. Only if the matter cannot be disposed of quietly should it be refered to the Church, more publically. In other words the goal is not “judgement” and “punishment” but rather, “fraternal correction in charity”.

Maybe it’s a matter of the approach? My friend would not come to me and say, “hey dude I saw egg on your face and was concerned that you liked it there.” He’d simply give me his observation, “dude there’s some egg on you chin.” No warning, which transfers my fears to him. That should be clear enough for me to figure out if what he sees actually involves an underlying serious issue, or if it’s just how I come across.

Suppose we change one phrase in the above…Change “expressed distrust in me” to expressed concern for me and our marriage…Such a change makes a great deal of difference in the tenor of the example.

If that makes it easier to say, then I think that’s good.

For me, if Julie said, “today my friend said she saw your car in front of the strip club,” then I can say, “yes, my oil light came on and I pulled into the nearest parking lot to add some oil I had in the trunk.”

But is she said, “I’m concerned about you. I heard you were parked by the strip club,” then it would hurt me because I would feel accused.

I’m very sensitive, so it’s a good thing I have a wife who is the very model of unconditional love for me and completely trusting. Good thing, through many ups and downs, 24 years of marriage and six kids.

Alan, you have brought up many good points for consideration. For this I thank you.
I think that the bottom line is that, we are NOT entirely precluded from making “Judgements” but we must be extremely careful in how we do so because, as Christ says, how we judge is how we will be judged. If we judge carefully and Lovingly, for the good of our neighbor, then this is how we will be judged. If, on the other hand, we judge rashly, without proper cause and/or evidence, if we cut off our neighbor and malign him without a proper hearing, then we close our heart to God’s Love and we will be likewise judged harshly…

I completely agree, and like the way you worded it.

One last comment… http://bestsmileys.com/religous/3.gif

We are called to be perfect, not practical. We are practical because that’s how we get through this life until such time as we become perfect.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I hope I didn’t kill the thread…

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

One last chance, and I promise I won’t be the next person to bump this thread.

My point about chaos v. order is that many of the attributes we give to them are not intrinsically good or evil, but we often judge those same attributes, when applied to our lives, as good or evil.

For example: I make it to work as usual, without remarkable incident. Is that better or worse than if you make it 10 minutes late because I witnessed an injury accident and stopped to check on the people and call the police for them? So can we reasonably say that we can’t make a blanket statement that predictability is better or worse than unpredictability?

Can we say that a surface that is rough is better or worse than a surface that is smooth? I guess that could depend on whether you are playing air hockey on the surface or are grinding things. In fact, we often use rough and abrasive things to bring another object to smoothness. So we can’t say that smoothness is intrinsically better or worse than roughness.

Now here comes the tricky part: is a sinner better or worse than a righteous person? Can we say for sure that one is intrinsically more valuable than the other? Can either one learn from the other? Are they likely to?

I cut my finger, but take a liking to the nurse in the ER, date her, marry her and have children. If I cut my finger, can I say that it is good that it happened or bad that it happened? Not really, I say, not intrinsically good or bad.

I die. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? My loved ones grieve over the separation, but I’m at peace. So is death intrinsically good or evil?
John 12:24-25:

Amen, amen, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains just a grain of wheat; but if it dies, it produces much fruit. Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will preserve it for eternal life.

How about this:
Sirach 30:3-6:

He who educates his son makes his enemy jealous, and shows his delight in him among his friends. At the father’s death, he will seem not dead, since he leaves after him one like himself, Whom he looks upon through life with joy, and even in death, without regret: The avenger he leaves against his foes, and the one to repay his friends with kindness.

Finally, I had an episode of severe bipolar disorder. My mind raced around beyond the limits of my imagination as I knew it, and went through all sorts of thoughts, some of which were very troubling, shockingly evil, and some led me to act in ways that nobody would think are constructive. Was it good or bad that I went through that? You may answer any way you like; I honestly think that without that experience, I might never have a taste of the peace and joy I feel today. :heaven:
Alan

 

[JRKH]

One last chance, and I promise I won’t be the next person to bump this thread.

My point about chaos v. order is that many of the attributes we give to them are not intrinsically good or evil, but we often judge those same attributes, when applied to our lives, as good or evil.

Can we say that a surface that is rough is better or worse than a surface that is smooth? I guess that could depend on whether you are playing air hockey on the surface or are grinding things. In fact, we often use rough and abrasive things to bring another object to smoothness. So we can’t say that smoothness is intrinsically better or worse than roughness.

Now here comes the tricky part: is a sinner better or worse than a righteous person? Can we say for sure that one is intrinsically more valuable than the other? Can either one learn from the other? Are they likely to?

Alan,
I’m afraid I cannot keep up with you. Perhaps someone else can…

Most of the things in your last post are not things that are “intrinsically evil”. a cut finger for instance.

