THEO621_Discussion 3 Sin and Salvation_09012021

docx

School

Boston University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

621

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by ProfRaccoon3821

Report
THEO621 Discussion 3: Sin and Salvation 09012021 1 . In 1 John 3:11-12 we read, “For this is the message you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. We must not be like Cain who was from the evil one and murdered his brother” (nrsv). This suggests an interesting and important relationship between love and sin (mentioned on page 84 of The Story of God). How would you describe this relationship? As Lodahl mentions in the text, sin is a term described as “abuse of our God-bestowed freedom…a life lived in idolatrous relations rather than turned outward toward God and neighbor in loving service” (2008, 84). As I was reading and meditating on the notion that sin is “rebellion against the God who is Love” I felt like I immediately had to ask for forgiveness, for all of the times that I have walked in sin and not in His love. That I was so stuck in my own head, my own thoughts and perceptions that I blocked out who God told me I was and what I had the power to do. This is profound, rather interesting and important. Anything that we allow to happen that is not in alignment with God’s love for us, simply in and of itself is sin (self-imposed nonsense as my Pastor says). We fall short of the glory of God each and everyday, none of us are exempt from sin. 2 . Lodahl says, "Scripture never accepts sin as an unavoidable consequence of human freedom. Sin is a misuse, a perversion of God's intentions and God's creation" (p. 77). How is this illustrated in the account of the Fall in Genesis 3 (pp. 78-80)? Why, despite our "victimization" by sin, does Lodahl suggest we are still responsible (p. 80)? Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not? In Romans 5:12, the word tells us we all have sinned, which Lodahl goes further to equate to each and every one of us in some sense, being Adam or Eve. We are then given six reasons as to why this may be, being that: sin is rooted in a shifting of attention from the Creator to the creature, sin is often a matter of asserting self-sovereignty against the divine, sin quickly weaves its web throughout the social-corporate dimensions of humanity, it involves the breaking of relationships and the attempt to hide, as well as including often the denial of responsibility, and lastly becomes a destructive factor inn all our relationships (Lodahl 2008, 78-80). Despite our “victimization” and being tempted by the enemy, I agree we are still responsible, we made a choice, between right or wrong. 3 . Review the debate between Augustine and Pelagius, described in chapter 9. How would you defend Augustine's view? How would you defend Pelagius' view? With whom do you feel most allied in your thinking (pp. 84-86)? Why? 4 . Lodahl says, "it is arguable that God was not entirely certain about the outcome of this experiment in freedom" (p. 88) referring to humanity's fall into sin. How can this be so, according to Lodahl (pp. 88-89)? Is Lodahl correct that "we want to feel that somebody must have everything under control" (p. 89)? Why or why not? 5 . What does the story of Genesis that God is the One who says, "Let there be," mean for human sinfulness (p. 89)? Can you have a world with "Let there be," where God controls or causes all things? Why or why not? 6 . Sometimes people wonder about “the problem of goodness”: if all of humanity is fallen into sin, how is
THEO621 Discussion 3: Sin and Salvation 09012021 it possible for people to perform good, generous, and loving deeds? Do you think this really is a problem? Why or why not? What is prevenient grace and how might it speak to these questions? 7 . What does Lodahl mean when he says, "God refuses to redeem creation 'by force'" (p. 83)? Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not? As second-century theologians suggested, God refuses to redeem creation “by force” and He “willed to save man by persuasion, not by compulsion, for compulsion is not God’s way or working” (Lodahl 008, 83). When I was first reading this in text, I automatically agreed. But as I began to meditate on the question posed, the terms force and compulsion stood out to me. Synonyms of these being: coercion, constraint, enforcement, oppression and harassment. When I think of these words, I do not get the feeling of the Holy Spirit whatsoever. It is not the work of God, to coerce us into a decision, to oppress or harass us. Yes, he chases after us like lost sheep, but harassing us? I don’t think so. That is not how he wins over our heart, rather in weakness, an antonym, as it is written in 2 Corinthians 12:9-10, “But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong”. We are redeemed with grace.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help