I think most of the advice given in scripture can be distilled into this idea. Dishonesty, the willful deceit of another to alter their will based on the information they have to make their decision from. Murder, the taking of another's life ends their capacity to have a will. Theft deprives the original owner of the use of that good for which they bought it for preventing them from acting in that capacity when they see fit. Adultery, you are either allowing someone to break a contract they made with another or breaking your own, which is a form of lieing. Thou shall not covet, coveting limits your vision of possibility. It also leads to decision making that may not weigh fully all the available facts. Idol worship. Putting anything on a pedestal may influence you to make decisions you otherwise wouldn't have.
The question then becomes , how is that one can claim that we should be free to act as we see fit, but then limit those actions based on some arbitrary set of what rules and who defines those rules? There are cases where killing someone is the right choice, there are cases where theft is the right choice, so, how is it then that we are to know what is right and wrong when right and wrong are so dependent on the situations in which we find ourselves.
And how does any of this relate to forgiveness, which was the thought that sparked this line of thinking. Forgiveness is not for the sinner, but for he who was sinned against. Forgiveness allows the one who was sinned against to move on and not dwell on the sin or wrong done them. This allows them to avoid being mired in the psychologically damaging state that prevents them from acting as a free agent. However, were there a time, when the sinner came to the sinned against with intent to restore as best they could the damage done, the sinned against having already forgiven will simple have more restored unto them. Which then takes us to what must be a great lie perpetrated by all the christian churches of today. The idea of Christ forgiving all of us and thus allowing us to bypass justice. How is bypassing justice ever good? Lets assume I've done something wrong, lets use an example that allows for a consequence that I cannot avoid. Lets say, I steal a car. Eventually the police catch me and I'm thrown in jail, where I spend 5 years. From this experience I learn that stealing is wrong, or at least unacceptable in the society I live in. I vow to not do it again and I don't. Haven't I then, suffered justice and paid the price? How then am I going to be punished more by God at my day of judgement. He already knows I learned my lesson, since I didn't steal another car my whole life, even if I had a desire to I repressed it knowing that it was a bad decision. Lets say however, I didn't learn, and I continue to steal cars and I continue to go to jail and when I do eventually die, the only reason I didn't steal more cars was because I was too old. Now at judgement I say, sorry God and Jesus and Jesus says, "no problem, I know you didn't learn your lesson even though you went to jail 15 times in life for committing the mistake over and over, but since you said your sorry , I'm going to put a good word in and get you through the gate".
My point is, there has to be a bad punishment/consequence associated with our actions if we are going to learn it is wrong, there by achieving "forgiveness" and further perfecting ourselves. Your perfection cannot be given to you. Thus, its very possible that they only purpose for the concept of repentance, is that through it, you avoid the anticipation of the punishment. Its like telling a child that a shot isn't going to hurt, when it is, but you say it to keep them calm enough to get it over with since you know it really isn't going to hurt for very long.
No comments:
Post a Comment