However, I quoted the sections I did because I think that yes we can say that roughness is an intrinsic evil if the prarmeters of the design say it is.
If I recall correctly you said you were an engineer and I too have a machining, quality and engineering background…So I put this case to you.

You are designing a complex product with multiple moving parts each with less than .002" clearance between the parts (something like a complex valving system). Even the slightest burr, or roughness will cause interferance and the product will not function, or will function poorly with excessive wear. In this case, surface roughness is “intrinsically evil” within the designed system and you note this on the various drawings etc.
Now note that, in a poorly functioning product, the parts might be disassembled, the burrs and roughness removed, and the system put back in perfect working order. - but only by removing the “intrinsic evil”.

God has likewise designed a system with many closely fitting moving parts. Sins (roughness) cause problems within this system. Therefore, sins are, by definition, “intrinsically evil”, because they are outside the design parameters of the system - and the designer has told us so in the instructions.
The “Parts” (us - sinners) can be restored, and the sins (roughness) removed through baptism and confession.
So here we have a near perfect example of “judge the sin, not the sinner”.

Peace
James

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Alan,
I’m afraid I cannot keep up with you. Perhaps someone else can…

The best thing you can do as far as I’m concerned, when I get rowdy in a thought party, is to be yourself. There is no wrong because I trust you and if it sounds wrong I’m sure we can make it right.

You can go with me or not. If you see what I see, that’s great. If you don’t, you can either opt out, or tell me what you see. Looking at it from different angles, we can study the problem like as if we were safely in the center of security headquarters, looking at all the angles from different cameras.

God has likewise designed a system with many closely fitting moving parts. Sins (roughness) cause problems within this system. Therefore, sins are, by definition, “intrinsically evil”, because they are outside the design parameters of the system - and the designer has told us so in the instructions.
The “Parts” (us - sinners) can be restored, and the sins (roughness) removed through baptism and confession.
So here we have a near perfect example of “judge the sin, not the sinner”.

Peace
James

We are all allowed to take the imagination trip in whatever direction we want, and that’s the beauty of it. The Bible is mysterious enough we’re not quite sure what it means. So we try to understand by studying the literal meaning, while not getting the benefit from the other senses of scripture because we are struggling with apparent contradictions and trying be apologetic for them all the time. So let go, as in Lectio Divina, and lovingly allow the word to soak in and transform you. Once your heart is fixed, your tongue has nothing more to worry about because it can betray your true light as well as it used to betray the parts you might think of as “dark.”

The short story is that love conquers all. If you hang on to that and build it, you will be able to overcome everything else.

Your love is not my business, nor can I experience it directly through your words. I can “feel your pain” and “feel your joy” to some extent through human empathy.

Sometimes I’ve felt like I was the only one in the world who had walked in my shoes. Nobody really understood, although others have withstood other problems I can’'t imagine having. When we feel each other’s pain or joy through human intercommunication, then there are two of us who have been there, and that’s a unifying thing.

That, IMO, is why we want to connect with his suffering. We each have our own cross, which is different than the one Jesus was on. Why would a loving father allow his only son to be ridiculed and marginalized, tortured, killed, and then took a tour through hell? It’s because the innocent lamb became sin itself because “cursed is the man who hangs on a tree.” and was put to death, under the law. Therefore, the worldly law no longer had a grip on Him, because He was no longer of the world because he gave his life away and died. That agony was but a labor pain to open the gift that was eternal life in glory, and then as soon as He got it open, he started opening the doors and says, “come to my feast” The Christ has died, and is risen. Why did He go to hell? So he could let us out of there if we were locked in there, I suppose. Or maybe so He could allow himself, as sin, to be in the place where other sinners are cast out. You think being a leper is a casting out, imagine being in hell. I don’t know what He did in Hell, but anything’s possible with God. Now He has prepared a place for us and may knock at the door at any time, in any form.

Sorry I’m getting wordy again. Thanks again, for playing the part of “you” so well. :clapping:

Alan

 

[JRKH]

Alan,
I’ve enjoyed our conversation, but it has moved too far from the original topic. My life situation does not allow me to go along with you on your “thought journey”. That is to give sufficient thought and care to all that you write. For that I am sorry.
I’m afraid I must “opt out”

Peace
James

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Alan,
I’ve enjoyed our conversation, but it has moved too far from the original topic. My life situation does not allow me to go along with you on your “thought journey”. That is to give sufficient thought and care to all that you write. For that I am sorry.
I’m afraid I must “opt out”

Peace
James

Please don’t be sorry. I can assure you, I have nothing you need. If you could get my drift I think you’d like it, but I am confident that you are as surely as I am, on the spiritual journey.

You have contributed immensely to my confidence, my ability to explain myself, and acted as a sanity check for me as I tried to bring these dreams to planet earth.

You have done enough for me for a lifetime. I don’t “need” you if God doesn’t bring us together, so I am free to enjoy your company without emotional codependency.

Thanks again for all you’ve done. I’m looking forward to chatting about things you are more comfortable with.

Alan