Concerning the mind and repentance

[Naivetry]

All analogies break down, of course.

But do you see the point I'm trying to make about the "divine plan"?  There's no need for it to be totally imposed from the outside; this is a cooperative game, not man vs. God.

[Solnath]

So what you are in fact saying is that the divine plan is not fixed, but rather... negotiable?

[Naivetry]

As far as we can fathom that concept... yes.  Our actions impact and help shape the pattern of the divine plan, even if its character is out of our control.

Check out the Old Testament - Abraham, Moses, and so many others bargaining with God.  Or several of the approaches to prayer that Jesus talks about in the New - where if you ask boldly and persistently, you will receive an answer.

God doesn't want playthings.  He wants sons and daughters who can approach him freely and freely choose to love and obey.

[Solnath]

That sounds like really strange behaviour for a being that can do anything. Why does He need family?

[Naivetry]

God doesn't need family, for God is perfect in himself and requires nothing.  But God desires family, for God is love.  Love desires always to increase in self-giving.

Try to imagine an existence without time and space.  There are exactly 3 things or beings that can be distinguished without the use of time or space: the Father who begets, the Son who is begotten, and the relationship between them.  We cannot imagine greater complexity - say, having multiple sons - without bringing in time and space.  How could you distinguish between multiple sons if you could not measure which came first?  How could you separate them from each other if there was no space in which for them to stand apart?

And so, for love to increase to include additional subjects, it is necessary to create time, space, and all the rest.

[Solnath]

I suppose I just fail to comprehend why perfection would desire anything. But assuming it would, that theory works. However, the more it is extended, usually to the Christian way of teaching, the larger the area it tries to explain becomes and at some points it breaks and then the whole system collapses with that point.

[Naivetry]

Perfect simply means complete.  But complete does not mean static.  Love is a dynamic force that expands as it is expended on its object, like a constant spring must eventually overflow its pool.  The more perfect the love, the more it must always increase.

Out of curiosity, at which point have you found that the system breaks?  Not all ideas aired in the church are matters of essential doctrine. The system should not be made to twist and contort around points that are not essential.

[Solnath]

It depends on who's expanding. For example, completion is static as it is the "ideal state." No reason to descend from it. But still returning to the omnipotence, God, regardless of what He does, manipulates reality and humanity.

EDIT: Examples:

God doesn't require anything... except dedication, obedience and prayer.
God loves you, go to Hell!

[Naivetry]

I am not suggesting that God "descends" from an ideal state.  I am in fact suggesting that God's love is continually growing - increasing or ascending from an already completed state.  The ideal itself requires growth without the arbitrary limitations and ceilings that would be imposed if the ideal were static.

I'm not sure I understand what your examples are getting at.  (But I've also gotten 7 hours' sleep over the past 80 hours, between the TRR thing and Harry Potter, so maybe this'll all make more sense in the morning. )  Are you criticizing the fact that different people may come up with differing interpretations of the will of God?

[Solnath]

That and the fact that some people attribute every detail of everything to the will of God. Christianity breaks against itself when its members all have their own personal Jesuses.

[Naivetry]

Pressed, but not crushed...

The farthest I take the will of God to apply is Romans 8:28. "And we know that in all things, God works for the good of those who love him, who are called according to his purpose."  (Or "God works all things together," or "All things work together.")  God does not will bad things to happen.  But when they do, he is working to redeem them.

[Solnath]

He might not will them, but he allows them to happen. Guilt through consent. Can you answer the examples, though?

[Naivetry]

Guilt through consent only works if the person "consenting" can do something about the situation.  Without infringing on our free will, God can't.  But he's done everything else, up to and including die himself, to help us change ourselves.

I don't see how one answers examples.  Do you want me to say one or both of them is wrong and why?  Do you want me to explain that they are inconsistent statements?  I don't know what to do with statements we both dislike.  Give me a question and I'll answer it as best I can.

[Solnath]

Why is it the God doesn't want anything from us... except dedication, obedience and prayer?

If God loves someone, why should they go to Hell just because they are using their right to free will to exhibit a behaviour different from God's perfect goodness? After all, we, as imperfect beings, are born to err so should we be punished eternally for being created so?

[Naivetry]

Why is it the God doesn't want anything from us... except dedication, obedience and prayer?

May I ask where you got that surprising list?  For on the contrary, God wants quite a deal more from us than that.  "To live justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God" is what I remember... and even that is more descriptive than "prayer."  I don't think you win brownie points with God by praying for an A on that last test.

If God loves someone, why should they go to Hell just because they are using their right to free will to exhibit a behaviour different from God's perfect goodness? After all, we, as imperfect beings, are born to err so should we be punished eternally for being created so?

Because there are natural consequences to the choices we make, and there is such a thing as responsibility.  Hell is not a punishment.  It is the natural result of living a self-centered life.  It is the logical extension over eternity of the daily choices we make to disregard, belittle, and injure others, in ways big or small.  And of course it's not fair for people to go to hell because they can't help making mistakes; that's why we have grace.  But when they want to keep making mistakes, you and me and everyone else, not just God, has a problem.

C.S. Lewis said there are only two types of people in the end - those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, in the end, 'thy will be done.'  All who are in hell choose it.

But goodness, we've jumped off topic.    Where are we going with this?  A full-fledged apologia?